Saturday, October 29, 2011

Lucy, Leviathan, and Lucifer

Little imagination is needed to apprehend conspiracies based on the shared envy of Dinos and the greed of Rinos. Just read history. Man's capacity for evil, even in the least of us, is chilling. Wealth, power, and opportunity tend to snowball --- especially among the most cynical. They find the same watering holes, and there they meet. Those most fit to succeed as sociopaths hardly need explicit words to intuit where to combine in order best to maximize nefarious ends. An overarching agenda and narrative arrests the minds of sociopaths, the clear outline of which is already boldly written in various places, even though it need not be. That agenda calls for the elimination of all republics and nations, and it necessarily leads to the dividing and replacing of the rule of peoples and kings with the rule of "elites," aka nation-less, international corporatists, cronies, czars, caliphs, and other such sociopaths. What keeps us blind to that reality, which now permeates all our institutions and the brains of all whom our institutions have "educated" (duped)? Answer: Hard wiring that has evolved with our brains drives us towards immediate gratifications and concerns, while keeping us slow to apprehend the default patterns and repetitions of history, and even slower to apprehend the hand of a higher Guide. In the time of mortality, nothing suggests that either Zion or the New Republic are near. Our elections are more akin to farce, good for the entertainment of master hedge operators (like Lucy lifting the football just before Charlie Brown's hopes of kicking it are raised to highest level). When will we learn how to walk and chew gum at the same time? When will we learn how to incentive socially responsible work, without promoting serfdom under sociopaths?

A flat tax would not by itself limit Leviathan, nor would it limit those who came to rule in place of Leviathan. A Republic must be able to talk and chew gum at the same time; that is, it must have checks and balances by which to incentive workers while not raising despots in wealth and power beyond all compare. Just turning power over to international corporations does not save ordinary hard working folk from Leviathan; it just puts a different mask on Leviathan. Ordinary Americans, those who pay attention to a variety of sources, want neither a society of self absorbed louts nor a society of sheep being sheared by sociopathic advantage-rollers operating under crony-aided accumulations of wealth. They don't want a society of peasants and lords. The Tea Pary ought not rally to Republican candidates simply because they put on masks as Republicans. The Tea Party ought to rally to Republicans who want to preserve America against temptations of pimps selling out to lowest interests of a thug-infested global marketplace. Many among the OWS mobs are louts, but not all. Some are simply and quite disenchanted with the notion that those best fitted to rule in place of government are those who are enabled to accumulate the most wealth in order to buy and sell government. For them, Governor Perry is altogether too nonchalant about grossly enriching a few in order to enhance their capacity to rule in place of republican government. If Perry-ilk strip away the focus of the Tea Party, Obama will be reelected. But even if not, Perry would not stem the fall of the Republic into gross New Worldism. Now, more than ever, we need champions who are not long-time mules for lords. I don't know whether Cain is that champion, but nothing in Perry's background since he switched parties leads me to believe that he is.

Friday, October 28, 2011


Does it not seem odd, how one's incapacity to limit the Infinite Consciousness to the finite quantifications of substance so often tricks so many to believe that the Infinite Mind must be impossible?  Indeed, quite as impossible as the cosmos. Yet, there the cosmos is --- a walking contradiction. What is anyone's idea of present-locus, if not entirely subsidiary to conscious apprehension? Sense of sight is supported by organ of eye, hearing by organ of ear. What organ supports sense of memory and recordation of previous in-form-ation, if not some aspect of the cosmos itself? How is it that one is availed to sense any discrete point in apparent time as being other than a mere Discrete, that is Unconnected to any continuity of sequence?   How is it that one who does sense a present that is connected to a past is also availed to apprehend, all at once, a buzz of choices among potential futures? How, unless the cosmos itself somehow feeds back to the apprehensions of our senses? Is it not reasonable to intuit that the Field of the cosmos, as well as each particular perspective of consciousness of it, each somehow functions as receiver-transmitter for the other? How is it that mere apprehensions of consciousness are coordinated with measurable emissions of bursts of energy and communications of substantive changes?  How is it that our choices appear, on measurement, to have been made before our brains engage synaptic appreciation of such choices already having been made, even before our self awareness of them registers? In the immeasurable or eternal void that lies between each apparently instantaneous and particular quantum leap, what Reconciler factors our apprehensions and appreciations in synchronicity with the buzz and fuzz?  What is the fuzz and buzz, if not in respect of an implicate accompaniment and connection between the Holism and its Parts, beyond precise measure or proof, but not beyond intuition and empathy?  Or do Atheists and Marxists deny even intuition and empathy?  But for whatever IT is that factors such fuzz and buzz, how could we hope to experience or interpret our unfoldment in space-time to present any kind or degree of meaningful sensation or sense?  What profit it a man to try to argue meaning with another who despairs of any meaning at all, lest the Unprovable prove Itself?


How is it that particular perspectives of consciousness sense and experience space-time as if it were continuous, rather than consisting of a discrete series of sequences? Could this sense abide in respect of a dance of feedback between an holistic perspective and its particular perspectives? Could it be that neither the Whole nor its Parts would sense or experience any perspective but for the abiding back and forth between them?  Could it be out of such feedback, in discrete back and forth sequences, that an illusion of continuousness emerges to the sensory experience of mortals? How is it that human minds sense a buzz or fuzz of present possibilities in accompaniment with each expression of a precise choice or apprehension? How is it that our choices appear, on measurement, to have been made before our brains engage synaptic appreciation of such choices already having been made, even before our self awareness of them registers?  In an eternal void between each particular quantum leap, what Reconciler factors our apprehensions and appreciations in synchronicity with the buzz and fuzz?  How may the Holism of consciousness be at work at an implicate level, below the level of explicate consciousness, during each present mortal illusion of an instantaneous quantum leap, between discrete appearances of measurable particulars? What is the fuzz and buzz, if not in respect of an implicate accompaniment and connection between the Holism and its Parts, beyond precise measure or proof, but not beyond intuition and empathy? But for whatever IT is that factors such fuzz and buzz, how could we hope to experience or interpret our unfoldment in space-time to present any kind or degree of meaningful sensation or sense?  When it comes to "objective" proof or disproof by a subjective perspective of consciousness of the existentiality, relevance, quantification, or quality of the Holism, how can our back-mathing be other than ambiguously fluxing?

Conventionally hammered wisdom is that Math counts things of Substance, with Consciousness emerging merely as derivative byproduct.  In respect of that view, cronies and dupes work backwards, to cherry pick things by which to argue and fit their math to that model.  The problem in this is that such artificially constrained "back-mathing" will not help one foresee when a substance that is being linearly mathed is about to flux or transition into a thing of a different quality, for which the model, not being equipped to count or measure qualities as opposed to quantities, will not apply.  One simply cannot count degrees of cowness, man-ness, or consciousness.

A better model would abide in apprehending that math and substance are "associate-derivatives" of qualitative fluxes among perspectives of consciousness.  While Consciousness cannot be quantitatively mathed, at least it can be apprehended in empathetic intuition.  Thus, the model based on Consciousness as being a priori would fully accomodate science, while not feigning to turn mankind into a mere quantity, of no special qualitative value.  By keeping in mind that human consciousness is a value whose qualitative interests and purposes are worth preserving, one will be less inclined to miss apprehending key signals.

One will be less inclined to fail to notice that the Ideal of America is dissolving -- in its borders, logos, families, industries, mores, and civilization.  One will be less inclined to think that such dissolution can be fixed merely by altering a few forms for how to redistribute the math of taxes, revenues, and centralized stimuli.  Instead, one will notice that the main forces or trends that are erasing America abide in the mathed bunk that is hammered into the minds of sheep.  That bunk pretends to prove a lie:  that America is best served by freely and cheaply marketing herself to a worldwide marketplace, with no standards for discriminating friends from foes, empaths from sociopaths, good-faith traders from crony gangsters, or decent values from lowest common denominators.

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Sheep and Shearer

Everytime government does something new, don't just ask who appears to benefit.  Ask who REALLY benefits.  The electorate for our Republic consists of Sheep, Farmer, Shearer, Bureaucrat, and Governing Politician. Most are being farmed like Sheep, hedged back and forth between leasing-Farmer and Shearer, both of whom are taxed by Governing-landlord-auditor. How Farmer and Shearer settle accounts makes little difference to us, because we are going to be sheared in every event. It makes little difference how account currencies are printed, or whether Governing-auditors levy for services in the Form of a flat or a progressive tax. If Progressive, Farmer will pay government-Bureaucrats kickbacks in exchange for favors and loopholes. If Flat, Shearer will use profits to buy more leases, erase borders, or contribute campaign bribes to elect Governor-candidates in exchange for smaller taxes. Candidates will hold fingers to wind, set up contrivances, and hedge. They will hedge, kiss, pander, tip, and extract campaign bribes --- both with implied threats and with winking promises. Farmers and Shearers will hedge by threatening to back opposing candidates. Either way, Sheep are shorn.

Yes, Sheep get to Vote, but the back and forth of threats and promises Divides and keeps the Sheep off balance. Every year, they get shorn a little closer. Families get more humiliated, indebted, and controlled. More Farmers and Shearers are bankrupted and reduced to Sheep. Still, hopes of Sheep rise with the approach of each new election. So, they stay on the farm and are enticed to work more for less. Once Sheep are rendered entirely at mercy, and only the most cynical survive (i.e., those who form an Unholy-Alliance with an Unholy-Sponsor), the surviving Unholy-Farmers and Shearers will erase all borders, incorporate all lands, divide the spoils, and rule as the new international-Corpoligarchy-of-hedge-fund-artists-sans-nations.


Signs may as well soon be posted throughout the land: Abandon hope all ye who enter here. This we achieve by putting faith and trust exclusively in Man and Forms while banishing Higher-Truths from the public square. Thus, we abandon a Nation under God to whims of cynics, Hedge-Artists, and Tax-Designers. Having bit the apple, we now trade it for snake oil. America's main problem is not its tax code (rotten as it is). America's main problem is Americans are no longer united to preserve one nation under God. Result: We allow ourselves to be divided and robbed of inheritance, freedom, family decency, and nation. We allow cynics to sell our land, borders, trade, infrastructure, industry, citizen-workers, and even our mores and currency out to nation-less, godless-cannibals. We reduce ourselves to bargain as cheap whores. And how do we try to fix this? With magic FORMS! Insanity fit for a people of corruption and ignorance. How about a Savage and different strategy? How about Borders, Language, Assimilating Culture ... and Decent Respect in the Public Square for Higher Truths and Values (aka God)?

Which is More Fake: Money or Spirituality

There's a fundamental disconnect between pure materialists and people who believe there abides a reconciling Source for pursuing answers that is not limited to pure materialism. So long as that disconnect prevails, any attempt to pursue serious debate tends to become waste. Simply put, it's waste to contend about "oughts" with those "thinkers" whose philosophy is so all-knowing as to refuse to entertain any capacity for dealing with oughts. It's a debate they shut down because they simply lack the tools to think about it.

There can be little reasonable hope for preserving America so long as there abides so little appreciation for what America is.

Where does a striving politician with little money go to get quick money for organizing and campaigning?  He goes whoring to the street.  Then he puts out gimmicks and for-sell ads.  He lets the Johns and Cannibalizers know he's their gimmick guy.  Appointments and czars.  Flat tax.  No death taxes.  Redistributions.  Currency manipulations.  Open borders.  Free trade with despots.  Corporate welfare.  Crony Capitalism.  Crony Socialism.  Thug buyers of technologies and arms.  Off shore laundered contributions.  Dividing and laying waste to everything that could assimilate a resistant middle class.  Facilitating cheap labor.  Inciting class, race, gender, and generational warfare.  Bunking assimilating faiths.  The deck has been stacked.  Against foreign despots and homegrown nihilists, the middle class has been declawed of competitive capacity to fund or control candidates to do more than promise to defend America, all the while selling America out.  Among those who now control the springs of power, except in pretense, faith in America is all but died out.  Certainly, faith is derided in most of America's main institutions.  Until that trend changes, the lights will continue to flicker out.  Fake?  What's fake is the snake oil that mere forms, gimmicks, and tax laws can fix the middle class.  What?  Widening the wealth/power chasm is supposed to protect us from imposition of serfdom?  Insanity.

Which is More Fake ---  Money or Spirituality:

The people who call God and all religion fake tend to be the people whose brains are sunk entirely in materialism and misguided works. Given their head, they will make America fake. Without a nationally assimilated sense of higher values, all contrived forms of government for replacing God will reduce to vanity and will eventually and necessarily lead humanity to be ruled by the least humane and most callous, cynical, and deceitful. Without respect among Americans for an assimilative Source of higher values, America will be reduced. Promises about defending America's borders, people, infrastructure, industry, general standard of living, and opportunity for middle class strivers will become fake. Why expect mere promises that are unsupported by any higher values or will to be other than cover for cannibalizers and self promoters at all costs?

Once we become hollow in our values, why expect mere FORMS of tax gimmicks to save us? Without assimilated values of WILL, the forms for defending America will be hollow, fake, and will matter very little. Once Americans acquiesce that property means anyone can own stakes in America, free of tariffs and regulations and values for protecting America, then promises of preserving America will become fake.

One's ease for making more money and acquiring more property and power to cannibalize America tends to be inversely proportional to how much money and how few principles one begins with. Once the principle of defending America as a land of assimilated values is wiped aside, so that the controlling electorate is led to expect to find its salvation and defense in mere tax gimmicks and regulations, regardless of whether Left or Right, Dino or Rino, then all the tax gimmicks and regulations in the world cannot stand to defend ordinary Americans against the rise of a cynical new aristocracy of international wolves pretending to have our best interests at heart.


Recipe for Destruction: Rooting out of assimilated spiritual values, tax as savior (in all its varieties, flat or progressive), free trade with despotisms, no effective restraints on crony enterprise for the buying and selling of political influence and cheap labor and currencies, invitations to despots and gangsters to invest in America, ineffective restraints against the flux of international money and corporatists, ineffective restraints against the buying and selling of politicians. Against that recipe, especially given the division and denigration of higher assimialting values, an America that avails opportunity for decent middle class strivers who are not willing to sell out to Moral Crime Inc cannot stand. Once the idea of God, i.e., higher assimilating values, is sacrificed, there can be no effective substitute that can sustain the idea of America. Moreover, the coming aristocratically imposed serfdom will not entertain a restraining sense of spiritual values, but will entertain a verbally smooth and materialistic sense whose higher value is self enrichment.

The default position for materialists who think all that is worth knowing is in materialim will come home to roost with vengeance, and their vengeance will feast on their own humanity.  It's not respectful spirituality that has plagued the world; it's the fake and deceitful value of pure materialism and self justification over all.  Once scales have tipped to favor deceit and eviscerate trust, a change in faith in necessary to restore a decent balance.  It's no substitute to prop up a mere man who acts a messiah or a mere form proffered as a panacea.  Without inspiration to a higher sense of decency and proportion, there is no effective form-in-itself that can fix things for us, as opposed simply to continuing to facilitate distortions. There is nothing in mere atheism or political reformulation that can fix a deep, deconstructing loss of social trust.

The true debate ought not be front loaded or artificially confined by narrow minds as being only between (1) proponents for stupidly false quick fixes in forms of regulations or taxes versus (2) proponents for absurd dogmas for trying to confine God to a box.  Vision needs to be freed.

Monday, October 24, 2011

Grace, Original Sin, Archtypes


GRACE: St. Paul never met Jesus. Never heard the voice, except in an epileptic vision. Never saw the body. Did not have a New Testament to read. Only heard the good news second hand, from different perspectives and interpretations. We know there are as many interpretations of Jesus and Christianity as there are sects. We know Paul was familiar with various Greek myths, religions, pagan stories, and Mithraism. So, what is Paul saying one must believe about Jesus in order to be saved by his grace? Must one believe Jesus was God's son, died for our sins, and was resurrected? Stripped to fundamentals, what must one believe regarding definitions of sin? What is sin? Does sin consist in wilful wrongdoing under an evil mind? Does it require knowledge that a thing or act was wrong? Does it encompass mistaken wrongdoing? Does it mark us as separate from God, regardless of what we do, unless and until we accept Jesus as God's Son, who sacrificed himself for our sins? Does salvation require that we have a clear idea of who Jesus was and the essence of his teachings, or does it only require that we believe He, as God's Son, died for us, and/or that we follow His teachings, regardless of whether anyone ever spoke them to us? Is opportunity for salvation fairly availed to all? Do those who never heard of Jesus, or who died before being born or as infants somehow or somewhere get a second chance? Suppose a poorly trained evangelist mis-hears, believes, and teaches that Hesus was born on May Day of a mother named Rebekka in a town called Beersheba perhaps in a country called Libya, was hung from a tree in order to atone for our ignorance, for which all who accept His grace are to be bodily resurrected and saved to live forever as if they were at age 15? Would such a mis-trained evangelists's converts be "saved?" What would such "salvation" mean?

ORIGINAL SIN: Thomas needed to see Jesus body to believe. What of those who never see the body, never heard the story, and never imagined any such a miracle? Cannot they also be guided to evolve spiritually?   Of course they can. However inspiring the historical story may be, there must be something behind it that is more essential than any single person's interpretation or imagination. Sin must have something fundamental to do with a state of being separated, as an imperfect and Particular perspective of God, away from the Holism that is God. Sort of like a separation of a particle from its wave function. So it would seem well to re-think the concept of "original sin," to conceptualize it more as a state or condition of being apart from, and therefore imperfect in respect of, God, in respect of which there is availed a way back. It would seem that the way back would be to intuit what God is about and then to will to accept and devote oneself to that; to be willing to have all that stands in the way of getting back to be, by grace, lifted.
SAVING DANCE: At some point, during some reincarnation or resurrection, it would seem that one would need to intuit or apprehend how it can be that one can make one's way back and still retain any identity that remains inferior to and apart from God, without wholly losing oneself and being reabsorbed into God. To dance, it appears God needs separate, apart, and particular dance partners of some kind. Making such a dance possible appears to be enough of a challenge, even to God, to entail what seems to us to be a slow process of guided evolution. Slowly, God takes our feedback and guides our archtypes finally to evolve, intuit, and apprehend that we are in a dance. God wants a dignified dance, one that entails free will, or, at least, degrees of freedom. So the process is not immediately forced, as it would be were God satisfied to dance with a paper doll.
DEATH, HEAVEN, ARCHTYPES, REINCARNATION: Our bodies are secondary, derivative significations. It's the conscious feedback they facilitate that's important. Archtypes for the feedback abide, reform, and re-manifest in new bodies as old ones wear out. It's the spiritual evolution of the archtypes for which our bodies facilitate expression that's important. Consciousness in its particular manifestations is everywhere and always of a same common sponsor and connecting character. The Universe that avails the Holism (or Field) of Consciousness also avails that Field to give and receive feedback to and from Archtypes of its particular perspectives. The parts are different from, yet connected to, the whole. The Holism seeks to guide into beingness Archtypes worthy to dance with. Subject to missteps that help us mark the right steps, we are participating in a dance that connects towards spiritual evolution. We are here and now perspectives of a same, eternal spirit. We participate to blend our lives and incarnations with spiritual evolution that leads to our salvation in Archtypes within a holarchy that connects back to a dance with God. Along the way, aspects that misstep or fail to harmonize with the unfolding choices and purposes of the Lord of the Dance are discarded, or perhaps recorded in storeage, reserved to possible later revivification. This dance is less because of our "original sins" than because of our innate separation and need to preserve or reestablish connection. This dance is in respect of God's needs as well as our apprehensions. Thus, Eastern incarnations of spirit blend with Western salvations of embodiments of Archforms. There's no original sin; only original need. God has all-access to our pasts, but is not all-knowing as to our futures. To gain fulfillment in the dance, God requires our participation. Of import to us is not belief in the "reality" of the here and now, but apprehension and faith regarding its relation to the hereafter, i.e., the dance between the Particulars, the Archtypes, and the Whole.
YEAR 1: In and about Year 1, there was a context that would have inspired thinkers to ponder a need to inspire a better way for humanity to make sense of the relation between the here and now and the hereafter. That connection could not very well have "become viral" or been illustrated to the understanding of people at the time except in respect of the language, myths, terms, and beliefs at the time. It just so happens that God was necessarily involved in guiding the development and evolution of those ways of speaking and inspiring. It appears that many of the figures of speech for that way of thinking will and should continue to find worthwhile expression as the dance continues to unfold.
OUR RESPONSIBILITY: In a way, our greatest fear should be in apprehension of our power. For that which we appreciate, pray for, and seek, will often tend also to find favor with God. We have significant roles in participating in choosing the steps for how the dance should unfold.

Saturday, October 22, 2011

Small Trigger Points for Unleashing Incredible Energy

But for a one-of-a-kind Reconciling Changeless Changer, how could myriad particular patterns of evolution be constantly guided or avail expression of sensibility detectable to reason?
One thing both Obama and the Islamists often do not lack is faith. It is quite dangerous for the materialistic unfaithful to mock the faithful. What are the limits to possibilities in organizing switches, signals, and physical manifestations in this universe? Pushing a 1/4 inch domino, if properly placed, could, if everything were lined up, within about 30 segments, set in motion the knocking down of the Empire State Building. See By organizing a series of dominoes so their potential energy is stored along a line of them, one can, by a small expenditure of energy against the center of gravity of the lead smallest of them, suddenly trigger a cascading unleash of energy that is stored along the center of gravity of all of them. Planning and setting trigger points can unleash incredible forces. Given the evident self-organizing that arises out of chaos and is unleashed by the butterfly effect, can anyone correctly say, apart from the trivial, what is not possible to be signified to the fulfillment of a signifier? Beyond the trivial, what is not possible fos Sisyphus to accomplish by a persistent application of will, apprehension, empathy, insight, focus, diligence, and faith? What empires cannot be brought down by disassociating their currencies from their purpose-directed energies? Given the faith of a mustard seed, it is incalculable what could be done were the Tea Party to lead a resurging reassimilation and reinvigorization of decent, purpose-driven faith.


Whatever the holonic structure of the discrete cycling of that which gives expression to continuous appearance of properties, there emerge to our avail property expressions of at least tens of constants, including such constants as limiting values for electromagnetic radiation and acceleration due to gravity. Even so, the expressions of these relational constants are in constant flux and change, in relation to, and in respect of, locus, context, quantum leaps, conversions, and field versus particle expressiveness.
But for a one-of-a-kind Reconciling Changeless Changer, how could myriad particular patterns of evolution be constantly guided or avail expression of sensibility detectable to reason? At most fundamental level, lower case holons among the holarchy seem, by innate capacity or by Pre-Design and Pre-Organization, to avail guided evolution among perspectives of signifiers and signifieds. Regardless, discrete, smallest levels of expressions of particles are often organized to respect trips for triggering and guiding astonishing expressions of often instantaneous, fractal changes.
Thus, centers of gravity and other potential energies that are pre-stored in extant organizations are already availed and lined up, Waiting To Be Triggered to various re-organizations and purposes by particular perspectives of human will, apprehension, empathy, insight, focus, diligence, and faith.  Thus, spiritual apprehensions trigger mind apprehensions trigger brain apprehensions trigger field expressions trigger leveraged releases of potential energies trigger astonishing changes in substantively quantifiable expressions and significations.

Beyond Linear Thinking

Our universe, as it unfolds, constitutes not just a self contradiction, but a walking contradiction, a changeless changer. Yet, here it abides. It cannot be explicated, appreciated, or controlled merely by import of bivalent logic or a rule of non-contradiction. This is because logic and science are its derivatives, not its creators. Appreciating universe and one's role in relating to it necessitates more than value quantifiers such as logic or science. It also necessitates value qualifiers such as empathy and intuition. Fortunately, even though empathy and intuition are not entirely reducible to logic or science, they are self evident, in that they are evident to conscious selves. Appreciating universe necessitates more than constructing a logic system or hierarchy of a priori fundaments and consequent derivatives. It necessitates an empathetic quality for appreciating a spiritual system of holarchy.

From A.T. -- Re: "Both capitalism and socialism work on paper. It's when you introduce human nature into the equation that problems arise."

Very well put. Too many linear thinkers push simplistic formulas that look pretty on paper, but avail no insight concerning what happens once their formulas have followed results off the paper, beyond the Bell curves, where weird phase shifts occur and quantitative shapes shift into different qualitatives. We are at a point where insight is sorely needed because old paradigms simply do not work well. Examples: Giving international corporations large tax breaks hardly incentives more production in America when the money is simply siphoned all the faster to overseas markets run by gangsters, where labor is cheap and senses of entitlement are low. Same for giving laid off workers welfare benefits forever. At some point, thinkers need to begin looking past the money and other second-order abstractions to that which money is supposed to facilitate: people trading their talents, production, and wills to work. It's no good simply to pour out revenues --- either down the hole of welfare addicts who are content in their holes, or into the siphon pipes of dismantling cannibalizers. Either way, the larger the role government plays in pouring "stimulus" revenues into such welfare holes and corporate siphon pipes, the faster America, as patient, dies of blood letting. Modern government is panicked, doing the same things that don't work, only faster, much like the bleeding doctors who stimulated Washington's early death. Until government gets more insight, it should follow the first rule of medicine: First do no harm. Then put aside the old linear models. Think about how to stop pouring out money. Instead, think about how to start getting out of the way so people can look out for themselves. Then think about how to assimilate and defend such a people as a nation. Stop the staking out of our nation onto a feast table for international, sociopathic marauders, who begin by eating through the bellies of our politicians and then feigning to represent our interests.

Friday, October 21, 2011


Holistic Universe, in unfolding its story-telling via significations to be interpreted as substance, interfunctions and presents to us in discrete, quantum sequences of feedback, back and forth, from whole to parts, from parts to whole. Because of the nature of our perspectives of now-ness, we experience a shared illusion that the space-time of our universe exists as a quantifiable continuosity, as if it were substance-in-itself, a changeless-changer. Parameters for our identities are meta-fuzzed in a way that facilitates our experiences, to reconcile us with a synchronicity that preserves both the sequentiality of our experiential interpretations and the absolutes that limit our perceptions. Holonic fuzz facilitates various fundaments: the separateness (cracked symmetry) of patterns, forms, bodies, and identities of perspectives; the constant conservation of math and substance (matter and energy); the relative constants that relate to us as gravity (space) and light (time); the illusion of continuosity and sequentiality; the empathetic intuition of the moral worth of other perspectives of consciousness; and the wall of statistics that blocks access of mortals to prove, disprove, or subjugate their sponsoring Holism.

The fuzz efficiently blocks each perspective of consciousness from receiving information that would mark the destruction of the curtain that conserves the apprehensions of each perspective's experiences. Without the fuzz, all particular measures and perceptions of universe and substance would vanish. The fuzz is contemporaneous byproduct of that by which particular apprehensions are availed their kinds and degrees of freedom and dignity. The fuzz is intuited, but aspects of it are apparent, and indirect measures of it may be possible. Direct measures or controls over it are beyond mortals. In that respect, the fuzz is "dark." It doubles to constitute an aspect of what physicists may call "dark matter" or "dark energy."
The Author of the fuzz may well correlate, synchronize, and reconcile all surrounding perspectives to an opportunity to interfunction with an eternally, perennially present interpretation of a manifestation of the Author's truth, empathy, and music. From time to time, expression may be availed through a special messenger, envoy, or exemplar. In each case, the Coordinator who facilitated the envoy would be one and the same God. The envoy would be supported by inspiration and miracles. Indeed, some talents are blessed to be expressed by some people in ways so beautiful or compelling as to defy any probable explanation through mere evolution from nature. Regardless, the miraculous character of the Envoy would NOT be supported by proof in logic or science. This is because logic and science could not very well prove God without being superior to God ... which they are not.
In variously expressing points of inspiration for those all around, the Author would NOT be exercising an all powerful or all knowing capacity. Rather, the Author would be seeking to win us, while respecting our freedom and dignity. Even so, the Author would retain access to all the power and knowledge that at any present time may abide and have accumulated. From availing our various degrees of freedom and dignity, there may from time to time and place to place arise violence, disorder, and angst, as God coordinates our spiritually represented signifiers with our substantively represented signifieds. From time to time, violence may become more conducive to getting The Word out. Regardless, violence for the sake of violence is not God's way. God may carry an aspect of angst, which God generally banishes from God's better inclinations. That angst, however, may grow as God's spiritual challenges grow ... in ways beyond our fathom. So, Hell may be real, as a temporal byproduct. However, the invitation to serve God is eternal.


From RichB, at
“The major flaw [in C.S. Lewis’ argument regarding Jesus] is the assertion that there are only three options and that those options are mutually exclusive. I think this is known as a false dichotomy (or should that be trichotomy?)

Even with the original 3 options, you have to consider the possibility that Jesus was a liar AND a lunatic, or lunatic AND Lord, or possibly all 3.

Lewis provided just 3 options because he was talking only about the Bible's depiction of Jesus. His basic argument was that the Bible doesn't give us the option of saying "I think Jesus was a good moral teacher, but I don't think he was the son of God". If you take the Bible story at face value then if Jesus is not God, he'd either have to be lying or delusional (or both), and neither of those qualities would make him a reliable moral teacher.

But if you don't take the Bible at face value (which even many self-identifying Christians don't, and people who argue Jesus was not the son of God CERTAINLY don't!), then all options are on the table, up to and including the possibility that Jesus never existed at all.

Another option that still fits in with the Biblical account of Jesus's existence is that Jesus was not the son of God, but was tricked by others into believing that he was. This would make him neither a liar nor a lunatic, it would just make him gullible.”


For my part, I suspect there have from time to time occurred at least composite demonstrations through envoys and exemplars such as Jesus. Some of the talents are simply overpowering. Philosophically, I don’t see that as being beyond the power or inclination of God. I have no need to consider the envoy as being other than an avatar for a representation of God’s then and there interests. I also have no need to try to use that which is inferior to God, i.e., logic and science, to try to prove God. Rather, I think intuition, experience, logic, and science join to avail a reasonable belief and faith in God. As one pursues a philosophy that can respect both science and purposefulness, I think a kind of intuitive, trivalent logic eventually leads one to apprehend God.


Regarding the C. S. Lewis Trilemma:  It should be rephrased at least as a quad-lemma.  There are these possibilities:  Liar, Insane Person, or Truth Teller.  But there is also at least a fourth:  Uncertain Unknowing Believer.  That is, God Himself may have all the power and knowledge that abides, and yet be uncertain of it, and un-knowing of what He may determine to do with it.  The fourth is consistent with my belief, for it is based on faith, not knowing certainty, and it is also based on belief in human freedom and dignity, even if only on loan from God.

Thursday, October 20, 2011



Often, that which one thinks of as relationally-measurable, inanimate-substance can be conceptualized as consisting of meta-placeholders (holons) for operators, signifiers, and representations of various forces, interfunctioning (within a holarchy) in mathematical obedience to variously synchronizing formulas. Some of the operators happen to become designed to effect or force discrete generations and quanta, in accord with mathematical randomness. Some of the operators happen to become designed to be responsive to meta placeholders for representing non-random, directional forces for entangling, transposing, unifying, splitting, vibrating, attracting, or repulsing. Some of the operators happen to become designed to seek to consume others, to add or reduce complex patterns of fractals, chemistry, and biology. Some of the operators happen to become designed to effect forms and bodies in order to seek self preservation. Some of the operators happen to become designed to effect, associate, and identify with forms and bodies that experience and express awareness that they are seeking to self preserve. Some of the operators happen to become designed to experience and express SELF AWARENESS that they are effecting, associating, and identifying with forms and bodies that express awareness that they are seeking to self preserve. Some of the operators happen to become designed to experience and express self awareness that their EMPATHIES extend beyond the forms of their bodies and brains, to begin to express understanding, fulfillment, and enlightenment in relation thereto.  (Note:  When I refer to "design," I don't mean pre-design. Nothing that unfolds needs necessarily have been pre-designed. However, everything we now sense is becoming designed, under a process of guiding, unfolding apprehension, in digitized two-stepped feedback between The Holon and its particular perspectives of Itself under the holarchy, in all its signifying and signified aspects.)

When that which is signified comes within the fuzzy sphere of interest of two or more field operators of more or less equal capacity to signify their influence, the successful field, in each discrete and successive sequence, will be the one that first asserts itself, therewith simultaneously becoming the more powerful for effecting such assertion.

Thus, ultimately, the relationship between and among particular perspectives of awareness (mortals) and the holistic perspective (God) is availed via a discrete dance of meta feedback. The unfolding character of that dance relates to a way in which the separateness of each particular perspective is buffered or fuzzed. By definition, a perspective that identifies with a part will not have the perspective of the whole. Nor will the perspective of the whole necessarily fully apprehend the quality of the perspective of each part. Still, the perspective of the whole may well map or record a coordinate appreciation of the quality of the perspective of each part, with which it may, on the demise of each part, absorb. Thus, there abides meaning in the adventuring of mortals.

Thus, a function for apprehending and appreciating choice-making (God) operates in a circle dance with a function of force-directing (Nature). The medium for such interfunctioning is meta (Mysterious). In this, there abides no necessary violation of logic, experience, science, or intuition. However, there does abide a basis for appreciating meaningfulness. Thus, there abides a basis for inculcating and inspiring societies to encourage empathetic appreciations and communications within their civilizations.

Bottom line:  It is logically, empirically, and intuitively unsound to search for scientific measure or demonstration of a cartesian ghost or soul or mind in the machine or body or brain.  Rather, the machine, the body, and the brain are to be explained in terms of The Ghost, i.e., The Holon!  And The Holon is beyond measure or replicative demonstration.  Rather, IT simply abides, and we abide simply as perspectives of IT.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011


When we sense and measure things, we don't sense them as things-in-themselves, but in relational respects. When we seek to manipulate things, we don't sense ourselves as directly manipulating any thing in itself, but as manipulating relational aspects. How we approach a manipulation will depend on relational purpose and context. The same model of approach will not work for all purposes and contexts. Thus, models rely on analogies, which rely on metaphors and figures of speech, i.e., models facilitate attempts to approach appreciations of one kind of thing in terms of another, even as we remain aware that such comparisons, while practical for some purposes, will not be precisely accurate or literal for all purposes. Example: A cosmologist discussing the "flatness" of the universe need not mean that the universe is literally a flat disc, but simply that light rays need not curve back into any geometrical center.

A problem with scientific experts is that they tend to bind themselves narrowly to the linear, often non-dynamic math that defines limits for their favored models.   When devoted to explicating reality in respect of a particular model, a scientist may not see much beyond the fuzzy borders for his model, because no single model can avail a complete, coherent, consistent map of reality.  Separate models, once pushed to their limits, cannot avail precise mathematical translations among themselves. The way a term is measured for one model may not avail a same meaning or measure for how aspects of it may be referenced for another model.  Math itself may show that the identity of a "physical thing" that can be scaled in terms of one kind of thing or aspect (charge, polarity, entanglement, spin, orbit, level, vibration, direction, locus, inertia, angular momentum, amplitude, frequency, intensity, density, size, shape) may not unambiguously translate across its being split, eaten, or scaled in respect of a different kind of thing.  Values cannot be scaled in respect of one kind of thing (or identity) and then taken and unambiguously scaled in respect of a different kind of thing.  Rather, translations in qualities expressed among quanta occur in discrete leaps, interludes, and fractals. During or across such leaps of quanta, no mortal can predict precisely how, whether, or why a particular pattern or result will emerge.  A cookbook may make predictable a practical translation from one quality to another, but it will not precisely explicate the quality of all that is done during or across the transposing interlude or instantiation. Indeed, by definition, the  qualitative aspect of a translation across boundaries of kinds of sets cannot be quantitatively reduced.  One cannot take components of a cow, rearrange them into a different kind of beast, and then non-arbitrarily measure the Frankenstein in terms of its "cowness."

There is also the qualitative aspect of what it means to try to sense, think, and predict as a cow. That is, there abides a problem of infinite regress in trying to quantify the quality of experiencing consciousness as a cow. An infinite regress consists in this: To be of objective service, the math for each model must be treated as if exterior to one’s subjective consciousness. Yet, one’s subjective consciousness is part of reality. Yet, one cannot very well quantify or plug a prediction of one’s future behavior (or of the future behavior of anyone else) into a formula and then build on that to predict subsequent results. Why? Because at the same time one predicts one’s future behavior, one will have simultaneously altered the factors that will constrain one’s future behavior, as well as the behavior of all to whom such prediction was communicated. Knowing what one intends or is likely to do, one simultaneously becomes free to alter it. And so on. When you compound this by similar degrees of freedom availed to every human (or other) perspective of consciousness, you begin to apprehend a many-faceted problem in math. Thus, an infinite regress marks our incapacity to reduce our own consciousness to mathematical precision, prediction, or control. The infinite regress also marks our incapacity to comprehend the mystery of how various perspectives of consciousness somehow synchronize to avail coordinate signification and meaningful communication among themselves. We may intuit a reconciling Source for such synchronization of perspectives of conscious experience, but we cannot objectify, predict, or control IT, or how IT may guide that which is to unfold as our future.

If our universe somehow constitutes an a-temporal, one-of-a-kind class unto itself, as a Qualitatively-Quantifiable Holon (of a class of one, with capacity to leverage its oneness into appreciations of countable math), then intuition suggests it carries an holistic aspect, nature, or character, which somehow correlates with Its capacity to Be, yet also to always be in a state of Becoming, or changing (its only constant being that It constantly changes?), and to transmit that aspect with various (kinds of layers and levels of degrees) of perspectives of Itself. That transmittable aspect would not itself be a severable part of a hierarchy, but an indivisible aspect of a holarchy. IT finds, experiences, prehends, apprehends, appreciates, and synchronizes qualities of changing expressions by attaching and identifying Itself with variously temporal, fluxing, quantifiable, measurable significations of feedback within and among Itself ... as a holon. In some meta-mysterious way, IT has one-of-a-kind circular capacity to will Its destiny based on feedback appreciation for the unfolding of Its destiny. How IT expresses Its perspectives of conscious will cannot be reverse-engineered by the kind of tinkering that is availed to our incomplete sciences and mortal perspectives. Our "scientific" attempts to quantify Spirit or to measure or find the locus of conscious Mind ("the ghost in the machine") in some part of the brain cannot but come to naught.

Each particular perspective of Mind coalesces in concert with its self-identifying in relation to a contextually-embodied, quantifiable frame-of-reference and point-of-view. The clarity of a perspective's severable coalescence will depend upon the fuzzy character of the cluster of undecided and unchosen possibilities that accompanies the unfolding experiencing of its perspective. All that buffers and separates each perspective of Will from being re-absorbed into the holon of Mind is correlated with that fuzz. Simply put, the aspect of each perspective for being separate will not be found in any correlative, physically-measurable "thing" or part of the brain. It is the Holon's meta capacity for dividing its unitary perspective by interposing patches of fuzz that avails each-perspective-that-experiences-Itself-as-being-separate with an illusion of being wholly derivative of "nothing but" the substance that it measures around itself. However, the experience of each perspective flows in a stream of two-way feedback, from the whole to the part, and from the part to the whole. Thus, each mortal perspective has no logical, empirical, or objective basis by which to disbelieve its "Intuition" (if such it has) that the Holon (God) experiences an entirely correlative and empathetic dance with ITs various perspectives of consciousness (that is, that the experience of consciousness among every perspective is shared in a same, fundamental, reconciling, unifying, holistic quality and aspect).

That said, in practice, we do TRY to model and bend our future to mathematically objective controls. For that, economists and other social and political mathematicians and “scientists” tinker with techniques and leverage models that often astonish us in their unintended, dynamic consequences. However, there is no math by which to leap, convert, reduce, control, or objectify the DYNAMIC back and forth dance between models, between the subjectivity of the eating signifier and the objectivity of the eaten signified. To the extent we cannot roboticize human beings or model the subjective quality of consciousness, our scientific models and the math we apply to them will never avail us the foresight to apprehend all of that which our inventiveness may or should next leverage. To hope to receive vision and guidance that can bend beyond the puny math of our practical and political constructs, one must be receptive to empathy, insight, and vision "from on high." Yes, we can construct various models and myths to our hearts’ content, and we can make the Math Within The Limits Of Each Model just as rigorous as we want. Still, there will always remain a fuzzy interface that will preclude the unification of our various models into any grand construct that could possibly allow a mere perspective of consciousness to measure its touch to the face of the holistic field of consciousness.

Thus, mortal mathematicians and modelers do not have capacity to divine that which society should do. To let math fool non-mathematicians into believing they can our should surrender their responsibility for their own empathies and choices would be to surrender their dignity as individually responsible beings of consciousness. Math modelers CAN avail us with techniques and telescopes by which to focus on various layers and levels of exterior reality. Within limits of Bell curves, modelers may interpret how an exterior reality of “Y” will likely follow “X.” They CANNOT tell us what will likely happen when a situation or model becomes heated or consumed beyond its descriptive parameters, when more and more events begin to fall off the Bell chart. Nor can they reconcile all the many perspectives and models that avail color and character to our unfolding choices.

Bottom Line: No team of scientists in service to a despot can be qualified, top-down, to best regulate and distribute all aspects of society. This is because the best system of regulation is that which best avails the responsibility of individual perspectives of consciousness, bottom-up. That is an issue for spiritual empathy, not for scientific determination. Except in service of Bilderbergers falsely claiming to be more spiritually evolved, scientists can hardly assert a decent claim to expurgate spiritual empathies from the public square. Rather, to twist top-down scientific determination in order to force spiritual empathy is to subjugate heaven to hell. Mutually imposed hell is what Anarchists, Atheists, Islamists, Socialists, Fascists, Crony Capitalists, and Despots would subjugate the world to. Scientifically coerced destruction or redistribution is NOT individually responsible charity. Rather, Coerced Charity is the lying calling card of Big Brother, owning and operating and pillaging Big Government, posing as Secular Religion. The Obama Regime carries all the hallmarks of unspiritual unsanity. Neither Truth nor Justice is in its science or its intuition. What is in the Regime is a near-naked confidence and aggress in the corruption of will to absolute power; that is, a reduction of humanity ... to Eloi ... by Morlocks. Obamaginem esse delendam

Monday, October 17, 2011

Orwellian Foundations

Of Orwellian Foundations:  Communism needs to be clarified. It's not communalism. Only a master Orwellian would characterize it as taking from each according to abilities and distributing to each according to needs. In the real world, Communism reduces to the use by the corrupt of the stupid in order to rule the capable. It makes little difference whether you call communism demonic socialism or demonic capitalism. Either way, it's demonic.

Bilderbergers give, so that highbrow foundations can enthrall us with wonderments, such as “Piss Christ,” the celebration of which was sponsored by the NEA, whose Communications Director eventually became Yosi Sergant, later suspected by Andrew Breitbart of having participated in a conference call directing artists to promote Obama's domestic agenda. The William J. Clinton Foundation gives us the Clinton Climate Initiative, helping to convince people to want to line up for the privilege of buying carbon credits. Check out the report about foundations that was given as far back as 1912, by Basil M. Manley, Director of Research and Investigation. He declared, "Control is being extended largely through the creation of enormous privately managed funds for indefinite purposes, hereinafter designated 'foundations." Not only does the sponsoring of such "philanthropic gifts" not promote democracy or enlighten decent society, it insults decent society. Thus, the middle class has long slept while evil has been funneling money through despotic corporatists into tax exempt foundations and tax shelters, so most of us can now have the privilege of being allowed to dig into our own serfdom.
It’s the Middle Class that defends our ground and gives us the actual ministers, doctors, scientists, historians, and artists who help make sense of our lives and man the medical, police, fire, shelter and other safety nets and charities for all society’s derelicts. Problem is: Derelicts prefer not to appreciate safety nets as charities provided by devout middle class workers and volunteers, but to take them as entitlements. How easier to capture entitlements than to align with that other entitlement-minded segment of society, Bilderbergers and their fawning elitists? The middle class, so preoccupied with hard and good works, has hardly noticed the unholy gathering of entitlement-minded derelicts and corrupt elitists, until the wannabe plundering derelicts and their self-styling chiefs and kings have now surrounded nearly every decent, trusting soul.
Taxing Bilderbergers' INCOME is counterproductive. They'll simply take it back, in political kickbacks. The only way to reach them is by taxing how they spend their WEALTH. To do that, all consumption ought to be taxed, and the translation of wealth into political consumption ought especially to be very "progressively" taxed! We punish insider trading in securities. Why not at least tax insider trading of wealth for political influence? Indeed, when wealth is used to grease political influence, why not confiscate it entirely, and return it entirely to cities or states? Sure, let money talk and enjoy political free speech, but tax the hell out of it when it is found to have talked in too furtively a fashion.
One soon notices how the richest foundations often serve as tax dodges, availed by ordinary Americans to help plutocrats fund ways for putting rings through the noses of the masses. All this has been played before. This time, perhaps the axis of entitlement-minded corruptocrats has played its hand too soon, and has forgotten that the American middle class is not the defenseless lamb of the past, but a mature ram. Meanwhile, however, Soros is quietly buying up all the gun companies. When foundations of Soros ilk are investigated, no doubt many bribes will be paid to enlist masses of derelicts and flash mobs to rain fire and brimstone upon every American who tries to uproot the communism, filth, corruption, constitutional treason, mind enslavement, and godlessness that are rampant in the land.
When Buffet says he'd rather be charitable to his foundation than to the government, what he means is that his foundation is meant to be among those that will help push all governments under the noble rule of an international syndicate of corporatists who know best. Political Economics 101: Unchecked and absolute wealth translates into absolute power, which translates towards the corruption or belittlement of every decent person and thing. What kind of educated fool would believe plutocrats are promoting socialism just so they can live among the common people? Evil has long been growing strong under tax codes designed to enhance control by the most wealthy. Their grip is now much too strong to expect any presidential candidate to have a chance unless he or she first passes muster with Bilderbergers. Unless the American people somehow turn a Bilderberger into their own double agent, the arch structure now in place for worldwide reimposition of serfdom will not be turned. For Bilderbergers, ordinary people will soon be considered as one of two things: neutered pets or feral pests. A Screwtape toast to rot: All praise be to Obama-Soros.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Illusion of Being the Driver

Both Rinos and Dinos want to destroy the middle class. Rinos don't want competition on their clouds, and Dinos don't want anyone that causes them to feel shame for what they may have failed to achieve. Dinos prefer an aristocratic oligarchy. That way, since the only way to break into the elite class would almost always be to be born into it, Dinos need never feel shame, and Rinos need never feel threatened. The only thing lost will be freedom to think for oneself and to communicate about it. But why would a peasant or billionaire care about such a trifle? (Sarc.) A small price to pay for the economic Utopia of Collectivism that will be owned and operated by elites, and the Umma for which Imams will enforce bowing five times a day.


Whether Rinos believe it or not, they have Dinos convinced that: there's nothing special worth preserving about America, capitalism is always corrupt, elites and scientists know best, national borders are obsolete, the entire environment is endangered, forced competition with third world labor is fair, families are repressive, the material world is a one time affair, immediate gratification is an entitlement, and God is dead. Every significant institution is owned and operated by those who run Rinos and fool Dinos. Thus, we have wonderful ideas, like global warming, carbon exchanges, depopulation, and free trade with gangsters. We even have Americans fooled that, but for a world market and free trade with despotic regimes, our economy could never have flourished. For awhile, we were even told we lacked energy resources and rare earth materials to make it on our own, without free trade. Lol. While Bush had us attentive to 9-1-1, did he willingly do the least effective thing to shut down the border? How long did he let Ramos and Compean rot? Why did he try to turn port security over to Dubai? How little did he respect aspirations of middle class people of the Tea Party? Look around. Which viable Republican candidate denounces the Bilderberg-spooned Agenda 21 sponsored by the UN? Anyone? Anyone?

Saturday, October 15, 2011

999 and the Home Owners Deduction

999 would not hurt the housing industry; it would stabilize it. Like most swords, the income tax deduction for making interest payments for buying homes is double-edged. Yes, it can encourage booms in the housing industry. (Not that booms are necessarily a good thing.) Obviously, people are attracted to put money in things conventional wisdom counts on to appreciate in value, especially when doing so reduces their tax rates. However, There Is No Free Lunch! The slack will be taken up in increased costs for new buyers. So this is just another kind of gimmicky pyramid scheme, for making younger generations pull burdens imposed by elders. The benefit of the income tax deduction is temporary, being most prominant for those who get into the game early, but less likely to flow through to very much benefit for following generations. Further, young families need to move more often to follow the job market. Home ownership, especially once the market stagnates, becomes an anvil around their necks. The popular benefits under home buyers' interest deductions are a lot like robbing younger Peter to pay older Paul (and the gimmick man in the middle). This cynical kind of connivery occurs every time government engages in stumulus shenanigans! Every time, these schemes blow unsustainable bubbles into the market. If government could be Made To Butt Out And Confine Itself To Its Proper, Limited Role, the market would become more balanced and less enticing to sharpies, panderers, and race baiters, who are practiced in arts for leveraging gimmicks, credit default swaps, and other unsane hedges, but who otherwise constitute drags on society. If the market were freed to balance home needs, people would be more inclined to rent while their jobs were in flux, and they would be less inclined to take speculative risks by buying homes that are larger than they need or can safely afford. Landlords would still build and rent housing, just more realistically coordinated with the market. It hardly takes an economist to spot a ponzi scheme. The goal should be to make Congress as unneeded as possible.

Friday, October 14, 2011

Choice of Axiom for Dance of Conceptualization

Of quantum discretes that signify Quantities while availing continuous experiences of Qualities:
A moral Dance unfolds. It entails a process, or two-step dance, of quantifiably digitized feedback. The partners consist of a Field synchronizer (God?) dancing with Particular Perspectives of the synchronization (Human Consciousness). Each Perspective apprehends its point of view within the fuzzy parameters and possibilities availed to its fluxing and allotted context. Each Apprehension coordinates with Intention in respect of the preservation and flourishing of its sponsor's Identity. That Intention leads to a Synchronization of Consequences by the Synchronizer. Depending on discrete level and layer of analysis, that synchronization may be appreciated in various aspects of pre-set Default (deity-like inanimate substance, conceptualized as pre-set artifacts of meta-functioning levels of consciousness) interfunctioning in (god-like) Choice-making active engagement among levels of consciousness. The Consequences are particularly Appreciated. Each particular Appreciation leads to Apprehension-Intention in its Appreciator. That Intention leads to Consequences, which the Synchronizer synchronizes. Back and forth between the Field and its expression of particular perspectives goes the quantitiatively digitized expression of Feedback. However, the motive (or emotive) QUALITY of conscious Apprehension-Appreciation that is enjoyed (or feared) by each Perspective (perhaps enjoyed as well by the Synchronizer) is not itself subject to direct measurement. Thus, the shared Play of our Morality partakes both of the Intentional and the Consequential, the Quantitative and the Qualitative, in a discretely separated but sequential unfolding. Thus, Morality pertains in part both to State of Mind as well as to Responsibility for Results. To whine that such often seems "unfair" is mainly irrelevant.

It's when Perspectives of a Field of Consciousness begin to apprehend the Dance that things get metaphysically interesting. A body may be merely a derivative of pre-set signs, a bootstrapped vehicle for facilitating the Dance. The human body may tend to be more fitted to house a Perspective at a level that can apprehend an apprehension of metaphysics. However, what becomes of each such Perspective, once the substantive form of body that was leveraged by it decays? Is all the progress, learning, experience, and awareness of substantive possibilities that were theretofore affiliated with a now dead body then lost to the Field that underlies the universe? In withdrawing the conditions that theretofore sustained the body that housed a Perspective, does the encompassing Field therewith reclaim the Perspective to its embrace? If so, may the re-assimilated and absorbed Perspective then "remember" or receive enhanced metaphysical capacities in respect of its particular ventures into the quantifying universe?

Thus, when one's axiomatic system begins with a conception of a conscious Field interfunctioning with conscious Perspectives, one may conceptualize the non-discrete Continuity of space-time as epiphenomenal appearance, artefactually signified in respect of a dance of apprehension-appreciation that unfolds between a Synchronizer-field and its expressions of particular Perspectives. That is, the appearance of Continuity is derivative of interfunctioning of digitized Discretes. On the other hand, when one's axiomatic system begins with a conception of non-conscious, inanimate Space-Time (gravity), so that one tries to model everything else in respect of a concept of a non-conscious, "holistic thing" (purely substantive universe), one will eventually be led to try to reconcile and reduce everything, even the quality of consciousness, to purely quantifiable relationships. The fly in that ointment is this: One cannot objectively prove that which Ought to be done based only on that which is quantifiably measured to have been done. In other words, were one successfully to reduce Man to mere Quantities, one would have suicide-bombed, humbled, devalued, dehumanized, or zombie-fied Man. Conversations about that which we should do would become uninspired, meaningless, and absurd, untethered to any attracting assimilation.

To my adducement (or intuition?), people begin a mistaken path when they expect to reconcile a true and correct unifying belief about "reality" that will be constant, consistent, and practical for all purposes, regardless of point of view, context (frame or model) of reference, and flux of purposes. I don't think we have access to map a unifying model for that kind of reality. Our bivalent logic runs up against the paradox of the class (or set) of one. I think it's enough that our different maps tend to be practical for different purposes. I suspect the Lewis people and the anti-Lewis people are both wrong if they expect, either via objective experimentation or rigorous logic, to adduce an all purpose unifying map. The basis for my suspicion is fuzzy, ineffable, interior, subjective experience. Because I bootstrap intuition to "prove" intuition, I can neither be proved right nor wrong. I am a Whitman blade of grass.
From Walt Whitman --- Song of Myself:
The wild gander leads his flock through the cool night;
Ya-honk! he says, and sounds it down to me like an invitation
 Wandering, amazed at my own lightness and glee;
In the late afternoon choosing a safe spot to pass the night,
Kindling a fire and broiling the fresh-kill’d game;
Falling asleep on the gather’d leaves, with my dog and gun by my side.
I think I could turn and live with animals, they are so placid and self-contain’d;
I stand and look at them long and long.
They do not sweat and whine about their condition;
They do not lie awake in the dark and weep for their sins;
They do not make me sick discussing their duty to God;
 Why should I wish to see God better than this day?
I see something of God each hour of the twenty-four, and each moment then;
In the faces of men and women I see God, and in my own face in the glass;
I find letters from God dropt in the street—and every one is sign’d by God’s name,
 The spotted hawk swoops by and accuses me—he complains of my gab and my loitering.
I too am not a bit tamed—I too am untranslatable;
I sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world.

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Yates, Faith, and Hope

From A.T. -- Re: "Obama was all hype and no substance. That realization has dawned on voters, resulting in horrendous polling. Richard Nixon was never liked, but he was at least thought competent. Obama was liked but never competent."

Well, Nixon was no Communist, but Obama is. (If he's not, pray tell where he'd voluntarily stop his collectivization, given opportunity to contrive enough crises?) Doesn't the description above sum up every Communist who has ever achieved power? That is, unless, by competence, you mean competence to deliver people to misery and then to make them, with fear or bribes, pretend it's great. Sort of like a human misery pyramid or Ponzi scheme: Get people to buy into a great sounding scheme and then, once you have them, show that their only way out is to recruit and stand on top of enough heads of idiots. Once you run out of new people to recruit, then, to allow the same cronies (excuse me, those-elites-who-know-best) to rule until they die or begin to drool, you contrive an emergency, freeze the situation, and call off elections. Putin. Chavez. Castro. Dear Leader. See a pattern? After you see enough black cats crossing the same deja vu path twice, you begin to think like Yates: "That twenty centuries of stony sleep / Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
/ And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, / Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?"

We now know, given enough exposure to high tech "education," that a majority of people can be brain washed, that modern advertising techniques have devised how, and that Advertising-Serves-The-Business-Of-Farming-Idiots-Just-As-Easily-As-It-Serves-Consumption-Driven-Capitalism. These techniques are everywhere --- on our computers, in our media, music, posters, schools, banks, courts, speech codes ... even in our fake religions (Black Liberation Theology). The wonder is that approximately half of the populaton (Tea Partiers) still are not so hollow as to have lost all wits to resist. Apart from faith-and-hope, the question you have to ask yourself, punk, is Do-you-have-good-reason-to-trust-either-Romney-or-Cain?

Science for the Communal Savage

Science for the Communal Savage: Most everyone aggresses to assess moral fault, perhaps assuming problems would generally be resolved if only the target were made responsible enough to accept blame. We seem to be animated to behave this way, even when we don't seek any coherent basis for morality that is higher than whatever passes for our immediate desires. Fault tends to be viewed as something that does not belong to oneself, but mainly to others. People generally consider situations reactively, rather than as subjects for systemic analysis.

What is THE FAULT for the movement among the jobless to mass in order to protest as occupiers? Should they mass only to call attention to an ever increasing social problem, or should they seek to lay blame? Should the blame be on (1) themselves, (2) the Democrat establishment, or (3) the Republican opposition to the establishment? Is blame being gamed and, if so, by whom? What is the motivation? First, did the people who are out of work cause their own problem by how they voted? Second, did the Socialists who were elected, because of that to which they are beholden, exacerbate the problem? Third, would problems be lessened if only opponents would not resist trends towards putting the world under socialism? Among those three choices, which most accurately defines the blame? Regardless, does assessing fault have anything much to do with inspiring people to devise and assimilate to more reasonable or moral responsibilities? Have we become too much conditioned to feel entitled to immediate solutions, when the only way forward is to accept the hard work that is entailed in gradual solutions?

Why does our society seem to have lost capacity or leaders to assimilate us to gradual, hard work solutions? We have come to an impasse that will continue to mock us until one side or the other gives way. Science can guide us, but it cannot prove which side, were it to prevail, would most likely best serve us. However, innate good sense suggests to most Conservatives that, if we want a best chance to enhance the freedom and dignity of each citizen, we must (1) defend the borders of our citizenry, (2) staunch the drain of our industry and resources, and (3) reverse and make better sense of the pace of bureaucratic entanglement.

Liberals generally claim not to rely on common sense or traditional religion, but mainly on some kind of syncretic and incoherent combination of natural altruism (philosophy of the noble savage?), yet to be guided only by science. The issue now before the world: Is empathetic regard for the dignity of our fellows best promoted by availing more individual FREEDOM and less governmental and bureaucratic intrusion, or is altrusim best promoted under the "charitable" force of a COLLECTIVE to be ruled by a governing elite? On that fundamental question, the world is at an impasse.

If Liberty Lovers are to prevail, they must inspire each member of the masses to believe in his own independent and spiritual dignity. At the same time, Liberty Lovers must work to remove blinders, so all can more plainly see the nature of the generally misguided and often corrupt purposes of those who seek (1) to collectivize us, (2) to rule us, and (3) to dissolve our nation with the acid of faux free trade with collectivizing gangsters. Has the middle class been at fault for having too long been asleep to the shenanigans and incoherency of the ignorant and the corrupt? It's past time for every decent American of whatever race or creed to take up the Tea Party Person's burden.

Sunday, October 9, 2011

Wormwood Materialism

From A.T. --- Author, Re: "This "corporations run the government" meme has been around since the 1970s, and it's no more true now than it was then. As Rick Moran points out, if corporations really ran the government would we have an EPA, OSHA, SEC, the EEOC, the FHA, the Department of Labor, or any of the other number of state and federal agencies regulate corporate behavior?"

Oh please. Where did Obama get most of his campaign finance support? It's obvious corporatists don't RUN government efficiently (or like a corporation). But internationalists among them do milk, cannibalize, and RUIN governments. Indeed, who is calling, financing, and hedging with the Wall Street Occupiers and flash mobs? Isn't that precious ... look what our protesters have advocated: More regulations we can use to increase control and pull the ladder up.

What's RUINING us is not the corporate form or corporations, per se, but international crony corporatist speculators whose entire faith lies in materialism. So long as nothing checks them from cannibalizing the American middle class, they need not give a damn about preserving meaningful influence or freedom for ordinary strivers against a purely materialistic alliance of elite apologists and useful dupes. Forget ownership. Ask what small percentage of people CONTROL most of the world's politicians and productivity? What tends to be their political philosophy?

Re: "The problem isn't corporations, the problem is that we have a government that has its fingers in nearly every aspect of the economy." Agree. But what's the nature of the political alliance and materialistic philosophy that has fostered this? If the problem is middle class indolence rather than a philosophy of materialism run amuck, then ask what are the foundations and institutions that have fostered this indolence? What? The American middle class deserves to be impoverished for not bowing down to rotting internationalists? What kind of wormwood is this?

Saturday, October 8, 2011

A Priori Truth and Morality

I believe or intuit a faith:  that I should work with others to establish, defend, and propagate a decent civilization for reasonably availing the freedom of expression and enterprise of its citizens.  Apart from direct intuition, or as an aspect of conscious faith, I cannot prove the validity of such a belief ---- not as a derivative of logic, nor as being necessarily consistent with empirical experience.  Rather, I take such belief as a priori given, an innate aspect of the condition of being human, a foundation upon which I base all philosophy.  That faith seems innate to my consciousness.  If it does not seem innate to yours, so be it.  I recognize that others may not share that faith, and they may even be antagonistic to it.  When they believe and behave antagonistic to it, I see little reason why I should tolerate them, beyond what may be convenient.  Some consider such faith  to be meaningless, irrelevant, or a hindrance to philosophical progress.  There are many who claim, incoherently, not to accept, act upon, or believe anything or any faith unless it can be demonstrated consistent with logic or material experience.  Insofar as faith cannot be demonstrated consistent with logic or material experience, such persons render themselves irrelevant to any moral pursuit that may be superior to logic or to material experience.  Insofar as moral "oughts" cannot be derived from material existence, such persons render their philosophies mainly meaningless, irrelevant, or of hindrance to moral progress.  Insofar as such persons (analytic positivists) disdain all that cannot be quantitatively considered, they necessarily concentrate on how the distribution of that which constitutes material goods can be measured, perhaps to ascertain what is the mean distribution or what would be necessary to effect more equal distribution, thus to compare their worth in respect of a material scale.  Such persons have no moral precept by which to advocate that government "should" in any way redistribute material wealth.  The foundation of their philosophy is directly antithetical to any notion of "should."  When such a person claims his philosophy is not antithetical to moral advocacy, he is either incoherent or seeking to profit by deploying deception.  How can he profit by advocating for governmental enforced redistribution of material wealth?  Well, at least two ways:  First, he can enlist the fascist force of numbers, by inculcating others to help his advocacy, as by conditioning them to believe they ought to be entitled to equal shares in whatever any other may produce.  Second, building on skill for living a lie, he can plan ways to backstab fellow fascists when they least expect it.  He can finance protesters to seek stimulus bills designed mainly to transfer fiat wealth to skilled sociopaths.  After all, nothing in his philosophy forbids it.  By living such a lie, he maximizes his opportunities to experience short term pleasure, survival, and replication of his genes and memes by mating with such persons as he is able to condition, hoodwink, or subjugate.  Living such a lie, he becomes ever more facile in rationalizing it among all whose thinking may be slowed by more deliberately seeking more worthwhile philosophy to devote themselves to.  As Chris Matthews may say, Life's a campaign.  There abides a clear choice among paths:  seek fulfillment by devoting oneself to a search for truth and higher morality; or devote oneself to maximizing skills for tricking all others out of short term pleasures.  Responsible minded Americans tend to devote themselves to the first path; entitlement minded people devote themselves to the second.  Neither truth nor morality can abide with the second.

Thursday, October 6, 2011

Scales of Cultural Dogma

Every culture that tries to sustain itself eventually seeks to rationalize itself in respect of some vague, higher principle or deity. Finding such higher Principle to have conferred its blessings, each culture then rationalizes justification to defend against, exclude, subjugate, and/or enslave its neighbors. The more primitive the culture, the more it scales towards subjugation and enslavement. The more secure and enlightened the culture, the more it moves along the scale, from enslaving its neighbors to defending against them. When a culture moves beyond understanding or defending against neighboring cultures, to tolerating and conferring affirmative and special privileges to them, without first requiring their assimilation, it soon commits cultural suicide. What leads a secure, successful culture to tolerate its own destruction? Answer: Too much ingestion of the stupid pill. It becomes captive to a false sense of security, forgetting that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance. The sleep walking, suicidal culture is the one that equates active inculcation of dogma of stupidity with education. Indeed, we are taxing ourselves silly in order to pay teachers to evangelize the kind of stupidity that will kill us. And now, the zombies we have stupefied are massing, coming home to roost. By now, the Tea Party well knows sociopathic opportunists will not let this crisis go to waste. It's time to recognize that the godless enemy is not interested in fairness. It's "higher principle" reduces to this: subjugation and taking the spoils. There's absolutely no reason to tolerate, much less honor, the perps and their useful idiocracy.

Tuesday, October 4, 2011

Zombie Ceteris Paribus

Zombie Ceteris Paribus (all zombies remaining equal): Factors that seem to account for many complex systems, such as systems governing human civilizations, are so interconnected and fluxing that they defy analysis via customary techniques that use double blind experiments while varying only one factor at a time. In every complex regime, a despot and his party line toeing elitists will deceive the easily misled or bribed hoi polloi by claiming the blessings of "settled science." Apart from preference of myth or faith, there is no scientific basis to weigh whether a despotism or republic will tend to be "more moral." The apologist for every NWO despotism that is run by elite lackeys for international crony corporatists will claim to be guided not by receptivity to intuitive faith but by the superior blessings of science. His usefulness to the regime will be as as liar, idiot, or both. Only by reducing the masses to the maleducation of ignorance and to the divisive corruption of envy could a static heirarchy of bureaucrats serving a central despotism claim to be able to adjust in time to the myriad of factors that flux within a dynamic civilization. In other words, only by reducing the freedom and dignity of the citizenry, thus giving them the "equality" of moral zombies. If you desire to be or to serve the king of the zombie collective, that would be your "go-od." The MSM propagates it 24/7.