Palliatives

.
Much of media has evolved under thumbs of progressively more worldly and sinister masters.  Their palliative is:  He who dies with the most toys wins.  Therefore, "what difference does it make," no matter how many you need to deceive, injure, or even kill?  However, everybody looks for some kind of palliative, that is, some satisfying explanation or purpose.  When finding it exceeds their capacity or patience, they seek it in diversions:  such as ridiculing the seeking of others, or dope, or recruiting innocents as coping companions, even initiating them into cults of physical or spiritual death.  As if nirvana or enlightenment should be found in exploring meth, gay sex, or ganging up to take from whitey.  Many scientists seem to seek their palliative, exclusively and ridiculously, in science, as Marxists and Muslims seek it, perhaps even more ridiculously, in the State or Umma --- even while they ridicule those who seek it in some spiritual religion, or inviting God, or some mystical or meditative appreciation of the cosmos. All who seek, while they seek, implicate an assumption, belief, or faith that a "correct" palliative can be found.  None is able to say anything worthwhile about the alternative, that is, if it cannot be found.  Excepting those who believe they have found it, or are on its scent, all who mock, mock uneasily.  If a correct or best palliative can be found, I doubt it will be captured in force of science or despotic religion, as opposed to insight that is patiently pursued, self reliant individual by self reliant individual.  Was there a time when most media competed to present information for the appreciation of individuals, rather than for shaping, deceiving, and dividing people in order to provide kabuki heater for entertaining tyrants?
 

Of the Prog Persuasion

.

Progs tend to be uninterested in faith in principles, purposes, or possibilities that rank ultimately higher than pleasure. In the West, they tend to think conscious will is nothing more than the accidental expression of matter, rather than that matter is the created expression of Conscious Will. Progs who are religious about their collectivism tend to think everything in this world is meaningless, except the ridiculing of everyone who believes in worldly meaningfulness. So what does interest people of the Prog persuasion? Pleasuring of self: Drugs, sex, and violent entertainment -- especially when it's either made funny or made part of an exit statement.

.

How do Prog deniers of worldly meaningfulness leverage and gin up their pleasure? Not by work, but by indirection, by organizing community gangsters, by ganging up to use collectives and governments in order to take everyone else's stuff, to redistribute it to their advantage. This continues so long as they do not see themselves as thereby ending up with less, or until they kill their host. When their society begins to fall, they sustain it by unmercifully imposing dhimmitude and tax slavery, to punish all who are not of the favored gang, while telling all who are of the favored gang that they are forgoing worldly pleasures because their most erotic fantasies await them --- either in the next world or the coming utopia. No wonder so many of the Prog persuasion eventually stage their final exits via mass death-suicide stunts! I rather doubt that very many who are not of the Prog persuasion engage in such stunts.

.

 

Time Travel and Twin Paradox

TWIN PARADOX: Imagine you live with a school of fish in a deep eddy of a river under a weight of constantly flowing information. You exert yourself and swim for a season to a shallow pool. While you are at the shallow pool, a far less accumulation of river weight will pass over you. Even as you return, you will never accumulate the same weight of information as passed over the school while you were gone. Perhaps the paradox of the twin traveling from a deep eddy of the river of space-time may be analogized in that way. The river of information in itself may not be real, but the frame-dragging experience of it ages the fish in segmented accumulations of experience.

ESCAPE VELOCITY:  That body which expends local energy, while gathering and expending distant energy, in order to escape a dense local frame of inertial energy, will seem to age slower than that which does not depart the more massive local inertial frame.  This begs questions:  How far does a local inertial frame of influence extend?  And how quickly and geometrically does its pull dissipate?  The answer would seem to be only to such point as the escaping body is able to assume an inertial orbit.

.
VECTORING TIME TRAVEL:  I suspect that to accelerate one's physical body (material machinery) beyond the speed of light, while maintaining one's separate illusion that surrounding substance is real, would be to push-pull (frame drag) oneself into a parallel universe, as required in order to preserve one's illusion that substance-in-itself is real.

.

MATHING TIME TRAVEL:  However, suppose Will is the superior reality, and it abides, perpetually and instantaneously, with the only NOW. In that case, it would seem that Information about what is signified in mathematically segmented measure (platonic geometry) would be communicated among separately normalized iteratons of such Will. Each iteration would entertain a seemingly separate perspective within an illusion of space-time.

.

It may be only hubris that defends our relatively infantile comprehension of Beingness. It may be that some quality of Will is the superior reality, of which all our quantitative, measurable physics is derivative. The existence of our physical formations in space-time may be only stubborn illusions, entirely dependent for their seeming vectors of substance upon nothing more than fluxing whims of a Will that has perpetual and instantaneous capacity to normalize itself among plural iterations of measurably segmented perspectives.

.

If so, it would be as important for such a superior essence to be not only a prime mover, but also a prime halter. Measurable, digital, if-then sequences necessitate means for testing whether an "if condition" has been met, in order to halt and redirect its vector. This gives rise to appearances of granulated chronologies, i.e., the illusion of time.

.

I recognize such speculation does not rise to the level of a theory. Theories must be testable. However, a sort of preliminary test IS available. If I am right, then there is no real material past or future, only a perpetual present in which we experience mathematically granulated sequences of appearances, which pass for time. If instantaneous communication across vast reaches of space is eventually shown to be possible, then the idea of a shared "nowness" across the cosmos would be implicated. There would not be "time travel," because materially measurable time-in-itself does not exist. Only Will, playing with math (geometric forms) is the real, superior existent. Except as applied by Will, math-in-itself exhibits no consistent vector. If math is conserved to anything, it would seem to be zero, i.e., no-thing-ness.

.

If instantaneous transmission of information is possible, why have we not yet devised how to do it? Well, in respect of comprehension, we seem to be in relative infancy. We do not live very long in respect of the "granulated time" that is required to move apparent bodies via rules of measurable physics. Suppose we received an instantaneous message from afar. If we required physically, measurably-segmented confirmation to believe it, we may have to live through a long series of events. Suppose we did believe the message. Even then, we have not devised means for replying, nor for feeling confident about a conversation. Until we solve the problem of aging and death, we will not soon get directly measurable confirmation that information can be exchanged in present nowness across vast reaches of space. So, how can we test the possibility in ways less ambitious? I suspect physicists are actually working on that.

.

Perpetual - Instantaneous - Halting

.
PERPETUAL - INSTANTANEOUS - HALTING:

.

Intuitive to inside knowledge (or self-evidence), some ASPECT must account for the feedback that is driven by foundational laws of our physics. Such laws must be, and/or have been, (1) pre-configured and conserved, (2) contemporaneously communicated and renormalized, and (3) chaotically coordinated — perpetually and instantaneously, outside of space-time (it’s hard to reason well in the middle of urban noise), synchronously reconciling the eternal present. Determination shows in three faces: the pre-determined, the contemporaneously determined, and the chaotically (randomly) determined.
.
To experience meaningfulness (sequences and segments over time and space), even to bring space-time into relational and relevant existence, one needs a locus of an implicated geometric grid and/or a renormalizing array of mathematics. That is, one needs a trivalent means for bivalently appreciating, affecting, halting, starting, and delaying digital, on-off, if-then, machine-overlapping switches. Such an existent is produced by a qualitatively and trivalently one-of-a-kind (God?), which experiences countless iterative, bivalent representations of itself. Being bivalent, every machined body and representation is inherently mortal, fallible, and incomplete. Logic and math are incomplete for defining or limiting the Trivalent Existent, because IT is the Source for the geometrically bivalent logic and math of space and time and formations and unfoldings thereof.
.
The trivalence of such One of a Kind is self evident in its all-abiding and all-permeating iterations, such as in: Beingness: the ambiguous-the manifest-the potential; Logic and Law: foundational-transitional-subordinate; Math of Sets: whole-sum-parts; Empirical Physics: cosmos-field-particles; Substance and Signification: qualitative-quantitative-transitional; Determination: Pre Determined - Contemporaneously Determined - Chaotically (randomly) Determined; Will: reconciling-collective-individual; Experience: perpetual (existential)-instantaneous (qualitative)- segmentally and haltingly appreciated and processed (quantitative); Companionship and Civilization: government-society-citizens.

.
THE HALTING PROBLEM: Each bivalent, off-on, if-then, digitally segmented sequence HALTS and delays when and where the "then" part is tested for and found completed, and then re-starts to "choose" and impose a new "if" part. WILL, either contemporaneously or with presets, tests to determine when what ("then") is decided and what "new condition should" be chosen ("if"). Some testing and choosing agents for this cyclically segmented processing of if-then-feedback are (1) specifically preset, some are (2) pre-placed for random and/or chaotic encounter, and some are (3) contemporaneously aware. Even the PRESETS (specific, random, and chaotic) at one time must have been SET, i.e., contemporaneously (consciously) set. So, how would a testing agent "know" to intercede, in order to granulate (halt, delay, and restart) formations-of-space-time into non-instantaneously sequenced segments of bivalently-measurable, experientially-renormalized, feedback? It would seem that for each halting segment that is transitioned throughout digitized experience, there must be entailed some trivalent function, some Recorder that (1) Senses (quantitatively tests), (2) Appreciates (qualitatively judges), and (3) chooses (wills). That is, there must abide some Trivalent Observer, functioning at some present and perpetual level of conscious appreciation, that ITERATES itself holistically (instantaneously) and participatorily (perpetually) throughout the appreciable cosmos, as a plural-iterator of a class of one. For there abides no other like IT. IT is as much a prime halter as a prime mover.

.

STAR TREK:  A trekkie reading the Singularity blog might imagine a future of way stations established and maintained by fantastically programmed machines, able instantaneously to print and "beam" polarized duplicates of the material information of bodies and cells back and forth across vastly connected realms of space. Are we advanced enough yet to "know" whether such may already have been done? Or whether our evolution may be being guided towards participating in some such future? Problem is, some of our genetic deficiencies for crashing into antisocial craziness would probably need to be blended out before we could be trusted to join any such hyper society. Honestly, some of the stuff I see happening in technology today, I never would have dreamed was possible 30 years ago. I would agree with Shakespeare, that there are more things in heaven and hell than abide in my limited imagination. I would also agree that it is not immediately profitable to ponder whether dogs may "really know" the truth about humans. Regardless, they have come to interact with us.
.
*******************
.

PERPETUAL PRESENT: The past-in-itself does not exist. That which accumulates is only Information about previous sequences, of events that are segmented in space-time. Math of sequenciation is what accumulates, and it only accumluates in the perpetual present. There and then, such Information is perpetually re-normalized to manifestly define and potentially limit the chaotic experiences of locally dependent, Participatory Determiners (Deflecting Recorders and Observers).

.

OF INSTANTANIETY AND MEASURED SEGMENTING: For the Big Bang, synchronizing units, nothingness units of ZEROS, of a sea of instantaniety, seem to have been projected outbound to encompass and enclose an expanding sphere of space-time, like an expanding balloon, which, when it pops, returns instantly to a single point of no balloon ... cyclically, like a battery discharging into a capacitor into a battery into a capacitor, and so on and on. Each outward phase is followed by mushrooming units or particles of ONES, pushing and pulling like surfacing jellyfish, each segmenting into starts and stops of ever repeating math-based platonic-geometries of spins, twists, and curves, towards ever widening orbits: Qualitative Instantaniety perpetually followed by Measured Quantitative Sequencing, followed by Qualitative Instantaniety ... and so on. Quantum sequenciation at every mathematically digital, if-then algorithmic step and staircase.

.
 

Energy --- Meta, Potential, and Manifest

ENERGY -- META, GENERAL (POTENTIAL), AND LOCAL (MANIFEST):

May ENERGY be comprised of the meta, the general, and the local? Some energies seem to be information-bearing unto differential space-time locales, some seem to abide as sources of undifferentiated, mathematical constants, and some seem to remain implicated but undetected. Information-bearing energy cannot impart (or deposit) information to a space-time locale except by having its information renormalized so that it is interpreted to the locale as obeying a limiting constraint that is a relative-constant (i.e., the speed of light). Regardless of locale in space-time where energy may deposit its information, such information will always be renormalized to be interpreted as obeying a limiting relative-constant. Regardless of whether adjacent or nearby locales in SPACE may be expanding or contracting in their separation in distance, the information that is imparted to them will be interpreted as traveling subject to a limiting constant speed in TIME.

.

INSTANTANEOUS SYNCHRONIZATION OF POTENTIALS: I suspect that energy that is not information-bearing remains part of a cosmic constant that generally and instanteneously affects present potentials everywhere, at the same present timem the Universal Now. I suspect energy that is not experienced by a local portion of space-time simply passes it by, "outside" any local grid or geometry of space-time. Energy that conveys information to only one portion of space-time will either have been newly and conservationally formed, or it will have passed by all other portions of space-time. Even when energy is detected only generally or indirectly, as by gravitational lensing, it is interpreted as traveling at a relative-constant speed. However, when energy is nowhere detected differentially, it would seem implicated that it "travels" (sequentially and synchronously feeds back to affect), instantaneously. Energy that is not differentially experienced by any particular part of space-time would seem to bear only information that is general, not differentially specific. That is, it is "dark," even though it may affect mathematical, cosmological factors or constants.

.

INSTANTANEOUS SYNCHRONIZATION OF COSMIC POTENTIALS VERSUS SEGMENTED TRANSMISSION OF MANIFESTED CHANGES: Every particular iteration that is modulated and normalized through a local change-agent instantaneously charges the entire cosmic field with potential to receive the charge and transmit it along a path to discharge it, which itself effects further transmission, and so on, in perpetuity. MANIFESTATIONS occur in mathematically measurable sequences and segments, while cosmic POTENTIALS, in terms of possible subsequent unfoldings, flux instantaneously. Manifest Energy relates to quantitative measurability among segmented manifestations. Meta energy relates to qualitative apprehensions of generally and instantaneously synchronized unfoldings of possibilities.
.
DARK SUBSTANCE: One can conceptualize that the Singularity at the instant of the Big Bang was not purely an outward burst of energy. (Lightning can be from the ground to the clouds, as well as from the clouds to the ground. Whether a charge should be called positive or negative is a concern for labeling.) Were one to conceptualize a cloud or Field of space-time, vectoring "before" the inception of any Singular Particle, then the inception could be conceptualized as the product of an instantaneous charging, from the field to the singularity. Thereafter, the bursting from the Singularity could be digitally and segmentally meted out in measurable and normalized sequences --- until such time as the Field were restored to its originating charge. The Field could be like a capacitor that, when fully charged, instantaneously releases. The Singularity and the Field could be like antipodes on a perpetual battery that is connected to a meta capacitor. An instantaneous release of all cosmic energy would not be measurable, because measuring necessitates chronological sequencing (time).
.
NORMALIZING MEASURABILITY: The outward bursting from the Singularity would be much slower than its inwardly, instantaneous charging. Even so, some of the initial outward bursting may be instantaneous. This is because there would be no observers or recorders to measure it or require its moderation or renormalization as a relative-constant. It would be pre-space-time, i.e., the contemporaneous creator of space-time. However, as the Singularity became asymmetric (cracked), there would be differential sequencing, hence renormalization to perspectives, via relative-constants. However, what would become of the outward burst that preceded the cracking of the Singularity? There would be nothing by which to measure or inhibit it. SO, WHAT BECAME OF THE OUTBOUND ENERGY THAT PRECEDED THE CRACKING? Did it define geometric limits to the expansion of the Singularity in space-time? Does it, when "consenting" to being subjected to substantive interaction, detection, or measure, show its face only as a relative-constant, yet remain of instantaneous potential in the absence of such subjection? Until detected in any particular relation, must it, in general relation, contribute to some kind of cosmological constant for affecting the measurable vectors of our sequentially delayed interfunctionings?
.
BREAKING SYMMETRY: MIGHT THE OUTBURST BEFORE THE CRACKING OF SYMMETRY ACCOUNT FOR THE DARK SUBSTANCE that seems to be missing from our standard models for measuring interactions in physics? May Dark Substance be the instantaneous, meta energy that generally affects our measurements of particular interfunctionings, i.e., the meta substance of universal, cosmological constancy that, absent particular detection, does not normalize as a local measurable? IOW, must there remain vast stores of non-detected Dark Substance, whose correlative effects can be estimated, but not precisely controlled? May such Dark Substance convey non-quantifiable, instantaneous apprehensions between the Field and its Particulars?
.
META WILL: What is the superior existent-in-itself, in respect of which all inferior appearances are derived? One may label or analogize that existent as Meta Will. As to ITS ITERATIONS OF IDENTIFIABLE I-NESS, each “I” is experienced by each other I as being a somewhat different personage or identity. Each friend who “knows” me knows me in a qualitatively different way. Even I, myself, experience myself over time in qualitatively different ways. "I" am not a thing-in-itself. There is some aspect of I-ness that cannot be confined to a particular measure, perimeter body, or avatar of choice. This applies to every apparent particular and to every measurable medium of particulars. Even light, as we experience it, "in itself," does not exist as a thing in itself. Rather, light manifests and presents as sequentially serried exchanges of charges and discharges of measured information among receptively renormalizing recorders and observers. Light’s constancy in speed is not of light in itself, but of light in how its speed of conveyance is re-normalized as a relative constant among relating perspectives. Observers, bodies, recorders of information, and measurable significations do not exist in themselves, but only insofar as they are appreciated by perspectives of Will.
.
TRANSCENDING AVATARS: When trivalent Will no longer associates with the bivalently presented machine of my body, it may bond to a succeeding avatar, therewith to guide, experience, and communicate chronologically renormalized measures of sequences in space-time. Thus, our avatars abide as way stations for Will to communicate appreciations of sequences, not as things in themselves. Hence, relative interpretations of our bodies are subject to renormalized interpretations.
.
HALTING PROBLEM: The more a perspective can do, the more it competes to do — unless it encounters a superior order to halt. Precious little leisure time is not filled with makework and fattening noise. One tends to fill one’s leisure time with collective hurly burly or solitary prayer. Being trained to think of oneself as only a machine would fit nicely with being trained to be only a cog in a collective.

Bivalent Machines v. Trivalent Will

The problem with digital, bivalent machines (gland ruled Progs) is that you can never satisfy them. The more a person identifies with being nothing more than a pleasure-seeking machine, the more he demands and asserts entitlements. No cleverness in making machines upon machines to serve his expanding appetites can ever fill the hole that holds him. For a person who believes his dignity and identity are confined to nothing more than the perimeter of his material body, you can never satisfy him merely by feeding and filling him with stuff. The more material efficiencies you devise, the more he craves. The more complex machines you build, the more complexities are needed to sustain his civilization. The more complex a governmentally machined civilization becomes, the more stifling its bureaucracy needs to be made, and the more the infirm and unconnected must be disposed of or left behind.

.

Have machines, in themselves, really made our lives more fulfilling? When we look to nothing more than machines to fulfil us, can we ever be at peace? The more the capacity for machine work, the more the makework that we require. As machine efficiency rises, so also rise dependency, sloth, and addiction. As machines, we make our health, safety, entertainment, and preservation into unfillable holes.

.

To make machines for our convenience, many among us are conditioned to think like machines, to aspire to be machines, to stay within if-then algorithmic functions, to be oiled as machines, to worship the cosmos as nothing more than a machine, composed of nothing more than particles that have been pre-vectored outward within a finite, expanding bubble from a singularly-departed meta-machine. The expansion continuously rockets or falls towards and into nothing more than an unbounded hole in infinity. The expansion of space can never fill space. The more clever our machinations, the deeper the hole that appears before us.

.

What if the reality of all this measurable matter and substance that recedes before us signifies no-basis-in-itself, but only signifies ways for us to relate to an Immeasurable Qualitative? In that case, futility would abide in efforts to fill the receding delusion with if-then machinations, while reality, and perhaps peace of mind, would abide with qualitatively and analogically appreciating its Immeasurable Signifier.
.
************
.
IS QUALITATIVE TRIVALENCE ONLY AN ILLUSION:
.
The System's establishment of if-then algorithmic functions conserves and rules our shared cone of measurable cosmic experience and avails our interpretations of space-time chronologies of sequential delays and separations in causal distances. So, then, are there only layers and levels of reconciling, pre-determined, IF-THEN SEQUENCES OF BIVALENCE? May qualitative trivalence be only a delusion, secondary to weighting of if-then, digitized operations on feedback? May the ADDITION of levels of complexity fully account for all increasing of parameters for possibilities? May nothing more than dumb, bivalent machination, by itself, account for all the complexities of Beingness?

.

Well, ADDITIONS OF COMPLEXITIES still begs questions: Why should such additions be made, by whom, and by what agency? After all, doesn't the Second Law of Thermodynamics call generally for subtractions in complexities, rather than additions? So, no, complexity in itself does not account. Nor does arbitrarily assuming complexities upon complexities, i.e., parallel universes upon parallel universes.

.

To the mix, there must be added a NON-BIVALENT (TRIVALENT) VECTOR, i.e., a meta-force-energy, an instantaneous-perpetual, established by the establisher of NATURE'S LAW, which establishes no choice for every organism but to facilitate choices. This vector seems never to tire or dissipate. Moreover, each if-then sequence has been made potentially subject to random encounters for being aborted, hijacked, transmogrified, mutated. Such CHAOS may affect even some phases of laws otherwise thought to be part of the foundation of Nature's Laws. Indeterminate chaotic complexity is also introduced as levels of interdependent COMPLEXITY send each choice along unfoldments, which may vary markedly from what they otherwise would have been but for the leveraging of COMPLEXITY. Thus, a Meta-Vector, Nature, Chaos, and Complexity all align to alter expectations and pre-determinations, to alter "choices" by segmenting, delaying, and shuffling if-then sequences. Thus, the Determination of each unfolding is subject to trivalent influences of perspective, context, and purpose, as well as to trivalent influences of foundational Natural Law, Chaotic Randomness, and Indeterminate Complexity.

.

QUALITATIVE: Thus, mere machination via bivalent, if-then logic cannot fully account for the unfolding of Beingness.

.

QUANTITATIVE: Bivalent machinaton does, however, account for how the quantiative aspects of the unfolding are signified to empirically replicable measurement.

.

IS THE QUALITATIVENESS OF CONSCIOUS ABSTRACTION ONLY AN ILLUSION:

.

Does abstract capacity to mirror-represent-imagine trends and possibilities and desires depend only on if-then organizations of complexity? No, I think relational-representational modeling is INHERENT to the adoption of any particular perspective within an apparently shared cone of the cosmos. I think layers and levels of representations of representations of representations, of abstract modelings of modelings of modelings, of potential for imaging and imagining possibilities, are inherent to Holistic Beingness and emergingly inherent to Perspectivistic Beingness. There abides a Conserving Meta Vector, which records, stores, condition, and bonds with fields and particulars of unfolding, bivalent information and machined signification. Somehow, IT temporally bonds to participate in appreciating and directing choices from spatial vantages of adopted local avatar.
.
 

Systematic Holonic Will

 .

THE BORG-ING OF AMERICA:  Under Regimes that disavow any underpinning of free will (or decent, cosmic, directional guidance), "free trade" (like "open society") reduces to an incoherent, Orwellian rationalization (dog whistle) for the neutering of all thinking middle classes. Rinos call middle-class neutering by siphoning its industry "free trade," while Dinos call such neutering the "open society." The axis of Rinos and Dinos, Lions and Hyenas) means to harvest middle-class influence by dividing and ruling, by recruiting and directing easily-bribed, useful-idiot Progs in order to grind all thinking opposition under malicious, crony corruption. Thus is every oasis of human decency that disrespects godliness exposed to bondage of omnipresent inhumanity. If you don't cotton to talk of spiritually guided ("come to Jesus") will, you're gonna "love" the consequence of its expungement. Secular and sectarian evil want "no partners" who walk in individual dignity. While disavowing free will, while advocating for unrestricted accumulations of syndicated power, prepare to be Borg'd.

.

QUANTUM SYSTEM IS FINITE YET UNBOUNDED: On the establishment of measurables: All particular idealizatons about qualitatives are modulated in terms of signs that are systematically, conservationally quantified. However, the qualitative, contextual meanings that are conveyed by signs are not especially correlative to how they are quantified. Every quantum change in signification is instantaneously offset by a digitally conservational balancing of quantities of the system. Yet, the appreciation of the system remains qualitative. The measurable Cosmos is finite; the immeasurable Cosmos is unbounded.

.

VECTOR: What IS IT that STARTS AND SUSTAINS the foundational VECTOR (general direction of expansion of space-time) of our universe, and what meta experience does it intentionally and/or unavoidably pursue?

.

FREE WILL: It is not our bodies that give us free will. It is WILL (reconciled) that gives us our bodies. Conscious, reconciling Will is not confined to the bivalently measurable perimeter of a body's skin or skull. Skin, bone, skull, and brain are as bivalent as any preset machine. However, the "ghost" of trivalently analogical, apprehensive, and appreciative WILL is not confined merely to preset machinery.

.

FREE TRADE --- FREE TRADE IS INCOHERENT WITHOUT A WORKING IDEA OF FREE WILL: A defensible notion of free enterprise and free trade depends on a defensible notion of free WILL, i.e., freedom, i.e, conscious, individually dignified and responsible Will. However, as to "freedom-in-itself," there is no such thing. Rather, every notion of freedom depends on according respect for the contemporaneous determinations of such identities with which one identifes. Among oligarches, freedom depends on their mutual regard for justifying their rule over subservients. Among sychophants, freedom depends on their mutual regard for apologizing for the oligarches they serve. Among subservients, freedom depends on their obedience to their classified realms. Thus proceed hierarchical systems of “freedom.”
.
REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC:  Countering "hierarchical freedom" is freedom within a representative Republic. Republican freedom depends on a system of checks and balances adequate to preserve the Republic. However, once checks and balances are reduced to commodities for trading among oligarches, the Republic tends to be lost. Nowadays, "free trade" is often a rallying cry for oligarchic cannibalizers of Republics. Free Trade has become an euphemism for virtually open borders, which are stalking horses for Obama-Soros open societies, which are really declarations of open season for collecting and harvesting all weaker minds.
.
MASQUERADES:  When oligarches are not masquerading as free traders, they're often masquerading as philanthropic socialists. What they mean to trade freely in (and grind out their rent-collecting lives from) are the bones of the collectivized. They offer the feigned tears of the walrus and the carpenter, rolled into one system of gangsterism. Everyone outside their syndicate -- including citizens of the Republics they own -- is merely a commodity, an oyster. Free trade is the slogan of blind and corrupt agents for crony reapers of republics. The underlying idiocy seems to be that "legitimate free trade" (like legitimate rape?) will not undo (not knock up?) a properly virtuous republic. As such, free trade tends to be the slogan of choice of oligarches -- both when they are opportunizing as crony corporatists and when they are opportunizing as crony collectivists. Until adequate checks and balances are restored to protect the Republic, "free trade" should be seen as a rallying cry for perfumed pimps and predators.
.
TRIVALENCE OF PRECEDING INFORMATION, PRESENT MANIFEST, AND POSSIBLE POTENTIAL: Of the Qualitative Inherent, the Measurable Emergent, and the Meaningfully Inherent Emergent: Were everything thought to abide merely as inherence, such would beg the question: whence goes the inherence that has been superseded by change? Were everything thought to abide merely as emergence, such would beg the question: from whence emerged the first emergence? It seems a particular, as opposed to holistic, perspective of conscious will must not abide purely as (1) an emergence, nor purely as (2) an inherence. Rather, a particular avatar (body) with which consciousness has bonded emerges to abide as a present reconciliation of measured choices, while the essentially conscious aspect of it abides as (3) an inherent emergence.
.

COSMOS EXHIBITS INTENTIONALITY IN RECONCILING FEEDBACK BETWEEN AND AMONG PERSPECTIVES EXHIBITED BY THE COSMOS AND PERSPECTIVES EXHIBITED AND BONDED OUT TO PARTICULARS: Among all possibilities of reconciliation for each flux of the perpetual now, how is it that any particular unfolding is made to become manifested out of all unfoldings that are possible within knowable laws? How and why does the cosmos favor to exhibit choices among potentials and possibilities? Bivalent, either-or logic is powerless to account for cosmic intentionality, or WILL. Either-or logic works fine for deriving how to pursue intentions. However, it does not account for what such intentions should be, nor how, among all possibilities, they should be reconciled. That reconciliation necessitates a sort of feedback dance (or game theory) between and among all vertical levels and horizontal layers of perspectives.

.

PERPETUAL PRESENT: Conscious Will necessitates a digital kind of dance of apprehensive and appreciative feedback between and among its various particular, conservational, and reconciling levels and layers. Each flux of individual expression is within allowed parameters of freedom, and each extension of freedom is thereafter instantly reconciled with the conservation of the cosmic system. This flux bounds the "duration" of the perpetual present, while it abides as the present. Each time I move within permitted parameters, I disturb the cosmos, so that the entire measurable cosmos, to preserve its common laws, must in some respect instantly push-pull reconcile the rest of the cosmos to my measureable movement. My observation of such reconciliation is necessarily renormalized to my perspective, via what relate to me as relative-sbsolutes (such as the speed of light and the curvature of gravity due to local mass).

.

DISTANCE (APARTNESS) AND DELAY: Distance is a conically-local, re-normalized measure of space. Weight is a conically-local, re-normalized measure of mass. Density is a conically-local, re-normalized measure of space and mass. Chronology is a conically-local re-normalized measure of time. Form change (comparative chronological rate of transition in geometric expression of forms of vibrations and spins) is a conically-local, re-normalized measure of energy. Meta energy (cosmically polarized geometry?) synchronizes instantaneously. Locally communicated energy is renormalized to be experienced and interpreted as if it were delayed through apparently local interpretations of measurable and "causal" expenditures and translations of energy. Distance, weight, density, chronology, and comparative rate of form change (as well as the space, mass, time, and energy with which they relate to measure) are none of them real in themselves. The "reality" of all of them is derivative of how they are observationally normalized to the conscious experience and appreciation of such unfolding observers as happen to share a universe (shared cone of vectored experience) that is subject to the same mathematically measurable constraints and relative-constants.

.

ACTIVE MATH: The System's establishment of if-then algorithmic functions (Active Math) conserves, rules, and renormalizes our shared cone of cosmic experience, and IT avails our interpretations of space-time chronologies of sequential delays and separations in causal distances. The math is "active" in that it renormalizes and reconciles the experiences of each perspective to the conserving holism. Particular perspectives are not "inside" the Meta System, as if it were some kind of spatially encompassing, geometric set. Rather, they are renormalized and reconciled to the System.

.

CHRONOLOGICAL APARTNESS:  In terms of qualitative-game-role-stage-playing communication in presets among perspectives of consciousness, "distance" pertains to (spatially delayed) separation, in terms of being available for chronological feedback-communication with and among separate and "distant" particular perspectives. Perspectives are "distant" to the extent the Holism holds and defines their local changes as being chronologically apart from one another, in terms of otherwise simultaneous feedback to one another. Otherwise, each "cause" would be its simultaneous "effect."

.

RENORMALIZING:  A way of rationalizing, synchronizing, reconciling, re-normalizing every perspective with the present perspective of the Holism of Consciousness -- the Perpetual Now:

"Distant" (separate) perspectives must communicate through bivalent presets. All perspectives must communicate measurables in respect of presets. Space-time is a medium for establishing presets that, when not altered by intermediate mediums, is renormalized with all presets of the present.
.

OVERLAP: Intentionality, via the apprehensions and appreciations of Observing Will, "operates" on measurables. However, measureables do not create or "cause" Will. Rather, measureables are the facilitating byproducts of communicative feedback among perspectives of Will. It is possible to apply either-or logic to pre-program, pre-set, and build a MACHINE that can exhibit, facilitate, and reproduce facilites for the expression of conscious will. However, each such facilitation of Intentional Will would necessarily entail conscious, instantaneously conserving feedback, interfunctioning, and guidance from the cosmic field. Such exhibition of contemporaneous choice-making and conscious will would arise from FEEDBACK WITH THE COSMOS, not just from pre-programming based on mere either-or logic. Conscious Will defies being entirely pre-machined (or exiled from the garden of the cosmos).

.

ROOT OF MORAL CONFUSION: I suspect that measurable matter, in itself, is not the root of evil. Ultimately, measurable Matter is only the signification of a qualitatively immeasurable Will. The ROOT OF EVIL is in believing with all your soul and all your might and all your delusion that the cause and determination of every thing and every sequence has an explanation that, ultimately, abides only in the indifferent law of an amoral nature. Thus begins a problem with too many scientists and analytic philosophers: they begin with a most fundamental axiom that seems to be false. That is, they engage material-based either-or logic in support of a faith that the cause and determination of every signification and every communication is governed by, or can be explained entirely in terms of, preset fundamental laws that forever determine all of matter.

.

TRIVALENT BELIEF SYSTEMS: To believe literally in religious literalisms, as if they were empirically and demonstrably true, is to believe in Manachaen heaven-hell, yes-no , bivalent machine-ism. It is to aspire to think like, and to be, a preset machine. It is to put oneself in an absurd position of being baited to "prove" religious literalisms empirically. On the other hand, to consider sacred stories as being of analogical truth value is to consider God as a signifier or teller of analogical stories, good for appreciation and feedback as such, on the world as a stage. To believe in "literalisms" meta analogically, is to be correct, analogically, within the renormalized universe of your analogical universe.

.

TRIVALENT QUALITY OF DETERMINATION: Many people seem to think of determination as only that which is preset (to accord with mathematically definable laws of measurable nature). However, throughout the perpetual present, determination (causation) shows a trivalent face: (1) that which (considered within degrees of freedom) is individually and contemporaneously determined, (2) that which is pre-determined, and (3) that which is systematically and chaotically mutated and randomly determined. To conceptualize about causation, there is implicated a notion that all that now measures as pre-determined and/or randomly determined was, at one time, sourced, that is, set along a systematically determinative vector, that is, contemporaneously set to a system with which we have bonded that is both finite and unbounded. That is, the system/set that avails the measurability of the preset matter and the statistical randomness with which we communicate was at its origin contemporaneously created and determined. Our perspectives of Will are bonded with material bodies, vessels for recording observations and communicating concerns. Thus, we Qualitatively and contemporaneously rationalize and renormalize our communications in respect of Quantitatives that we measure as preset and random. We deploy our bivalent, either-or logic with respect to Quantitatives, but we deploy our trivalent, meta-reconciling, intuitive-empathy with respect to moral Qualitatives. Bivalent reasoning will not answer our moral concerns with regard to what we should be interested in pursuing. Bivalent (math-based) reasoning is the way by which we define presets for machine operations, but trivalent (analogy-based) inspiration is the way by which we come to bond with, and identify, our moral purposefulness.

.

PRESET MACHINE OPERATIONS OF MATERIAL BODIES, COMPUTING CENTERS, AND BRAINS: Dumb machines can be preset to be "slaves" to (either-or) programs and (digital based) algorithms and to reproduce lines of derivative machines. In that functionality, the body and brain, by themselves, are machines. For machine purposes, many aspects of physics and biology can be analyzed in the bivalent logic that governs their determination in terms of their presets and randomness. However, when there abide "degrees of freedom," such that some possibilities and potentialities are contemporaneously determined ("chosen") to become manifest, while others are not, how can/should we reason or rationalize about their "cause"? One who wishes not to refer the cause (or choice) to some meta-determiner (or higher will) may wish to believe there must abide innumerable worlds in which all possibilities are indeed made quantitifiably manifest. Problem is, for mortals, such pretended quantification seems necessarily to remain qualitatively within the realm of the meta-speculative. We are thus confronted with an attitude of Faith: Does one prefer to believe the Talisman of all possible universes is quantitatively indifferent Chance versus qualitatively interested Will? Does one intuit that the quality of each Observer's feedback (identification, bonding, interest, contemporaneous perspective of Will) is reconciled as meta determinant or as mere emergent epiphenomena? Does one intuit that some fundamental aspect (reconciling Will) of the Cosmos is involved and interested, or does one prefer to belive the Cosmos is entirely indifferent, so that all caring and morality are (and "should" be considered to be) mere delusions?

.

THE UNREASONABLENESS OF TRYING TO HAMMER TRIVALENT MORAL CONCERNS INTO BIVALENT LOGIC: The consequence of beginning with a false axiom, as if "either-or logic" should explain and inspire every thing, is that those who subscribe to such belief are able to find no thing by which to inspire or inculcate any reasonable basis for civilizing mores. Rather, they play word games by which they deconstruct every value and social tradition (sort of like language-murderers of the gay agenda), while trying to convince fools to believe in "the science and logic" of alternative values ... which alternative values likewise deconstruct. This is why materialists who lock themselves into either-or logic render themselves either impotent or corrupt for erecting any moral scaffolding. When moral "reasoning" is restricted to either-or logic, it soon becomes unreasonable. Moral reasoners may be asked to advocate in terms of inspiring analogies and sacred stories for that system of social propriety and property (mores and regulations) which would seem to experienced (skilled and adult) judgment (intuition and empathy) most inclined to foster sustainable pursuits of human freedom and dignity. To try to confine moral reasoning to bivalent either-or logic is a fool's errand, as well as the beginning of a quick slide to moral obvivion.

.

DECONSTRUCTIONIST CONFUSION AND ABSURDITIES: Irony abounds. Progressives often take the posture of atheists, that there is no higher basis for morality, that the Cosmos is entirely indifferent, and YET ... they tend to elect politicians who assert that they and the State "should" care for them. In effect, they substitute their Source of Caring from God to the State. As if atheistically scientific leaders on behalf of the secular State would/should be more caring. How can any thinking person expect that a decent civilization that respects human freedom and dignity can sustain itself on such an absurd foundation? Can it float itself indefinitely on fiat money, wished from a utopian State, as if it could assume a role as caring intercessor between Progressives and the uncaring Cosmos? On such an absurd foundation, are there any limits to wishful, entitlement-minded, decency-dissimilating thinking? What have post-modern Progs not deconstructed or rationalized? Caring State, fiat money run amuck, gay marriage, borderless nations, equality enforcing regulations run amuck, invasive computerized monitoring of your every keystroke, meaningless constitutions, political parties operating as rival wolf gangs reconciled under crony syndicates, thought regimentation beginning at kindergarten, crony monopolization of every institution of social significance. Is the Prog-rationalized model of a "Caring State in an Indifferent Cosmos" paving the way to utopia or to indecent serfdom?

.

RESPONSIBLE WILL: Given the present state of affairs, what should be done to help measure out a path towards sustainable, surpassable, decent civilization among perspectives of conscious will? To answer such quest, it is not helpful to try to throw all qualitative regard for conscious will out of the recipe. What should not be done is to say that science has settled the issue of responsible, conscious will, by finding that there is no such an existent.

.

WILL DOES NOT ARISE FROM BODIES IN THEMSELVES: EVERY MEASURABLE BODY, INSOFAR AS IT IS QUANTITATIVELY MEASURABLE, IS A PRESET MACHINE, RULED BY PREDETERMINANTS AND/OR ALGORITHMIC PRESETS OF GENERATORS OF RANDOMNESS. NO MATERIAL BODY OR BRAIN, IN ITSELF, IS CONSCIOUSLY AUTONOMOUS OR INDEPENDENTLY WILFUL. WILL THAT IS BEYOND PRESET CONTROL, WHETHER IT BE INDIVIDUALLY PARTICIPATORY OR HOLISTICALLY SYNCHRONIZING, DOES NOT ABIDE CONFINED TO ANY MEASURABLE BODY. RATHER, WILL, IN ITS SYNCHRONIZATION OF FEEDBACK FROM PARTICIPATORY PERSPECTIVES AND RECONCILING HOLISMS WITHIN HOLISMS, AVAILS THAT BY WHICH BODIES ARE MEASURABLY SIGNIFIED. WILL IS NOT THE EXPRESSION OF A PRESET BODY. RATHER, EACH PRESET BODY IS THE COMMUNICATIVE SIGNIFICATION OF PERPETUAL TENSION BETWEEN A RECONCILING WILL AND ITS SUMMING OF PARTICULARLY BONDED PERSPECTIVES. THE SIGN THAT TRIVALENT WILL IS SUPERIOR TO BIVALENT RULINGS OVER MATTER CONSISTS IN THE OBSERVATION THAT MUCH THAT IS MEASURED TO UNFOLD IS DETERMINED IN PROCESSES OF CONTEMPORANEOUS AND CHAOTIC FEEDBACK, MANY ASPECTS OF WHICH NECESSARILY REMAIN BEYOND PRESET DETERMINATION.

.

SOLIPSISM AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: An A.I. machine that that was programmed ("trained") to respond in pre-established ways to detected parameters of stimuli may be indicative of a previous expression of consciousness. Its present responses would be iterative expressions of a past quality of that previous consciousness. However, if and when it were to respond to stimuli in ways beyond preset parameters, such responses would then and there be iterative of a present quality of consciousness. The machine itself would not be conscious, but it would have become a medium (or avatar) for availing expression of consciousness. Consciousness would not emerge as a property of the complexity of the machine. Rather, the complexity of the machine would simply facilitate the bonding and trivalent expressiveness of already existential, conscious will. That is, the Bonding-Will would in some way USE THE MACHINE as a MEDIUM OF BEINGNESS, through which to appreciate, bond, leverage, sense, experience, and evaluate observations ... in order to express itself in meaningful response to a conceptualization of the cosmos AS A WHOLE, rather than entirely in predictable and preset bits of "either-or" outputs.
.
INSIDE KNOWLEDGE: A problem for a person communicating with such an A.I. facilitation of consciousness would consist in this: Such a person need not KNOW whether the artificially facilitated consciousness were responding beyond presets. Could such a person KNOW whether the machine were availing expressions of contemporaneous determinations beyond presets? Well, regardless, the consciousness that bonded with the machine would "know," i.e., it would directly experience a quality of meaningfulness, which would be beyond proof or measure. That is, it would enjoy a quality of "inside information" ... of which C.S. Lewis spoke.
.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE:  A.I. facilitation of consciousness would consist in this: Such a person need not KNOW whether the artificially facilitated consciousness were responding beyond presets. Could such a person KNOW whether the machine were availing expressions of contemporaneous determinations beyond presets? Well, regardless, the consciousness that bonded with the machine would "know," i.e., it would directly experience a quality of meaningfulness, which would be beyond proof or measure. That is, it would enjoy a quality of "inside information" ... of which C.S. Lewis spoke.

.

IS CHOICE (FREE WILL) REALLY A NON-EXISTENT? If quantum randomness is our best way to model measurable reality on a statistical level with regard to the interfunctioning of purely bivalent, dumb, if-then particles, then WHAT is the cause of such randomness? Some kind of random number generator of the Cosmos? Some kind of Author of a random number generator of the Cosmos? Some kind of cosmic choice-making feedback-appreciator? In such case, IT's choices would not be owned by separate bodies (avatars). Rather, IT's choices would be effected through avatars. Even so, IT's particular perspectives would be experienced THROUGH the complex senses of IT's particular avatars, such choices to be renormalized all through and along the interfunctioning trading and fluxing of conversions of variously layered and leveled algorithms and overlapping subalgorithms. There are CHOICES, and such choices are made through our bodies, but they are not made BY our bodies. Our bodies are mere temples for a fluxing, holistic-particularistic spiritual presence. Mere mathematical reasoning does not inspire the expression of any qualitatively appreciated choice-making. To be qualitatively receptive to any advance wave of the Holistic-Choice-Reconciler, it would seem to help that a perspective that is bonded with any particular avatar be qualitatively appreciative of its RELATIONSHIP with the Holism.

.

 

Inevitability of signification of Life

.

Of the inevitability of the signification of Life: Within our Universe, suppose vector of entropy were to push-pull all that is randomly determined and all that is contemporaneously determined into a simpler state whereby every unfolding relationship were predetermined. In that case, it seems Consciousness would have abandoned our Universe. Were Consciousness to abandon our Universe, what then would become of Substance and Information?  Would not they "wink out" and become as meaningless as nothingness? In that case, to what state, universe, or cone of shared experiential existence, if any, would Consciousness, Substance, and Information have migrated? As there is "increase" in that share of existentiality which is converted into The Predetermined, what becomes of that which is Randomly determined and that which is determined Contemporaneous with expression of conscious will? Must not they correspondingly and continuously be transitioning, phasing, and transcending towards altered states and Universes? Must not they be creating their own wromholes through which to transcend to, expand into, and bond with ... new phasings and new universes availed via the potentiality of the Beingness of the Cosmos?

.
It's not that "LIFE" can be pieced together merely from dumb matter.  It's that dumb matter is not really dumb, nor is matter in itself the superior reality.  Dumb matter is simply representively significant of the previously pre-determined.  For mortals, there abide several faces or aspects of THE DETERMINED (i.e., the  representively significant):  (1) the Predetermined (pre-willed), (2) the Randomly determined (hap hazardly willed), and (3) the Contemporaneously determined (contemporaneously willed).  These seem to correlate with the pre-appreciated, the randomly appreciated, and the contemporaneously sustained appreciated.  What is predetermined are algorithms that seem to define the cone of common experiential parameters with which our identities happen to have bonded.  From the perspective of any particular mortal, what seems to be randomly determined are the synchronizing reconciliations of all the appreciative perspectives with which each of us shares our cone of experience.  From the perspective of any particular mortal, what is contemporaneously determined are the effects for which power is availed through him to affect.  The measurable aspects of my body are not in themselves "life" or even the source or cause of life.  They are the significations of consciousness.  After such significations have been preset, they are then termed dumb, inanimate Substance.  While such significations are presently unfolding along paths that are beyond precise control or prediction, they may to that extent be termed random.  As an unfolding path seems to respond to the present will of a contemporaneous observer, it may be considered as being contemporaneously evidentiary of an interested expression and "living" perspective of consciousness.  What materialists often have trouble getting their minds around is that what appear to be measurably material causation is SIGNIFICATIVE of a quality of reconciling consciousness, not "the cause" of consciousness.  For the preset, the consciousness preceded the signification.  For the random, the interests of the various levels and layers of consciousness are reconciled, beyond the capacity of any particular mortal perspective to precisely predict.  For the controlled, some perspective of consciousness is contemporaneously willing or affecting the unfolding signification of the control.  For every event, whether preset, random, or controlled, CONSCIOUSNESS is necessarily entailed.
.
******************************
.
What temporally CONSERVES our perspectives of Will is the temporally mutual arrangement whereby we BOND to perspectives that share being defined by, and subjugated to, a common CONE (matrix) of mathematical rules and experience. To break that agreement/understanding/arrangement is to “die,” i.e., to depart the avatar that is measurably bonded under that cone. To use that avatar (body) through to its demise is also to undergo the death of such avatar and consequent dis-bonding, whereby the rules for the expression and communication of the avatar will no longer invigorate its use as an avatar.
.
Bodily AVATARS, like all measurable things, do not really exist in themselves. Rather, they are PLACEHOLDERS FOR STORING INFORMATION, communications, and significations among perspectives of consciousness. The measurable things I BELIEVE, and seem to observe, myself to be doing affect how I am capacitated to observe that which others seem to be doing. However, the bodyless Will-Of-The-Subjective-I has no measurable energy or means by which to feed back “to do” (or “CAUSE”) anything, apart from (through the avatar it bonds with) to experience, OBSERVE, and appreciate its doing-ness.
.
Ultimately, measurable things are not what is/are “really” conserved, since things-in-themselves do not really exist. What we observe and measurably represent are RELATIONAL THINGS. So, how is it that our measurements of conversions are observed to follow rules of conservation? The answer must be: Because the meta-method by which we bond to a common cone of experiential signification requires that all measurable communications be OBSERVED and SIGNIFIED to obey shared mathematical rules of conversionary conservation. Ultimately, however, the conservation is not of things, but of means for exchanging INFORMATION and communications, i.e., qualitatively experiential-appreciative feedback.
.
Thus, Will, ultimately, does not “act” on “things.” Will acts with that which avails the signification of things. Will is not the freedom to move things, because things-in-themselves do not really exist, as such. Rather, WILL ABIDES WITH FREEDOM to intend to exchange communications. Ultimately, an individual’s Perspective of Will limits itself in respect of an avatar, with which it remains interested and bonded. The avatar is availed in respect of a common cone of mathematically conserved expression and representation. The cone is availed in respect of feedback between and among individual perspectives of Will and the Field Reconciler of such perspectives of Will. The cosmic cone, being conserved under rules of math, defines parameters for how perspectives of will can use avatars with which they BOND. Being based in math, such avatars are subject to BIVALENT (“if-then”) algorithmic translations. Ultimately, however, Will’s TRIVALENT capacity to bond with avatars is limited only by its capacity to believe, suspend belief, bond, suspend bonding, re-bond, analogize, and leverage if-then-systems of significations — to imagine and inspire wormholes for TRANSCENDING or phasing through The Matrix.
.
Each DIGITIZED SEQUENCE that is appreciated by each perspective within its allowed parameters (“degrees of freedom”) is fed back to the system as a whole, which sequentially and immediately pulls the whole into re-normalized reconciliation. Back and forth. The appearance of delays in effects over distance is secondary to the process of using relative-absolutes to RE-NORMALIZE experiences so they are made rationalize-able to every measuring perspective. Space, time, and space-time are stubborn illusions. Will, both from the perspectives of individual avatars and from the perspective of the reconciling field of the cosmos, functions only in respect of mathematically digitized feedback between the particulars of the system and the whole of the system. No thing-in-itself requires that any vector for such feedback must follow any set or sequential direction. Rather, such feedback operates only in the PERPETUAL PRESENT, the duration of which abides in the quantum expressions and reconciliations of the perspectives of Will and the field of WILL. Our experiences convey meaning, value, and DIRECTION only in how they are apprehended and appreciated by GOD. As we lose appreciation for such God, our basis for rationalizing mores unravels into ir-rationality and a-rationality.
.

 

The Second Amendment

.

Second Amendment: The right to bear arms is in respect of a natural right to take reasonable precautions to defend one's interests against potential ravaging and pillaging by unprincipled gangsters who have taken over government while posing as civic servants. Against such gangsters as now occupy government, such right is not one that can be preserved by mere paper, precedent, or constitution. Ultimately, such right depends upon sustained committment among an assimilated core of decent Americans, enlightened by study of history and morality. The specific contours of such right flux with the competitive and cooperative needs of society, as the social and technological arms race unfolds between crony takers and liberty lovers. A right to bear arms cannot be machined out in simplistic, either-or logic. The Second Amendment cannot be sensibly respected merely in bivalent reasoning. Rather, liberty lovers must duly consider what is needed to defend against being stampeded under ever more intrusive indignities, as masses are made to moo under sociopathic controls of gangster cronydom. The Second Amendment is shorthand, like a sacred parable, for communicating a standoff between individual producers and crony takers. It's definition cannot be entrusted to "elite" collectivists.

.