|
|
|
|
Preliminary: This is July 1991 version, modified 1 Nov 2002 as it was up loaded, but still with possible errors. There also was a June 1993 version, but the electronic copy has vanished (temporarily I HOPE). Thus this is not the "best" version just the best electronic version available NOW. I have a paper copy so it is not lost JHLL
REALISM:: AN ATTEMPT TO DEFINE RELIGION REALISM:: AN ATTEMPT TO DEFINE RELIGION, what it is or should be, and what it is not or should not be. A rejection of transcendentalism, accepting observation. First we must go through a series of definitions to establish a vocabulary with which to discuss the topic. RELIGION:: (Webster)::1) Belief in a divine or superhuman power or powers to be obeyed and worshiped as the creator(s) and ruler(s) of the universe 2) Expression of this belief as conduct and ritual 3) any specific system of belief or worship, conduct, often involving a code of ethics and philosophy, 4) a state of mind expressing love for and trust in God, etc. WORSHIP:: (Webster) Coming from Weorthscipe or Wyrthscipe, a state of dignity, honor or worth 1) A prayer, church service, or other rite showing reverence or devotion, 2) Extreme devotion, intense love or admiration of any kind 3) Something worshiped 4) A title of honor and form of address for officers of high rank 5) Archaic: greatness of character, Honor dignity worthiness verb transitive :: a) to show religious devotion or reverence for b) to have intense love or admiration - to idolize verb intransitive:: 1) to engage in worship to perform any religious act of devotion, offer prayers, attend church services etc.
RELIGION is here restricted to being mental, a state of mind, and appears in reality (observed) as the actions and rituals which that state of mind requires. It involves belief, and perhaps a philosophy. It may form a basis for conduct, as it sets philosophy and values and goals. BELIEFS:: by definition are the un-provable. component of our mental picture of life. If it is provable, if something is observable, then it is reality, science or fact, not religion. Belief is the unique domain of religion. Belief must match, be compatible with reality, belief may depend on reality for much of its basis, and that is true of all religions. The differentiating points are the beliefs which can not be observed, and which lie outside of reality in that they can not ever be observed or proven. REALITY:: That which is observable. It is divided into two parts, history and science. History is a record of past events which are not subject to present verification as they cannot in general be reproduced. Science is more credible since it is based upon recorded observations, usually supported by abstraction and theory, which can be predicted and repeated in a controlled manner (experimentation and reproducibility) as needed. What is truth? Truth is = reality. Religion must not conflict in any way with reality. It may - even must - be compared with reality, but the specific domain of religion is that set of beliefs which can not be observed, cannot be measured, and in fact, frequently can NEVER be observed. When a religion tries to use reality as a sole basis, then it ceases to be religion, and steps into the role of history or science. Religion is NOT science , history, or fact, and must be carefully separated from these components which are the subject of analysis, observation (experimentation) and which may be observed in reality and agreed upon as facts.
COMPARE BELIEFS TO REALITY:: Religion may (must) combine beliefs with reality, and the beliefs must never be in conflict with reality. Values involve combination of both tangible reality and intangible beliefs, and usually both must be considered. Values will in turn set goals, and thus establish behavior. Beliefs must consistently be checked against reality and conflicting “belief's” discarded. Discarding a belief is EXTREMELY difficult, and failure to do so quickly has been the cause of a major amount of human misery. We need to re-examine our assumptions, and in particularly hidden assumption or hidden beliefs. VALUES: Values are mental judgments, they involve happiness, and sorrow; mental pleasure or mental pain, Mental comfort or discomfort, and are (or should be) related to a world picture that is emotionally compatible with life, reality, and which then helps establish goals. The payment for intangibles should be intangible and the reward for tangible values should be tangible.. PLEASURE & PAIN as VALUES:: As an assumption I will assume that things which give mental pleasure are good and things which cause mental pain are bad. Reality uses physical pleasure or pain to tell us what to do or what not to do, and I will assume that these same terms apply to mental pleasure and mental pain which are caused by intangibles in the mind, but which can be judged to decide which beliefs to pursue and which to abandon. Those beliefs which lead to mental pleasure are good, and those which lead to mental pain are bad=evil. This is a specific definition and use separating the two terms mental (pleasure/pain) and physical (pleasure/pain) to indicate that the mental component arises from unobservable beliefs and the physical arises from reality. Both types are mental, and happen in the mind. Pleasure and pain are both mental states, but the added adjective is meant to indicate origin. I have observed that life brings both pleasure and pain. IN fact it is impossible to know pleasure without also experiencing pain. To know great joy, you also must know great sorrow. The opposites are necessary. But we do not have to have equal quantities of sorrow and joy. Once we comprehend the extremes, we may then act to minimize the pain and to maximize the pleasure. As a philosophical question is this life supposed to be a place of punishment and thus to “serve our time” we need to suffer? I have rejected that in my assumptions, and assumed pleasure is good, and rejected this reverse thesis. GOALS-- From the values which we hold, we then select actions which will let us achieve those values. If for example we hold this life to be of no value, a rational result from that assumption would be suicide. If life is valueless, then we do not desire to continue it, and the goal is as quick a termination as possible of the unwanted state. I hope that the obvious counter conclusion here from taking the negative and showing its consequence is that I propose as a belief that life is of value, and that I seek happiness from living. LIFE EXPERIENCES:: We should seek a variety of life experiences. If pleasure is of value, then I will seek to experience a variety of pleasures. This is very similar to the Hedonist, Sybarite assumption, but it will lead to somewhat altered actions. I have other beliefs, particularly about afterlife, which alter Hedonist, Sybarite goals and thus change long range actions from “Roman” pleasure orgies..
ETHICS:: Ethics is the study of interactions of humans, and the effect those actions taken by one person have on others. It is a study of the effect of actions taken by one person on the values, the happiness, the pleasure or pain, of other people. The prime rule here will be DO UNTO OTHERS AS THEY DO ! Insist on consistency and that each be treated as they treat others. At this point it probably is well to also define a spectrum of ethics, from totally selfish in which a person would kill another for some minor gratification, to the higher or more abstract ethics where a person will exchange a lesser harm or loss to self to increase the pleasure of someone else. This last is love. We need to learn higher types of love. There is a normal progression of ethics learned by children as they grow up. Each level progresses to more and more consideration of other people. This is covered in detail much later after describing past religions, and their progression. There are six major degrees or types of love, to be better defined later. The more abstract the benefit to others in general the higher the ethic being practiced. But all types involve consideration to greater or lesser extent of other people. We should select beliefs in part based upon how well they serve to increase happiness. In fact I am so self centered I will say MY happiness, and then say that my own ethics are such that my happiness also must be inclusive of the happiness of others. The closer I am to them, the more I know them, the more I am concerned with other’s individual happiness, but overall I establish mental and physical pleasure of everyone as a goal. By the way this is a form of saying “I love them” (Agape II type love). Religions must never result in a basis for actions which would greatly harm other people, particularly wars; “Holy war” being an oxymoron. As a prime directive causing physical harm and physical pain that can be observed would violate the basis for any rationally based ethical belief. The observable pleasure and pain from reality are dominant and superseding the more subtle mental pleasure and mental pain from beliefs. Beliefs must NEVER be in conflict with reality. FREEDOM:: Freedom is assumed to be highly desirable. If we are to achieve a variety of life experiences, then we must be free to choose actions so as to also maximize our values. But Freedom implies a cognate and often rejected equal self responsibility. If you are truly free, then you also must accept full responsibility for all your choices and all your actions. Thus all forms of enslavement where others make decisions for you, removing freedom, are rejected. Parents must make decisions for their children up to a point. The children are irresponsible and incapable of making informed decisions. They lack both the facts, and the ability to use the facts - in short lack experience enough- to select proper actions for maximal long range benefit or to avoid harmful decisions. But once the child has enough experience, and enough mental training, then they are “adults” and must be given freedom to make their own decisions.
WHAT DECISIONS ARE PROPER WITHIN “FREEDOM OF CHOICE?” If it harm no one, do as you please. “An that it harm none, do what thy will”. The extreme variation and variability of the race may in fact be its strongest point. We are able to winnow out problems as a race, without getting locked into evolutionary specialized dead ends. We have the variability to survive extremes since we ourselves go to extremes. Taking climate as a possible example, no other species is found in the extremes of temperature that H saps endures, and even thrives in. Neither altitude, nor variation in food supply , nor extremes of condition seem to halt us. In fact we thrive in conditions and in places where any sane animal would not even consider going. CRIME:: When we act, our actions almost always effect other individuals. Our ethics determine the consideration we give to the effect of our actions on other individuals. We judge the ethics by the harm or benefit of our actions on others. When an individual in our society gets too out of control, and inflicts harm on other individuals we class that person as a criminal and provide means of removing him from society. We restrict his freedom of choice, and thus prevent his bad ethics from continued harm for other people in our society. In general we allow complete freedom in actions unless it causes too much harm to others. The extreme variation which we allow before we act still lets individual criminals kill other individuals. We have not as yet learned how to identify probable bad ethics and place protective restrictions preemptively. We act historically, and by “law” only after the harm is actually done. In fact we punish crimes only after they have been codified and listed as such, and do not act against bad ethical behavior until we make written rules about it, the rule of law. We do not in general punish retroactively, no “ex post facto law” is allowed. The theory of this is incorrect since if it is unethical later, it was unethical in the first place. In theory the punishment fits the crime, to deter the crime. The more severe the crime the more severe the deterrent needed. The extreme harm of murder is punished by permanent removal of the bad ethic from society; of old by execution of the person having that bad ethics, of late by long term prison, hopefully permanently. We remove virtually all freedom of actions.
CONFLICT:: if there is a difference between what we think and reality, what we observe, then there is a conflict. It must always be resolved by changing our mental state. Reality is NEVER wrong and never is in conflict with itself. It may involve physical conflicts, but in this use conflict simply is an indicator of an error in our mental world picture. The mental state does not match what is observed. In that case we must change the mental picture. We must not “wishfully” go on ignoring reality and wishing it would change to match our mind.... that will only cause more conflict and by my observations those conflicts eventually cause pain to greater or lesser degree. These conflicts can be called irrationality. The mind has a pattern which is in conflict with reality. Perhaps this should be called a mental disease. It is another form of insanity. Religions are frequently repositories of irrationality and contagious mental diseases. They may start out “clean” and then accumulate contagious mental diseases; irrational concepts frequently are found in many / almost all religions. Example:: When religions are so formed to give one person or an oligarchy power over others, then it has stepped out of the realm of religion and become politics. It is serving a “governmental” function. Govern is opposed to freedom, and when it is applied to religion, it is even often trying to restrict what we believe! That last is intolerable, and in violation of the ethics which value freedom. At this point we can now begin to examine beliefs, and accept or discard them. I now have a (hopefully) rational basis for accepting or rejecting beliefs. BELIEF 1) (repeated) GOOD and EVIL: Pleasure is to be desired, pain to be avoided, both mental and physical pleasure and pain are included, as stated above.. BELIEF 2) REALITY:: We should study reality / observation / as primary “text book” and base mental abstractions on that as far as possible. Belief must never conflict with reality. Observations will be taken over mental constructs. Reality, observation, dominates intangible mental processes. Sub note: Science will also be given precedence over history, and in case of conflict of science with belief or any mental construct the experiment will be performed, and the first person observations taken over reported “history”. People can lie. Nature does not lie. BELIEF 3) LIFE: Life is good and there is a continued life after death. As a scientist I observe several conservation laws such as conservation of mass, conservation of energy, conservation of momentum, etc. I believe in conservation of that entity which I call :me: Cognito ergo sum, I think therefore I exist. As a cognate I also believe I existed prior to my present life, birth in a more primitive spirit form in another universe. I have no direct observational basis for this belief, I have never met a ghost. In my experience every spirit or soul has been attached to a body. And once a person died, I have never met anyone who came back to visit even for the briefest time. I also note the Biblical story of Jesus (or the earlier Osirus legends, etc.) is second class historical data (third person, not first person) only and the records are not in a form which would meet my “judicial” criteria for reliable evidence, but of the hearsay form which is least reliable. and they are totally without observational basis. I never met anyone who met a ghost.
But my mental picture my “understanding” (theory) of Physics also explains why we are not hip deep in ghosts, and why it is not possible for spirits to return. Thus this assumption is listed as a belief, meaning a mental picture totally unsubstantiated, but not in conflict with reality as I understand it. With this as a hidden assumption perhaps, I also assume life existence is good, and of value, and reject death as nonexistence. Life implies action, experiences, change, and growth. BELIEF 4) FREEDOM:: Life is action. Freedom is the ability to seek new experiences. A variety of life experiences is good. Death is the opposite and is non action, a lack of change or progress. Thus I assume that progress, continual self improvement, is desirable, and stagnation is a form of death. HOPE:: Expectation of life, planning for new experiences, anticipation. This in general I find to be good and accept hope as a good belief. My religion must include “hope” - the expectation and desire for improvement. BELIEF 5) ETERNAL PROGRESSION:: Continued Self Improvement:: The “belief” in life and hope has led to another, ”belief”, which is perhaps even more fundamental. I personally believe in a thing I call “eternal progression”. I find that as I learn more, I can make better choices. The choices I made as a younger person in many cases are not the choices I would make today. As we learn we have a better mental picture that matches this reality better and better. We learn, (when we do learn) from trial and error, emphasis on error, and from secondary experience, observing others. With the better picture we can choose better to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. I am learning about good and evil. I believe that we will continue to learn in a next life, in an eternal progress. That word eternal has a specific meaning to me, and indicates progress which transcends both time in this universe, and space also defined as limited to this universe. The laws of this universe restrict our observations to a zone of about 15.387 billion light years. I do not accept even that limit. I personally hope to achieve eventually such qualities as would let me form such a universe, and even the very large number (in excess of 1064 of them) of such universes which my physics indicates may exist in multi-universe theory. I thus hope to achieve a status and progress to a level now reserved for “gods” in our limited theology and understanding. I look at this life as one school term (the fifth grade), and believe that we will continue in another such school, but that we will enter that future school with what progress we make in this one. As a cognate I also believe that we entered here with the status from prior portions of a prior life, so that we build on what we were able to accomplish there. We will progress depending on the past accomplishments , the “grades” which we made in each stage of this “school”. BELIEF 6) I believe in God. A creation without a creator does not make sense to me. I may not be able fully to comprehend the methods or purpose for this creation, but I can at least observe it exists. I believe I even know much of the purpose for this creation and part of how it was done. I can not accept the opposite view of atheism which has no prime cause. Atheism just says “it happened”, and denies any purpose at all to life. Atheism, denial that there is a god, IS by the way a key belief for a religion. The courts by giving forced credence to atheism are still unintentionally and unethically mixing religion and state. I can neither prove nor disprove anything about God. The words Proof and God are mutually exclusive and incompatible. Since God is all powerful, and proof requires a reaction to my action, I can not take any action which would force a response from God to some action I can take. But to me God is “My Father {and Mother} who are in Heaven” -the creators of this universe. Being my parent(s) that implies I also may progress to their status. By the time I get there presumable they will also have progressed, so catching up seems out of the question. But at least it gives me goals which also give me mental pleasure. My (male) goal is simply to learn as much of what Father did as possible, and thus to follow in His pattern. The cognate female goal should be to seek out what Mother did and emulate that. To say this in another way, I am trying to follow his example, and I use reality as a “text book” telling me what he did. I will progress assuming I am both careful in my observations, and careful in my hypothesis / theory / law formulation, being sure my mental pictures match what I observe (Belief 2) This means that I (we) must be willing to modify any mental construct which does not match His “text book” - i.e. it requires that I (we) be willing to toss out ANY belief, no matter how long men have cherished it, and no matter what “value” they place upon it, as soon as I (we) find a conflict. I observe that this universe operates on a “simplest” principle (William of Occam’s observation) and that when man creates very complex messes for theory, usually he is wrong. The truth inevitably seems to be simple if we will just examine the “elephant” as a whole, and not as the 7 blind men, each insisting on HIS small part of the observation as the whole truth. That implies we must also rise above petty pride, and be willing to listen (observe). We must be willing to learn from the errors of others- we don’t have time enough to make all the mistakes ourselves... even if we do seem determined to try. I have already more than hinted that I accept the observed male/ female duality in this universe, and that my God is actually plural “Gods” - a Father and Mother, and in fact Mothers, enough Mothers to produce all the spirit children for the whole human race. Each Mother tends to have spiritual children like her, thus the various races. Each Mother is associated with a different human race. But these Mothers with the same Father are so “one with each other” that they must appear as “one” and thus the common denominator of the very polygamous common Father dominates in our world. Thus the “Father” has been emphasized to the point that we forgot our Mothers. That was improper. I accept sexuality, thus the word God is plural and bisexual, individuals working, loving together as one, with one purpose. There also is implied in the above an opposing force, a god (small g) if you will, that of disorder, which actually rules in this world. That god, Satan, is a god of confusion, disorder, etc. and is the “opposition” in all things that is necessary - to know good it is also necessary to know evil. Thus Father has a spiritual child who has mental and spiritual power, but who will eventually be left in this universe when we move on to an orderly universe (God’s). That was and is Satan’s choice. He has chosen, by choosing disorder, NOT to grow, to stagnate, to be “dammed” and thus to stop where he is now. I have made my choice to “move on”.
BELIEF 7) I believe in an ORDERLY consistent universe and ORDERLY God(s). I observe that in our universe everything tends to Disorder (Entropy is increasing). That postulates then that God -the one I want to follow - exists in another universe parallel to ours, and the properties of that universe can be derived from physics equations. It is contra-terrene (made up of anti matter), time is reversed, it is Contracting, not expanding as is ours, etc.. and thus I derive the probability (unprovable) that we are in the process of transfer from one such CT universe which had begun to “run down” to yet another which is relatively “young” and a place for growth, for progress. That explains why God does not physically appear to us. If he did it would be catastrophic to both our self and him. He can intrude “mentally”, but he has forsaken intervention in general, and most particularly the use of physical force except in a very few exceedingly rare cases. He set the rules, and he follows those rules, and does not change them. We need to find out what the rules of this universe are, so we also can follow them. To restate that we need to form a mental picture which matches the simplified orderly rules under which this existence operates, so that we may better understand good and evil, needing to understand BOTH, so we may choose one and avoid the other. We experience one only in our MINDS, and thus avoid it in reality. BELIEF 8) ROLE MODELS:: The Gods we “worship” should establish role models to follow. The attributes which I place with my God are also the attributes I plan to seek. There also is an opposite “god” with reverse attributes. I gave him the name “Satan” or many other names. My God is a god of rationality Logic- in fact mathematically precise logic, while Satan, Diablo, Lucifer, the Devil, etc. is a god of confusion, lying and that may be a reason he has so many names. The confusion in all past religions is a direct result of the conflict in reality between these two forces. these confused messes in past religions equal conflicts and have caused almost unimaginable pain and suffering. We need to see positive role models. Their values should help set our values. (Do as they do, did) Thus a male role model for men makes sense and a Female role model for women also makes sense Really we need a dual joint role model showing how (why) BOTH coexist. BELIEF 9) NON-INTERFERENCE. This concept is stated to a greater or lesser degree in many Science Fiction shows, particularly Star Trek, The New Generation. I include it in beliefs, because I can not prove it AT THIS TIME. I think it can be demonstrated using ethics eventually. Basically I assert that we should allow each individual, and each civilization to develop with minimal interference. There are some things where interference is clearly warranted to save the life of the person for example. But overall we need to give each person as much freedom as possible to develop as they choose into what ever they wish. Thus this is a corollary of Belief 4: Freedom, but turned outward granting freedom to others. It also is a corollary of Role models, since, if there is a God he certainly is invisible to us, and if he interferers he does so so subtly that we can not detect it. I thus hold that goal also- to interfere so little or so subtly that my interference also is undetectable or nearly so. There are ethical interactions where we must interfere with one another. That is what ethics is all about. But here I state as a belief that we should neither force nor coerce anyone as far as possible. We can try “gentle persuasion”.
Note that I have admitted that I can neither prove nor disprove anything about God. Thus, if you so desire, you may drop the word God totally, and substitute the words “nature” for what I call godly and substitute the word irrational or just “causes pain” for satanic. The identification of pleasurable and rational behavior and painful and irrational behavior is all that is really needed, seeking to follow the one and to avoid the other. This list of attributes simply is a list of those things which usually are “good” and “bad”, cause pleasure freedom or pain. I have found this useful in selecting behavior, things to do and to avoid. ANTONYMS original Sept 1987, modified Nov 1991, Nov 92 © J. H. L. Lawler G O D= good Satan = Beelzebub = Devil etc. God is Love Hate God is Truth Father of all lies God is Rational, observable Irrational, mystical Glory is intelligence Thrives on and promotes ignorance Orderly, decreasing entropy Disorderly, increasing entropy, confusion Creator Destroyer Eternal Temporal Future, makes plans Has no future, here-now-only Open, public, accessible Secret, hidden, private, inaccessible Light Darkness Merciful Vengeful, spiteful, threatening Forgives Uses Blame, guilt, shame Just Unjust Benevolent Malevolent Giving, Graceful Selfish, jealousy, envy, niggardly, Greed, thief, taking, possessiveness, Gave life, separate existence Conspires to kill, murder, enslave Gave ability to observe Confounds observation, trickery Gave memory, history Here-now -no past (and no future) Gave ability to reason Unreason, illogical, irrational Gave ability to choose Unquestioning obedience, unethical, Knowledge good and evil Takes away choices Free agency Force, power, coercion Non-interference Incessant interference, pervasive Operates by laws, rules Magic, miracles, avoids rules and uses mysticism. unlawful Consistent, unchanging Changeable, confusion, indecisive Quiet, unobtrusive Boisterous, aggressive, belligerent Gentle persuasion Contentious, argument, controversial Self-confidence Vanity, pride, pomposity Guilt, Shame FREEDOM = (self responsibility) ENSLAVEMENT (Irresponsibility or lack of self responsibility-others control) Responsibility = reward Get something for nothing; separation of reward from responsibility for actions. Sexual, = sex is good. Asexual, androgynous, (homosexual ?)
LOVE ::: Types of Love - - - The Levels of Interaction Love can be defined and sub divided in terms of six types of love. One person can not interact except with himself. Knowing one's self, meditation, and introspection; however, is a valid self interaction. One point has no breadth, it is a solitary point. Self value, self love, self esteem, self worth is this reference point. This is the basis for all other types of love. You can not love (value) others unless you love (value) yourself first. Two body interaction is linear. Any two points form a line in geometry. The polar interactions in physics represent two body interactions. These are charge, gravity, and have the form of force inversely proportional to the square of the distance. In human relations this is the male-female polar interaction. The emotion of love the eros or erotic sexual love pertains to this interaction. Three body interactions are planar, any three points (not in one line) establishing a plane. The Strong Nuclear force is one such interaction in physics, and note that it is destructive of the nucleus causing radioactive decay. The force shorter range than the two body interaction and is inversely proportional to the sixth power of distance. Three body interactions in general are destructive of stability, and in human affairs this also is true. The "eternal triangle" begets jealousy, and/ or envy and destroys linear polar relationships. Even a baby, the natural consequence of polar male-female interaction, is destructive of the two person- polar marriage type relationships. This force can be overcome by other forces; however, and learning to manage the disruptive force is part of nature's way of teaching us. Learning to control and totally overcome jealousy for example is one of the highest human accomplishments. Tangible Values lie in this field also. We compare one item to another and establish a scale of worth, I evaluate and A is worth more than B; (three things I, A and B). Yet there are other intangible values which transcend this childish sort of value system. I do not disparage it, it is a necessary step on the way to the other higher values. But I also wish to focus on the other value systems as more valuable in this precise sense in three value field. The four body interaction is spatial. Four points in general establishes a volume in a tetrahedron (assuming that they are not all linear or all co-planar). This force in physics is the weak nuclear force, inversely proportional to distance to the twelfth power. It can be either attractive or repulsive, but in nature it is the force that holds the nuclei together, and makes atoms and matter possible. It is a very short range force, but powerful enough to overcome and dominate both the two and three body interactions under proper circumstances. In human relationships this term can be summarized as brotherly love, philos and agape, in Greek, as opposed to eros, learning to value others, both for similarities and for diversity. It starts out at love of a sibling for the sibling, involving a four body (mother- father- brother or sister- and self) relationship. That is by the way a good argument for having more than one child in a family. It is asexual, not excluding sexuality, but transcending it. It is the maternal instinct, the love of the mother for her child, (which must include a father), the love of the father for the family, and in general is the most stabilizing influence in nature.
The five body interaction is hyperspatial. Five points not in one volume, transcend three space. The fifth point can be into time. The distances are inversely proportional to distance to the twentieth power, i.e. so extremely short range as to be swamped by any of the prior interactions. In Einsteinian (or more properly Lorenz) physics the terms in interval, I, defined as I2 =X2 + Y2 + Z2 - C2T2 (or in a contra terrene universe +C2T2) are in five fold relationships. The so called ESP (Extra Sensory Perception) falls into this category. Telepathy, Clairvoyance, Precognition, and so on operate with a five fold interaction. The mind itself and things "spiritual" operate in this way. Note that since it is hyperspatial, neither time nor distance constrain it. My mind is not limited by the laws of space-time. I can not get from here to Tau Ceti, some 9.6 light years away, in less than 9.6 years (relative to Earth). But my mind in the act of saying this sentence jumped here to there and back. The word simultaneous meaning at the same time, gets in to relativistic trouble at large distances. But within the field of five fold interactions, it does have meaning in that it relates to an event chain which is not constrained by time. History, for example is five fold, and not real in the spatial sense.. it lies out of detection by the five senses in another plane, and thus is not subject to experimental determination. Yet our whole social structure depends on history. We tend to place great credence on "old" written records, the Bible in particular, or El Koran. Yet there are older books, the Book of the Dead which comes to mind predates both of the above to 2500 BC, several millennia. We ignore it. New thoughts have not been tested with use and time. For that reason they must be reserved for higher skepticism. But that also does not alter their value if true. They can be tested against history and historic facts, and thus validated. The decisions always must lie in each person's mind, in the mental or spiritual realm. Most people abdicate mental self control and self determinations in favor of "authority", the tests other people have made. That has worked for millions even billions of people. Yet it also has allowed the persecutions, the "divine right of Kings", the inquisition, the Jihad of Islam, and the purges of political power struggles. "Authority" is slightly better than nothing, but it is NOT the perfect way, it lacks perfection and we are told to seek perfection. Thus we also must seek new things a well as old which are known to be flawed. Thus the five fold force includes FAITH, HOPE, CHARITY type LOVE, (AGAPE) and many other emotions. Planning for the future is five fold. Thus the maturity which develops as people learn to plan further and further into the future is five fold. None of these can be seen, or detected by the five senses. They are mental or spiritual in nature, but are far more valuable than the first tangible values which we learn to hold/value and love. Biblically speaking we were told to seek after these values. Six fold interactions I am just beginning to understand. They transcend time itself.. ETERNAL LOVE- or GODLY LOVE. This may well be beyond comprehension of any near descendant of man. At any rate it can be defined, and exists, and it is something to strive to understand.
NOTE: that there have been six distinct values,types of LOVE, mentioned: 1) Self love, which is the reference point from which all other love starts 2) Eros, sexual love starting with self and expanding to two people 3) Material Value, comparative love, values, comparative evaluation 4) Philos "brotherly love, Asexual love which subsumes and also includes sexual love. 5) AGAPE, “CHARITY” type Love, extending to all people and living things. 6) In addition GODLY LOVE exists, extending past time.
Education as goal, way of life As one of the basic assumptions “Eternal Progression” was listed as a belief. That then implies that we should try to keep learning, and try never to stagnate. “Every day in every way we get better and better.” As a matter of observation, we forget some things with time. For me they usually are not totally gone, but they do get “out of reach” to where I must re-learn the items before I can use them again. The relearning is almost always easier than learning in the first place. This then leads to a multi layer model of my own mind, which I assume also applies to other people. Since I cannot directly observe what goes on in someone else’s mind, I can not really observe this, but from other second hand observations I deduce that other people’s minds work like my own does. THE MIND:: Since Religion take place in the mind, here is a bit of what is in the mind and where various parts of religion fit into the mental process: There are at least four major parts to the mind. CONSCIOUS Short term memory, feelings UNCONSCIOUS Filters input Controls learned “automatic” actions like walking, balance Long term memory Values - conscience Inhibitions Intuition - creativity SUBCONSCIOUS Eidetic memory - really NEW creative work, “ID” (The Reptilian brain) “Pain and pleasure” Sex drive (libido) Instinctive - includes defense of territory, “Fight, Flight, or Freeze” semi automatic like breathing, eye blink automatic like heart beat, digestion, reflexes
The CONSCIOUS part directs what we do, and is what is thinking right now. If I say “I think therefore I exist” the part of the mind that does this is the conscious “I”.
SHORT TERM MEMORY The conscious part is connected to the unconscious by way of a short term memory, and apparently we get things into the unconscious ONLY by way of this short term memory. It has about 20 “bins” in which to store memory items and this memory is erased every night while we sleep usually. FEELINGS The conscious mind also receives “feelings” including pleasure and pain directly from the subconscious, and frequently acts upon them without really thinking things out. Our values and intuition pop up in this same “feelings” box for us to consider. Some would call it intuition or the conscience, but it does more than just that. There is a communications link in the feelings box into the conscious mind that we need to encourage. The more the conscious mind filters “feelings” to make rational decisions, usually the fewer feelings come. The little man in the feelings box can be discouraged easily - after all he operates ONLY on feelings- so we need to keep him happy by telling him how much we appreciate his input even or especially when we ignore it. UNCONSCIOUS; The unconscious mind is made largely of a long term memory, and it also acts as a filter for the senses and actions. FILTERS: We receive so much input that we would be totally inundated if we tried to process it all. So the unconscious mind filters out and throws away more than 90% of all we sense - abstracting only what it thinks is “important” in what we hear and see - retaining only the “abstract” of what was really input. ACTIONS: Similarly we do not think about walking- our conscious mind says get up and go to the refrigerator, and the unconscious mind tells the body and feet what to do to accomplish that complex action. A baby is still learning the set of commands that accomplish this, but once “uncle” learns the proper program for the feet they are off and running. LONG TERM MEMORY: The long term memory is operated by a “little man” (girl) who stores and retrieves our memories Getting things into the long term memory is limited by three things: ITEMS: there are only about 20 items in the sort term “in box” RATE (number per hour), and TIME attention span, time allowed on one subject This little man (woman) also who works on problems for us. he is a really GOOD problem solver, if we just let him alone to do his thing, and when he has the answer it pops up in the “intuition” box. STM to LTM RATE This little “guy” also is our filing clerk, putting away all the memories we throw into “temporary memory” - or short term storage. He does have a limited filing capacity, and thus we file only about 3 “items” an hour on the average. This is the “rate of memory transfer” from short term to long term memory. You can increase this from a typical 3 per hour to 4 or 5 just by asking for it. BUT you also must let him alone to do his job and not keep piling other work on top of that order. Just by good training he also can easily be trained to be more efficient and file 6 or even 7 items per hour, even up to about 20 items with real practice- but you must help him by a bit of pre-sorting, pre-labeling as to WHERE to file it (Oh this is another fish tale so it goes “with fishing stories” like another specific similar one), and not ask him to retrieve unrelated stuff while he does his job. This is called “making memory links” or “associative” techniques. It also makes it MUCH less likely that he will loose things. Your memory gets better as well as faster. He is a downright messy secretary- he may file for example a fun evening with a friend at a fine restaurant under the friend’s name, the name of the restaurant, under what you ate, or what you did, or anywhere else that seems likely to him. He just wants to find a pigeon hole for the data. And he may or may not make all the cross references you might like unless you specifically open all those file yourself and set them up yourself. Once you do that it makes loosing the memory much less likely since opening any of those files will find the reference to that memory and it will pop up in the short term memory window letting you know he has successfully retrieved what you wanted. This repetition with minor variations on a theme and association with other past events is a way of making sure that your memory is properly stored- it reinforces the memory by repetition and cross links it to other memories so it will not get lost. STM TIME In addition he has an “attention span” and only wants to work for so long on one job. This is usually about 50 min for most adults. That is why classes of 50 min work best. For children it is less, 20 min typical for a 7 year old, and for college grads usually much more, about 2 hours. There is a trick here however that will beat the game. You just tell him “This is different” and he will happily go on his way with this “new” topic as if it were a totally new subject. Thus what one person would lump under “chemistry”, I might subdivide into inorganic, instrumental, physical and organic chemistry as if they were different things and get 4 attention spans for them PLUS, if you know the limit exists, all you have to do is tell him to be patient and stretch it, and he will. With practice this can be doubled easily and run up to a factor of 8 hours if you work at it. STM NUMBER Finally he also only has so many “items” available in the temporary short term memory- and if you stuff more into the file than it will hold they simply get totally lost “on the floor” and swept out with the other garbage that night when he closes up shop for the night and he goes to sleep. Again there is a way to beat this game- we just lump many items into a memory string, and the whole mess goes into memory (cross indexed even) as one item. A memory string of one item for one person might fill up all of the short term memory in another person that tried to remember disassociated individual things. By linking them we really make life easy for him and he repays us by finding these memory strings easily and completely, with high fidelity. If we want to talk to the “little man/ woman in charge of this operation we can do so. He/she (I will use “he” here after- girls read “she”) rarely receives direct orders, and may be very surprised at any direct communication, but he is also pleased we finally got around to noticing him and usually will respond quite well, and try his darndest to do what we wanted. Most of the time he files data away and occasionally hears us ask a mental question such as what was the name of that big blond guy I met last week- or other indirect hints to go retrieve stuff from the files. But a direct “PLEASE DO THIS OR THAT” is rare. But if you DO ask, then make sure he understands what you want, and then quit bothering him and let him go paw through the files and find it. If you keep telling him he drops the search, comes up and listens and then in disgust gets back to work since all that happened was to distract him. Eventually he rushes up and tosses the memory into transfer memory and rings the bell “HERE IT IS BOSS” and indeed there it is. If you ignore it at that point he may just pack it back into the file (in total disgust), so you need to grab it with enthusiasm when he does produce it. Even say think you!
INTUITION - CREATIVITY - VALUE JUDGMENTS - and CONSCIENCE VALUES and CONSCIENCE There is a label “filter” of information from the unconscious to the conscious, and this filter that sometimes gets in the way of proposed action has been set up to apply value judgments to the information “this is good” ”that is bad”-”if you do THAT you will be embarrassed beyond belief”- and this choice is better than that. This filter center can be put out of action by a moderate quantity of alcohol, and at that point people cease to know right from wrong, - they loose their sense of values, and also loose their inhibitions. CREATIVITY this is a “right brain” located function that receives the “revelation” of new concepts and new ideas- it is the conscious source of creativity. I can not say exactly HOW it operates- the operations are in the unconscious, and this is the “output” register where the answers pop up, but it also is the source of what ESP there is, and is more or less opposed to the left brain “logical” language or linguistic, and math ability. SUBCONSCIOUS: The subconscious level is below the conscious, and it receives data from the eyes, ears, touch, taste and smell directly, and apparently stores it all without comment or processing of any sort to cut “noise”. This level has MASSIVE storage ability, and seems from all I can determine to be populated by a host of very active gremlins. They take delight in tossing irrelevant data from the file into the “dumbwaiter” and stuffing it into the unconscious and by that route it gets to the short term memory and conscious. But they also balk at helping the “uncle” little man at all except as they darn well please, unless forced to do so. This is where the ID comes in. The ID causes them to do what IT wants to achieve its own ends. The Wizard of ID- Deep down in the base of our brain is a “reptilian” like part which controls the automatic actions like heart beat, and knee jerk reflexes, the semi automatic things like breathing, and eye blink and it has its own opinions and values, and will try to impose its basic values onto the rest of the mind. For example it may say I DON’T WANT TO MOVE AGAIN, and will arrange feelings to force a wife (with nesting instinct) to ask for a divorce rather than move when a job related move is required for a husband. It will “fake” an accident (actually really causing the accident, complete with all symptoms) to put the person in the hospital and thus avoid some event it perceives to be totally unacceptable. You can argue with this part of the brain- but it is VERY stupid, VERY stubborn/ slow and responds only to endless repetition, it ignores logic generally, and operates on feelings. - reward for actions. But remember its rewards are VERY basic, for example sex, or similar sensations. It does not respond at all to altruism, agape love, or similar higher order learned pleasure type stimuli. It learns very slowly (if at all) and is just about like a lizard or perhaps a bird - in term of learning. If you want to get its attention, try thinking about what you want to impose on it and masturbating to orgasm - or better yet having a helpful partner who will “do you while talking about what you want to get to the ID- reaching climax as a “reward” for getting to the right conclusion - getting intense pleasure just when it gets where you want it to go, and reaching a conclusion you want it to reach. Like Pavlov’s dogs you will need several repetitions to convince it, it is “reflexive” - not logical. For example you might try something like the move to outer Slobovia is going to be FUN- FUN (orgasm) F U N! -- THAT will usually get the message through to the ID. IF done just right, it may even grudgingly change its mind, and cooperate with the inevitable. You also can convince it that the alternatives all are worse- a pain bad feelings type incentive. If every time it considers some option and it feels pain it will also get the message, but beware as it will just as likely as not twist pain into pleasure rather than listen! Remember it is VERY basic and controls the definition what IS pain and what IS pleasure. This is where masochism gets tangled into the mind. One more comment about the reptilian or “dinosaur” part of the brain. It operates on a very basic level. It must be controlled by the upper part or it will get totally out of control. It is the part that causes a male /female to start a “mating dance” acting like an animal in rutting season. It initiates the “Defense of territory” reflex, and starts the “fight, flight or freeze” motivations. It has almost no ethics of its own. It does start “adrenaline” type actions which served our ancestors well, but which may be totally inappropriate for thinking men. Some outside influences act almost directly on this reptilian brain, and in so doing may be able to slip past the filter of ethics. Music for example, with its sexually based rhythms, does this. The “herding” instinct is another case where the animal goes with the stampede and does not think as an individual any more. If you under stand this you can control it. If you do NOT then it can control you and cause you to regress to reptilian behavior. Thus underlying our “religion” and beliefs is an almost instinctive layer which can cause irrationality. BRAINWASHING: This is good place to mention abuse of trust, and one person violating the free choice and self responsibility of others by brain washing techniques. These almost all depend on reptilian reflexes, and reward, punishment in Pavlovian knee jerk reactions. The “bait” almost always is food, sex, and reward or deprivation of basic needs like sleep. Any time you hit an “initiation” which acts using these tools, you should be wary, and virtually always it is not to your benefit. The army boot camp, religious indoctrination, medical school long hours and confusion are all key examples of this sort of conditioning. All forms of brainwashing are unethical as they conflict with the basic belief of freedom and self responsibility, by depriving the person of choices, and fixing behavior to the path selected by the person doing the mental control. Mental slavery is bad.
Bad Ethics as a Destructive and Contagious. Disease Bad Ethics are a mental disease. They are contagious and they spread from one person and one action site to the next. Humans are the carriers of these bad mental states. Bad ethics tend to proliferate via the bad actions, and tend to grow in frequency and virulence. They also are similar to biological diseases in another way because they also generally are destructive. In fact that is a definition of a bad ethic: a value which causes destruction, a decrease in values. They cause irrational actions which harm people physically or mentally; to a greater or lesser extent. They eventually can so damage their carriers that they destroy the carrier’s mental ability to function. In the extreme they cause the carriers to self destruct, either by outright suicide, or by taking some foolish action like drinking to excess and driving a car. In the long term they also can cause people to take actions that cause them to be “unfit” in the survivalist sense that their genes (physical identity) or teachings (mental identity) become extinct. Ethics are immaterial and intangible in themselves. But they can be postulated, deduced, and recognized from observable actions. Ethics involve mental states, and value judgments, which in turn appear in reality as actions based upon those mental states. Thus bad ethics may perhaps best be classified as a form of mental disease. Once ethics have been defined in this way, good ethics are seen to be a form of mental health, and bad ethics are identifiable as a form of insanity. Insanity can be caused by many internal physical diseases, and also by collections of irrational mental states. The best examples of bad mental ethics interestingly enough all come from religious irrationalities. When for example a religion prohibits sex and demanded celibacy from their followers, the penalty is automatic. The religion dies out. The Shakers are a classical example, they did not have children and now are extinct.. The religions that demand self immolation almost always die out because their adherents kill themselves. Any religion which does not defend itself also will be unfit. As others persecute it, it will loose followers. But any religion which is too violent will also be exterminated. Either extreme is generally destructive. Laws, or customs based upon bad ethics destroy the society using them. The argument about bad ethics being destructive also applies to customs and laws in societies which reflect and cause harmful actions involving bad ethics. If for example a society takes actions which are unethical, then to the extent of the impropriety of the ethics, it will cause irrational and socially destructive actions which will destroy that society. This is a precise one to one linear relationship. A form of taxation which steals from the producers and gives to welfare non-producers, destroys incentive at both ends. The worker will be less inclined to work, since he no longer has his reward; and the welfare recipient will certainly be less inclined to become productive. Any redistribution of the wealth which violates self determination of values tends to reduce value present, (value is a mental evaluation) to that exact same extent.
Redistribution of wealth
destroys values for the society as a whole exactly equal to the difference
between value the person would have achieved for himself with
Should society listen to these people with flawed ethics? Yes - we must listen to all sides of an difference of opinion. But we also must judge the source and ethics of argument for more “welfare” - and probably use their own example as a reason to reject the whole argument! DO UNTO OTHERS AS THEY DO ! Simplify your search for justice, let others judge themselves. Why try to apply your own; hopefully higher, ethics to them, when they do not recognize your ethics? If they understand only a lower level of ethics, then you must operate at that lower level in order for them to understand, and in order for them to progress to the higher levels. You must apply their own ethics at their own level of development to them in order to communicate with them, as unpleasant as it may be to do so. Religious intolerance: .If the leaders in any one religion are not tolerant of other beliefs, and for example persecute people who have beliefs different from themselves, then by application of their own “ethic”: to themselves, society must be intolerant of their religion and persecute them to the precise same extent that they would persecuted others. In the case of a fundamentalist Muslim court that recently condemned Baha’i followers to death for their religion, those same people deserve no less than a death penalty themselves. We are simply reverting to their own level of bad ethics and applying it to themselves. We are letting them judge themselves -(judge not lest you yourself be judged & by the same exact standards you have applied to others)..
VACCINATION - a cure for bad ethics. Vaccination or inoculation implies applying a mild form of a disease to an organism to stop the full bad effects of the disease. Socially speaking, using society as an organism, we must vaccinate to stop the mental disease of bad ethics. We as a society must apply the “ethic” to the person who claims and uses it. rather than allowing him only to apply it to society. Make it go two ways. This then offers a vaccination for bad ethics. If society applies a person’s own ethics to them, frequently it solves the bad behavior problem. If they don’t like that then they can renounce the ethic, stopping the disease.
If a terrorist in a terrorist organization places bombs that kills innocent people, then that terrorist and members of that terrorist organization should themselves be killed. For every person they kill several of them should be killed. Eventually they will either get the message that what they are doing is wrong when applied to themselves, or they will cease to exist just because they ran out of members. This was done by Hitler against the French resistance to stop them from killing German Soldiers, and it worked well. For every German killed, 30 French freedom fighters died. While Hitler is perhaps not well known for his practice of good ethics, this historical example at least demonstrates the practicality of the suggestion. It works. People will certainly be hesitant to join any terrorist organization knowing that if caught the liability is probable death. Contrary, if a society just jails these killers, then people may still feel free to join, particularly poor people who were semi starving and at least will have enough food in the jail.. Society must provide a deterrent to recruitment, absent in the above case as even if they are caught, they will be fed (without work), and eventually they may obtain freedom to continue their search for power, or what ever goal brought them to this activity.. The people in jail are a financial drain on the society while they are in jail and non-productive. Thus the whole application of good “Human rights” to those who do not themselves recognize human rights is an exercise in futility. There is no effective incentive for stopping their actions from prison sentences alone.. Apply their own ethics to themselves - every time they kill, it also is a death sentence that they pass on one of their own members. That is not the higher ethic I would want to apply to myself, but it is what THEY adhere to. All I am doing is forcing them to live- or die - by their own principles. I let them judge themselves. I do not like it, and hopefully eventually they will also not like it and come around to my way of thinking. I observe my ethic - and require them to observe - to live or die by their own ethic. I am just insisting that they be consistent - no more and no less. Observations from reality are and must be integrated into religion. I found that I could not make progress in physics some time ago until I “solved” ethical questions, and the solution of that in turn demanded solution of “religious” questions, i.e. a formalization of my own beliefs. The process has left me with a religion and a peculiar understanding which demands a termination of abuses in virtually all existing religions. That is not to say that they are ALL bad, there are elements of truth in virtually all religions. But there also are elements of disease which seem to be universal as well. Men have taken the best of concepts and mixed in government, worship of MEN, of attaining power, and hypocrisy, and so distorted the teachings of “messengers from God” that all religions of men have been corrupted by men for their own purposes.. I presume I also may have made errors. But to the extent that I am closer to the truth than anyone else, it is a better theory, a better start, it requires less correction that any other starting place. It also does provide a basis to stop the “magicians” who deal in “miracles” -and the shamans and priests who are really dealing in power control of people (politics and government) without admitting to that label - i.e. they are lying to gain an advantage. It does provide a basis also to recognize religious and political theft, and other bad actions from bad ethics from the governmental sector. With this as a tool the ethics of all proposed rules of conduct (laws) can be examined and the real motivations separated from the “smoke screen” and perhaps “politician” can be altered in trust from just behind “used car salesman” in last place for ethical credence as a profession. It also will allow rejection of the religious emotional preachers of fundamentalism relying on emotion and charisma to gain power. In fact it would suggest long terms of penal servitude might be in order. They have enslaved others, -- that is their ethics- it is time they served those very others they have been bilking out of money and they were forced be consistent with what they preached, and practiced. SEX is A POSITIVE, “GOOD” VALUE:: I observe that sex, copulation, and the associated foreplay gives much pleasure and as a bonus also is a way of getting children. Children:: hope in a package. Sexuality is observable in reality. This value judgment is based on observation. I do not have to “believe” anything, I can observe that I find sexual release strongly pleasurable. Mary was an unwed mother, got married only after she was pregnant. This is a role model, so after all getting “knocked up” is a goal. Also Mary had lots of kids, but many Catholics don’t like to admit that and try to maintain a permanent virginity myth. Virginity is a correctable problem, not a value at all. Sexuality does need to be controlled, and from Syphilis, Gonorrhea, and now AIDS and all sorts of other sexually transmitted diseases I must conclude that promiscuous, irresponsible sex is bad, it can even be lethal. But overall I have to note that sex is so inherently good that it takes a lot of effort and talent (we seem to have many talented people) to make it bad. It is a powerful force. Without it the human race might well have died out. I reject hiding it in closets, and hold it to be an extremely major value. Note sexuality develops in stages, and children can - by observation - be harmed by premature exposure to sexual actions for which they are not ready. Again there is a normal progression that should be followed. When the person (child) is ready for that next step it should be allowed to occur naturally as they are ready for it. It should neither be repressed -nor rushed. . PURITANS::I reject the Puritanical point of view. They reject “pleasures of this world”, seeking some heavenly “reward” in some ill defined next life. But is this next life is also without pleasure? Would their sad faced straight laced next life be a heaven or a hell? I think the latter. Their ethic has caused so much misery, pain, and death that I must examine their premises as a way of elimination of errors and rejection of bad assumptions. If nothing else we can always use them as a bad example, something to be avoided. The puritanical rejection of their own body and everything in this world including sexual pleasure warps normal sexual progress. In the extreme it is a rejection of this whole earth and life. If they really reject life, then let them commit suicide! If that is REALLY what they believe we should not force them to go on living in a world of pain and suffering. Put ‘em out of misery! If we put animals who are suffering, without hope, out of their misery can we do any less for our fellow man? Or are they really masochistic? Do they WANT punishment? No thank you please for me.
|
|
Send mail to
Jhlawr@wmconnect.com with
questions or comments about this web site.
|
