Introduction

The thoughts that come to mind when I think of knowledge as it has been conceived here, are stiff, solid, disciplined, sedentary, categorical, historical; posthumously accumulating facts and retracing instants so as to add longevity and depth to a conservative stance; these things are not normal to my dynamic multidimensional feelings and even to my squandered heartless thoughts, little as I spend on that latter they are magnified by the current hypnotic rational trance that embodies every aspect of our being.

The world to me is not intellectually or orderly contrived, it is based on emotions, something terribly went wrong when we fell in love with rational as rational and not as rational as a product of our emotions. My primal causes instinct tells me that rational is a logical emotional deduction. Unfortunately logic decided that it was the foundation, and has since tried to commit parricide. Nothing wrong with that, every child does it, only we ought not let it happen since it is to our detriment. Logic does not care about us, logic does not appreciate our human failings or our limitations, logic will kill any human being that it comes into contact with. Because logic is the suicidal son of our self-hated self; logic is the “I” saying to itself, “I hate myself, I hate my limitations, I am going to overcome my emotions and I am going to control the universe.” Nothing wrong with that because it does not cost logic anything, logic is the first hypothetical non entity to consume a living thing, human beings. Quite an accomplishment and we should be as impressed as we ought be scared. A metaphor for explaining existence and the universe has become a deadly virus running our wills and our worlds and we are doomed for it, and we cant recognize it because we can not see far enough ahead to see beyond reason and its counterpart knowledge. More horrible, even the past which is by nature sedentary, it will hold still for us to look at it for a little bit, even the past has been so fused with rational hubris that history is a deterrent rather than something we can learn from; history as it has been written, by the intellect, will not allow us to see the years before the intellect. The intellect is convinced, and has convinced us that before it we were blind and ignorant. We really don’t know if this is true, we really can not know it, and to become aware of what was before the intellect we would have to silence the intellect, and we are so enamored and dependant upon it, that we can not imagine being without it.

This book is an attempt to go beyond reason, and to recall what it was like to be without it, neither task is simple or doable under the current world order but just maybe…

Appendix

Whatever faith lacks in proof it makes up by being un-provable.


When I think of the word world or think of the word self, so intertwined are they that I can not imagine why they require two words. I am a delicate person the world is delicate, the universe is composed of all of these delicate things, only the universe is tough. All those neutron stars and blackhole-ulcers in its timing fabric seem innocuous and free; gamma, beta and cosmic rays frugally wonder the immensity, the universe is tough, everything that composes it is fragile. I am fragile.

Here where earth encrusted settled magma ripens trees and flowers and canyons and mountains I start with my brain, I end with my brain.

Never understood the concept brain, an apparatus that serves me well in these here wonderings, even so I imagine, even only through my brain, that the universe is composed, in infinitesimal percentages, by my brain, and my brain is composed by the phantasmagoric universe, much the same as world and self are deterrently mutually inseparable. I sift my port, a flowered alcoholic trouble, and feel its influences upon me, such an idle thing, such an idle thing.

I tell myself, who is here talking, the fine exquisite port or is it me, and why my brain so weak as to allow such niggardly influence altering my will of self. I will to drink indeed, and tell myself I could just as well will my will to resist the influence exercised by this fine port; why we have known well for long that the mind can render poisons powerless and the brain can make a molten pot burn not the hand of the monk that wills denial of the burning flesh.

Oh but to fight the port would be so silly, even as silly as port turns on me. I don’t question the idea, I don’t and won’t deny the effects that port has upon me, which I assume are the result of centuries of careful port production, were I then to rebuke my port, I would be saying naught to centuries of carefully combined renditions accomplished by simple ambitions.

I yield to those labors because they call me and I call them, much the same as world and self call and duty themselves all over each other. What is all of that combined necessity of expression is naught in me brain to know, it is however in me brain to ask. And so it is that I begin here with the question, is it possible for a brain to ask questions that it can not answer? Is there, in the brain something so endemically destructive that a brain might not know when to stop asking questions or what questions not to ask? And if so could then a brain be crippled by its inability to resolve a question? And if a brain is mortally crippled by such endeavors then will this brain continue manufacturing truths that answer its interrogations even as these might themselves be beyond proof and so by nature unbelievable?

I think I can imagine this brain organ trying to turn everything into a thought. I think I can imagine this brain organ trying to turn feelings into thoughts. I think I can see my feelings believing that they are thoughts, especially if their only way to gain acceptance from myself is by accomplishing such disgraceful feat. I pause.

According to Darwin I am a product of evolution. Something about my DNA listening to the environment and reengineering the best possible me to deal with the environment. These process takes hundreds or thousands of years, it is therefore very difficult to observe, so you won’t see any dinosaurs turning into birds, but you can at least fancy that idea. It would be irrational of me to refute something based on evolutionary theory, I am perfectly ok with the idea that a bird is the result of a dinosaur’s instinctive extinction prevention program. Lose some weight, hollow out those bones, exchange that huge body form large wings; it seems an appropriate reaction, for a massive creature to want to be trim and flighty.

Evolution has been or is observable at the microscopic level, which is probably the greatest evidence we have for it though I could argue that microorganisms evolving is not evidence that macroorganism evolve. Of course evolutionists say that we come from monkeys and some other said; why dint all the monkeys evolve? And I say it is because they are conservative. Anyway I don’t think it is too difficult to find relationships between things that inhabit the same environment, I mean that we are all going to have organs and bones that function in this environment or else we are all not going to be here because the environment does demand a certain kind of composition. When we go up and out into space we put on astronaut suits that mimic this environment because the vacuum that is space is hostile to our nature. So Darwin saw the monkeys and said to himself, we look like them so we must come from them. It never occurred to Darwin that the monkeys might actually have evolved from humans. But there is nothing in evolution that would prevent that from being the actual truth. It was just easier to sell the theory if we were the most advanced and refined product of evolution; we don’t really think much of monkeys.

There is much here to talk about but let’s try to keep to our point, I mean to say that there is such a thing as runaway evolution, this is when an organism keeps on evolving even when such is not favorable to the organism. I think peacocks have been used as a perfect example. A peacock’s tail evolved to impress and attract its mate, the ritual got so out of hand that the tail kept on growing in majesty but as always with majesty, it also grew in uselessness to the point of making the peacock easily spottable to its predators and easier to catch because of a very beautiful tail that prevented flight and made it clumsy too. This is what is known as run away evolution, the tail of the peacock is a danger to the peacock but because it is a way to attract a mate it keeps on growing in majesty while ignoring the troubling environment.

I will trouble my self to say, that the brain has now become a danger to the self, it continues to grow with its own importance, asking question that it is not designed or trained to answer, and entering into the emotional and metaphysical realms where it does not belong. Is summary I make the case that the brain is trying to be everything to a human being and that the human being is many more things than just a brain, and so we must proactively determine if we shall allow this brain thing to continue to disproportionally define us and everything that surrounds us.

I would further argue with all my mental energies on hold that the brain has been displaying symptoms of being an appendix for at least the last three decades. So much so that any visionary can only conclude that posterity is going to be brainless. At fist this might seem difficult to believe, specially since we have done so much with that fine organ; but I propose here to prove the obvious, the brain is the product of what we are, it is not, I repeat, it is not what we are, it is a consequence, an attribute that serves a purpose to our manifestations, manifestations which are embodied by an essence that projects itself into this condition, as such, the brain is not only expendable but must have a temporary value to our corporeal being.

It may even be that my brain is writing this to warn us all of its imperialistic folly, at many levels the brain is a wonderful intricate thing, and it is entirely imaginable that the brain could indeed have an altruistic function which would allow it to care more about us than itself; in brief the brain may indeed begin to shut itself off, by causing me to outthink it with its own thoughts. I, as a person, might be a mere trigger for the suicide of brain. Cells in my body constantly commit suicide because it is a benefit to the overall system, when they don’t kill themselves we get cancer, and when the system realizes that then the entire corpus begins to collapse upon itself; much as cells have desirable and undesirable life spans, organs too; only a brain is a very especial organ, and because of this not only do we fall in love with it but also we may give it a greater importance that it may deserve.

Brain must and is capable of unthinking itself and thinking beyond itself. The real difficulty might lie in the habitual dependence that the self which uses that brain acquired, this makes it fall in love with the simplicity and manageability of rational results as produced by the complex organ whose entire function is primarily to simplify the world, make it manageable and comprehensible. That to accomplish this the brain might have to deceive and conjure linear ideas that summersault the complexities and concentric triangulations that must invariably silk themselves into the wool of existence is an unobservable, specially once the brain gets done with it.

Brain can unthink itself, but that the organism that owns it can not unthink the very brain that it created is as magical as it is troubling. It is troubling not because of its brain function but because of the user that has fallen helplessly in love with its logician. Brain is like mother, it tells you “don’t worry darling I will make the world ok for you, everything is going to be alright, in the end you will not only comprehend and control everything but you will be able to change it to your liking.” No sour pudding in that feast. Mom loves you, and mom is instrumental in helping you conquer the challenge of life, but then, and this is the then that matters, then there comes a point when mother dies.

Homogenization/Perfection

Why we might ask is the brain so all imposing? Why has everything developed by the brain become so all encompassing important? The answer lies in a very twisted reel of the physics and circumstance of the universe and its conception of perfection. I say its conception of perception because we can observe it, and as it is an observation we must conclude that the universe is intrinsically as we observe it to be, and even if it is not it does not matter, for us it is so. And when we observe the universe and everything in it we have to come to one paradoxically worrisome situation, the universe tries to perfect itself. Don’t pause to think of it as absurd for me to say that, just analyze yourself, do you try to perfect yourself? Does your government try to perfect itself? Does god try to perfect itself? Does the species seek to perfect themselves? I am not judging the merits of the type of perfection that is thought out, government certainly consider effectively controlling their peoples a perfect and reasonable objective, while this may in fact be bad or good for the people regardless it is an objectification of a subjective idea of perfection.

If we postpone moralizing the matter, all things that we know to live, seek some form of a perfection. How then might that perfection be measured? I measure perfection by how much freedom of movement I have within the environment I inhabit. The greater my ability to move about, up and down and sideways through the social classes, through the professional and economic ladders, and even I measure my perfection in my ability to leap social conventions. Others might measure their perfection in their ability to worship god without having to get a job. Some might think it a perfection to be idle without natural resistance from the governing masses. A machinist might consider a screw or a laser chisel a perfection. The universe might consider expansion a good thing, that is if size is what matters and it is really difficult to get the title of universe without being gargantuan and largely indifferent to all the things inside of you.

Obviously we are not perfect, it is doubtful that people can be born, at least into this universe, if they are perfect. Perfection is unlikely to endure or understand or appreciate the concept of suffering and limitations. God, the most perfect diamond in the universe does not suffer and is not bound to limitations. God himself is everything but the suffering and the evil in that everything. You and I get cancer, you might consider evil and pain God’s cancer, he doesn’t like it, but he has to put up with it. Of course this minor part of an imperfection in God’s universe is being cured, by a step by step self help book, you don’t need any PhDs, just this one book and a bit of repetition and you can cure the part of the perfection that you are. See in God’s eyes you are the part of him that is imperfect and he wills you to perfect yourself in his image.

My point is that if God, the most perfect of things, has not obtained perfection is not from lack of trying, we are a stumbling block, but God has tried and will infinitely continue to try. See god too is seeking to perfect himself just like DNA is seeking to perfect itself. Just like a virus that gets attacked by penicillin seeks to adapt and or become resistant to it or to learn to eat the penicillin, bottom line a virus seeks to perfect itself. Why even a cancer tries to perfect itself, a cancer is nothing more than a cell that said to itself, “No I don’t want to die, no I don’t want to die just so that my host can keep the general characteristic to which it has grown accustomed, I don’t want to die, I want to live for ever and reproduce and be my own host.” Cancer in attempt to become an independent and self sufficient organism, blows itself out of proportion and collapses the entire environment that host and surrounds it. So it is with brain.

Brain, even as it is magnificent, can grow obsessed with its own importance and corrupt the entire system, persons and humanity which it is design to embody. This is because as things seek their perfection they begin to realize two laughable but critical facts. The imperfection is really out there; and, the only way to perfect yourself is to change everything into you. Anything less, is limiting and not perfect and most probably finite. Though I am not sure on this last point, it may indeed be that the only thing that can last forever is imperfection, this is because if you just think about it a little bit you will come to find that imperfect things are willing to share and sharing with added tolerance is what makes the universe so complex, varied, and huge. The most successful politicians are usually the most ambivalent, they are committed to neutrality, they cant seem to attach with militancy to any opinion or cause, they could belong to either, or and, and; the most successful artists usually cater to mass sensibilities, this is true even if those mass sensibilities develop, within the mass, posthumously. True artist are so sensitive that they may actually live and be more at home with posterity. Certainly an intolerable condition while they are alive but if you smell aesthetics from afar you aren’t getting lunch anytime soon. Still the artist realizes this at some level and prefers to live in the future because the perfection, at least for the artist that smells the future, is in the future. The artist is intolerant of his times because he is tolerant of the times to come, not because he is really intolerant, in fact the artist is ambivalent to real time conditions; having already, done much like god, and martyred his being for the sake of exhibiting in posterity. Part of the reason for this form of nihilist aesthetic from the part of the artist and god might be induced by sheer disappointment with the current condition, so they fall in love with the promise, with the possibility and they compromise and hemorrhage their present condition.

The brain is different than the artists and a little more different than god, it only cares about the present, it has very little value for the future. Lack of planning is an endemic function of the brain, this is because the brain is design to function in real time environments. An artist and god suffer sensibilities that have very little to do with getting along, eating and immediate satisfaction. The brain however was designed to live, adapt and function in response to the local environment, a brain is only visionary as far as it seeks to secure and control the reality which it has to endure. A brain is creative, but only creative at a functional level. A brain creates logic, logic is linear, a brain creates control, control is a fanatic structure to nurture the conditions of security and predictability. When a brain searches the future, it searches with fears; this is why most films about the future are filmed after the human race has exploded all their nuclear weapons and all are left are mutants trying to reconstruct a world order. The brain plants this fear in us, so that we prepare for the most horrible outcome, caution is a brain’s function, study the situation, analyze it, draw conclusions, check, verify and catalog those conclusions, learn them from memory, slowly adopt them into your mode of thinking. Brain does this because it makes brain important, one of the most beautiful representations of this is retirement planning, there is nothing more hilarious than watching a thirty year old working diligently to nest a nice retirement plan. Hilarious brain work.

The brain has to be cold because the brain has to make decisions that aren’t always appetizing. A father in China has regularly had to make the decision to live far away from his family in order to provide them with money so they may have a habitat and nourishment. Brain does this, brain has to decide how many nuclear warheads it will take to destroy 250 million people and which cities and military installations it needs to destroy first; and the brain must do this without imagining the laughter and creativity and ingenuity that it has to destroy within itself and in the world, in order to accomplish this task, a task that to the general executing it becomes a brilliant strategic campaign, you have to think!

It is the brain that does economic calculations, when an economist decides to raise your interest rates it is his brain telling him that you are feeling to happy go lucky and that he needs to prevent your free spending feelings from inflating out of proportion. When they raise your interest rates maybe you will barrow less, maybe you will put more money in the bank, and if you start doing that to much the economist will use his brain to free up capital flows so that you can spend more and not depress the economy. There are many ways to look at this but the way an economist looks at it is the most frigid. Why, because he has to think like a brain to manipulate the entire economy, the economy is a brain function it was created by brains that move these levers and pulleys so as to balance out human desire with some sense of rational behavior. As the brain widens to encompass the wider and wider population the brain exponentially freezes.

Brain creates knowledge. Of all things being and none being nothing is more important to god than faith. Of all things being and none being nothing is more important to an artist than the aesthetic. Of all things being and none being nothing is more important to a fashion designer than a failure to remember last years fashions. To the brain nothing is more important than knowledge. Brain and knowledge are intertwined and unable to bleed to death separately. Brain defines itself with knowledge. Its ability to gather, to question, to probe to investigate, to affirm and to repeat, and, and this is the and that counts, and its ability to predict logical outcomes, is the precision and perfection of brain/knowledge.

If brain can predict logical conclusions at a universal level, such as it is wished with a Grand Unified Theory of Everything, then god will have nothing that knowledge can not reproduce. It would be difficult not to have absolute faith in rational logical linear knowledge if such can reproduce, recreate and know the universe and its functions. It is the obtainment of such perfection which eludes science, and science unlike god has a tougher measurer of its success, proof; god, wisely tied belief to faith, a far more lenient measure that made up in appetizing mystery what it lacked in precision. In a sense god’s perfection outdid brain here, because brain commiserated to proof the definition of the unknown, you can not say you know something unless you have observed it, tested it and reproduced it; proof is physical, it is real, proof is graspable, tenable, proof reaches conclusions that match the universe and everything in it; but god, perhaps wiser as he is older than knowledge, decided that the unproven could be believed if one administered faith, and the more unbelievable something the greater faith it would require, but one thing was sure, faith would win out. If you feel it and you believe it, and believe it blindly you cant go wrong!

I am probably being a bit obvious here, unification theory is nothing more than the attempt of anyone thing, to make itself the most important thing in the universe. The god thing wants everything united under its own image and belief system, and brain/knowledge wants everything united in its own image, and I want everyone to believe everything that I believe and it would hurt me any if they all wanted to be like me, and here you have the Grand Unified Theory of Grand Unified Theories: “Everything in the universe is related to me!” That is to say that the universe is not different from end to end, but rather that there are international, universal and supra-entity laws that govern everything and everyone. Of course this laws do not feel, morality does not feel though it may indeed be a consequence of feeling, justice does not feel though it certainly is a euphemism for vengeance, and the physics of the universe is the most insensitive of all, the weak force, the strong force, the gravitational force, and electromagnetic force they don’t care about you and I, they only care not to break any of the laws that make them up, there is law and order in the universe. Humanity discovered this with its price possession brain/knowledge!

And are we ever fortunate, because without this brain/knowledge thing we would have never known all these encyclopedic things we know, more important and a pleasant surprise it was, but thanks to brain/knowledge we now know we are the smartest thing on our planet and from the immediate look of things the most intelligent thing in the solar system. We might even be the smartest thing in the universe, though we can not yet prove it so we must doubt it, still we search on but it certainly looks through the telescope that intelligent life is the rarest of preciousness.

It may have never occurred to us that we might be rare because we are not desirable, nor would it occur to brain/knowledge that the executive committee of the universe said no to more life forms like us, preferring blackholes, suns, whitedwarfs, neutron stars, even more empty space, just a few of the things that are not only larger and more imposing and more common than us; not to mention neutrinos which happen to have a free run of the place. But we, little people with big giant brain/knowledge, we are specials.

Well I guess if there is going to be a baseball card collection in the universe it would not make much sense with anything else than a human in the picture with statistics on the back, IQ 129, ergonomically bipedal, fully functioning brain; and baseball caps are certainly a unique accomplishment. The ability to catalog the universe has to be impressive as well, and we have awed ourselves, not an easy feat after all, we are primarily skeptics. We doubt everything, we question everything, we don’t just believe, we ask deep and insightful questions, and we don’t settle for the first answer that comes along; we have in fact proven that we can disprove ourselves, we have throughout time found just cause to end entire belief principles, and we did it because the truth was more important to us than our pride. That is the kind of self correcting animal that we are.

Anyway there is nothing wrong with admiring the human race, it would be difficult to believe that the human race could sustain itself without loving itself first. Of course love is an irrational and not really logical brain function, but more on love and all that it does to contradict brain later. For now we only bring love into the picture to explain one brain function, self aggrandizement. Yes, brain is logical but it is also in love with its child knowledge, and the reality is that brain wants everything that reproduces to be knowledge, the smartest thing in the universe is in love with itself; this is not logical, this is not rational but it may help us explains why it is all important. And as things become all important they homogenized hegemony into perfection.

I need to reiterate here that we are covering a critical substance full element: the natural tendency of any given matter, subject or being is to want to make everything else in its own image. It is a natural inward tendency, it is probably not a healthy thing for anything living outside of that desire. The only technique to accomplish absolute mastery of the universe is to make it like you, all entities in the universe must and wish to disembody themselves of their self being and turn it into you; the infiltration is never pure, the host organism will never get your ideas or nature just right; still you, me, god, scientists, and everything will attempt it until some harsh mangled tragedy collapses the idea. We want everyone to be avatars of us, and everyone else wants us to be avatars for them, the resulting collusion is not a very ripe universe, rather a universe with everything trying to get into everything else, and since everything is already whole even as it is only part of a part, then not only does it not fit into anything else, but it wont fit into anything else; this is precisely why the god thing has been so destructive as it attempts to manifest itself within us here on earth. The idea is good, the god entity is probably very nice, but endeavoring to make a perfection out of a human is really pushing cockroach idealization too far. One might dare ponder why is god not just sufficiently satisfied with his own greatness enough to leave us alone?

Monotheism religious, governmental, rational, etc… is the objective of each of us for the rest; if things understood themselves a little better they would merely try to be themselves so as to accomplish the universe, just the exploitation of the self by the self is a worthy task and exuberant task, besides the universe does not have room for two versions of you; the universe does not replicate entities, there is a mandatory exclusion law in the universe for no-two-of-a-kind, all the suns are different; it is this absolutism which makes us crave the cloning of what we are. The universe masters this individualism at a cosmic level because things that are the same can not cohabitate with anything else; and things that can not cohabitate can not a universe make.

The universe in us is the complex self, and yet brain/knowledge cries out: “I am one with everything and everything needs my rationalizations.” Only there maybe places where brain/knowledge might not be allowed, just ask Love.

The Sun is My Shadow

It is very imposing of brain to dash out into every horizon and claim that everything exists because of some logical order that can be reversed engineer with knowledge. The entire history of science has been the practice of reverse engineering, there is nothing creative in that process, it is stealing from nature what is natures to use it as we wish and not as nature deigned it so. Not that that matters much but since nature does not really take itself to seriously, we could go blow up the sun and nature would not feel any less for it; wouldn’t notice it, this is because nature does not exists, nature is a construct of man, there is nothing natural or unnatural in the universe, there are just things that by happenstance have brought themselves into being and an occupation of space time, without prior regard to consequences or definitions, the definition of a sun is more brought about by its persistence than by any sane universal order. This is because there is no such thing as a universe, everything in the universe repeats itself and that is what knowledge calls a universe, if there is a planet here, and you can see a planet a trillion light years from here, that is a universal observation, which makes the universe and its repeated consistencies.

I think I killed a man last night. I know I did killed a man last night, because in my dream I was haunted by the authorities and they caught up with me and their interrogations were suggesting that I killed this man at this tourist shop, this while I was trying to steal a music CD. I never really saw myself kill the man; when the police arrived at my house and started questioning my roommates I felt guilty, I knew I had blood in my hands, I mentally traced a trail of red drips, each supple and artistic in composition and vividness of color; when they got to my room, you could see that they had smelled the blood to reach me, it was a magnificent accomplishment of associations. The blood, the stolen CD, the man dead, my feelings of guilt, the suspecting police; and yet I never saw myself kill the man. Knowledge works just like that, it has never seen the truth, but it has seen all the evidence of the truth.

Then we must and ought suspect that there is some truth to this idea of knowledge even as proving the final truth of anything is elusive, and even if the only thing that scientists can do to discover the truth is to reverse engineer nature. Reverse engineering cant be to accurate of a science this is the only kind of science we got, so we must conform with its results. But I propose here that the sun is my shadow. Why do I propose this, because I think it no different than the proposition of law and order imposed by science. It is equally absurd and fantastic and so I bow to the knowledge freaks for thinking it that all things have a purposeful connection and, and here is the most terrible and in the universe, and that everything is made up of building blocks, which can be taken apart and put back together if you follow the instructions. A sun can be made by simply following these steps and using these ingredients; compress more matter than can fit into a little tiny hole until it disappears from existence, let it undo itself, bang, it will be suffering hyper temperatures for eons, but as it disperses, it will cool and the cooled energy will turn into many disparate groups of chemicals and matter, these will result in helium and hydrogen concentrations than when massive enough will spew themselves out into the vacuum surroundings creating an spectacular circling chandelier. Interesting for sure, but is it the truth?

The difference between believing that a god, one day, while utterly bored, created the universe is none, the idea of a god or a big bang and or both is and are equally complex in stature. The ingredients that you need to have a god however are far more interesting and certainly more exotic. Faith, belief, a heaven to house him in, an antagonistic evil agent, free will and a human to use all this gradients so that they may manifest themselves in such; this are even tougher ingredients to put together, and certainly do not appear to have a linear building block mentality. Given the choice, to have to believe in either, currently I have neither inclination, but given the choice the god part sound far more fascinating and gorgeous. Believing in scientific models of the universe, while beautiful in their own right, they have not the perplexing beauty of a garden of Eden or a heaven or an immaculate virgin Mary, or an infinite and omnipotent yet benevolent God. This are truly fantastic things, and one must suspect that while knowledge bound brain wanted us to think, just because it is more practicable, that in the procedural act it took away something fantastic. I am not and can not be sure that this was a step forward but the catchy thing about brain/knowledge based actions and conducts is that they do are a product of our actions, and in the universe, where most things for sure aren’t a product of our actions, it seems woeful that we create some little insignificant things that we can control. Brain got knowledge to give us a sense of control, god himself was so unique and rare of a thing, his magic would not win out over the obvious, our brains could only see and function in the obvious so the most brilliant battle between the rational and the fantastic was won out by the pedestrian.

Why was that so? Because the brain, designed to act out at the local level super imposed its locality upon the universal concept of god. God had to answer to a local force, why? Because the local force could respond and god remained silent in his own defense. Its possible to imagine that god did not even notice the struggle, it is possible to imagine that god might feel that in the long run we will comprehend the error of our ways, it is also possible that this god thing was so complexly device that it only existed for a trillions of a zillions of a second after the big bang, and so it was consumed by its own inherent complexity. All in which case makes it very easy for a plebian brain to impose knowledge as the commanding standard of the universe.

What do I have against knowledge? That it takes credit for everything that I already know.

Knowledge is the product of reverse engineering and at a superlative level of something that happens in a more complex and less determinable manner because to exist all things must have one thing in common, they must “know themselves!” In order for a rock to be a rock it must wholly compose the essence and purity of rock being. In order for a sun to be a sun it must inherently and endemically be a sun, you cant embody something that you are not in this existence for the very simple reason that this universe requires a hell of a lot of induction of energy in order to make itself it self in order to let anything else represent itself that self embodiment must be 100% sure that it is what it is. This is because our universe is so overcrowded with entities and forces that everything is trying to push everything else out of the way, and these efforts as so ferociously consistent that they invariably end up consuming all of our self energy and we die. It is just that way that suns burn out, they keep on trying to be themselves and the surrounding vacuum eats them up telling them that they are not nothing but a wasting of energy into the precipice that is the seemingly empty vacuum. The vacuum consumes, it would kill you if it were to touch you. But Sun brings us to the interesting point, the Sun tells us what it is. The sun defines itself, the sun is! And the Sun tells the universe I want to burn alive my whole existence. I come here with all this helium and hydrogen and I am going to invest it all here. The interesting little obvious thing here is that no one had to tell Sun to be a Sun, Sun knows all this, Sun comes into being as a Sun because before arriving into this here and now space dimension it already knew what it was; and so Sun pushed itself through the continuum to disrupt it and define an expression that it firmly believed about itself.

This is what we must all struggle with, the self knowledge is corrugated by the fabric of the universe as it stretches and curls and dissipates, the corrugated knowledge of self, becomes disrupted by self doubt; when everything seems to be trying to kill you its because you don’t fit, or should not fit or ought not to fit and the only thing that keeps you struggling on is the fact that you do know what you are, how you embody that, and you are executing the blueprint of your self define essence which is the product of a desire, misguided desire, perhaps, but a firm misguided desire for sure. Otherwise you cant participate in this volatile universe, you must render energy quotients on a consistent and persistence basis; this is not hard to do, if you are doing it as caused by your endemic nature and definition of desired being, it is however impossible for you to accomplish existence if you are not fully self defined beyond question. The universe is a place fulll of absolute definitions that ever impose themselves over anything that will let them, it is merely your desired persistence of self which induces the contrast against the background of the universe, of which you are part, and it is your persistence of self which gives the universe its personality.

Knowledge being the product of a reverse engineering action does not recognize this, because if you are the result of a devolution you aren’t going to recognize it, it would be dangerous for the well being of knowledge to accept itself as the product of a reductionism process. But this is the very essence of knowledge, knowledge is the thing that decomposes things, knowledge breaks things down and categorizes because it does not understand whole things, broken down parts of the whole it comprehends, but whole things not. Knowledge must therefore kill its subject in order to understand it and manipulate it. All the things that knowledge has studied and knows have been murdered by way of dissection. Piece by piece. And Knowledge can not put these things back together, it can only know how they worked. It does not however know the why of their being, knowledge is limited by knowledge because a thing that is known can only be known as it manifest itself and not as the desire from which it sprung which is wholly unknowable. Knowledge does not comprehend desire, because a desire can not be dismembered or reversed engineered. When knowledge stumbles into a desire it is to late to see it bloom, it is wilting. This is why, if we assume that there was a God or a Big Bang, full blooming desires, knowledge can never observe them, Knowledge can never observe them because when a desire is in full bloom it annihilates anything that is sedentary or pedestrian, knowledge only rises, like mosquitoes taking blood samples, in the residue puddles of the universe.

Finally, not to bore you indefinitely though I embody that potential, what Brain assimilates as knowledge is really something that can not be learned or taught. I am born knowing what I know which knowledge will try to teach me. Within me is the knowledge. One of my jobs has been to manage groups of programmers, one of the most obviously amazing things is to see how a genius programmer intuitively knows what to do in such a complex, though basic world, as is the mind of a computer network. A genius programmers and a genius physicists have one thing in common, they know, they are aware of their endemic nature, and they come with very firm ideas as to how things work and how they will get the results that they are seeking, only knowledge wishes to take credit for teaching them, but what indeed is teaching if not the allowing of a wonder child to manifest inner talents. Teaching actually corrupts those talents into modalities of preconceived ideas, we are however fortunate, the corruption is minimal, the power of knowledge is corrosive but not deadly to the gifted. I come with what I know into this world, I come to this world to deliver full blast, there are forces here which wish to put out my raging fires, it is my persistence which will cause my self imposed irrational desired essence to contrive its place next to you.

I Object to Objectivity

It is difficult to explain how I can be against objectivity and be right. It requires that the listening subject suspend belief of a world outside of him or her self, it requires that the person not believe in the “I” as much as it insinuates that there is indeed an “I” though this “I” can not be external or outside of itself and everything else. My audience does not know that I am a part of them, they see one another as complete disparate parts, secularization has told them that there is a world disconnected from them, so disconnected in fact that not only does it act and react without concern for them, and that it lives beyond them and before them and before “I”; while I can not for some unphantomable reason conceive of a world or universe without me in it for a single adventure of its existence.

It is rather selfish of me to believe that the universe has such adamant sense of energy conservation that it would always have me in it under some whatever guise, and I accept the selfishness of that, even as it is possible to conceive that an expanding universe will eventually get cold if only because it is not cuddling up to all of its parts; and in an energy bound universe cold is death. Still I assume that making myself apart of everything is not so selfish after all if everything is apart of me I am more inclined to have its best interest in mind. If everything is a part of me then I feel everything and everything must feel me; I am inextricably linked to every point in the universe and every point on the universe pivots around me as well as it does pivot around every other subject noun in the universe.

Why is it so important that I mesmerized you with the idea that you are a part of me, perhaps a part of me that I don’t know, or perhaps a part of me that I don’t wish to invest too much consciousness upon, but a part of me regardless? Because once you realize this you begin to comprehend that secular views were originated to distant ourselves from each other so that we could study ourselves and our surroundings without getting hurt. We detached, we separated, we osculated the results of knowledge so that we could cut deep into our hearts without feeling everything. Categorization by disassociation is the job of logic; to logic is to deconstruct the emotional value of something and to say that one is not, not a part of it, but that the subject or object that is not a part, can suffer and feel what we do not feel or comprehend. Logic is diagnosis, heart rendering diagnosis ostracized from sensitivity. Which correctly implies that logic is the product of our intolerance to pain in a suffering world. We became logicians so we would not hurt.

As much as that is that is a glorious truth, glorious in its imposition, a greater truth is that we suffer because we are logicians! It is the separation that causes suffering, separation caused and primed by secularization, rationalization and logic. The alphabetizing process with its numerical counterpart separates us from the universe and then careens us against it! First we are plunked out of the universe by the conceptualization of disparate knowledge; and then we are fatally drawn to it by emotionally dependent gravitys which slams us back into it like the silly putty that we are. We aim to separate ourselves from the universe but the universe refuses to release us simply because the universe can not separate from any of its parts, it is impossible for the universe to be part of a part, a whole universe is a mandatory condition; when we attempt to separate from it, the universe feels a flea and it scratches itself, the flea does not die, it merely bleeds on through its existence; bloodsucker that it is its autonomy is limited to its mental agility to create a metaphorical world of objective layers. Even as this is being attempted the internal desire endemic to all creatures is to be what they are and all that they are, that is not to deny it, so what rises from the denial of supra-integrity is the desire to belong to everything that one has disintegrated into disparate parts. The gorgeous result is that we are then endeavoring to find a universal theory for everything, through religion, through government, through the sciences, trying to intellectually put everything back together into a single whole. Of course the task is impossible not because it inst already so, a Grand Unified Theory of Everything is after all the real endemic truth, but rather because the instrument by which we are trying to unite all the forces and all of humanity is knowledge; the very instrument that we created to bring asunder what god hath brought together. In short, you cant put it together with theory because it isn’t a theory.

Please don’t get religious on me when I use the term god, I use it in the context of an unavoidable fact, everything in the universe touches everything in the universe, how you may decide to feel or not all of this ferocity of turbulent emotional embracing consciousness is not necessarily acceptable to me or to others, we may all arrive at the same truth, and the same truth is not that fantastic, the real truth is that “we cant escape.”

I therefore, with all the intensity of my being object to the concept of objectivity! I object to it not because it is impossible to obtain it, (it is not possible to obtain it without suffering depersonalization which causes suffering,) but because I can not escape being one with everything!

I Object to Your Objectivity

No where is objectivity more self damning that when you use it to get your way with me.

The theme is simple, objectivity does not benefit anyone directly, hence the reason why it is so objective and unobjectionable. Western civilization has been particularly gifted at using this methodology to conquer exotic philosophies and principles so as to supplant them with its own. There is no people more objective and rational in the world than the western tribes. Of course the reason for their success has been that no one considers rational irrational or reason unreasonable or objectivity subjective. And yet, this is precisely what those things are. Objectivity would, for instance, never be objective enough to consider the possibility of its own subjectivity. Something that independently minded has no need to question its autonomy; and let us not forget that autonomy is the being root of all corruption and violence.

Jump into the box: If I ask you, Is rational a philosophy? Is reason a belief? Is objectivity a moral guide to the physical world? The resounding answers are yes, yes and yes. But somehow people got it into their head that these philosophies or methodological approaches to the world were and are more accurate and real than pimples on a sixteen year old. Mind you that there is far less evidence for rational than for pimples. This is because pimples create themselves while we create reason and objectivity.

In fact let us just climb down the hatch of reality, just pick one, anyone. Not so easy because you can have a religious conversion in one, a mystical experience in another and a logical revelation in yet another. Which one is valid depends on which one works for you. None more valid than that, and so you will attempt to objectify it to convince others that it is ok to eat the heart of your victims and make it your own. The dependence on belief is huge, and belief requires participation from the external world, we happen to think that there is an external world, even as that is a whole lot of impossible, but we believe that the external world must needs to believe us for what we sense and feel and that it must reproduce it to reaffirm the self, when the world does this we feel good about ourselves and less alone.

Unfortunately, and this is the unfortunate that matters, nothing is going to let you take it over and its ideas unless you can first convince them that your ideas are not your own but rather that they are the ideas of a mightier third independent body that has greater powers over reality. The struggle is of course to define the most powerful version of reality and to substantiate it; that the limitations of such an endeavor are based on the individual observers imagination is of course an unknown; humanity’s horizon is limited by humanity’s vision. There is nothing in humanity’s vision of the universe that does not try to humanize the universe. Universal laws are a human invention. A humane and just god is a humanization of infinity. These are objectifications which we use to convince the world and ourselves that there is more to us than meets the eye. After all if we were merely capitalist and war mongers that would not complete a picture of the complex beings that we are. Unfortunately objectification is not as much true as it is successful, objectification if you’d not notice is a mere philosophy! We and the world have made it believable! But it is not more than an attempt at imbedding the self into everything else that is not perceived as part of the self. When we sterilize and segregate the universe we then must bring ourselves to it, we then touch the universe with e=mc2.

Waiting for Confirmation

It is strange, we sit around waiting for the world to listen to us without speaking. How can the world respond if we do not make our notions public? We sit around waiting for the world to discover us, and since the world doesn’t bother to proactively listen to our mute voices we feel rejected. This is one of the most beautiful improvisations of futility ever mastered. Here we are world, waiting for you to listen to us, we wont speak until you acknowledge us; we wait for the audience to quiet down before we will speak, only they will not quiet down unless we speak and interrupt their clatter. We must make ourselves felt, else the world will not give us a standing ovation! Come scream with me says the world, and if you are screaming I will listen to you, but if you are just standing by, standing by, then wait for the silent period to end, only there is no silent period, the world screams all the time. All the time.

I come into the world hesitant, only the world does not hesitate, the world moves on, I am part of its master plan, only if I don’t execute the world will just alter its master plan to meet its intended reality. I count but if I don’t speak up the world will just assume that I am not immediately important enough to take into account in the master plan. But what is this thing about speaking out? Does it mean that I have to tell the world where it is going and why? Not at all, the world merely wants to hear that I exist and how I exist and why I exist and what have I come to give it or surrender to it. The world does not sit and wait for me to make the decision, if I come into the world and remain silent or if I am intimidated by its underpinnings where I refuse to speak up my cause and my deliverable fortunes, then the world will demand them from me, the world will ask of me what I have to deliver, the world will coerce me to surrender what it needs if it cant figure out what it is that I have to offer. And the coercion will not be pleasing for one very simple fact, what the world demands from me is not what I have to give the world, the world does not know what it needs, it knows only what it craves, and this is not the same thing as what I have to offer; the dissidence can be so great and nice and astronomical that it can only collude to destroy me because I am not apart of the world that is demanding things from me, that world does not exist because of what it demands, it exist because of what it is given by me, when I do not surrender my self essence to the world what the world steals from me can only leave it wanting! Shy away from the formality that demands can acquire what they desire, they cant they wont, the only thing that can be taken whole is what is given; when the world takes from me what it takes is a bungled up part of my whole that wont make any sense for centuries; where I can assist the choice, where I can help existence is in the introduction of my self essence into the world, by calling out my tributes and allowing a benefit to be harvested by all. Only I can not accomplish this unless I am wholly capable of surrendering myself to the world. And the surrender allows me to be whole, only I fear the surrender, this is the paradox, I can not equinox with myself essence in this here and now, unless I come to grips with the idea that I must give all of myself to this suspect world; in order to accomplish this I must come to the conclusion that I too am suspect, and that I am not here of a complete understanding enough to refuse to surrender; I am here, that is the only license that I can confirm to surrender everything, and I must surrender everything that I am because there is no other way to measure the exhaustion of my resources and capabilities; I must and will unleash myself upon the world, let the world interpret me as it will, let the world turn what I have to offer into moral or immoral offerings, the only thing I am apt and capable of, is to unleash my self essence into the world, what comes of it is not for me to judge, if I fragment the world then the world needs to rearrange itself; the alternative, were I, I, this soul and spirit that I am, able to govern myself, then I would restrained myself, but I am not for self governance, nor is it possible to govern the entity of self, self explodes into the world; many selves attempt to govern themselves, because they listen to the external world which calls upon them for self restrain, only self restrain is not something that the I, the I, that I am, can call upon, I must explode into all that I am, self restrain can only hinder and damage my expression or any expression in the universe. I explode, this is what I am; handle it world!!

Fixated especial Delivery

The human race has a particular problem with all this giving that it must take upon itself in order to compose the thing we call a humanity. Each human particle that composes the humanity feels a responsibility to itself that is greater than the responsibility that it feels towards humanity at large. This significant problem rises from the quandary of being an undefined identity crisis. Humans have a natural propensity to question who they are, that cannot be changed, that is who they are can not be changed, but humans like to question themselves and doubt themselves to the point where they may cripple themselves and by such even cripple their humanity. Monkeys don’t sit around wondering who they are, humans consider this an inability to question and call it ignorance, you must be able to question and to doubt, monkeys don’t practice either because they know their nature to well. Humans of course question themselves all the time: Why am I here? Such a question immediately implies ignorance. But rather than accept it as such the bright human being tries to answer his or her own question. Because god created me is a popular answer. Who is god? God is the creator of all things. Oh ok I understand now. The possibility that the implications of the existence of god defy all knowledge, including the knowledge that there is a god, is not a quicksand quandary for humanity. Humanity will not acknowledge the permissiveness that knowledge allows itself; this is the safety pin, we can have knowledge of an infinite and omnipotent perfection, the safety pin.

From another remarkable point of view there is rational knowledge, and this one we must question with a different tool. Proof! Empirical proof. We are not repeating ourselves here. The belief in science is just a belief, a combined agglomeration of proofs, which become the laws to live and act by. Big bang becomes a subject of concentrated study, there are a great many angles from which to look at the big bang, its first five minutes or the edge of the universe, but no matter how you look at the big bang, as long as you are looking into it, if only to disprove it, you are creating and recreating the framework, and orbiting around, big bang. It is the agglomeration of belief, not the principle that matters, if enough people believe it then big bang explodes. It has to, it can not do otherwise, it is not given a choice, the evidence will be traced and found, there will be remnants of the big bang everywhere, and these will be like crosses or rosary beads; why can this be even if it might not be so? Because the universe has evidence for anything you want to find in it. You want to find an all cosmic loving god the universe has gods by the lot full. Call it a force, call it nature, call it an awareness, call it an order, the universe can give you the evidence that you need to prove yourself correct. The only thing the universe can not give you is just the thing itself, the real god or the real law or the real truth, the universe is just not absolutist enough to give such substantial evidence.

At first this may seem like a dismal view, but then you have to look at it from the point of view of the universe, you are really truly a very insignificant aspect of the universe. I am here to tell you that, I am delivering the message, and in fact you are a saboteur, a monkey at least is faithful enough to believe in self-being, sufficiently not to doubt itself and start asking questions, but humans, you, you really are trying to interrogate the universe, and I am here to tell you that such could corrupt the fiber-continuum of the universe. You are at odds with the universe, and this, at least in principle, implies that one of the parts of the universe, however insignificant, is wondering if it ought to exist at all, in other words, you are the suicidal consciousness of the universe. And your draconian measures towards belief or unbelief, certainty and doubt, are a fanatical view of something that is complex and radical in its undertakings, which means, that the universe can not be known and more traumatic for you, the universe can not acknowledge you fully. Your self doubt is caused by the universe’s dislike of the very ambiguity that you represent to it and to yourself.

Imagine what you would do if you did meet god. God comes down in all his immaculate conception and sits next to you and asks you: “hey how are you doing?” The mind boggling conception of that is so huge that you would just burst all of your neurons and collapse to your immediate death, thus embarrassing god and the rest of us. You can not obtain to the idea of sitting next to god, you can not obtain it, why? Because you would not be able to capture that moment without dying from neuron explosions. It is a complex idea this thing god, and complex ideas have overwhelming structures which can not be assimilated by the brain of a human. This is why most people have to be dead to meet god and have breakfast with him. And it is also why most people even when they die don’t get to god, god is very unobtainable and inaccessible. The proportion of god is so mighty and huge that it is beyond our grasp; and yet it is reasonable to suspect that we created god. That whatever this thing god is, in whatever its manifestation, it is possible to suspect that we are one of its most important constituency, the constituency of belief. In short, god exists and we may have created him, but we can not see him or touch him because by the very definition with which we have chosen to believe in him, by that definition he can not inhabit the earth, there is no place here for a perfection, he can not inhabit the known universe, there are too many disorganized and chaotic things happening in it, god by virtue of the perfection that he has made of himself or and we have made of him, has been alienated from our universe and zapped to another colorless, tasteless and formless dimension.

Spectacular as that especial delivery might sound it is not improvable; just fixate yourself on the fact that god requires absolute faith. Absolute faith is a very powerful thing, it is perhaps the most powerful thing in the known universe, one can only ponder its effects upon other, more or not susceptible universes and dimensions; we are at risk here of the hazards of a mortal existence, at least from this angularity, but this is not to say that we do not radicalize dimensions and universes with our faith.

The need of a fixated belief is composed by the uncertainty. We ask ourselves who are we and we want external answers, only the universe does not know who we are because the universe, at least ours, is not a universe of knowledge, our universe just feels, it just touches everything, and touching is not thinking, so the universe can not answer our prayers or our questions, it can only remain silent to what it does not hear. When we sonar out our feelings of being with formidable puzzled rationalizations that do not echo back to us, but rather get lost in space and survive only as we continue to compose them, it is then and only then that we realize our solitude, we might be the only loners in the universe, and everyday our knowledge makes us hermits amidst an all feeling universe, knowledge is a cold chisel by which we alienate and perform our ritualistic suicide. A monkey wouldn’t know how to do this, just wouldn’t know it.

Cleanliness Holiness and Sterilization

When objects, subjects and beings get taken apart by knowledge then they have to be cleaned.

Think about that for a while, and forgive me for asking you to think, feel it instead, smell it, touch it, listen to it. Listen to it like when you hear the word NO, sound out the word NO, everything about the word no is definitive, it is a very large notation of a feeling that is imposing itself and feasting on its own essence. NO, means not just no, it also means a negative damnation of everything, you cant imagine that the word NO can be used in a positive manner, “no you will hurt yourself.” …mother cries out but a warning is not positive feedback, it is negative feedback, NO burns, NO hurts, NO imposes limitations, NO quantifies everything that is wrong, NO unleashes the limits!

When you feel NO, you realize that it is one of the most complete essences in the universe. NO is full of itself, NO is indeed true to itself, NO embodies its self essence completely, hence its common use, hence its agility and effectiveness, hence its lightness of being.

NO is an effective whole. A rare occurrence in the universe, much the same could be said about its happy cousin YES. And here is my point darlings, these things constitute themselves, YES and NO, are the names of YES and NO, this much we know is true, and we would not sanely consider changing their names, but it is also true that YES and NO are the names of an essence, of something that commands a negative and positive reaction-emotion, something that reacts, something that changes everything into a definite finality, their positions are stiff, dead set rigorous; now travel with me inside of their bellies, the essence of either is indeed definitive, and you feel good about their high sense of resolution; feel certain with either, and yet either could be wrong about their stance, even as they might never consider being the other.

Except for one thing my precious darlings, they are exactly the same thing, loosely defined! The same thing. They are exactly the same thing loosely defined. They are what then? If NO is the same thing as YES, and YES is the same thing as NO what are these seeming opposites then?! They are the essence reflections named of: CERTAINTY. When you mange to accumulate enough of NO or enough of YES then you get correspondingly EITHER. The essence is certainty, its reflection has two names. We wont discuss AND!

You have to feel it to believe it. But I am sure you are working on just that right now, so lets move on while you parallel process your emotions; don’t worry you will keep moving right alone, you have the right to feel everything instantaneously, it is thinking that is linear, but thinking is the product of secluded emotions, just stay in your emotional trance, and we can do everything at once.

The problem might have started with holiness, the problem with divine intervention in a mortal world ought be obvious so I wont go into further detail, but if we think back it probably all started to go wrong with holiness. Holiness you see is the master of NO. And look at it from either angle, good or evil, evil tells you YES, but that is a negative YES because you know it is going to get you into trouble; this is where the essence, in the case the essence of holiness absorbs both values, and because it does not grant them independence it does not suffer the positive of both, but rather suffers merely the negatives of either. Holiness for obvious reasons can not be separated from evil, that much is obvious, contextually they are the same force essence manifested in different certainties, but phantasmogarically they are egregious intrusions. Why? Because they are trying to have control of us; and they eternal are trying to have control in the hear and now. Shame eh.

There is nothing wrong with being comical when you are trying to be philosophical, so feel free to laugh at any time, philosophers have to act solemn for how else could anyone take them seriously.

Now them, have I got all the ingredients in there yet, YES and NO are master agents, Holiness adopts all the negative attributes NO, and subtracts YES from the equation. God says thou shall not! Devil says thou shall! When you are a human it is impossible to take either position and not be a hypocrite. The consternation of trying to be good in a world where temptation lies at every step - must invariably produce something we call - for lack of a better name - the ugliest name in the universe - though true to its nature: DISCIPLINE!

Discipline is the most twisted difficulty in the universe, and specially so for beings, as oppose to Suns and Asteroids and Comets all which show a high level of discipline. Only all the discipline in the universe is degradating and degrading; just ask entropy. Now common lets rush here speeding up… …BERGONSITY is a name for an essence that has not been born yet; DIATHRIVE, according to Rosa, is a word close to being baptize into existence, the being of everything manifest itself when it is falling, in other words when it is starting to fall apart. This is why entropy, this is why it is possible to believe that the universe will die a cold death. Even so there is room there for a hot death, but a cold death seems more likely for human beings, fact: All humans hitherto have died a decompositional cold death! Crashing from that accident into the why mountainous grand beings and objects manifest themselves when they begin to rot; because a composition must be complete when its symphony is orchestrated into existence; otherwise it does not coalesce and it just simmers with lack of definition, and the mind, specially the mind, is so dull, that it has to be banged over the head with a hammer to bring it to recognize and acknowledge anything. This is the beauty of it, and the ugly of it, I think you are starting to feel the essence associations and their isolated synonyms, the duel of antagonism faces off and antagonism dies, and this is the last step we needed to climb to get here, to enter existence you have to be fully blown! You must be whole! You must radiate in all directions your self essence, everything around you names you and brands you and characterizes you based on the fulfillment of your peacock mating display. The sun is a flagrant peacock and it recognizes you and flourishes your innate essence.

Why are we doing this fancy sort of multiplex navigation? Because I have to alter your reality, I have diffuse it and then jump started; and I think I feel that we have managed that, and how have I managed it, with pure logical feelings that rose into majestic irrationalities. The brain can do that too, it is just, as its purpose calls, a very weak interpreter of feelings. Which brings us to the real point that this ladder reaches, we are not the center of the universe, ok, ok, that is ok with me, I can stomach that, sure it hurts, I am not sure what the benefits of being the center of the universe are, or for that matter I am not sure what the benefits of being a god are, but I certainly can accept the fact that I am neither a god nor the center of the universe. But who dares tells us this? Not our feelings, our feelings would never lie so grossly like that!! Never!! The liar in question is no other than Brain. It is Brain that has told us that we are not the center of the universe! It is Brain that has told us that we are not god! It is brain that continues to add minuete to our lives; mince-slivering us to be the chicken salad of the universe. And now, and now I am here to tell you that not only are we not the center of the universe and it does not matter that we are not the center of the universe, but neither is Brain the center of the universe, nor the all important that it has made us believe it is. Brain is not the central most smartest most intelligent thing, Brain is nothing more than a ruler, a thing that we use to measure, a measuring stick, that is all Brain is! And we, while not the center of the universe, we are the center of everything that Brain is, we are its user, we are its god, and we are its maker and definer, and everything that brain is, depends on us. Everything! Which is why the dislocation of the user by its Brain seems so disproportionally absurd. A measuring stick that upon realizing its own unimportance in the universe decides to fragment, reduce and insecure its host so that it will be wholly dependent upon it. Yes, today humanity is largely dependent on Brain, and largely insecure, and I think it all started with the teachings of religion, though it could have started longer ago than that, but my brain wont grant me access to that history, specially because I am not letting it collaborate in this here book; but it was Brain, with the teachings of the scriptures that started to manufacture its own overlord importance.

Brain did not invent god, god is disproportionally against all knowledge, knowledge is atheist by nature, but Brain realized early own the power of the god thing, the god thing was mystical, the god thing had faith and Brain had a mere ruler. It had degrees, centimeters, Celsius, digits, and it could think one thing at a time, though Brain’s linearity is hidden by its smartness and sharpness, Brain is linear; one thing at a time; many humans thinking different things amount to one brain thinking in parallel linearity! So Brain could not have invented god, god invented himself, but that is not saying much since we all invent ourselves, we all conceive ourselves, only Brain did not conceive of itself, we, our being essence conceived Brain and Brain decided that we were irrelevant, replicable and controllable; and so far that premise has been difficult to disprove.

Brain had to first dislocate god, imagine how beautiful, for its first test, the brain had to dislocate an omnipotent being and perhaps, though doubtful, a purely emotional creation. Regardless the god thing is a very powerful entity, and while its ability to control humanity has proven highly inadequate, mostly because god does not control, has no power to control, god merely dictates a policy of love and mostly impresses. Yes we are getting to the love thing later, but god is a lazy ass when it comes to putting his children in line, so the victory over god that awaited Brain was squably formidable. You cant beat an omnipotent being that wont even fight his number one antithesis, Lucifer.

Squabbly yes, but spiritually formidable more so. The only way to truly beat a god up is to force him to do battle in the field of knowledge. But how can you get god to do battle in the field of knowledge, that was Brain’s problem, and brain solved it! Teach the word of god. To teach the word of god you must be a philosopher, all of the apostles were philosophers hiding under the guise of prophets, none, but none of the apostles were prophets! Prophets cant teach! Prophets suffer an audience of disbelief, prophets are fascinating creatures, but prophets do not operate with or within brain. I am a prophet, as I write this words, I know that you wont believe them, and if you do believe them it is because you too are a prophet, and there aren’t many of us left after the persecution we have suffered as done in by the academic zealots. But does it surprise you that it was teaching the bible that Brain got its first chance to control us? It shouldn’t, as it ought not surprise you that to create the first printable bible the man had to be a tinkering scientist, he wanted to teach the word of god, so as to pass it own he invented the printing press. This is an amazingly obvious thing, a linear brain thought it, first preach then print, the amazing sonic correlation between preach and print essence is the damming evidence!

Brain had officially then mortalized god.

Not that such ought matter for an immortal god can not inhabit earth, and a mortal one would not last long here; but what does it mean to mortalize god? It implies that you can kill him. The first evidence that Brain was going to kill god was the old testament; there could not be other gods, god if you can imagine went on a rampage and started killing his own kind. Not very wise, and certainly not very loving, and killing all the other gods was bound to lead to divine extinction; it could lead to nothing else. As humans we need more humans, god needed gods too if his idea essence religion was going to liter the universe; but what does god decide, god decides that there was and would be only one god. The god of the old testament is the most human god ever devised, it is the first mortal god, because that god arrives at vendibility. A god that can be taught and sold to the masses and they must pay with prayers and with alms! Bingo. And best of all, a god that can be sold is a beatable god thus Brain can kill his son. See if there is really only one god anything else is really an impostor. The appearance of Christ at the scene was nothing more than humanity suffering subconscious emotional repentance, lingering from the polygod universe. When this aversion of Christ appears before Brain, trying as Christ was to add trinity and suffering love to his holiness, a division of the god thing into parts that could only be whole and hurt, for when you cut a god you don’t get a part, you get the whole thing, everything god, omnipotent god, and you say how can you have so many everything omnipotent beings, and really I tell you it is a common everyday occurrence in our multidimensional universe, within and without, but it is not possible for Brain to phantom such magnificent whole division! And so Brain figures that there is a plot, by the god faith thing, to kill off rationalized learned monotheism, by way of infiltrating with a son god; if you have one son god the implication is that you can reproduce, brain understands this kind of logic, and decides to crucify the son of god to prevent god progeny.

That final blow done, we were able to get back to monotheism and so Brain’s master plan was little adulterated even as there continue to be other religions, the teachings and the preaching’s are slowly converging as their knowledgebase grows more global, the homogenization and grounding of religion is inevitable, (witness the Mormons as the most advanced non religion,) at least as long as we continue to worship knowledge. Brain is aware that as it points out to the seeming cruelties of religions that more and more people will become more tolerant, unaware that the cruelty of religion is brought about by the hegemony of Brain. So I think that it all started there, the bible is a book of knowledge, and guess what that knowledge is, the knowledge of god. Of knowing god, the bible makes the ultimate trespass against all divine holiness and rampages through God by teaching his words, once you can learn the word of God, well you can learn!!! And better still learn to unlearn god! Once you appreciate learning, you will appreciate rules and rulers! Check Mate!

Incidentally chess is a fun way to learn to appreciate the power of brain/knowledge. There is nothing radical about chess, it is linear, anyone can do it if they principle themselves to logic it out; it is here where many are taught how easy it is to think and how accessible linear knowledge can be. Surprisingly few if any notice how inanely idiotic chess is.

It was not a leap of faith that Copernicus or Galileo made, it was a landing on the most basic chess reality, here are the pieces and here is how they move and relate to one another. Slowly disconnect god from the universe, suspend all other possible notions of being, earth is not the center of the universe, magic is a farce, you cant make gold from iron, if everything we believed about the cosmic or the natural is suspect then it starts to reason that we could be wrong about our belief systems. Farted out of our delusions we must begin to interrogate ourselves, and when we commence this bestial process we have unlearnt the faith of god and worst ourselves. Having learned to doubt our emotions and our hearts, disembodied-disconnected from the universe, there, at that junction, the only answers that we may trust and believe come from Brain and they come from Brain because Brain is asking the questions! Surprise. Brain can ask questions that it can answer, and those were the first questions it begun to ask from the perspective that was the most obvious, because, again, Brain is a mechanism, an instrument to measure local realities, unfortunately the Brain got a glimpse of the universe, and it emotionally made the judgment call to be the most important part of the universe.

So where do we come from asks Brain? Well everything must have a starting point and an end, brain again is linear, it can only compose the universe in its own mangled image of singularities; the universe is really infinite and nothing dies or is born, but the concept we have of the universe is Brain’s and brain concepts are fatalistic, there is always endings, beginnings and process. The world ends configured and reconfigured based on the order required by a ruler, not by a human, humans are not logical creatures, they have a logic tool, and that is the image which has made the mirage we see; a mirage that is the symptomatic delirium of our emotional and spiritual starvation!

Brain keeps up the show, demanding that everything be looked and searched with the scientific eye, and that we use knowledge in order to be smarter, better, and as we do so it is obvious that there was a Big Bang, that we evolved from monkeys, monkeys evolved from fish, fish evolved from tiny asexual organisms; and all the tectonic plates of the earth were once one, pangea and it cracked; and human life is just a few amino acids and mostly DNA junk. Yes it all really is like that, and it all is like that because we were first taught that we were sinners and that there was only one god; then you can clean and sterilize yourself. Cleanliness separates you from everything around you, once you are separated by process of sterilization and vaccinations, then the universe can not touch you and you cant feel the universe, and when you cant feel the universe, blind, you need a white stick: brain/knowledge. Once you subtract yourself out of the universe you can live in Brain’s world. Congratulations you have simplified yourself into understanding.

Never Believe In Anything Beyond the Given Extreme

Here is where the damn thing crows. Because we are lavished with narrow-mindedness there is no aspect of reality that is not based on dogmatic behavior. We are monsters of the sweetness of the moment, we create the reality that is conjured by our mind’s eye by filtering everything through a singular conception. We are the world, the world is us, what we believe is the world is what the world is, we are not wont to think otherwise. The world responds to our stimuli and gives us a half baked idea of what it is. Generations are singular structures. At a supra level humanity is a singular structure; the difference of the whole is so insignificant that it can only be viewed with a microscope.

It is not that we can not see, it is that we are blinded by our visions of ourselves. We are unable to conquer the self, and the self makes us a slave to its heart felt emotions. These in turn recreate the external world, or rather rearrange its furniture to meet our preconceptions. We don’t stumble into the furniture not because we are not blind to its true reality but rather because we keep on moving it around as we walk so as to meet ourselves everywhere we go. One would imagine that after a while this would get boring, and yet, yet it does not, not because it inst boring to keep on discovering yourself over and over ad infinitum, but rather because what you lose in surprise you gain in the comfort of familiarity. Its really that extremely fanatically simple.

While most philosophers have been impressed with the discovery of the self it might be more worthy to consider the dissolution of the self and its declared importance. The problem with the unit of self is that its importance is generated at a cost to everything else. Further it is evident that the self exist and that it acknowledges itself above all things, this is today’s current extreme reality, you do not see beyond yourself essence, you are not able to live in worlds that are not populated by you, the possibility of exceeding your self essence is difficult to believe and substantiate; one would have to first accept the possibility that the self can be disembodied from its core being and still have perception. Unlikely, and a fairly uncomfortable approach, you cant just be undoing yourself all the time. But if not doable then what might we try to accomplish or why would we try?

First the discovery of the self by philosophers was not a fantastic discovery instead it was an inevitable discovery and that it took them so long is cause for alarm and fact evidence of the lack of intuitiveness in philosophy. Its difficult for a being not to find itself. It is next to impossible for a being not to say “I think therefore I am.” This is what every child learns by the age of twelve, philosophy itself is an adolescent contrivance meant and designed to deal with adolescent behavior. Consider existentialism, what is existentialism more than a twelve year old that cant over come himself. Take hedonism, hedonism is a child’s wishing well. You get philosophy when you hit a wall. You get philosophy when you stumble into a pause in your existence. You get philosophy when you are disconnected. When you are restricted you discover yourself philosophy. There is only a few zillion things rubbing against you all the time and these things tend to believe in themselves without thinking about it, they acknowledge themselves with impervious impunity and they cause you to doubt your own existence and you get philosophical.

“Why do I exist?” “Why is life worth living?” and that sort of things are merely the product of a conflict, conflict which you get only when you hit something which is what everything does in the universe all the time. But the discovery of the external identity of things, now that has been more difficult, you cant really believe in the secularity of the universe without costing yourself a lot of emotional turmoil. The problem is that you cant create a secular comprehension of the universe without first subtracting yourself from the universe; the pain of that separation is so much that any construct that you make of the universe will have to entail your own image; the reason for this its because your own image is the only thing you are familiar with, it is the only thing which you truly acknowledge, it is the most difficult thing to kill off, your own image! And so the familiarity you have with yourself contaminates your secular philosophies of the universe and you only have the YOU view of the universe and you don’t want to accept that because without objectivity the whole universe becomes largely incomprehensible. You have to be able to study the universe, you cant study yourself because your mind is not going to tell you who or what you are, it cant! This is the extreme view, you are inwardly trapped, outwardly encouraged and suffer a high preservation handicap.

Objectification is then an extreme view of yourself and the self entities which have managed to congregate in your vicinity, all objectification is focused and local by nature, it is what a bunch of things or beings acquire when they all get together to think the same subjective reality. If it makes you more comfortable the universe is an extreme agglomeration of perceived grandiosity. Humanity is self centered and extremely objectified in escaping its self essence but helpless in doing so because the gravity of self is a black hole and there is no escape from that singularity.

I don’t know any other way of saying it so I hope you forgive my directness, but the universe and everything in it is wholly self absorbed, we are the only creatures in the universe that do not accept that self absorption; we want objectivity to absolve us of our subjectivity; we want objectivity to renounce us; crazy, but that is what we want. Fortunately for us the universe and everything in it is not unreasonable, they, it and all only care about themselves!

The Successful Marionette

The success of the marionette we call Brain is largely due to the fact that Brain does not feel pain. This is precisely why brain tells us that we are the most important thing in the universe regardless of all the other things in the universe that just want to share the place with us, think us ok but not all important, and want to be a part of the part that we are. Brain of course instructs us that we are special, we jump into this conceptualization of ourselves because there is something really teddy bear woolly within, it feels warm to be special, to be god’s chosen folk, it feels good to be the center of intelligence, it feels good and this is the one that I will never comprehend but it feels good to be able to question! Fuck the only thing that ever questions anything is the thing that does not know and not knowing only has one proposition; it has to marry itself to an answer. The marriage can only end in divorce. The answers that we find ourselves are inconsequential to the universe regardless of how important they are to us. You can sit around marveling about the fact that we split the atom and Columbus discovered the new world; to the universe splitting the atom is an everyday occurrence, one of the least exotic events within it; and the fact that Columbus discovered America is frankly so inconsequential to the universe that it will simply wont matter and it wont be documented or registered in universal history. A shame because I assume that discovering America was not small feat for Columbus and specially not a small feat for Spain which has a Don Quixote relevance quotient.

To be fair to Spain, Einstein’s theory of relativity is also interesting and better yet pretty, but the universe really doesn’t care about it, sorry Einstein but that is the honest truth. The universe does not really care! And that is what is so damn difficult to appreciate, because it is damn difficult to appreciate that the universe does not care because it should not be that way because that is not the universe we would have designed. Of course, for obvious reasons we did not design the universe and so the universe does not surprisingly behave like we would like it to.

But while we did not get the privilege of architecting the universe we have been fortunately given the role of being a part of it, and since we are a part of it we make up that part of the universe of which we are the part. The wholly difficult thing is that we are not the whole thing, though we are a whole humanity which is saying a lot, only we have subdivided ourselves by creating the individual entity which means that we are now a part of a part of the universe because we broke up the whole into individuals. Brain does this because Brain doesn’t care about you; and you wont do anything about it because your in love with what Brain does. Never mind that this whole division makes us less capable of truly conquering the universe, if that were the thing and the right thing to do.

We scramble this way and that way and away from one another as a way to manifest our uniqueness, only our uniqueness is in the fact that we are a humanity, as that we might be unique, further dividing humanity does not make it more unique it only breaks it up into what must end result in broken parts. Humanity is an essence, a universal essence, when we take it and riddle it with individuality we may feel especial but we will feel less; and the less we feel the more we are going to like cold blooded Brain.

Of course things don’t seem right to us, plenty of us know that things are wrong, and plenty of us would like a unification of the uniqueness we call humanity; but it really seems impossible; from every angle we are a fighting faction, from every root we seem to want to blossom as the masters of the universe or at least as the masters of our profession. How can you say an artist produces in isolation? How can you say that an architect does his own thing? Where is the truth in individual accomplishment? I have never seen an individual accomplish anything significant? Even Einstein depended on ideas and theories developed by other to come up with his pretty thing. The Mona Lisa was as important to the painting as Leonardo DaVinci and so were all the producers of the materials, maybe the inventor of the canvas was more important, maybe the importance of the inventor of the canvas lies hidden within that smile. When I see that woman smile there seems to be a massive satisfaction as if she were getting something over on us, as if Leonardo was saying I know what I am doing to you and I am not really doing it to you, you are really doing it to yourself and you are going to think I am fantastic. But was Leonardo fantastic or was that woman fantastic? More a chance I think that she was fantastic and that he was a good copier, he copied her, he had this model, the perfect model for the expression, he merely copied her onto canvas. This I think is more accurate, but of course he had to have known the importance of the moment, and he ought get credit for that, and credit for the accurate rendition, but there are so many things that make a painter, the artistry of it is only part of it, there was of course something between Leonardo and Mona, and they did it in front of us, they are still doing it in front of us, and that is what keeps the painting so fresh, these two are feeling something within each other and they are letting us watch. That is precious.

The correlation of self to the world and to others suffers no distance nor dimension. This is what really hurts ruler Brain because we don’t need Brain to touch the world. What Leonardo and Mona accomplish everyday is touching.

Touching is not an individualistic act.

Beyond Peace

We need to discuss something very dear to us all. Murder. There seems to be nothing that fascinates the human imagination more than the topic of murder. Statistically speaking 99% of all Hollywood movies have murder in them. Novels and their plots would be difficult to develop and finish without a murder and a few accidental deaths which may also amount to murder of necessity. We may discount acts of god such as a floods, pestilence and famine as murders because god only kills us to teach us a lesson. Less easy to ignore is the child’s play obsession with killing, hardly one of us has grown up without uttering the phrase: “I am going to kill you.” Silky as that might sound it is bordering the edge of the precipice between life and death.

Why the obsession with Murder? It would be to simplistic to attribute it to our fascination with mortal death or to a natural fear of it. War, violence and the multiplicity of murders have shown that we do not have a fear of death or of murder. The ease with which men can be conditioned to kill one another in a military manner betrays a lack of fear of death. Some will argue that the reason they killed was because they had no choice, they were in a war situation, it is preposterous to imagine a grown adult saying that they had no alternative but to be in a war theater. Difficult indeed and surprisingly shocking how few opt to defect from the battle field. But war brings the murderer, irresistible attributes that are certainly fascinating as much as they are real: anonymity and prestige. The soldier that murders usually does not see his victim, and even when he does at least he does not know them. The soldier that murders does not have a personal reason to bring about the infraction of murder, a soldier can never be personally proven guilty of murder as long as he maintains the stance of patriot following orders, the soldier has the ability to exercise a killing with complete impunity, if a soldier rapes and abuses human rights while on the campaign to murder the atrocious enemy, it will largely go unheard and unpunished. This is a side benefit of war, we can ravage our passions with the lust of the moment and survive grievance as comeuppance.

Everyone takes it for granted that there is going to be killing in war, and everyone knows that their son Joey, cute little Joey wouldn’t harm anyone and doesn’t really want to go to war, but Joey has to go to war, to defend freedom and to defend nationalistic honor and to defend his girlfriend Suzy. When Joey gets back he will get a purple heart, that is if he manages to get wounded and survive, and he will be respected as a war veteran; and if he manages to kill enough of the enemy he might even be hailed as a war hero instead of as the murderer that he is. That in order to be a hero like Wellington or Napoleon Joey might need their killer instincts is not possible, Joey does not like to murder people like Hitler or McArthur , not that McArthur wanted to kill anyone, he was merely defending his country and did a damn good job of it.

Neither Joey or McArthur are murderers, they are efficient killing machines but normally when they are not killing they are more likely to enjoy a nice BBQ with the family, and Joey would prefer to be captain of the football team and McArthur would rather that there be no wars period; in other words McArthur was not a general by instinct.

It would be difficult to prove, in a case study, that there are wars for the sake of war and wars for the sake that Joey might get a chance to kill someone in anonymity. Nice kids need to satisfy these urge but they would never admit it, besides its not something that any sane person would or ought admit.

Really fascinating how this Murder thing can be promiscuously practiced without any conscientious objections from the moral self; war after all is a moral act, so much so that even the enemy does not know that they are the bad guys.

Sometimes however, Joey strays, there is no war, he is selling insurance, one day Joey gets a strange rage, and kills someone. Joey kills a man he did not know, a man that merely opened his car door and scratched Joey’s cherry red paint on the side of his classic roadster. No one can believe it, Joey’s mother knows her son is not a murderer, she realizes that he has killed a man because he scratched the cherry red paint on his roadster, but she well knows that Joey is not a criminal and that while he did lose his temper Joey would never ever commit murder ever again. Joey does not need correcting because Joey has never killed anyone before, never even stolen chocolates from the grocery store, Joey is not a murderer, Joey’s mother does not know that most murders are committed by people that only murder one time in their lives, serial murderers are the exception not the rule, and so by Joey’s mother’s emotional reasoning it is not necessary to put all of the one time murderers in jail because the only reason for jail is to prevent recalcitrant behavior and that would not be the case for Joey and his lot.

Joey’s wife knows her husband is not a murderer, she knows Joey more intimately than anyone, he is tender, why he cried in her arms when their baby daughter fell from her cradle and broke her nose. She will testify to the love inside of this man, she will testify to the gentleness and to the kindness and to how Joey is not a murderer, he was stressed, many bills to pay, problems with his boss at work, the stress caused by a poor economy that was preventing Joey from hitting sales quotas, but Joey is a good man your honor!

Joey’s friends are more surprised than his wife, the wife can see that there was lots of things unreasonably pressuring Joey, but Joey’s friends and relatives just would never imagine that such a wholesome boy, man, friend, cousin, such a well humored pall, such a helpful fellow, such a nice neighbor, well he would just never do something like that, its not in his character to do something like that!

Perhaps the most important person that can not imagine Joey committing murder is Joey. Joey can not believe it, he does not comprehend what came over him, Joey knows he is not a murderer, Joey did not sit in his living room planning to kill anyone, Joey would never picture himself hiring an assassin, much less planning a murder or even killing because of anger. Joey more than anyone else, not only knows that he is not a murderer, he also knows something that no one else knows, it wasn’t Joey that killed that man!

Of course Joey does not intellectualize that knowledge, Joey knows he got angry upon seeing his cherry red paint roadster all scratched up, he blew up and started pounding his fists into this inconsiderate man’s head, and pounding him, and the next second, before Joey could react with real world reactions to real world conditions, before that, this man was dead. And immediately after that Joey reflected and reacted, but before that, before that reaction, that was not Joey punching away at that man with his angry fists, not Joey!

Then who is the mystery killer?

An act of war is a society feuding with another. It is very simple to complete the murderers list of war, every citizen of the participating countries have mentally rigorously superceded the desire for peace and conquered their divine nature to accomplish a society at war.

No one wants to fight a war, except the supra consciousness of a society that needs to fight a war beyond peace. That is what conjures the war effort, that is what manifest the inevitability of war, war becomes an imperative when the social consciousness reaches such superlative manifestations within the extricating reality that no one can ignore it and must face a conscientious decision to behave pro or against war. A conscientious decision is an activating trigger mechanism for the underlying events as they begin to superimpose themselves into a given reality. When the supra social consciousness reaches critical pro war mass, in effect the country is at war; whatever preparations had been conceived will superimpose discipline, struggle and endurance over any peaceful options.

I think we can go back to our test case, Joey, and proceed to callously investigate his actions and their effects. Sometimes, just to tickle myself, I fancy myself a logician.

Joey is perplexed because Joey knows that he is not a murderer; Joey does not comprehend how he could have reasonably acted in such a way as to bring about the death of another. At night Joey tries to find the lord, not because Joey was an atheist, he wasn’t that, Joey was a somewhat regular Sunday participant in religious ceremony, though he had cheated on his wife with one of her best friend’s, still Joey did not consider any of his would be sins biblically impossible, instead Joey believed that overall he was a nice guy and that in the end God would more or less accept that as a valid argument against eternal damnation. Only now Joey was not so sure that God would be equally as forgiving of this murder thing, and so Joey was trying to get closer to God so as to tell him that he really did not mean to do it, and to please help with the judge and the compassion quotient of the general populace. God of course did not talk to Joey anymore than he had normally talked to Joey, but Joey felt that God was closer and that he was considering forgiving Joey, only Joey first had to do a lot of penance and personal purification in order so that God might come closer once Joey was less soiled.

Faith is easy to get, reason more difficult, and Joey was using faith to comprehend better his act at a rational level. Only rational tells you that you don’t kill a man for scratching the cherry red paint on your roadster. So Joey finds himself in a perplexingly difficult situation, faith can find compassion but Joey’s Brain can only tell him that what he did was wrong and that it can not go unpunished. Joey’s Brain tells him that if the crime goes unpunished other’s will be willing to kill their fellow men that much faster. Brain tells Joey that he should have thought about things more carefully before he acted, Brain tells Joey that had he done so he would not have acted so egregiously; Brain tells Joey that one must learn to control one’s emotions, that it is not good to act in rage, that one must always think before one acts; these are not consoling things that Brain tells Joey. Rationally Joey can not be consoled, and the Justice system is rational. The justice system is a social grievance system contrived to eliminate individual acts of vengeance. Joey comprehends that a just world can not tolerate a man killing another men regardless of the cause to anger and violence; a civilized society is a civilized society. Joey recognizes this and feels weaker by the moment for it. Looking at himself with a rational stance Joey concludes that he must be punished, for posterity and for the sake of justice. Of course Justice is no one in particular and one might rightly believe that the Justice system could withstand the injustice of not punishing Joey and survive unscathed; but Joey does not go to such embellished theoretical options. Joey believes now, as told by Brain, that he will be punished and that the best that can happen is that the judge sympathize in that Joey is not your typical murderer but rather a nice man that went wrong for only a second and wouldn’t ever kill again, so that while he will be found guilty, the sentence will be lenient enough that Joey will be on probation within two years and justice, Joey and everyone will be well served.

But Joey now knows the name of the man that he murdered, Phillip. Phillip is all over the news, nice guy too, church going, hard working gentle man, he was the manager at a hamburger joint, and had a young wife and two very lovely daughters and so on. Obviously if Joey had had a chance to meet Phillip and learn all these things about him he probably would not have killed him, Phillip died mostly because he was an unknown, that is the first true thing that we know about this case. We still don’t know however who killed him, for that we have to enter more exotic realms.

First why are we willing to pose the question that Joey did not kill Phillip? Because Joey did not know Phillip, because the motive is to fragile to support murder, because Brain has told us that there is no logical reason why Joey ought have killed Phillip, and in rare happenstance Brain is right. Joey did not kill Phillip.

We begin with the premise, am I sounding logical enough for you, we begin with the premise that Joey was ordered to kill Phillip by forces that Joey does not understand though he is obviously receptive to those forces. Joey is just the obvious, the easy pick, but Joey really had nothing to do with this murder. It is true, as his lawyer will correctly argue, that his client is not in the habit of killing people for scratching the cherry red paint on his car. We all rationally know that this would not be the case and so what remains as a justifiable reason is something unreasonable, Joey was coerced into killing Phillip by forces that were working on Phillips demise; yes Joey is guilty of execution, but not of the premeditation nor even the knowledge of his crime. As such Joey is the least guilty party of the guilty we are about to unravel.

First there are social forces that call for murder, within each of us lies a murderer dormant, waiting to act out our crime, but we suppress this murderer self because it would be very antisocial to exercise its malicious will. This is not to say that all murders are malicious, one has to seriously ponder why someone did not kill Hitler, the entire world would have been thank full. We don’t know how many murderers have saved us from their victims, but there has to be some validity in that we maybe killing people that deserve to die and whose atrocities may never rise to justify their deaths; and this does not make them any less real, nor does it exculpate the fact that society may intuitively order the death of many it considers a threat and malice to its greater objectives. Bottom line, society may have ordered the murder of Phillip, not necessarily because Phillip needed to be murdered, hardly possible to imagine a hamburger joint manager a threat to society at large, but we could dare say society killed Phillip because it needed to satisfy the murder rate necessary to appease the murderer in us all! Phillip died to quench our thirst for violence, it could have been someone else, it does not matter, we sent the message to Joey, kill this guy, in you we now congregate all the murderers in us, Phillip is the perpetual sacrificial lamb, and Phillip even participated in his own death with his dormant murderer self. Our sanguinary thirst was reduced by our reading of Joey and Phillip in the news.

There is another way that Phillip could have participated in his own murder. Phillip wanted to die. Phillip may have done something for which he could not forgive himself, maybe something as simple as robbing money from the hamburger joint, cooking the books, or maybe he too cheated on his lovely wife like Joey, and so he could not find forgiveness within himself, Phillip secretly wished to die, he was sending signals out on to the social ether, “I want to die, I want to be killed, I am not suicidal enough to act this necessity out myself but I am suicidal.” Phillip ordained his own death, his signal onto the social ether begins to coalesce with the murderous desires of the social lot and with the murderous instincts inhibited within Joey; the sacrificial victim begins to urge its own death. A death willed by personal fear, any sacrificial victim must be fragile, Phillip was unstable, Phillip was fragile, he was sensitive to the idea of his own death.

Then there is the anger that Phillip might have generated in others. His wife aware that Phillip had cheated could not herself forgive the trespass, she wanted to see him dead. When Phillip confessed to his priest that he had cheated on his wife the priest felt inquisitorial towards such betrayal and silently opened the gates to the emotional ether to execute this sinner. Subconsciously the priest would certainly be disgusted by the fragility displayed by Phillip, such could only add another wave of murderous desire, weakness is as worthy of death as is guilt. Secretly we all want weakness dead.

Joey had killed in the war, of course he had never witnessed his victims, Joey felt angry at himself, he felt a coward for not having felt his victims, Joey had to redeem himself, he had to absolve himself of all those faceless, nameless murders that he had committed during the war, Joey needed to bring himself to atonement, only Joey had no clue what atonement was, he did not comprehend spiritual harmony, Joey liked football because it was a rough sport, because a sort of ritualized killing took place in a blameless setting, every goal was a death, every victory justified the rising death toll, Joey never felt a victory from the war and had silently pronounced himself guilty of unsatisfied desires. Joey became susceptible to the murderous waves that cross and weave through the social psyche.

One day, it’s a very nice day, the sun is shining gloriously, Joey could not imagine a more perfect day to take his classic roadster out onto the open highway, and the moment mnemonically brought back his carefree high school days, the sound of that motor running, the echoes of his high school buddies and the blossoming spring smells, all served to disarm joy of his rational faculties, he enters a partial dream state, and to magnetize the moment one has to have a cheeseburger with fries and a shake; he drives to the hamburger joint, carelessly parking too close to another car that has just finished parking. Phillip is worried, so many things on his mind, he is tense, he has to get into work where a partial personal hell awaits him, he opens his door with the aggression that he needs to sell a million hamburgers, and Joey suddenly hears that screeching cherry red sound and brutally awakens from his high school day and pounds his fists into Phillip.

And that’s how it really happened.

The Smallness of the Universe

Destiny, what is it? Does it really exist? Well I think we can answer the second question first and the first question second. First we must come to an irrational conclusion that might make me sound more like a scientist than an emotional irrational human being, such as I am.

Even in our irrational universe there are things that tend to contradict irrational, you have seen logic attempt to contradict the irrational, and you have seen scientists attempt to add certainty and clock work to the illogical universe, and you have seen knowledge attempt to make sense of fish and trees. All rational acts accomplished over an irrational foundation. That has no need to bother us, because it does not matter what you do to the irrational in the end you are being irrational. Can you imagine anything more absurd than trying to impose logic and knowledge upon the universe? And even when they succeed with very cute theories such as evolution or gorgeous theories, such as quantum, they still end up coming around to nonsense. Quantum for instance is nothing if not irrational, quantum does not make sense, and if you try to make sense out of quantum you will go crazy.

This is because quantum is closer to the universe than any other scientific theory, and like the universe, everything in it that is logical begins to breakdown, and so quantum can allow for such exotic beliefs as multiple, parallel universes, infinite linear life sequences, and moving backwards in time too is possible with quantum, it just does not make sense that logic should have device such a gorgeous theory, and it didn’t; quantum is a scientific attempt to return to reality. The reality of quantum is wholly based on scientific intuition, and scientific intuition is the most creative, the most sensitive, the most feeling, and when it reaches feelings beyond comprehension, it devices gorgeous theory.

Evolution is not gorgeous, it is cute, you would take her out on date but there could be no second date. Evolution is the most successful simplistic theory ever conceived and it makes too much sense to ever make it into the universe. Evolution learns from its environment, get it, evolution evolves based on its environment, get it, this means that evolution is local, that it is not universal that it does not cater to cosmic complexities and that it does not react to solar or universal forces. In terms of weakness, evolution is the weakest. Of course evolutionary scientists could yet surprise us and do like physicists and adopt something really radical that would equal in specter and magnitude quantum. They could for instance explain how at the macro level, biological life spontaneously appears in existence, and that it can also spontaneously combust. As has been observed by some combustion aficionados; though it is very difficult to prove either way. Still this difficult to prove thing is never a problem for science as long as they can explain the interaction that it has with the real world that we touch and smell. For evolutionist this would just imply that there was a part of the theory of evolution, the most important part, that might never be truly understood, though it could be peered at with instrumental explanations. It’s the look into the black box with the radioactive isotope variable and see if the cat is dead or alive to explain the uncertainty principle. Personally I cant imagine a word that brings better with it its own description than uncertainty, uncertainty is a meta word, a definition and a word; even a layman can deduce its meaning from any angle. Besides I am a cat lover, it is a silly inhumane experiment, and it is so black and white that one understands that if they had not used a cat no one could have gotten emotionally involved and if you are not emotionally involved then you are not intellectually involved but that cat has certainly expanded beyond the lesser feely touchy eternally falling tree in the forest that has everyone wondering if it makes a noise.

I think I can help some of you out of a quandary, the falling tree in the forest does make a noise, for nesting birds, bugs and parasites it makes a chilling sound, for the forces that begin to harvest the rot a congregation of exuberance, to those that are in its vicinity it makes a general alarm, for those that are a bit further away it might not make an audible noise but it will be felt, for those that are some what at a greater distance yet, they will suffer the repercussions of less oxygen in the atmosphere, and for those that live in another planet, it wont make any noise at all.

You can lump evolution into that mate, yeah evolution does not make a sound outside of the earth. Maybe in other earth like planets, where there are human like creatures, that have managed to eradicate their emotions enough to sound out a linear theory with no event horizon, maybe there it does exist; but I would argue that the event horizon created by logic that divides and mutilates complex emotions, is probably not a common thing in the universe, as evidence I present the indifference the universe has demonstrated towards us. It is always us trying to reach, touch and link up with the universe, but the universe does not seem to much feel it mutual.

Maybe a long winded point but it needed to be made before we launch an all out love attack on destiny. The universe is full of things, hence the name. Inside of the universe you can have interesting things which while not require to run the universe they are apart of it. Knowledge, life, love, god, are some examples of things which may inhabit the universe but have no underpinning value that makes them critical for the everyday goings of the universe. I know it must be hard to take, not to be especial and all, but you are especial to yourselves and that ought be good enough, fact be told most things are only especial to themselves so even that does not quantify as much personal egocentric satisfaction, but in perspective you are not a universe. Knowledge of course attempts to address this horrible situation by attempting to create something that goes beyond the universe. Something that does not require heat energy, the power glory of the universe is energy, god and knowledge are two creations that ought not require energy but may explain energy and the universe. This is all very interesting, since the universe is full of energy the rebellious human race has decided to create or intuit the very things that ought not require any energy. God ought to certainly require zero energy, else God would be able to contract or expand which are the two key functional dynamics of energy. Knowledge itself is energyless in stature save for the fact that it is generated by Brain, which wouldn’t think a single energyless thought, though thoughts being the product of the least energy full creature in the universe, do not use much energy, I am not a scientist but I would guess that a matchbox contains all of the energy required to power your life time of thoughts. Anyway the idea of course is to go beyond the universe, as much as a human being would like to say that the universe is infinite and everywhere, the reality is that the human race wants to find the edge, the end of the universe, so that it can claim to be truly more superior than the universe. The reason is simple, if the universe is infinite, then we will always be within its boundaries and never be able to look at it, in the way that the universe does look at us, inwardly. The most precious thing was being able to rocket ourselves into orbit and look at the earth, while it was a magnificent view, the earth got really insignificant that day, that very day, humans could say that they were beyond the earth, and being beyond the earth they could acquire mastery over it, hence that was really a bad day for the earth, because it was also the day that we acquired our visual confirmation of our independence from the mother planet. The earth can be replaced by another like planet, the earth is not the eternal home of humanity, the earth is certain to crash into the planet, certain to die when or before the Sun dies, but humanity, when it flew a spae craft out of the solar system, showed that it could survive, through mere reproduction and an ability to relocate, could survive billions of years from Sun. Sure reproduction is an interrupted continuity and Sun does live a longer life than human, but Sun does not have generations, we may die all the time but we reproduce faster, that is how we are going to go beyond sun, and in that trip, since we sort of lose our position in space time, we could technically go beyond the universe too, that is if we could find its edge. Hence the reason why we are so hungrily searching for the edge of light, the remnants of the initial big bang; the age of the universe, so that we can sort of figure out how far away we are from liberating ourselves from the perimeters of the universe.

Once you can see beyond the universe I don’t need to tell you that the limitations are few. That day the universe will become as small and insignificant as it has made us feel. Unless, and here is the unless that counts, there is such thing as the tyranny of destiny!

Destiny’s Dynasty

Like it or not there is such thing as destiny, and as humans we can not like it because, just like the limitations imposed on us by being within the confines of the universe, destiny imposes even more tragic limitations, our lovers, our professions, our desires, are all curbed and distorted by destiny. And Destiny is very disciplined, so how can this be, how can an irrational universe have such an inconsiderate and unmovable proposition.

The first thing we must know about Destiny is that it is a local force, it acts and behaves at a local level, things, objects and beings that are far apart from you, do not share in its effects, effectively nothing outside of this planet is effected by destiny. However there is one disruptive violation to the effect locality of destiny, humanity, in this definition include animals and species, humanity as whole and per part, is effected by the destiny of anything that is human. If you were a human on the moon you would be affected by any destiny that effects any other human being. This nice little upset of local laws becoming universally applicable, is most fascinating because it is one of those rare cases where a local law has the potential to become a universal law, by way of simple human reproduction. If humans were to populate the galaxy this one law, the only one local law, to the best of my knowledge, which only applies to humans, may become a universal law by virtue of something so manual as reproduction.

As fascinating as that is, it is not the fascinating part of destiny, we must begin to trample all over the other aspects of destiny, so let us continue with the immediate clarity, that destiny is a local law and will remain local as long as humans don’t contaminate the universe, a contamination that seems less likely to come to pass than some of our futurologist may wish to acknowledge. But then again futurologist are living proof that optimist can bank on the future.

The most fascinating thing about Destiny is that no one wants to believe it as true. You do not want to believe it as fact, I don’t and wont believe it, the only people that want to believe in destiny are kings and presidents, they were destined to rule us. But when you get down to the rest of us, we just don’t want to imagine that our lives are indeed on auto pilot and we are just here like robots executing a master design plan that somehow manages to meet some universally coordinated effort. Its not like that, it isn’t like that. Why ought it be like that, I am here writing this book because it was my destiny to do so? Am I wired to for the wife I love, and if so what does love have to do with it, where is passion, why my desires, and, and why the hell would I want to live a life that has been preordained!

Well it really isn’t that bad, I don’t have to paint a tragedy here, there is destiny and it does manipulate you and control you, and yet, it is not so bad. It would be really bad if Destiny were trying to control you for its own sake, but rather, Destiny is one of those few dictators that actually is trying to guide you in your direction of choice; the problem is that you don’t know your direction of choice and Destiny counts on the programming to be right.

We all must agree on one thing, Destiny would be a terrible thing, and life not worth living if it were a fixed automaton execution, and we all must agree that it isn’t, there is such thing as free will, the point is that there is a crux, a Y if you will, that determines the angularity and shape of your destiny. Destiny in fact agrees with you, in fact destiny can not disagree with you, because Destiny does not think, it just reacts very much like the autopilot on an aircraft, you give it the coordinates, and keeps on going in that direction even if there is a hurricane in the way. The problem is in the task, Destiny is preconceived by you, by your previous desire to exist and finally by the social dynamic that you are born into. First you must decide to express your energy as a human being, why you would do that is not for me to judge, I personally don’t like it here and cant comprehend why I acted with such negligence, but once you decide that you are going to be born, and chose those parents that you want, and they select you, because you are all looking for each other, and then your mind set enters the world order, you have already formulated some character traits that you will not surrender, but mostly you are willing to check out the place and stay for a while regardless of the social dynamic which will absorb a good portion of your creative and work energies. All these things are set, by you, as design desires, then, your destiny takes on those desires and accepts them as fate accumpli and seeks to execute them weather you like it or not, even as you might have changed your mind and your desires, the god damn thing will Destiny will seek to execute your desires and thoughts, because it received orders from you, the social entity, and your desire energies to execute. Only once the thing is marching it is a body in motion and we all know the law, a body in motion has a tendency to keep on moving until it crashes into something or it runs out of kinetic energy. The greater your desire energy the greater your destined dynamic, the more difficult it is to get out of it. Say you desire to have a wife and children, destiny immediately begins to execute a search for those things, and it gets them for you, because you really wanted them, and then when you realize that when you are married you have to watch a lot of television you say to yourself this is not for me, and suddenly you are changing your mind but you already have the wife and the children and now you want to change a destiny that you preordained and there is no way that you are going to change that without scaring a few hearts and making yourself miserable for a few years. The problem is that you do not comprehend the impact that you have on destiny and it is going to surprise you why you have such a disconnect with destiny. Your Brain.

A brain has a problem with the minds eye, and the minds eye is the connectivity to your emotional engine and to your instinctual nervous systems. Brain, does not realize that it is not as important as your mind’s eye, and so it does not like to communicate with it nor does it like your instincts, because they smell bad. See Brain thinks, and thinking and following your gut instincts don’t need more contrasting than that. Brain thinks that instincts are fallible and animalistic and simplistic and Brain thinks this because Brain has nothing to do with instincts, they were developed before Brain, and in fact Brain is closely a production of instincts that felt it necessary to desire a measuring instrument to home in their instincts. The Brain was then generated by a destiny applying the mass desires of a species. All well up to a point, the point at which Brain begins to measure fear!

The instincts could have never conceived of fear when they desired Brain, they instinctually imagined that they had a global picture of the environment, but sometimes this was a problematic thing when it came to coping with very near, very local conditions and situations, the mass species desire, undulates through the will of the species and destiny comes up with Brain, and of course Brain can, by design, see and measure things that the instincts cant; and one of the terrible, terrible things that it measures and sees, is really a new discovery, fear. And nothing so demarks the most advance species from the rest than fear!

And with fear the instincts get apprehension, and the instincts do not understand apprehension, they simply have nothing that can help them deal with something so anti touching and feeling, they don’t know, and they are perplexed by the inhibitions that rise form fear and apprehension, and as Brain continues to see and realize the environment and everything around it as either food, weapon or threat, then the instincts have less information because the categories created by Brain talk to the intellect and not to instincts, and there you have it, the instincts by way of the unpredictability of the outcome of their own destined desires, lock themselves up, within the human species and gave rise to a categorical tyrant.

Before Brain one could reasonably argue that instincts took care of most of the day to day operations of the human species, but after Brain everything was going to get whacked, smacked and squashed with a ruler. Yet the universe and everything in it is composed of some many things that are far more powerful than Brain and so fortunately our story does not end there. Behind the scenes Instincts realize that something has gone massively wrong, they don’t blame themselves for it because they don’t know how to feel guilt, this is why my cats, that blessed by god have smaller brains than mine, but this is why my cats when they break my favorite shot glass and I yell at them with the curse of thousand hells, they simply stare at me as needed irrelevancy. My cats do not know how to feel guilty, they are still powered by their instincts, and your instincts know that if you break a glass nothing has changed in the universe, my cats have gone on to break other glasses with the same freshness of mind as the first.

I was saying, you remember, that all is not foolhardily lost to Brain, the Brain has an evil twin. We all have evil twins, I hear that mostly they die before birth and we spend the rest of our lives looking for someone to marry so as to replace them. Underneath the stirrings of all will desired is a desire that I do not much care for, the desire for perfection. You may ask why would I not like perfection, well because it is very obvious that perfection has nothing to do with me and I only like things that are like me. The desire for perfection is interesting, a perfect crystal with is gorgeous symmetry bores the hell out of me, I prefer fallible rocks like emeralds which seem to try to get every exquisite imperfection in them, so as to be ultimately fragile, as imperfection is the cause of all fragility, and of course they are green because when you are really fragile you are mostly very green, I love emeralds and I do concede that it is because I am a very fragile soul. But this obsession with perfection is brought about by the very thing that knows how to measure imperfection, ruler Brain. Hence the reason why my relationship to my brain is so tenuous, I am tired of knowing all of my imperfections, I ma tired of all the details I must follow to change myself into a perfect human specimen, getting a PhD would be a start, getting two PhDs would further advance me into perfecting Brain symptoms which are sickening to me, anyway I don’t like my brain, but I like her evil twin. As things seek to perfect themselves they create their replacements. That was the problem that curtailed instincts, they tried to perfect themselves only no one really knows how to predict all the fucking variables that any action manages to extricate into existence, perfect planning is impossible, a perfectly executed plan would be the biggest accident the universe has ever seen. And so it Brain, as masterly as it has managed to handle us, did not know it, could not know it, gave rise to my third eye.

The problem with measuring sticks is that they are local and when you are a local creature that wants to control the universe and everything in it the first thing you must get is order, organized all the furniture in the universe and catalog it so that you know what everything is and where everything is. Only the measuring stick begins to get bored with all of its catalogs and categories because it realizes that it has never gone beyond itself, and realizing this it also realizes another great superlative, if it can not go beyond itself it will never compose the entire universe much less control it, and know it and understand for what it is. And that is when Brain defies itself and decides to create predictability. And in order to create predictability you have to have vision and Brain does not have vision, remember that Brain is just a measuring sensor for local environments, it is not design to see beyond its environments, it is design to look at the environment, hence the reason why Brain and Science love each other, they are both local girls. But Brain is not so stupid that it can not conceive its own self perfection, and in seeking to perfect itself Brain defines a desire that undulates through the species for something that has prophetic powers, it defines itself as good at measuring, but the need to abolish fear can not be tackled with the results of analysis, there must be a preventive approach that would allow for preventive action, that would predispose Brain to absorb less hostility for the environment while exercising greater control over it due to its predictability. Only Brain does not know that what Brain was defining was the creation of what the instincts had truly desired when they got her distorting essence.

Within brain is that dead brother, the true desired condition that has not painted itself unto the universe continues to seek expression and while all are unaware of it, it machinates its desired rise into being. Brain carries her dead brother within her, brain killed him before birth, there was only enough nutrition for one of them, or so Brain reasons, Brain was the most advanced, it is easier to create an instrument of measure than a prophetic instrument, further from perfection the third eye lost to Brain, only to be desired by Brain, sibling jealousy, Brain had to have a visionary sight, to add grandeur to its measuring stature, and we get a minds eye from it, a third eye, an eye that is not only linked to the universe, but that is also linked to our instincts!!!!!

This is the most beautiful thing that could have ever been devised and we have it in us, though it is still in its primordial infancy and has much time to intuit the comprehension of self and world from its non analytical perspective. You probably have already deduced why it will take a long time for the mind’s eye to replace Brain, not only is it that it does not relate to a logic world, it leaps immediately to irrationals, but the problem is the maturity of Brain, old man Brain aint going to allow Mind’s Eye to take over without first putting a good old world order struggle. Currently the connect with world is still based on Brain, this makes a slow motion world for our Third Eye, and Mind’s Eye does not yet see how it all could work out, nor has it defined itself against Brain because the mind’s eye does not idealize antagonisms nor does it recognize them as quickly a feverishly and Brain did in its fanatical reign of opposites.

Mind’s Eye & Arterial Ether

There are good reasons why the Mind’s Eye has had such a difficult time being born into the world as we know it. Besides the obvious one, that it wasn’t in Brain’s interest to allow the growth of a creature that was sure to supplant it and make it irrelevant, yet the actual reason is a little more interesting and impressive in how it reveals to us the methods by which Desire constructs the universe.

Arterial ether is the genuine cause of the birth of ME, (Mind’s Eye), we will examine the function of it, but first lets see how it is born. For anything to be born we know it requires a gigantic amount of desire to volcanically erupt into existence. This is why the lower energy representations, worms, viruses, humans and plants are the primitive representations of desire, they contend with the lowest desire energy, their candle fury is therefore poorly represented in the universe, the universe requires a lot of desire energy to allow manifestation within itself, inherently within a manifested universe everything in it will have a lower energy quotient of representation; life, is a low desire energy representation. This is not to say that the energy put forth by life in order to exist is not sufficiently desired, it is, by the essence that it represents it is a full blast charge towards existence; to exist all things being and none being are operating at the extreme limit of their energy quotient of desire. However, the manifestation of any entity of desire, while whole as an individual representation of its entity being, is yet able to evolve further once it touches the reality that it disfigures itself into. What I mean by that is that we channel our desire in a given direction not necessarily knowing much of the possible actual outcome of our magnanimous attempt to enter the reality of the good and the great whatever. It is only once we are alive, when entropy begins its work on the maximum desired exemplified condition obtained, that we acknowledge a condition of variation and mortality immune to the consistency of the desired that we had dreamt up for ourselves. In short, once you get here you begin to wilt from the apex of your desired condition, and what you desired desires itself to continue being what it is (even as for you it has reached full expression,) but it is boggled down by the unanswerable question of how to persist.

The strange happens. In order for things to exist there has to be as much desire gravitating from any and all angles within, throughout and in the nothingness; your parents wanted you, they may not have known it, they may have been just as surprise as you were by your arrival here, but from either circular end there was a keyed in identification that locked your parents to you and you to your parents and the precious nastiness of that relationship is that neither of you understood how much you had desired each other. More your parents blindly believe that they brought you here and will not acknowledge your doings on the matter nor will they phantom the idea that you come complete with offerings so they will try to stuff you with the artifacts that they have picked up here, wholly unaware that the here and now is made by what you bring with you. Phantom you the unbearable and unalterable conjecture, the idea that things are created here has been unearthed here. When the locality can not rationalize or recognize the immensity it becomes original. Regardless back to your combined desired maternity. The universe is strict here, you cant unite two or three or more things that do not desire each other, however ill fated such desire might be is irrelevant to the universe, you happen to have your parents because your desired energy channeled a mutual acceptance to their desire energy, the universe acts upon the combined desire and that might not be beneficial to either entity as they are individuals but it certainly meets the criteria of the universe to hold things together and prop them up when they so choose to manifest themselves in congregations. This is not to say that you have to have parents and/or alliances, but entities that don’t ever make such arrangements are not recognizable and therefore can not exist within the parameters of what we call universe. Paradoxically the universe itself is held together by the non entities which don’t desire to recognize themselves as entities.

So from the ebb and flow of energy attractions based on mutual desires which are manifested by a self interest the arterial ether begets mind’s eye, and the brain begets the mind’s eye, and the instincts get a right minded brain that corners itself with left minded rational; and the cause and effect of all this is not preordained by any one thing, rather they are all arrested by the manifestations of their desires which are always ON and always operating on an INFINITE principle of maximum expression. “Mother I am going with my boyfriend to Texas…” Qualifies as a unifying principle development. Simple minds simple acts but simple results are not possible, the variables are too great and the actors of the cosmic play don’t know each other, they have not rehearsed their parts, and worst, they don’t know it is all just an act, an act that ironically creates an absolutist truth such as Texas!

If you have been paying attention you might have by now noticed that we all want the result of the mind’s eye conception but we don’t know how to get there, and it requires so much feeling of our selves, not our environment, as does Brain, but rather of ourselves, which in smelling feelings strangely creates a supra-entity which I dare call the Arterial Ether, and the arterial ether, devices mind’s eye from mutual self awareness. Both entities reach towards each other, and they grow in proportion to the presence of self awareness while crossing the ether of space which has no distance between one humanity and another or one human or another, zero separation. Sameness of desired does not obey the laws of distance within dimensional space, if I am like you, I am like you, I am you. I am just not aware of being you because I have separated myself from myself, that separation separates me from you at a psychological level, and even at a physiological level, but the distance is not accepted by the universe nor is it acknowledge by the Arterial Ether, specially because the Arterial Ether depends on our continuity and togetherness for its representational essence. And because the universe makes same things same, it has no other recourse, it does not catalog by individuality, you and your brain create individuality, but you are part of a same desire which creates bipedal, carbon based desire representations and their environments.

The more humans you add to the cosmic cake the more unification energy that you have, the greater they pull towards each other, all things that are a like conform to habitats and ambitions, I conform towards the finality of humanity, equally I am a rebel against that finality, I aim to destroy my mortality, I reach out to others that are like me to connect desire energy into an infinite cycle, regardless of the brutality or boredom that it might inspire in the universe. We are dwindling, from birth dwindling, but if we connect all the dots of our humanity across the furious vastness of the universe, we could band together and form an infinite circle around the circumference of the cosmic and strangle the birth right out of anything else! We just want to live our current expression, we don’t know why, there are plenty of arguments against living it, but they are all rational, irrationally it does not make sense to want to die nor does it seem fair that the universe ought consume our energy of desire from birth and corner us with entropy on to consumption.

Each of us enhances the viability of mind’s eye, even brain conceives that it is necessary, that such a sophisticated and beautiful thing as a mind’s eye ought and needs to exist, you walk away everyday thinking, I have to get an edge on the universe, I have to connect to all others that are like me, I have to reach out to them, the brain devices the space program, the mind’s eye would never think it necessary, connected as it already is to every other human, and every aggregate human adds merely to its dimensional vision and exotic persistence with insistence, the void is separated and collapses, there is no distance between a human born on the constellation Cassiopeia and one born in Cepheus. As each human adds to the arterial ether so do they strengthen its manifestation in the real of reality, each human is a building block in the symposium of the arterial ether, which grows in potential congregating energy and as this cosmic population growth exerts its desire force upon the universe, we get a daring and magnificent attribute, we get a consciousness of each others existence; we violate the separation imposed by other energy desires that altercate our intended desire and what appears before us is this sense of essence, the arterial ether undulates throughout the universe, between all human points and overreaches based on concentration. But for this there isn’t a space program that can unite us and urge the mutual recognition that we must embody to cause perdition to grow extinct, instead we grow a mind’s eye, a third eye, an eye that does not see the here and now, an eye that does not touch objects or reality, and eye that merely feels humanity where everything human is, as one, large body, with traces of its contamination in the grand canyons of the universe; there, our humanity dares to claim an alternate reality, yes you can come and try to kill us all, you must, really you must, but you cant, why? Because while our individual cosmic energy of desire is suppliant enough to surrender itself from the moment of its manifestation, our cosmic self energy, our eternal identity badge which links us to all the others, formidably emancipates us from the limitations of self and authenticates our existence with magnanimous certitude. Our message to the universe: “We are not alone.” The universe does not comprehend this message, nor does it cry out our complicity against all else that inhabits it, perhaps it thinks itself unable to stop us, or perhaps the universe, better and grander than us, understand that all things come to pass, one day earlier for anyone is not going to upset anyone, specially in a place where there are no rules and no order. But there is a greater reason, even a more particularly spectacular reason as to why the universe does not interfere with our dreams of immortality. The universe knows that the more we crave to be in the universe the greater the universe becomes. We are after all, just desire energy, if we were to decide not to be humanity, not to fight to be humanity, then an element of the universe would have such desire energy subtracted from it, and the universe would be something else for it. The universe understands that the more we want to be in the universe, the more human desire that we bring to it, the greater the universe, and nothing could be more detrimental to the universe than the horrid fact that we might not want to be here, that we might want to subtract ourselves from this world view, and still a greater peril for us, for having magnified and bursting storming desire that we are, what hell for us, what hell for us, to have settled into occupying a dimension where we can not be more, but less, from birth forward, here, in this dimension it is less, we have doomed ourselves into thinking that there is a way forward here, an evolution within this state of desire. When we ought have done the opposite, been here, seen it, let me wither so as to storm another aspect of desire. But we have convinced ourselves that this is it, that we are all there is to be, and this fanatical stance, has given us the privilege of being the most important rotting fruit in the universe.

With mind’s eye we will be able to feel a genetic map of humanity in relationship to the universe, and with it we will feel the corners, breath and depth of our flirtations, but that was from the start, we have not had to finish any race, when we came into the universe that was the finish line; we still think that was the beginning, the universe does not mind this misconstrued gesture of a mindless brain.

Needed Irrelevancies

We must bring to the table of doubts our need for love, politics, technology, mathematics, science and education. This is not to stop there, but it’s a good start. Because while we may feel that we need the Brain we really don’t need Brain, and so we must bring into question the existence of the things that Brain has nurtured within us. Education seems most disposable so why not also love, specifically romantic love, we may not yet know a genuine love, though knowing the name “love” is a start; and while religion has brought unto itself enough inquisitions why not bring it in for reexamination too. There are many things that are not required for our being but we seem to feel, stretched through time and by absence of comparison, are necessary. For instance, people lived without science for eons and lived more or less similar lives to the ones we live today only at a much more natural pace and without the cumbersome needs to know so much and to be so efficient, it is then doubtful that, say, something like a physicist is a requirement in the universe and or on earth. Some scientists, never ones to not find a way to take credit for everything, seem to think that science began when the first caveman started the first fire, I doubt that qualifies as science, however it is fair to note that science is mostly the product of intuition and not, as largely supposed., the product of experiment. If such a highly educated and sophisticated and complex thing as a physicist is not a requirement then what else is at risk, of being non-essential and if non-essential happens to be common as we might rightly suspect, what is the criteria that brings non-essentials into being even as a luxury item?

I am not here to tell you that I have the answer to what needs to be defined as a mandatory or desired item for existence, it might be a tough question to answer, it might not have an answer and it could also be the wrong question. Partly the problem here is that we seem to be ruled by a need for eternal life and a hungry need to infest the universe with everything that is us. First, when you are searching for eternal life that is bound to bind you into many thought or/and action loops that may lead to dead ends of repetitive behavior which won’t make any sense, as well they might not, for being subjects of this same escape clause. Eternal life may be a quest, but the cosmic may have a better alternative than you for eternal life, one could not imagine that the universe would want us to be so short lived if we were as important as we suspect ourselves to be. Neutrinos live what might seem infinite lives compared to ours, even neutrons easily out perform us, why is the universe willing to tolerate the ever immediate finality of our lives while catering to neutrinos and neutrons? It would be wrong to conclude that the universe needs us more, we seem to be far more expendable and certainly needed in far fewer quantities, our essential nature seems to be less essential, the universe does not need humans like it needs neutrinos, electrons and photons. Though this is not to say that we are not unique, we might be one of the more exotically unique forms in the universe, and in this particular case, uniqueness might imply that we are not needed and are indeed highly expendable.

I am not going to defend our need for immortality, I am not going to find a solution to that very problem, nor do I phantom it warranted, I prefer to die and never to come back here, nice place, but I am over it, I was over it by the time I was twelve years old, seems hard to imagine that, but life can only be interesting when you are looking at something else other than immediate life. Still I will make a case for the infesting of the universe; damn it, if we are going to live, and we can’t have eternal life, and the universe is ok with that, I am not ok with that, I stick by any humanity that wants to make more humanity, though this is a highly reactionary stance, and probably criminal at a cosmic level, even so I am not sure that the universe is going to take us seriously if we don’t invade it. Something in me tells me that we are the suicidal nature of the universe, but for now we are only the fleas in a dogged universe.

Which is probably why we have embarked on creating all of these useless needed irrelevancies. For example, I would like to take on the idea of romantic love. People are always dying for this idea, something really poetic about it, something really heart and blood affirming, people feel that they are able to tolerate life if they are romantically involved, when they romanticize day and night about their lover, when they have translucent flirtations and conquer cynical apparitions everything is delicious. But delicious can be delusional, and if it is that there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Hundreds of millions of people have some basic criteria for romanticism, a death and life struggle, “can’t live without you.” A romantic dinner, wine and a song; a Shakespearian poetic tragedy. Shakespeare was certainly a romantic which is precisely why I suspect him of being a bit of a fool.

But Byron and Holderlin and Blake and Rimbaud and Shelly and all of those wonderful saps of romanticism could not have been utterly delusional, though to write as they did they were in fact in a delusional trance. I am not a lover of reality, nor do I much care for it, a good fantasy is certainly better than any reality or truth and more worthy of fanatical pursuit; (as well shown by this book,) this is because reality is what it is, there is not much beyond that, hence the reason why I don’t much enjoy the empirical, but here there is greater issue: If romanticism is a delusion then is it the delusion of delusions, in which case it would be wonderful, or is it merely a petty delusion hinting at a more gorgeous delusion which at this moment, from our perspective it is not obtainable?

If the romantics were merely tracing the outline of something more profound, and one certainly hopes that was the case, then they failed to meet the nature of their romanticism and this invalidates their sentiments and truncates the nurturing quality of their ideas. Yes the stars are so beautiful, the sky so blue, the perfumed roses so fragrant, and my lover so sweet as the wine; only if I can not have her I shall kill myself, but for that little bit all works out like a charm. But there is a clue to how shallow romanticism really is, and it is in its infinite idealism of unrequited love. The lover that succumbs to loving another that will never correspond those same feelings, the lover that lingers in the darkness, from afar listening to every breath of the untouchable adoration. Benign, idiotic, absurd, and yet it is one of the most dramatic symbolisms of the romantics. Holderlin being the master lover of what he could not obtain. The romantics have always demonstrated that they WANT but CAN’T fuck innocence. The virgin Mary is a romantic ideal, and innocence is a romantic ideal, the romantics were and are always looking for the unspoiled child that will never be contaminated by reality. Here is the damning evidence, the romantics don’t want to get dirty with life, and if you don’t want to get dirty then you are not going to be the most important of all emotional aspirations: Passionate! The romantics can not endure the ravages of the passions, when they are passionate they are clean, they are morally correct, they tend to not trespass, they want to walk in the shadow of their lover rather than cause discomfort, they want to dream, dream their lover rather than taste farts in her pubic hairs. Passionate people don’t commit suicide, they don’t harbor melodramas and drink poisons and take on personalized dagger formations, passionate people don’t give a fuck about what puta-madre thing they have to do in order to obtain their lovers, or to reach their metaphorical objective, passionate people just get what they want or die trying; but the romantics kill themselves and others in desperation, and the only thing that they leave us with are their poems and sorrows and humid warm bleeding hearts.

Without meaning to be very cruel to the romantics, they really don’t need much more cruelty than the one they already inflict upon themselves, I just want to claim here and now that romanticism is a psychotic delusion which hints at a greater emotion than the one that can be obtained by the psychotic romantic! The romantic never really marries, a romantic can never enter into commitment, a romantic never touches his lover, but the arrested desires from deprivation consumes all romantics. The fantasy eats you, and a good fantasy ought to at least please, only the romantics perceive that an unquenched thirst, an unfulfilled magnificent desire is worthy of incessant pursuit. Will someone please stand up and tell them that they got it wrong! They got it wrong, but they can’t change their minds, because their brains fell in love with an idea that could not be concretized. Nothing wrong with that, I have enjoyed the romantics much, there is something pleasing in watching them go insane or to jump to their death with pills, guns and ropes. The romantics are the perfect alcoholics, a charming group, and their poetry has certainly put a blemish on the aesthetic, a tremendous accomplishment, even if temporary.

There is a passionate element here that is being hinted at, something which tells us of the ability that we have to blindly believe and have faith in something mundane that does not reciprocate our belief structure. It is possible to then conclude that romanticism is the product of desired energy that has been misconstrued and that will not be able to manifest itself, hence the reason why it is most likely to implode upon the self. The romantic is not so much saying “I love life” or “I love you” as much as they are saying “I don’t belong here and I can’t get out, please help me out.” Which is why they find an impossible object to fixate upon. But behind that is the constrained desire, the love desire, the genuine essence of something which can not be penetrated with poems but with actions, and with losses and gains and struggles that lead to endless flowering consequences; this is what romantics hint at and this is where they can not go. If they can not go there do we need them? Do we need romanticism? Bloody hell no! We don’t need constipation and that is what romanticism is, constipation of the heart. Romanticism is an incessant, obsessive preoccupation; and as long as we remain immune to the passionately profound essence of love, romanticism will let us touch it, without commitment.

Innocent Calamities

No-one can penetrate my shell, unless they kill me.

Infinite Absolutes

I hiss, you laugh… we have different ways of expressing the same thing.

The same thing, the same thing. This is where we are all having a problem, the same thing, we don’t want to be the same thing, a thing wishes to persist as what it is and not as another. Why then, against all subjective and valid knowledge for persistence do I make a foolish attempt to instigate belief in universal homogeneous hegemony?

The difference is that persistence is a local event, things act greatest at their locality, they also influence themselves greatest at their locality. Hence the inability of most things to see beyond themselves. We are clouded by our personalized atmosphere, which distorts all externals. The self is a very crowded place, most beings suffocate within their own confines; in a lifetime few ever manage to escape the gravity of self! Yet the act by which we all lock out the external world is a common act, it is universal, even as it is local in nature. Here are all these creatures, things, subjects, essences, raging and boasting their individuality en mass. They are approximately successful at it within the confines of self. Once you get out of that personalized world you begin to realize that replication is the most common thing in the universe, and that it is by way of replication that the universe holds itself together, and that likes, likes are mandatory structures for any, any type of desire to manifest itself into existence! In blunt summary, if there were not already someone here like you, you would not be here. There has to be another like you to give you a hand to bridge the abyss between your desire to exist and the simmering nothingness.

But of course the universe and everything in it is dynamic, when the fabric of the universe alters, it alters you, it alters everything, and yet so it continues by that very process to be the same en mass. This is no different than the ironic fact that within you is the potential ability of desire to compose any aspect of the universe. You are your current aspect of the universe because you so desired it, difficult as that might seem to you. Of course everything around you had to be in absent-minded agreement, your surroundings share your desire by way of happenstance, neither you nor your environment could have known that you were ideally suited for each other, nor that you would all labor in cohort to concoct your reality. Still that is precisely what happened, you only divine reason and cause from effect, but the effect is negligent of the reason and the cause, neither are necessary nor do they exist from the perspective of the universe.

It may help you here if I note that even physicists have come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no difference between matter and energy; if that is the case, may I remind you that everything in the universe is between matter and energy.

When we divine the universe we construct it within the scope of ourselves; this is because we have no other methodology available to us, we may have once been different aspects of the universe, but these would have little bearing on our current perspective. Even so the most important aspect of our being is that anything that we can recognize or touch or feel or smell or observe is, by the very fact that we can do any of those, is a part of us, not an external sterile isolated thing, but a part of us. The only thing that is not a part of us is that which we can not see or touch or smell or perceive or feel. We are alienated by anything that is truly not apart of our existence, the exclusion is absolute, and incomprehensible. Still there are subjects, beings, entities and things within the constrains of our universe, that we do not touch, observe, feel, smell or sense because we are not given to experience their effects in an aware sensory mode. This is not to say that these things are not a part of us and that they do not exist, in fact they do exist, and are there; for regardless of our magnificent consciousness we are not, not necessarily intrusive enough to perceive the all encompassing emotion of “our” universe; and it is ours, more than you can imagine. The universe would certainly be less without us in it, though it could be made more by other subject representations, our particular representation is unique, not in its individuality, but in its universal perspective and composition. It may allow some personal gratification for you to know that the universe without a humanity, is certainly less of something; and again universes like to have a lot of a lot of things. It’s just their nature.

Beating Thinkers Without Thinking

Sometimes, the eyes and the ears suffer negligence.

Average Converts

Politics. Can you think of a more discredited profession? No one suspects politicians of being knowledgeable, nor of having a dedicated character to a particular cause, a politician is a the most flexible, pliable, drifty and shifty character on earth. This is because they are non believers, politicians don’t really believe in anything, the least successful politician will always be the one that truly believes in something. This is because when you believe in something you are alienating something else. Belief is by its very nature exclusionary. Belief calls for absolutes. Politicians must not show that they are absolutist. They must profess to have an open mind, a willingness to listen, and the more they are willing to change the more we will admire them. To be an absolutist is to be a dictator, and the populace wants to have a feeling that given the right circumstances, and proper communication that a politician would understand their particular cause. If only they could talk to him, and obviously most will not get the chance to converse with their political representatives, but as long as they have the idea that the senator or governor has the potential to be influenced then they will support him; even as this is not going to happen they will support him, it is the idea that a politician can believe in anything that is the base of democratic massification.

It is interesting to note that the feminine is also considered much in this light, she is the more likely to be neutral, we are more given to believe our wives and mothers because there is an inherent aspect of neutrality which convinces one that they could support any cause. A mother loves her son the murderer, a mother is willing to forgive a lie, a mother is tolerant, a mother is receptive, a mother is of course a very autocratic & fixated concept in the universe but you wouldn’t know it from her ability to suffer, endure and overcome.

But then there is politics and politicians and I am here to tell you that there are only politicians and not politics. Political science is hubris, there is no such thing, never has been, but there are politicians, characters that behave and act politically. The implication of this is important to our comprehension of the birth of neutrality and objectivity which have much to do with the suspect independence of a subject: science, politics, religion and even something as mundane as environment.

There is an interesting difference between politics, religion and science. Politics and religion endemically recognize that they need mass support and proactively seek it. Science is the opposite, it believes that facts speak for themselves and anyone with enough mathematics and common sense will comprehend and become a believer, the rest of us humans must just believe they are right about what we don’t understand innately.

If planes fly it is because of science, it can’t be because god ordained it, the facts despise faith. Or it couldn’t be because we BELIEVE that they fly, it is because a formulae has struck the right balance with gravity and metal, and so planes fly. Or it could certainly not be that there is no such thing as a plane but that your imagination came up with the concept to explain the interval of time that passes when you convene the ravine of self between to points.

This rhetoric I am feeling you with here is to reiterate the point, massification of belief is essential to reality. The mass is the medium to any reality and it is precisely because of this that the mass is inert. Sorry Mr. Marx you can not awaken a solid object.

Science spends many laboring hours in its inquisition against religion and everything else that is not fact based, and throughout the centuries science has gradually acquired a psyche-massified-mindset that allows for its principles to become common truths.

The externalization of belief is what generates concepts that are detached from humans. And externalization is a requirement in order to acquire endorsement of your beliefs from the presumed external world. The universe, as most must suppose, is an extrovert. It doesn’t hide much, it is the most visible most obvious thing, the universe is an extrovert. But is it really? And if it is extroverted why is it so?

One must be careful when using the word reason, and specially if its me using said word, but it is reasonable to suspect that the universe wants us to know it is there so we will get out of the way of his INTRUSIVE being more and more universe. The universe is really an introvert, as really we all are, because we are all subjective beings, but we extrovert in order to create a perimeter, to arouse the nature of our existence upon anything that might be inadequately challenged to recognize it. The universe wakes me up to tell me look at my beautiful Luna, it calls my eyes to speck in sprinkled cosmic nova, it hums eternally the radiation of its origin essence, it vomits quasar-tons my way, it promises to disemboweled me into its black holes, the universe is externalizing its self essence so as to capture mine. Simply put the universe is a selfish agglomeration of introverted extrovertions, staying attached from lack of separation, there is zero distance between me and the universe, we keep convincing each other of that, by way of rubbing, but such convincing would not be possible if it were not already so.

One wants to imagine it not so, but so it is and so it is with humanity and its atomic components we call human. Later we will discuss the further duality of the human helix which is entwined in the feminine and masculine embodiment of blue glue. But lets not get out of the universe yet. Inside the universe is everything, if this is the case there is no duality within the universe and everything that comprises it. Please don’t get scare we are not going anywhere with this. Now magnify yourself back to your little tiny planet of self, there in your self essence you find the you that is a politician which is in all of us, though more manifested in some than in others. The reason for the variance in the magnification of the political self is based on lack or not of representation. The better represented you are the less likely you are to be politically active. This is why the average person is generally so comfortable and inert, they are well represented so they can afford to be apolitical or more accurately expressed, they don’t have to extrovert their political self to accrue greater benefit of belief.

I am sure all this sounds very fine to you, while it really sounds horrid to me, specially because I am not average which is to say that I am not comfortable and that I have a large political self which is seeking to extrovert itself and that explains this book nicely. The politics of the time have an average acceptance, but this is not to say that they are average and therefore serve the common good. Belief does not have a right or wrong qualifying quality check, something can be wrong and if enough people believe it then there is nothing wrong about that wrong even as it wrongs.

People that have a conflict with the apolitical average, which again is really not apolitical at all, their political gene is livelier because it is successful, but those disenchanted by the average will, that silently dominates the social psyche, rise to attempt to convince others that they need to wake up and be politically alive so that they can rescue his or her subjective dream of fairness and humanness. All those politically active organizations are composed of disenfranchised unsatisfied extroverted political selves. The only exception is political lobbies which are franchises of the established political order, merely there to secure that no one changes the rules on the game that they have already won. But the point is that those of us not served by the accepted average are forever at war with it, and so we are a danger to the current, stable and proven and largely comfortable social condition. A heapeance of tragedy would unfold if we the disenchanted were to find average converts.

And everyone needs average converts. It is average converts that make any and all systems. Nothing about the luxurious geniuses, the mavericks, the entrepreneurs, the visionaries, nothing about these is inherently stable, they will destroy any system or world of belief, it is only the average convert that stabilizes and creates a normal ambient temperature that is tolerable to all. The mass is automatically political and therefore endemically apolitical. You can study the inner workings of a thing that ceases to exist when it is most successful. The common world politic is not active! A successful politician doesn’t exist in the real world. It cant, because the political essence freezes and hardens and becomes average when it manifest itself within the social ambiance of the times.

Unless again it is not dully represented.

I have gone on long enough about this but my point is simple, politics as a science and as a profession is another of the necessary irrelevancies. It is an arena where the least politicking happens, and mostly the least successful. The political decisions have already been made by the time they materialize into the supra-social-psyche. There are only two ways to change the world as we know it, and that is to change yourself or to change others, neither are possible; humanity can not externalize itself from itself, the universe gets the same information from ten humans or a billion, the revolution is on lockstep.

Again the universe does not register 1, one, singular human. They came in two’s dint they?

Only Within

As we continue you ought to be realizing that the soberness of the world is largely dependant on your belief system. The psyche to which you synchronize builds the world perception, and the perception builds the reality. Your intransigents creates proof, and your proof is your intransigents.

This is also true and even more so in the case of faith and the religions that such create. It ought be evident simply from the extreme hierarchical that any church is bound to. There are saints, angels, virgins, devils, bishops, cardinals, priests, popes, good and evil, commandments, thou shall not, devotion, and so forth. It would be foolish to think that such an obviously matured social structure, with its rituals and its mastery does not arrive at us from some greater truth with which we identify with, but we may not be able to conjure or express in earthly physics. The question is why is the god thing so inaccessible? There maybe two valid answers, one it is not the thing itself but rather an expression of the thing as closely as it can be conceived; or and perhaps the greater accurate, the god thing is not obtainable from an earthly condition and the faith is merely the memory of an extinct dimension, an spiritual dimension which does not touch our earthly realities.

Bound into the logic of the here and now must be also some adulterated version of our path through the ever rebounding trajectory of nothingness and timelessness. The dimension of a god must be obtainable, only at such an extreme level that there are no hierarchical, in short god doesn’t exist as god because everyone is a god under such circumstances. The god thing does not compose levels of salvation, for that matter it does not even exist, being that a god made of matter or a god that could touch it would be, in either case, a dirty god.

I must reiterate the illusion of the condition because it is so absolutist by its own definition that one must decide if one is really made a better person under the severe holy dimension. In other words, because we register something from another element of our being, which is not inherent to our world condition, then we could be destroying ourselves rather than edifying ourselves through prayer. If so the biggest favor we could do a god condition is to abandon it. Proximity might be possible through personal devotion that would not externalize itself, in a direct affront to modern congregational belief the most saintly devout personally absorbs one’s self in an introverted religious poem, I pray to myself, my soul prays for me, I rewind the universe by being an inward meditation, within, within, is all religion and more within is all spirit.

The spell bounders that reach out to convert us have not in them the god that they are.

Monogamy and its Discontents

Monogamy rises from our inherent need to trounce upon our humanity and create the isolated path required by our severed consciousness. This is the market value and true cost of individuality. The severed humane consciousness alienates itself into an infinite reductionism that denies our genetic and cosmic marriage to humanity. We get a divorce from humanity but this does not mean that humanity separates from us, us our individuality grows, it is merely our separation from humanity that grows, it is merely our isolation that grows, but the eternal connection between one human and another human, and between an individual and society does not identify a separation, humanity can not be divided by its component parts, it is the sum of whole that equals one individual and all humanity.

Again, you may view your independence as important and critical, humanity feels a little different, your independence is a threat to the glorification of its essence. Humanity does not care for your individuality and why should it if all it accomplishes is a reduction of feeling, touching, sensing, emotional growth and even that disgusting thing we call learning. I might take the time to point out that learning is not all bad, especially if it turns out, as the evidence might point out, that the universe is indeed not that interested in humanity and may have acquired a great degree of separation from us, and that independence could easily imply that humanity may go extinct and the universe would not care of it. Interdependencies are magnifiers while individualities are inherently small and unstable. Homogenization is most desired but issue might be taken with the type of homogenization that occurs. Where is my coffee?

Things that are not alike are allowed a degree of separation that may invite mutual destruction when these two disparate things come into contact with one another. For instance the similarity between god and humanity is really not very realistic, whenever god attempts to make contact we kill him. While most people might see this as a terrible and inhumane act the reality is that it is probably the most humane act imaginable under the circumstances, presented when a divine entity attempts to enter terrestrial life. First, it is obvious that god prefers heaven-type environments, god wants to recreate this type of environment everywhere so that he can go anywhere he likes and be safe and happy. But humanity has resisted because that is the right thing for humanity to do. And resistance here is appropriate because god is trying to appropriate us, to make us into atoms of god and while that is good for god, and at some level it might be good for us, it is not the us that we recognize and certainly not the essence which we are most naturally given to assume. Humanity is humanity, and when god comes down and sees the magnificent energy and life force, god wrongly assumes that he can metamorphose us into god essence and magnify his existence. Unfortunately we revolt against this and crucify god or kill him or refuse to let him into our spirits. Important to realize here is that we have a spirit without god, there is no need for our spirits to share in holy matrimony with a god thing, the god thing is composed of its own holy spirit and the conversion of our supra-energy into its essence is the enactment of holy conquering ambitions. Of course god may not see it as such, god may see it as a kind act, to vanquish the ways and forms of our humanity, god may factor that such is a positively enlightening path for us all. God is therefore not objective, when god touches our objectivity he finds blood and spikes. And you might say why is it so easy to kill god? Because we are largely divorced from his essence, it is not something endemic to us, and so god becomes an easy target in our habitat. If god were instead successful and coerced us to live in heaven and behave accordingly, we would then be venerable and “preyable.” Prey and pray obviously imply the same thing. God’s bullets are prayers, the rosary is you counting yourself out.

Of course, don’t get all mad at god, for what god does is what we all do; the difference is merely in the essence and not in the methodology. You have opted to be a human essence and as such it would be a betrayal of you to pursue anything higher or lower or even or dimensionally opposed to this essence. I mean that if you could convert yourself into god you wouldn’t be here, and the transformation to the god essence requires your death in this life. Your desire in this existence is purely based on your human aspirations as they rise from the desire energy that surmounted the obstacle of irrational nothingness. Transformations, while duly interesting and fascinating, are neglected by the laws of the universe. Hence the reason why you might be dissatisfied for a long time before reaching the essence which you truly desire but have not the belief in you to exist.

It is this dissatisfaction which creates your individuality. Your universal consciousness realizes that the universe is a treasure chest of infinite and wonderful possibility, somewhere within you is the possibility and hence the reason why you could be anything or any entity within the universe, and it does not confine you to just this universe, deeper still within the prime of the cosmic is your energy to be in any dimension and any universe and of course, even in the nothingness, even in the nothingness. So it is without doubt that your escape or desire sentiments are genuine, at some level in some dimension, the question is can you get there from here, and the answer is fatally NO!

Sorry to be the one to tell you this, hope I haven’t spilled your coffee, but the jolt was necessary because while the universe does not have laws that can not be broken, it does have processes that once started are based on their energy of limitation and energy of desire. The energy lemmatization is based on the desire energy that harvested your existence. In your case, I can factually say that your desire energy was rather miniscule and this is due to the obvious human apparition that you are. You were born into your humanity because that was the energy of desire that you had to exchange for existence. Had you had infinitely more energy you could have been a neutrino or a photon, my more preferred existences, but no, you cashed in your desire energy chips before they were worth critical mass and so instead of being a vibrant quasar you are a simmering energy human slipping back to the nothingness almost faster than you’ve arrived.

Now you are here, what to do? What to do with you? Well I think it right to inform you that the cosmic, once it acknowledges your existence, records it in a universal time table that is most difficult to erase, in short, once an essence has acquired existence, it is much easier for the essence to exist yet again, and this even if it has gone extinct. By this measure a dinosaur has million trillion more chances of existing again than any other thing that has never existed. Equally, and I think for you more harrowing, the cosmic history of existent essence, while a great affirmer is also a great denier. Your cosmic energy leaves an imprint, not only in the universe but also within you, and this imprint is precisely what governs reincarnation, you are more likely to reincarnate than to be born something else, and this is true for all the entities in the universe, it is always easiest and most common for you to be the last essence thing that you were. Breaking this weird loop is tough stuff, and what it requires is most humorous.

See if you don’t like it here, as I don’t, then you probably don’t want to come back, and you might not want to be a human in any other humanity for humanities are bound to be very much the same everywhere in the universe, essence follows an asymmetrical symmetry, that is things are much the same though the character and terrain might vary a bit. Bloody indeed, then, if you don’t like it here, there is only one way for you to get out. You have to be more here, more here, you have to immerse yourself in the cauldron of existence, and get deep into being and deeper yet into your humanity and only after you dig yourself to the core of what is the nature of your current being, only then might you be able to get out!

Why this torturous process, because it is your desire energy that brought you here stupid! You wouldn’t be here had you not desired it, and the universe acts out your wish, but then it makes you live it all the way or and it won’t cancel it out. Remember when you were kid and you would get bored with the toy that you most had wanted and your parents would just get you another different toy and so on… the universe is not as imbecilic as your parents, you make a wish and you get to live it out like it or not. And since the universe has its own imperatives, which are more gargantuan that you are and which have their own time tables, what you desire does not always coincide with the best of times for the chosen essence manifestation. The most common incongruity in the universe is the appearance of an essence in a disjointed time of desire. I might have decided and desired to be a human but I must say being born in the cold war, post-existentialism and during the rise of capitalism and materialism was not on the menu. Still that is what I got, and you think it ok, yet not for me it isn’t, but that is what I get to keep. Now I don’t want to reincarnate, I don’t want to come back here, and so what am I to do?

I could just do as many do and exit quick via suicide. Or I can deny that I am human and say that I come from another planet, or I can just alienate society and humanity in general and become a hermit. Ironically, while all these things appear a sure escape mechanism they are actually the most bound to keep me here within the parameters of humanity. A hermit, the most distant thing from society is the most likely to reincarnate. Nothing keeps you here more than not living out the here situation. Suicide is sure to be the beginning point of another reincarnation. You get locked into your desire energy position by the cosmic and you can’t get out until you live the condition out, and the universe does not care about your misery, angst, drama or manic depression. The universe does not acknowledge that you could have desired to be something that makes you unhappy, the universe does not imagine that you might not have selected your parents, wrong, the universe knows how much energy of desire powers any creation and so it knows that if it happened, if it came to pass there had to be infinite local desire for it to be and the universe does not allow for any alterations, even as time and dimension can alter and wreak havoc upon your existence.

And so it is my good friend, that you must acknowledge your existence in relationship to humanity and not your individuality, be a hermit and cycle back into existence infinitely, the less you touch this world the less likely you are to ever touch another world. The less you appreciate your being the less likely you are to stop touching it, you will forever be moribund within the loop of this denied existence. And this is because you can not deny what you desire once the desire has manifested itself. Accept then you the fact of your congregation, be yourself, live out this desired existence, and as you so fuse yourself into humanity, with all the energy that you have within you to be a part of the humanity which is all the energy you had to desire, then immerse yourself in it, and as you fulfill your internal desire, the immensity of the fulfillment, your original desire is wasted away. That is correct, living out your original desire wastes away the energy and the magnitude and amplitude of that desire, and if you fulfill such within this lifetime, you won’t have to reincarnate, not because the universe will get tired of your repetition, the universe does not acknowledge anything more than once, this life can happen to you endlessly and the universe always records it as a one time event, this is the cosmic being serious, the universe takes you seriously, the repetition is humorless, the universe does not repeat anything, it merely conceives new things over and over again, which somehow never add up to two or three of a kind, always one, everything is treated as a one or a nothing. So why is it that if you live out your desired being essence, you get to get out? This is the trick of tricks, it is because the desire has been exhausted within you, you are the only one that can create your desire condition, it is your desire that creates from the nothingness. Just because you do not have knowledge of it, you so wanted to be here that you are here, and it is impossible to change primordial desire because it is the easiest default form of expression, it is what everything in the universe remembers that makes you keep on coming back, the only way to force the universe to see you and recognize you and create you in a different light is by way of your pure energy desire being made wholly different, and the only way desire can be erased is by fulfillment, once fulfilled desire dies completely.

That is all.

World Essence

You get fat! You wonder why you get fat, the universe is a cauldron of energy, you are storing it, and you are storing it because you are not releasing it, passing it on, and or you might have a voracious lover that is making you fat. Lovers transfer energy onto each other, the transference takes place mostly while making love, but tiny amounts are transferred with proximity and serve as chains which cling together when distance separates lovers, family, friends, acquaintances and even strangers. When you are tuned to your lover, this energy fixes your position always in relationship to the loved one, or loved ones. It is what causes your belly to ache when you transgress the cardinal laws of the relationship, it is what induces an emotional gulping ache when there is a tragedy, it is what grows the euphoric soul of those feeling each other within.

Energy arches between lovers and loved ones. More so between lovers, lovers form an energy loop, the energy loop aches or joys, but it really just feels everything happening between the loved entities, enhancing perception and creating a larger world essence.

World essence is fundamental to the nature of being, and it is how we actually learn things without learning them. Energy arcs through the entire human race, there isn’t any clear cut separation between a human being on the north pole and one on the south pole. Even a man on the moon is chained by invisible energy constituents all the way back to earth. You can cross that energy arc from any point behind the traveled path and it will echo both your presence and the former presence of the being that traveled through.

The energy that you are leaves a trail where ever it goes, and that trail is how we connect to everyone we haven’t met, it is possible to know more people than we know we know. Their histories crash into our field of being, and constantly transfer knowledge, cosmic energy and essence awareness. The more paths we cross the greater our world view, the greater our awareness, the clearer our comprehension. We must cross the path of every human, connect, connect.

When arcs of world essence crisscross they reveal what was before an unknown, they expand the bridge through which humanity and the universe meet us, they draw greater and greater awareness as one human meeting another is an adulterated essence now really more than one; the increase continues, and the growth and comprehension is exponentially increased with each person that you meet. The surest way to engorge is through the mystification of your human experience. Mystification occurs only through touching humanity. How you touch them, through contemplation, through kindness, or by simply crossing their life arc, is irrelevant, experiencing humanity mystifies.

Mystification is a complex phenomena that would be impossible to explain with the mere laws of physics. Best I can explain it is through an indirect explanation, the greater your sense of mystification the less your need for knowledge, there is no grater danger to knowledge than mystification. When you touch humans you acquire a intuitive comprehension which obliterates knowledge. It becomes ridiculous to be so pedestrian, only the mystic does not ridicule knowledge, it doesn’t occur to the mystic that knowledge is something to disdain, the mystic simply does not live the condition of knowledge.

Mystification is a danger to technology. Today they are working on perfecting the infamous Operating System. The operating system, as you must know, is what works all the pulleys and cogs that make a computer function input, process and output. It is the heart and the brain all wrapped up in one. More and more centralization is attempting to make the operating system everything, all the files that were different, photo files, word processing documents, sound and graphic files will all look the same and be treated more or less the same, except when it comes to presentation, and the climax of this orgy will arrive when your computer will know everything about you, tell it to whom it needs to tell it, plan your day for you, gather all your business partners, and keep track of where in the building you are so that the nearest computer to you will offer you all the games or work files that it knows you need. And so all these brilliant and very knowledgeable people are racing to create this know-it-all systems, and the more they do this, they come into contact with more and more of the world’s peoples which translates to a slow but certain mystification, resistible only through the accumulation of knowledge but equally knowledge is eroded by human emotional contact, which increases, however gradually, mystification. Which translates that it is entirely possible for future operating systems and future technologies, nano-technology included, and sadly also the ever intriguing super-conductors and quantum qbits, entirely possible that when they are mature enough to be functionally beneficial and cost effective, entirely possible that they will be made useless by mystification.

Perhaps fusion could survive, it seems largely none-technological, perhaps that is why fusion has been so difficult to develop, because it is largely technologyless, which is why the scientist haven’t figured fusion out. Fusion then must too wait for mystification to occur. Now you are aware that mystification occurs by way of incessant interaction with other human beings, and this interaction is currently taking place through and because of technology, which invariably will give rise to mystification which will render technology obsolete, specially when it perfects itself, because all perfection requires massive concentration and massive interaction to occur. Blink. Blank.

Thought Of The Moment

Where you need to think I don’t. Where you need to reason, I don’t. The reason is very simple, my heart thinks on its own, in a way that, not to parallel what others have said, but merely to state a truth, the heart thinks in ways that the brain can’t but it produces better or same results.

When I attack reason, or the ability to think I am not attacking because it is bad I am attacking it because it is not a primary cause. Insolent as that might sound, for you and I know that a primary cause might not be able to study itself hence the mind. So you have this mind to study the primary cause, only study gives you something else, not the thing itself but an approximation of some of its characteristics. However it is doubtful that these characteristics are central to the theme because the thing studying the thing is a product of the thing it is studying. The inward looking element distorts all possible realities infinitely.

When I attack thought I am not attacking it because I am killing a portion of myself, I am not thought, thought is a part of me which I have developed but in no way is it going to kill me to eliminate thought because thought is not endemic to me even as thought needs me to exist for the very simple reason that I created it, but that creation was in no way mandatory nor equally and vitally a benefit to me. One can create things that are not good for the self or for the humanity. The complicated intermesh of intersecting desires mandates that motors that churned out grievances and merely add disturbance to any system or entity are the norm. One could easily argue that the human race is merely a process of self correction gone bad. Thought, certainly hints more at the err of our ways rather than at the benefit we process for the universe and our community.

See it is that simple, thought doesn’t need to exist, for me it is doubtful that cats don’t think, they think a little bit I am sure of it, but largely they live their lives out with what appears to be a failed attempt at thinking something through. Which is why they can stare indefinitely at dripping water from a faucet and each time they seem to be beginning the process of what is this and why does it hit my cat head when I go to grab it with my jaw and paws. It is to me quite possible to imagine that cats are stuck in a moment of initial thought processing without any clue how to get to logical process and results. It is even more possible to imagine than an amoeba hasn’t given anything any thought.

You sit there and you read this and you say, is it possible that an amoeba hasn’t given anything any thought? Of course you don’t do that, you intuitively know it, you don’t even have to think it, to you and most of humanity these things do not give anything any thought, we are unique in that we think, or so we think and it is not a grand surprise that it is thought that tells us that we are thinkers and that this is unique and wonderful. In fact it is safe to say that we suspect that every other living creature doesn’t really think. Shouldn’t we critically examine the fact that at least 99 percent of living creatures appear not to think? Not necessary perhaps eh. It is possible to imagine that maybe most species have opted out on doing the gig of thought, maybe thought isn’t that happening; and you might argue “but we are the most successful species, we are killing everything else, so they can’t be that smart in opting out of thought.” But, and this is the wonderful reality, but then it is possible that by being successful at repeating and increasing life we could be being unsuccessful in another dimension of existence which might be more affordable and desirable and perhaps that is why the animals don’t bother much with resisting extinction. Of course this is an unthinkable; it might be unthinkable because maybe thought is not cherished in that other dimension.

So it is that perhaps the worst of it is simply this, that thought is a successful bad creation and that most organisms don’t bother to generate it because they fear it more than they value its benefits, which might be, in the end, none. Thought might be a deadly virus that infiltrates its host by causing it to imagine the benefits of the examined life. Regardless of how you chose to use it, thought might be a fatal disease because it rarely seems to care about its environment or the torments that thought causes its host; thought is purely self centered and absolutely selfish in its aims to control.

Finally thought can not study the essence itself that created it, self examination is impossible but self examination through a self extracted objective and self assured reasonable dominion is unlikely to yield a useful case study of the creature human or of the essence desired energy which comprises humanity and further down that rope the nothingness which is infiltrated and obviated by desired energies.

In summary there is nothing more likely not to make sense that not to think at all and that we do not need thought as much as thought needs us. Which is a lot.

Extremes Are Tiny

Most people imagine perfection as the ultimate. The ultimate and best of whatever it is, the reality is a little different, perfection is distorted by its association with universals. Everything that congregates around the perfection makes it imperfectly balanced at its own expense. When discussing the perfection one can’t escape discussing the only exemplar to perfection, God. The immaculate adorable precious being that knows everything, is everywhere and never dies and worst, because he is perfect never changes. Never changing has to be one of the clearest signs of perfection, is that the thing does not have to change and that because it does not have to change it is superior to its environment if not wholly out of touch with it.

Perfect things by their very perfection must isolate themselves in order to retain the purity of their perfection. Perfect things have no need to mingle, in fact mingling might contaminate them and destroy the perfection. It is this premise which causes religious zealots to want to isolate from the pagans and induces them to prefer weddings between those of mirroring moral and religious principles. The obtainment of perfection is thus an sterilization which makes the perfection untouchable by the surroundings. At least in principle this must be so, God can not be altered by a catalyst, a single individual regardless of how saintly is not able to change the constitution of God. God is impervious to influence, he can not fall victim to the whims of the times. Perfection is impregnable.

This lack of capacity to mutate, and the lack of adaptability makes perfection very demanding upon its surrounding environment. If the perfection can not mutate or adapt, if it has to remain the perfection then it must bleed everything else around to death. This is because the perfection must convert everything around it to its mindset and to its character structure. Perfections don’t eat because they convert. Perfections don’t digest because they don’t consume they amass, it is the Chinese checkered board, you want to have more of one of the two colors, black or white, by passing over the pieces you sweep them to change into your black or white character, but it is not a violent change, it is a conversion, the piece becomes the character of the sweeping influence. This is the sumptuously majestic perfection the more your environment is like you the less you have to consume it because you are the environment, the environment cycles through itself, the entity affirming energy is acquired throughout the emulsifying composition.

The universe is a perfection, if you look at it from the perspective that the universe can die a few suns and sweep away infinite quantities of matter into blackholes, and that the universe orbits around itself in grand unanimity even as it seems clearly compose of disparate entities they are all congruent to the fabric universe and are the perfection of the universe in that they continue to persist seemingly for eons without changing much or so at least it is apparent to us seeing it from the perspective that the signature of stars seems so consistent from one humanity to the next. Bottom line, you can’t get to be a universe unless you are largely a perfection. The universe is consistently itself.

The question that begs asking is why we can see the perfection we call universe and why we can not see the perfection we call God? Perhaps the universe is less perfect than god and perfection merges into invisible dimensions which may form the essence of things that are visible. One would certainly want the spiritual world to be more that the time-matter-energy oneness composition Universe. Is god within the universe or does he extend beyond its borders and dimensions? Flatly I don’t have an answer for this, I do consider both the entities, Universe, God as perfections of their idealic sense of self representation. Neither you nor I are going to challenge the form and nature of the universe, we are a subcomponent of it, it appears that while the universe may need us to feel it and desire it so that it continues to persist in its sense of existence, it is also imaginable that the universe can and does largely exist without paying much attention to us, which implies that we are not fundamental entities to the conceptualization process of what we call universe. In fact a universe might require a god more than it might require human existence, this I say though human existence might be a requirement for the creation of a god thing, that is that in order for god to evolve into existence he might have to first start out as a humanity, and it is only once that humanity becomes a god thing that it endemically grows within the infirmity of the universe. But after the god essence becomes a God it does not need neither humanity nor its devotion because it becomes a self embodied perpetual spiritual motion entity.

The implications of this magical possibility are severe for a humanity. Any humanity that can not become a God entity is doomed! Which makes it all the more interesting because their might be as many God possible compositions as their might be humanities, that is the God building primal elements which may lead to the composition of the thing we call God. Of course the humanity itself does not realize that it is evolving into a God entity perfection, it may actually believe that it is all important and that God will work for it and protect it and bless it, and forgive it, but the God thing is not aware of the humanity that will compose it, because the God thing extinguishes and better said sheds the humanity that forms its divine essence. When the humanity becomes the God entity, it is no longer a humanity and while on the process of making itself a God entity all humanities would naturally be endemically atheists!

It might not help you any to imagine that you are just a worker ant building the edifice from which a God thing will rise, and that thing wont be anything like you are only it will be because you were! Makes you love history more but not the eventual posterior happenings. The reason why you are evolving into such an unrecognizable entity its because you are a perfectly imperfect entity. And imperfect entities are always trying to perfect themselves which unknowingly brings about their own demise.

But not to worry for perfection too has a problem and this is the root of what we are addressing here, not your problem but the inherent instability brought about by a perfection which must be by nature at war with anything that is not like it, which is why all perfections seek to make everything like they are. The universe must worry about anything that is outside of it, the universe must swallow everything in its vicinity. The composition of infirmities is always tinny no matter how grandiose, because there is always an external that is defined by the perimeter of “entity”. Which is why the extreme of perfection is so tiny even as it is an agglomeration of varied entities that become the entity. This is all so beautiful eh!

Many people, sadly, Rosa included and specially so, believe that capitalism has not reached its perfection. They believe this because they see all the flaws in its fabric, but capitalism is a perfection merely in that it largely has eliminated resistance to its cause vital! Perfection can not be measured in any other way until the outmost perfection is obtained by an entity, which Capitalism can’t obtain because it will evolve into something else, and evolution, by its very nature, mandates incomplete perfection. This is to say that Capitalism is almost irresistible, people and their societies are more likely to clamor for it than not, when a thing eases resistance to such a degree it largely becomes immune to external forces that may compete against it, and thus they will propagate themselves more swiftly which will cause them to reach their point of evolution into something else much sooner than not. The less antagonism that capitalism acquires from the social forces the faster it is speeding towards its own demise. Just as it is likely that the Universe is about to become something completely different and just as it is likely that God due to its entity of self perfection is highly exposed to either extinction or to a brutal evolution which might make God merely the working ant of something with more grandeur than God; just like that, it is imaginable that Capitalism is not the end thing itself of any idealistic economic system, and so it must perish much as its feudal ancestors have done. Of course today there is nothing more alive than capitalism, equally that dictates that there is nothing closer to its own demise!

The future is always different than contemporaries dream it to be. One can’t imagine the Romans imagining a future like the one we have today, the Internet was not a visionary Roman ideal, and when I speak of the Romans you don’t imagine for long that I am speaking of the Romans as they are today, your cognition and sensibilities tell you that I am speaking of the great Romans that once were, a far cry from the Rome of today. You know evolution can be a cruel thing then, eh.

Today one of the least credible things I can say, is that the future will not be composed of knowledge and technology; yet the very essence of the future, as it has come to be known, mandates that it will be completely different than anything our expectations can formulate. Based on pure intuition we can conclude that the future will be voided of all technology as we know it, that it will have done away with science and even democracy (that is as we know it) and capitalism, and that our progeny will think us wholly barbarian for measuring wealth and productivity or caring so blindly about the raw antagonism of individuality.

Remember then to measure a perfection more from an ease of flow, a lack of resistance, without an opponent Dinosaurs perfected their certainty of identity and idealize their absolutist destiny, and it is then, at the height of their invincibility, that the propensity of their demise punctuated itself to extreme potentials.

Cleanliness & Symbiotic Relationships

I am probably the least quotable person of history in history but I am going to dare say that civilization has never been better sterilized from its environment than in these our times. We are better equipped to manage the slaughter of game in a clean fashion, our houses have fewer spiders, less rats, and dirt has been vacuumed out, our toilets flushed, and rubbish is disappeared underground or incinerated; and we must not forget that today we shower everyday and the water has been chemically rinsed of amoebas and minerals. Overall, our ability to clean ourselves, our homes and our things, has been a successful adventure that has separated us from rats, germs, our shit and disease; so the campaign to cleanliness, while holy in origin, has managed to separate us from bad health.

Well or so it would seem. Things are just a bloody bit more complicated and for us, perhaps it could be a terrible thing, perhaps by being obsessive about our cleanliness we have managed to sterilize ourselves into a bubble child existence, whereas now we are perhaps more prone to die of a gentle virus than survive it through contaminated immunity. Having significantly less exposure to the environment we are certainly not increasing the chances that our progeny will have all the antibodies to outdo a viral tautology. The concept is absolutely religious and metaphysical in origin, cleanliness is something that is strangely mustered by an immature spiritual life that peers into the metaphysical, and through inadequate interpretation, blunders the sterility of the metaphysical (which doesn’t eat, doesn’t shit, and doesn’t have to breath oxygen), blunders that metaphysical translation into our everyday lives. Suddenly we can not eat pigs because God doesn’t like pork, though he sure made prosciutto mighty tasty, and suddenly we have to pray before we eat the slaughtered beast while ritualistically cleansing it of its essence, that is, its bestial spirit!

Yet it is the damn spirit of the beast, as some Indians correctly believed, that we ought to consume and transform within us! It is the spirit of Bear and Tiger and even, Mule that we hunger for, to put their life force in us, that is what we are actually doing when we are eating lamb or cow or rabbit. That we may have chosen the least wild of beasts to consume because they were easier prey may not have been the brightest spiritual of horizons to aim for, but hey one gets worn-out from tiger hunting; I am not here to argue that I would rather hunt a tiger over a cow, I am game for easy prey, though everyone out there must agree that it would be much better to have tiger farms, and tigerboys than the plain and dull cattle farms and cowboys of today. It is the damn spirit of the thing essence that we are trying to munch on, and it is perhaps a reflection of the poverty of our feed and beings that we are consuming more and more chickens and even becoming vegetarians. Perhaps the best humor of it all is in that the most spiritual of peoples have almost an inherent tendency to become vegetarians, something which was bound to happen with the birth of monotheism which doomed us to consume only one god, such was the birthing poverty of our consuming spirits!

You don’t have to use too much logic to get into the spirit of vegetarians, you can’t get lost at that exit but you must question if eating a vegetable is more humane than eating veal. The vegetable has chosen to be non-aggressive; it ranks a diminutive stature within corporeal existence, while a calf, nicely trapped and fed in a cage, has chosen to be an all out consumer solely out to get fat off the land and even farting massive amounts of pollution into our atmosphere. Eat a cow and save the environment, only in this, even we can not beat them because the more we eat anything, by virtue of population growth, the more the thing we eat will have to be grown or raised within the environment, (save that we become those monks that contemplate existence, living on one grain of rice per year,) but be clear here, vegetables have chosen to be mostly harmless, though I don’t claim to understand their chemistry, so why eat something so bloodless and spiritless as a vegetable? Do vegetarians really think that spiritless diets are holier? Rigorously it must be observed that vegetables are by nature less spiritual than cows, this is why we eat more cows, they are more here, their essence is more here, they have invested more energy of desire to be here than have carrots, mushrooms and broccoli! With the only possible exception of succulently anxious asparagus, cows obviously have more spirit hence the reason we, not being willing to farm tigers, tigers being so high of spirit, aren’t willing to be farmed like chickens or cows, so we have chosen the easiest spiritual consumption route towards greater spirit.

Skeptics, who needs them, but skeptics will argue that while historically there is evidence of ritualistic consumption of animals, witches understood the benefits of eating “light spirits” toads, rats, grasshoppers, and higher up the spiritual ladder snakes. The Christians liked to look the other way on animal sacrifices but a few goats did not escape their attention, and I hear that the Romans may have been big on bull sacrifices (which seems appropriate for a civilization that really wanted to sacrifice the world), but skeptics will argue that today there isn’t a civilized people that commit ritualized sacrifice. I don’t know if you have been invited over to a nice dinner at a friend’s house, but those of you that have will take notice that in many households there is a prayer before supper. This is certainly a carryover from the prenuptial ritualistic slaughter. But modern ritualistic endeavors are more obvious in a less observable fashion; after all civilized society isn’t and couldn’t be ritualistic. Still consider dinner at my in-laws, garlic is practically given center stage (it used to be a favorite with witches too) garlic is rubbed, injected, smothered, ecclesiastically cut to finer and finer status, until it is able to penetrate the atom and quantum tunnel into the soul. Then there is the leg of lamb, with sanguinary and vitriolic-sharp knife cuts it is antagonized into an olive oil and sage revival, then thermometer metered so that the temperature cooks it without burning the spirit within, and its juices are silently recycled via a plastic greenhouse. Lamb itself is punctured so that it will, cruelly, reabsorb itself, after which it is served with mashed potatoes, which are themselves, for unadulterated consistency, covered in gravy sautéed from lamb’s secreted juices. The table is finely set, and red wine (the only proper denomination) is served and toasted before the leg of lamb falls prey to our gnashing molars and much satisfied taste buds. Then, a very rich sugary dessert is served, to erase, wipeout, any and all trace of lamb flavor from our palate, so as to assure God, if he decides to check, that we never slaughtered one of his hoofed beasts. Let there be no doubt that the ritualistic is buried in the intricacies, elegance and delicacy of today’s cooking

Now we must return to our Monk eating the grain of rice and surviving for a year on that mostly contemplative diet. Experimentally I would like to clear the way for this to be a believable truth as opposed to where it mostly sits now, at least in the Western world, as an unbelievable truth. Allow me to explain. Monk is contemplating in the metaphysical realm, that reality is not based on symbiotic consumption, interchange and metamorphoses, as it is with those of us, mostly all of us, that are living in one dimension that is mostly capitalist and republican and showy and not much all else; our one grain of rice per year eating Monk, lives mostly outside of this planet and outside of its most common dimension and so it stands to reason that Monk does not need to eat like we eat because he doesn’t get consumed by our dimension at the same rate that we get consumed by it. Time and rate of physical consumption, which can lead to perishing, is different for Monk, mostly it is the time of the eternal metaphysical dimension that Monk is experiencing through contemplative meditations, so while we think a year has passed by, Monk is really just experiencing an English afternoon tea and eating a grain of rice because it is more civilized and sacred than chewing his fingernails.

Clearly Monk doesn’t need to eat the grain of rice, Monk is not hungry in our dimension, he is just eating the grain of rice to show off, a vagrant need from the part of him that is living in our dimension. For some reason academics and journalists and the populace in general are more enamored with the idea that Monk ate only a single grain of rice than if he didn’t eat anything. This is probably because the grain of rice makes it a more believable truth, even people like me that have never seen a Monk live on only one grain of rice are willing to believe that, if he ate at least 1, one grain of rice, he has had proper nourishment, digestive processes were not ignored and just maybe, since we are a bit envious, just maybe Monk will experience a severe bout of diarrhea.

Aside from the obvious synergy of envy which we lay on Monk, Monk has little interaction within our world and so he is less consumed by it and we are less consumed by him, that is to say that our interaction with Monk is minimal which is why so few of us have ever seen or lived with a Monk that only eats one grain of rice. This is critical, we need to comprehend the realties from which we are absent, and of course the lack of symbiosis makes comprehension virtually inaccessible. Detached from Monk we subtract ourselves from belief just like we have detached ourselves from the dirt and the germs and viruses that are so inherently a part of our dimension; only our disassociation, caused through civilizizing processes, ends disrupting our connectivity to, imagine this, ends disrupting our connectivity to this WORLD, our world, not the world of Monk, but the world that we experience and inhabit suffers rejection, and suffers our animosity through our physical cleansing rituals. These superficial and worse, manual disassociations reduce the significance and depth that the environment can impugn upon our perception and senses. We can then go on a rampage to mutilate environment, having no associated utility value within the artificial habitats that we, the bubble children, have created to safeguard us from our built-in weaknesses.

Obviously Monk doesn’t care about the environment because he doesn’t live here, even as he is in being a local essence. When Monk dies he won’t know it, won’t realize his own death because he is largely someplace else; this is why Monks so often come up with philosophies for life that have no bearing upon our reality, and people are stupid enough to follow them largely due to the lure of their very impossibility, which only adds that exotic charm we all just inanely love. Common existence, the reason we like cows, they are more like us, common existence of course is the most appreciated even as we seek every other alternative, in the end we are mostly cow spirits and this includes those of you that were born in the year of the dragon.

We come to the egregious conclusion that humanity appears to be distancing itself from its environment through the conceptional realization that knowledge and sterility are all important. As we accomplish this (and we will accomplish it - the universe has no laws against foolishness), we come closer to depriving ourselves of the magical interactions which inform us of the goings on in the universe. The isolation from the mud of the earth makes us lonely, and yet, from our point of view this is healthy. The reason why we have such an opinion of the matter is because we have been grown to believe in our superiority over the environment, and over any and all species. We further believe that only God is superior to us, and God doesn’t eat, not even a grain of rice, and he lives forever.

Our agility to distance ourselves from the endemically symbiotic universe is due to a predicament with our point of reference.

Energy of Being Interactions

All intelligent readers, that is to say readers that have to know because they don’t feel, will quickly take notice that while I have been busy condemning all the philosophies and theories that promulgate mono, individual, singular, isolated, and credentialed on a single concentric idea, while I have also made the same mistake because I have dispersed the universe, the beings and the gods, matter and energy, all from the nothingness. Which makes the nothingness Pangaea, or the center of the big bang or something akin to a single source creation myth lake. All this is a valid argument but like all arguments also invalid.

According to the energies of desire, that spring from the nothingness and gather momentum and amass like snowballs into an irreversible but perishable conditions which represent entities when they so choose to embody themselves, the desire itself is not a desire constituted on one basic truth or one central subject, or critically, not an intertwined agglomeration of representations. Rather the desire is isolated, immediately frozen in its condition, perspective and aspect, so that it can not violate itself and become something else as long as it is what it is, at least not without some considerable alteration to status as being or subject, and not without massive amounts of cataclysmic reactions. In accord with this I mean to say that your energy of desire, being a fanatic in its quest for representation, commits you, commits your neighboring entities, and commits the universe to maintain the condition that you are born into being, or any other condition as it might have desired itself, even if the desired condition turns out to be harmful to the entity which it is.

A rock tries to stay a rock and everything around the rock recognizes the rock essence and admits to maintain it in its conditional state of being, with its bound up limitations. The rock essence defines itself in permanence and a disciplined disposition which embraces the idea of solace and indifference. Which is why a rock is so easy to throw at some one, because of its indifference, even to its own disintegration by way of shocks; this sort of indifference is fundamental to a rock essence, and it is the sort of difference that guarantees that the rock environment remain much the same for hundreds of thousands or billions of years, rock have permanence due to endemic indifference, after a while, if you are not trying to change your environment, your environment will leave you alone and mostly forget about you, save for some resistance which it might feel, and may react to with eonal reflections.

The universe in turn has a silent and agreed duty for tolerance, hence the reason why it is made up of so many different entities and beings. The tolerance of the universe is what makes it so large, and huge, and so immense and so long lived, and so out of the way of everyone and everything even as everything is in it, though nothing can say it has touched its surface or limits, the entity of the universe then, consist largely in its lack of repugnance towards most things, its high threshold for tolerance, and its lack of antibodies, the universe doesn’t attack you! This, that the universe doesn’t attack you is sort of interesting, but it may in part be due to the fact that entities and essence acquisitions may themselves try to destroy you, being they parts of the universe, but the universe itself doesn’t possibly consider you dangerous enough to destroy the universe. Though one could destroy a universe through a conception of desire which could plausibly cause a universal implosion long enough to squash the resistance that the universe and everything within might feel. The leading prevention program for this sort of internal madness is that the desire entity would have to be within the confines of universe, and hence able to suicide the universe requires a personal level of recklessness that would have to out survive anything the universe could represent. Which is why the universe is almost wholly fool proof, though that is not to say that the universe could not suffer an unforeseen accident and begin to collapse from all sides oddly! The problem with this is that at any given time, most of the things in the universe are pursuing their desire for presentation, the things that are dying within the universe usually appear to be dying against their will, though it is probably truer that they are dying because they will it, which implies that the universe will not react against them nor day against the universe. Only a thing that does not want to die and is dying can hurt the universe but for the most part even these types of death denial entities will have a tendency to be minimal within the constrains of the cosmic entity.

Retrograde that thought and you can imagine that there is a zeal of approval that comes with arriving at existence and that marks an entity through the course of its existence, even if this existence suffers from the most primitive form of change, known to Darwinists as evolution.

An entity isolates the portion of space, time, matter and energy that is theirs to isolate and it warrants the surrounding environment to console itself by accepting the essence representation, as a part of the environment. This leads to a caustic denial of expansion and propagation, or at minimum creates a limitation which would require massive amounts of energy to overcome, reduce or destroy. Which is why an entity remains largely unchanged from phase one unto death; death being a catalyst for genuine and fundamental change mandates complete separation from the environment. As entities become accustomed to their surroundings they will fear change and hence attempt to recreate the morphing environment by way of environmental consciousness raising. Hence the reason why environmentalists are a most reactionary constituency. They have fallen in love with a particular version of their surroundings and will seek to create a static condition by harnessing energy to maintain it. Only problem for the environmentalists is that most things go extinct because they want to, they don’t like it here any more, they have lived out their desired idea essence, Dodo bird doesn’t want to return because the desired essence energy that composed Dodo bird got the picture, didn’t like it, and doesn’t want to be in it, at least by natural means. Yet environmentalists might have it in them to use Dodo bird DNA to recreate the Dodo bird symmetry but not the Dodo bird desired essence to inhabit this planet. Besides what is to prevent us from considering that the Dodo bird didn’t kill itself? Perhaps, assuming itself the only supply of food for an essence called cat, Dodo bird might have wanted to extinguish cat, or to make cat miserable by eliminating its favorite food, Dodo bird. This might be the only perfect explanation for Mad Cow disease and the Chicken Fever that overtook Hong Kong, a species, and a group of animals, such as cows or pigs or chickens may hate their host in the food chain so much that they may try to kill themselves so as to discomfort or starve the feeding soprano. Even so conservation gives reactionaries a caring issue to justify their natural tendency not to change. In the end the universe won’t care because the universe doesn’t know to care, and any and all attempts to prevent change will invariably result in failure not because the universe wants change but rather because all entities, even egomaniacs, eventually get tired of being themselves.

The pangenesis dependant universe does not actively interfere in the existence of subjects that represent themselves within its parameters. Entities cannot resist being themselves, they can only die or be killed when they get bored with themselves. The Dodo bird subconsciously imported cats so as to suicide itself and, the cats grieved when they realized what they had done.

Color, Unilaterism & Self Imposed Satisfaction

The maturity of a civilization can only be measured when it exemplifies itself for what it engenders. When a civilization reaches maturity the signs are many, but perfection is not the obvious one. This is because the thing itself does not know that it has perfected its self-essence. It is possible for an entity, a society, a people, a country, to believe that it can be more, that it has not yet matured its potential, that it is in fact, only in its prime, failing thus to realize that its prime is the climax of its effervescence of expression.

A civilization will not comprehend its limitations most when it is at its zenith. Nor, will it obviously realize that from there it is downhill. When we speak of capitalism as waning, we are saying not that it is perfect but that it is as perfect as it is going to get, that neither its fundamental structures or its constituency have the ability to carry it beyond this point with the remaining creative elements within its maximums corporeal. Neither they nor the system which they represent and institute with their actions has the potential to exceed its self-imposed limitations. In the case of capitalism it is obvious that it can only see itself, it refuses to imagine that there is another way, and yet the cause for the rise of capitalism was that it had seen alternatives to dealing with the human condition. When severe economic depressions have hit in the past, capitalism has creatively spent in infrastructure, communications and education so as to buy its way out of depression; The railroads in America initially bankrupted more people than they made rich, in the short term that is; The New Deal was as anti-capitalist as you can get, and yet it is one of the triumphant horns of capitalism, and perhaps more, democracy. The issue is that today capitalism believes that there isn’t an alternative to its economic principles, this new and, for a mature system, appropriately sound inability is one of the symbols of the maturity of capitalism.

There are others, vivid colors, unilaterism, self imposed satisfaction. With self imposed satisfaction Americans build around themselves this idea that, even as things are difficult and not necessarily right, they are at least better than anywhere else. The rest of the world is for sure not as well off as America, and of course this ends up being a self imposed satisfaction because it is not valid in a secular sense, it is a subjective happiness, imposed by the self on the self, with a mental construct that dictates that chicken farmers with a maximum monthly income of 12 dollars, can not be happy cleaning chicken shit. Unilaterism is determinism; this is really how you lock yourself in tight on your current position and assume that ignoring the rest of the world will have its effects, some of them uncomfortable but in the end your will and way will prevail. Maturity does this to people and civilizations. Some of the most boringly interesting arguments I have had over the years have been with seventy year olds, who took a snapshot of the world when they reached the maturity of their forties, and they take it out of their worn out coat pockets, and with musty thoughts show it to you, they are still in black and white, and they show it to you so that you can see how the world is today, and obviously they know, they were there. Color, ah color is the surest sign, I don’t know why, it is not my job to explain prophetic truths, but for some odd reason, evolved civilizations poor or rich (and they can be both and evolved), tend to adopt peacock-like mentalities and display the color spectrum in every fashion. Consider how colorful America is today, they have reached the neon and x-ray spectrum, there are vivid reds and vivid greens, and deep purple green sunglasses challenge the rays of the sun; this is because as spirits mature they become red, which means that mature civilizations blossom with brightness, this is due to confidence and the self inflicted happiness, which somehow condemns them to display themselves, so as to say we are not targets, we do not have to hide, no one can hit us or destroy us and we must show ourselves off to the world so the world may acknowledge our greatness. The flashy materialism overtly sanguinary cars are cherry red, earrings everywhere, the value of uniqueness exasperated by prohibitive cost, designer houses and designer kitchens, and designer food, all blossoming before the coming rut.

I must tell you before you rot that there is nothing wrong with rotting, it is part of a process of change, as my darling Domaine likes to constantly remind me, “death is just change”, she would probably change the name of death to something more politically correct, what do you think of “this is my stop”, but regardless rotting is part of the process which beings of the organic sort (inorganic things apparently don’t die) when the sun runs out of hydrogen the sun is not going to agonize, but organic things seem to suffer a process which outright halts any endearing moment evolution, but there is nothing inherently bad about that, just like there is nothing wrong with blossoming with all force when you reach your systematic maturity as born by your own limitations and your won inability to stay a child forever.

Some of you might say, well true enough, we see the brilliance and radiance of Paris and New York, and yes it does seem like it is a process of maturity which allows them to exploit fashion and character and vibrant and ineffectual psychology, but what would you say of Africa, a continent that has not matured? You obviously know what my response is, Africa did mature, Africa has had many brilliant civilizations, Egyptian, Moroccan, …. These civilizations reflected the continent, and the tribes, which love vivid colors and are the inheritors of mature civilizations, carrying on, with their vividness even as civilization or the expression of their perfection has been lost. The Aztecs and the Incas were brilliant and regal civilizations, so was the more sedated, British Empire.

I hope that gives you something to think about.

Extravagant Infirmities

At the edge of the universe there isn’t any cataclysmic activity.
That should surprise you, one must imagine that the edge of the universe reaches a cataclysmic turmoil where its limitations and its edge and where something else other than the universe begins, be it another universe, the nothingness or something as repulsive as hamburger with eggs. And yet, at the edge of the universe things are rather cosmologically quiet. This is not to say that there isn’t some grand cosmological reaction in relationship to the size of your average headache but in relationship to the chaotic it is, overall a quiet border crossing.

The edge of the universe is monolithic, its perimeter, currently unknown to us, is well monolithic, but it does not cause havoc with the surrounding edges of everything else that it touches, for certainly a universe with a perimeter as large as ours must certainly touch many more things, other universes, the nothingness and things we have not thought about, but our universe relates well to those other entities, and mildly looses energy to them or absorbs some of their energy, or refuses to react and interact, but at the edge of the universe the congruence fits like a gigzag puzzle that has pieces that are missing and so the choreographed event is a eternal missing piece scenario, where we are constantly trying to fit or invade into the other things, entities that are arresting our advances and contrived desire for uniformity.

In brief the cataclysm is defined by us, a supernova or a black whole, in their definitive stages must reconcile themselves to the boring of their existence. Once you have seen a supernova you have practically seen them all. There is nothing gigantic or phenomenal about all this, we are certainly at the roots of the expressed phenomena, even as we are detached from its effects. The implications of these are exotic, there are no exotic events within the confines of the universe, at least none that we can observe in patterns. The exotic cause is substantially less accessible. If the edge of the universe is as large around or jaggedly linear as we suspect, it is common, and the endearing comment here, is that there might not be anything fundamentally unique within the confines of the universe save for our ability to be impressed by it.

It is after you cease to be impressed that you get to the bottom of the infinite.

Irrational Exuberance

When I am digesting the core mantle of the capitalist craze, people always find me a bit repulsive for my lack of taste for the machine that is solely powered by the idea of money. I shall then here address the reason why the idea of money seems so misplaced to me in an existence fueled by the desire; the explanation, at least for some of you, will seem unnecessary beyond the already stated in this first paragraph, the rest of this chapter is written for the others.

When you live in a universe powered by desire we don’t mean that there could not be a universe that isn’t powered by desire energy, it is entirely possible to imagine a universe powered by any number of things, the only thing that is impossible is to imagine a universe powered by money. Nice rhythm there, “powered by money.” It is not then that we are opposed to a universe powered by money, it is that it is impossible to have a universe, something in so grand a scale, financed, supported and propped up by pure raw wealth. Further it is impossible to imagine and even impossible period, to think of the consistent expansion of the human species as powered by money. We would want instead to argue that an inherent desire within the species, to survive, thrive and magnify its feeling of the universe, are what drive us to prosper as a species. We can even imagine that the destruction of other species by us as we civilize the planet is inherent in our blind desire not to understand that the death of living organisms, regardless of species, is detrimental to our cause, and indeed an act of suicide. This is because a species regardless of propensity shares with us the biological real of energies. If we are to beat inorganic material, the most successful manifestation of low energy existences, then we need to maintain biological variety so as to ensure that we may overlord infest all inorganic habitats and prosper control over them. Still, continuing with the overall theme, if we wanted to reduce the human quest to a more basic desire-component, such would be the pro-positive existence of biological creatures. With the understanding that there are times when certain biological elements are going to eat each other because the misery of biology is that it is based on symbiotic consumption, all living things eat living things, and those things that feed off of inorganic material are never going to thrive far from the inorganic material and will be reduced to population limit enforcement by habitat. Besides, if you want to grow up, that is become a complex multicellular organism, you must be willing to eat things that are bigger than you and digest them and feed them too so that they may grow and grow us with them. Regardless of how we get to appoint our progeny a greater sense of destiny, the propagation of species would seem to be better dealt with if we took into greater consideration the success of biology in general.

The question is how does money become such an imperative for existence? Where do we get it that we need to exist via a capitalistic agenda of monetary gain, property rights and intellectual property rights, when the desired condition of any being is automatically transferred and channeled through the medium of humanity to those that are receptive to it, and in so being how can we isolate and quantify individual aims, to monetize them, when individual aims have no bearing without a symbology for humanity.

Anyone reading this will say: “Who said money was everything?” think of it this way, the most important people in the world today are economists, not even scientists can top the notch, economists are the most important people in the world today, and were that not sufficiently wrong and bad and terrible, the most important institutions are central banks and their monetary policy shakes and bakes humanity. Further a field, business matters center all attention on business matters and monetary gain. Keep on going in the same direction and we find that there is really very little motivation without a monetary inheritance. And the monetary idea has a logical and grounded basis, jobs! The creation of labor was an interesting idea, the more interesting idea was the creation of paid labor, and when you pay labor you can then tax their payroll, which is why all the craze about job creation. Governments comprehend that they need to create jobs, the only way to create jobs is to grow the economy, and so every nation state, I like that word, nation state, I don’t know precisely what it means, but a nation state is probably bigger that mightier than a country, anyway every nation state must encumber itself with the idea of perpetual growth.

Now there is nothing wrong with perpetual growth, as long as you have infinite resources, which are first glance look dismal. The earth we now know, is round and therefore its resources are stuck in a loop. Geographically it would have been better if the world were flat, our ancestors were well wishers, when we discovered that the world was round we made it possible to go around the world and around, but all circles recycle geography and you can’t go beyond that! So the fact that the earth is round is a finality of geography which limits resources, further the diameter of the earth, were it fatter could substantially eliminate this problem but the diameter of the earth is not that fantastic a girth, we have managed to populate every continent save the polar caps, and the fact that the earth is mostly covered by oceans and not land, it means that we have been furthered reduced in potential capacity. Of course, there is always the moon colonies, the mars colonies, and the extra solar system colonies and even the orbital colonies, all these allow us to grow a little bit more in this and that direction, but until we find another earth like planet, we are all going to be astronauts per force. Granted, just when one thinks everything has been exhausted and done for and all that is left to eat is tuna, then something new and tremendous happens and whole new potential opens up. So perpetual growth is possible without thinking of current day mineral and especial limitations.

…but, but if we imagine the current economic hysteria, perpetual growth leads to a crash of nation states into each other, the only way for the Americans to expand their economy is to grow it into other economies, that is to crash other economies, it is not sustainable to maintain perpetual growth if you have independent economies, and much less if you only have one economy which would, due to sheer size, grow exponentially. If you look at Asia, Europe and North America you can see these economies as slaming tidal waves buying every consumer and attracting every job, until sundenly they have to decide if to work together as one economy or to attempt to maintain economic separation. If you merge world banking, a necessity if you are going to merge an economy, then the implications are that you immerse economies into one, as is the case in Europe today, the single market is currently destroying country economies, and the persistence of this ideology should generate substantial growth initially, but there will come a point when it will reach saturation, faster than disjointed economies because disjointed economies do not muster resources or the benefits of a single currency, the economically isolated gradient allows for slower growth, but in a combined economy of economies little prevents the markets from restricting themselves, specially due to the greater economies of scale. Undaunted the markets blindly collude to collide into each other at an even faster pace that would ever be imagined.

Economies as they collide into each other will find that there isn’t much love between the sameness of their economic architectures; they will all have fully developed banking systems, currencies would have been normalize by same currency between nations or by well adjusted exchange mechanism that would limit the worth relationship of currencies; intrinsically all developed economies will have it as a rule that their local markets have reached maturity, which translates to external expansion mandates, and this includes the nurturing of external resources as those back home ought to be running at optimum capacity, limiting how much greater output can be gained by further investment. The best mine is the unmined.

Unfortunately the foreign markets with their own economic engines will be reaching high levels of productivity and efficiencies and any association between two separate but enterprising economies will invariably lead to stagnation. They will have to place limits on each others scope of action, how far into each others markets will they allow business to feed, and as these are regulations, man made, they have a tendency to suffocate the progress of the machine but also to cause it to generate adulterated prices and goods, which will abnormalize both markets. Making them thus subject to more human intellectual manipulation which will invariably lead to transparent incoherent finagles.

Labor will continue to compete in price, but the price of labor will stagnate, the lack of dynamics in any market induces descending normalization, until an equilibrium is reached by the natural market forces. Only the economic engines of each region were geared for growth, the stagnation will not be considered an equilibrium but rather a danger to the world economy, capitalism has a growth cap that capitalism refuses to acknowledge, it is this little know cap that mandates a substitute to such economic engines. When capitalism finds that it can not grow it will attempt to alter things, move this here, change that there, add more spirited causes to cause growth to partake again in the economy, and there is always the faith in human ingenuity, a new invention like the steam engine, a new idea like the internet, cut spur growth, at one time we had records, then came tapes, then came CDs, then came DVD, all covering the same market and consumer, the music industry, the music listener, the changing platform made the consumer have to change their listening device and their music collection had to be updated to the new medium, but there is a limit here because you are just dealing with redundancies, save the benefits of digital recordings, or the tapes efficiencies over the record, there remains a clear allusion to sameness and market saturation. The same ill be true for any aspect of advance economies overreaching each others consumers. For all economic engines are more defined by a consumer than they are defined by the type of labor.

The prophetic prediction here is that a new system will come into being, by its very nature the system will not have anything to do with property rights, intellectual property or capital and growth as the driving forces. All those things will have been depleted as they are indeed exhaustible resources. The only reason that capitalism has thrived is because it has given itself exclusive control of these resources, human talent and ingenuity, but the most inconsistent thing is the human talent, at some point human talent unleashes its energies against its captor, how that will unveil itself is yet to be determined, but an ironic fact it is that undaunted economic growth will unchained labor.

Extreme Is Still Attached

Extremism is an interesting thing but that is about all; because exposed in the light of a universe based on congruency even the extreme is normal. Take for instance something as mundane as a radical acid rock band. Lyrics pounding out rebellion, anarchy, and the scatological right to be a misogynist, pedophile, drug addict, is a common theme. A common theme is not radical, but in this case, to add difficulty to our argument why don’t we suppose that hard edged acid rock bands, are indeed at the fringes of extreme expression. That they are a rare breed and not expressing a rather common young adult theme. Assuming this we can then grip the conclusion that they are prisoners of social constraints attempting a breakout. Acid rock is a tunnel for the psychological prisoner. Banging at their own brains acid rock listeners are actually trying to quiet their own brains. The loud banging, beatless music, void of melody, is a hammer to the head to accomplish the banging into a sadistic conspiracy with fellow listeners and musicians; to amplify the agony of restricted expression, and too the chiseling at the tunnel to escape, to find a way out, to reach the other side, acid rock is trying to perforate through to the extreme reality to avoid the painful dullness of averageness.

Unfortunately the extreme is a part of the whole and actually because it has to be, by its very nature; at the extreme it is then where two rather odd and mutually exclusive things occur, at the very extreme is the edge of the entity or object, which implies a retention wall strength, while equally and oddly, the edge is also the most diluted expression of the entity or object. It is near where it can be no more.

With this ruler in hand we can walk over to the acid rock crowd and feel quite at home with them. I am obviously not a fan, and so this is really extremist of me to say that I could enjoy an afternoon of Scum Sucking Pigs poking my eardrums with their toothpick pointed melodies, but with the above ruler, it is easy for me to see that Scum Sucking Pigs have more in common with me than I would like. Though they are radicals of the common they are still radical, which exemplifies an incongruence within the world order as we know it; that they don’t know how to attack it, destroy and much less have a valid alternative is equally obvious, and in so they share much with common individuals that display strong dissatisfaction with the system and yet have no way to express it or hammer out the faults. Perhaps the most strangest of things about acid rock lovers is how naive they are, how gentle, how uniquely self destructive; and yet the imposing perspective that gets expressed is one of radical insensibility.

And that insensibility that gets expressed allows the for the social repression, rejection and contempt of acid rock lovers everywhere. In summary they have been the most active participants nurturing a thrust of social antagonism which is used to denounce and limit their appeal. Without meaning to, but instinctively heading in that direction, acid rock lovers everywhere have created a “standard model” Mecca for radical extremism. Where now discontented individuals can go and form a part of a consensus, which renders them and their ideas harmless to the social order; in reality they are now wholly part of the social order.

In searching for inconsistencies that are genuine, one must always search outside the social or universal order. This is a very difficult thing to do, I am not sure that it is doable, it requires a true objectification which is precisely what no individual or subject can do without first killing the self or the entity attempting to step outside for independent confirmation.

I am then here to state for the record, that all suppositions of extremism are self-defeating, they will naturally be forced to recoil under the pressures that they mount against themselves with their boisterous naiveté. More humiliating, their expression will be allowed and not repressed for it is known that they will invariably collapse under their own alluding weighty matter.

Fancy My Fancy

The door opens to other suppositions, we type our destiny with desire but if so then how can our aims go awry? We are certainly in control of our destiny but the purity of that control is contaminated by the destiny that others harbor for themselves, the universe reaches a compromise, you are living that compromise.

In your way to self perfection you actually assist in corrupting that path even more, others in their own reach for perfection agree with your error and magnify it with you in unison. The err of our ways is conjured by the errors that our antecedents made before us and by those that are immediately due to be born, or have just been born, and they are greater magnified by those that have died leaving them in concrete historical archives.

With the magnificent revenue of history there is no lack of dynamic in the system, which is why we come to erroneous conclusions with such ease. Rational is an erroneous conclusion that has superimposed itself to such gargantuan proportions that it is difficult if not outfight impossible to deny it. -To deny rational is illogical.- inst that something magnificent, if you can’t deny rational how can you test for its inaccuracies? Scientists and fellow logicians alike will tell you that rational can be disproved within the context of logical-rational proceedings. And you might just guess that that is correct, it seems plausible, even probable that rational has the ability, rare in other subjective camps, of self examination.

Hardly likely, a rational conclusion is required for a rational examination; that is you need to have many rational parameters involved in the judgment process to conclude that a rational verdict can vindicate a rational ethereal. In summary, there is no way that rational can judge the rationality of an event, thing, cause or being solely from a rational perspective, and yet that is the very thing that empirical-rational-logical philosophers would want us to believe.

The leading cry of the rationalists has been, if it stands up to experimental proof then it is rational-logical and obviously it can migrate into the encyclopedias of knowledge, where all the things that have been proven true, are allowed to share a repository with all the other things that have been proven truth. Only problem is myth has been found to be false, that is not truth because it can not empirically prove its own impressive existence. God has been found wanting because he or she or it requires faith. Neither a good poem nor a good god can exist under rational parameters. They are beyond rational law and so that law can not suitably judge them. And yet, and yet we are told that all things worthy of knowing and worthy of being used to further the aims of knowledge must pass the empirical logical strainer.

The problem is in the proof, to devise a test that produces proof positive that there is a god is more difficult than to device a test for finding neutrinos. However while theorists are willing to take the existence of neutrinos as factual because they detect third parties that are apparently descendants of neutrinos, they are not willing to take the existence of god as real based on the words of his son Jesus, or for that matter through the voice of angel Gabriel or the blood tears of the virgin Mary. It requires a very-ultra sensitive detector to detect things that are the scattered progenitors of neutrinos, and to be frank only scientists can detect, interpret and reveal to us the truth of the experiment. We have to believe them, just like you have to be religious to see and feel god, you have to be a scientists to see and feel a neutrino. The scientists do not believe that is a very complex belief system, and that they consider it a threat is evidence of how closed minded scientists and science have to be in order to prove their logical desires.

In conclusion, you can not fault the scientists, they are only believing in what they desire to believe at everyone else’s expense. If you are a religious soul you should not be attempting to prove the existence of god by proving that the arc which saved Moses and his clan existed. First it is doubtful that god really flooded the world, that seems a rational way to kill someone. Second it is unlikely that if god had flooded the world that he would have needed to have Moses build an arc, and that all the animals would have been so willing to just congregate and cohabitate under nice terms. If the bible had said, “and god sent Moses and his clan, plus chosen species into a severe hibernation,” this would not only have a scientific basis but would be more believable from the perspective of faith. But the problem here has nothing to do with god’s actions and more with the fact that we need the bible to believe in god, where it is most probable that an all knowing god would have never bothered with a book of rules, much less with all those miracles, and more likely an all knowing omnipotent god, would have most likely created the universe and everything in it, maybe even down to the homo sapiens, and then just gone off; moving on to create all those other multidimensional universes that scientists need to discover. The real problem with scientists then, is that they have done too good of a job at proving their system of belief. They have made it clear that all things shall be judge with an empirical mind and that only those things that withstand such judgment can be call truth. While, the religious fellows have walked precisely and in synchronicity into the trap. When the faithful decided that they had to prove the existence of god that was a serious mistake and probably not doable from a human perspective.

I dare say, that no human can prove if god exists or not! I dare say that no Pope, Prophet or Angel can prove the existence or not of god. Further I stipulate clearly that god does not require proof any more than I require Descartes to tell me that I exist because I think. Neither can Descartes, with all his good intentions, however misguided, convince me of my existence. I prefer to be anabolic about such discussions. It is mandated by the universe that things can go wrong and a soul that was destined to believe in god might have to find god in science. That does not mean that the rest of us need to believe in such things, or prove our beliefs through such things. I am a metaphysical being, I do not believe in knowledge, I could however believe that others need to believe in quantifiable methods with categorical results. This I believe fervently, and I would be crazy and irrational to try to prove to them that my belief in the possibility of impossible things is rational or believable. It is not! Anyway I don’t have to prove it, anymore than I have to write this book which is only a jolly way for me to fancy my fancy with others that might fancy it too.

Fancy Continued…

April in Paris is not April in Paris because someone thought it rationally. It is irrational to think of April in Paris in the idealistically romantic terms which have so helped the French tourist industry. Even so it wasn’t the French tourist industry that created the romantic feelings that are so recognize the world over. “Oh I love Paris in the fall.” “Paris in the spring time.” “Paris in the rain.” Frankly, as of this writing I haven’t ever been to Paris, but some times when it rains I like to imagine myself in Paris drinking coffee. And when I do, a bit of Paris gets into my heart, and the hearts in Paris feel it too.

The reason for the magnification of Paris is a heart reason that can not be quantified. The reason that it can not be quantified its because it is radically subconscious and endemic to our hearts. Our idea of romanticism creates a Paris that has nothing to do with cause and effect. The effects however that Paris has upon our hearts are genuine, even for those, like me, that have not been to Paris. In the same way that most of the books that I love and feel I have never read. Lord’s Byron Don Juan is a particular favorite, I have bought it used and new at least three times, honestly I haven’t read it, but I feel that I have read it and that I understand the entire book, even as I have only fancied a few brief passages. It is an elegant book, well written, strongly versed, it is ironic, enchanting in a harsh way, it moves me to laughter and lightness of being, when I touch Byron, I feel like all the cares in the world have been lifted from me through senseless irony. Byron sometimes is too much, I think he takes his wit to seriously. Don Juan as a human character leaves a lot to be desired, and the intertwined political and religious and romantic subplotting is much overwrought with senseless meaning. Still I love Don Juan, I have friends that love Don Juan, I have friends that even love Byron’s Don Juan, but not Byron; and of all my friends probably none have really read Byron, though I admit even this I could not prove, but we all love each other through Byron.

Push This Button To Talk 890076.0965

Walking upright is one of your featured features; so is your ability to use your thumbs in just such a way as to advance the concept of biological grip. Your ability to think is not so bad either, you are thus able to prognosticate and even be a prophet. There is no equivalent for prophets in the animal kingdom, only you have that ability or shall we say potential. Don’t use it…you’ve wasted it.

Here we go again, the madness of our civilization coming home. Wrong, stop here, incoherent creature, we are the final answer to the universe. Final as in last, ultimate, no other recourse; the cute bipedal creature is the final answer for the potential of consciousness being illustrated.

Wicked ticket to nirvana. Say we manage the trick, what do we gain? As in all cases, the thing isn’t the end itself, it is for another’s comeuppance. Eccentric as this might be it is so common that it ought not bother us; the universe is always using things for another or another’s purpose. For instance, helium is important to the sun more so than it is to helium itself. We are more impressed by helium because of what it does in the conundrum we call sun than because helium is helium. Helium might want to say hey I am me, but really without hydrogen and fusion what is helium? Second, it is second.

Maybe it is a problem of being too light, but it really isn’t, hydrogen is lighter and more interesting, hydrogen and water, hydrogen and the mass of the universe, hydrogen and simplicity. Helium really lacks those proportions, helium is second.

But the neurotic element is not without its disproportionate proportions, it is second in the universe.

There is an element in the earth that is unequally spread throughout and this element holds the transference of awareness from one to all. The element is invisible, the element is not explainable with the scientific method, I don’t know this element, I have not seen it, I can only explain its properties, this element is number 890076.0965 on the consciousness periodic table. We shall baptize this element Los, after Blake’s creative consciousness. This element, if detected would be seen as useless as my amygdala or my appendix, both glands and organ that have undetectable functions; you have to be a spiritual metaphysician to be aware of their non functions. Los is everywhere, though more so where there are concentrations of spirits, humans and animals because it is a consciousness transponder, a relay, a receptor of all the common awareness: you think something, you imagine something, you feel something and the Los registers it, logs it in, records it, archives it. But the Los does not give category, it does not determine class or status, it simply registers that which it registers, like a photograph, here is this thing, this image, do with it what you will, Los does not know what it is or why it is, Los simply holds it so that anyone that is spirit, human or animal may detect it, what they gather from it is an unknown to Los; you may then kill your sister or your father or you might invent the rocket, or you might enjoy the sunset or write an epic poem, all these things are possible from the touching of 890076.0965.

You might ask how do I know the Los lot number, Los gives you the number, everything that touches Los, derives a conception of Los from Los, and determines the Los number from the essence of Los. Los represents itself silently, it is there, that is all you are aware of, but that awareness is built on a sameness of awareness, that humbles the uniqueness of the universe. You are now aware of 890076.0965.

890076.0965

This is the thing 890076.0965 is the relay station that absorbs the energies that you release, it is like a doormat, everyone that touches it, enters humanity, everyone that exits it leaves a significant trail. Within your existence you are a relay station for the energies that others possess and the others compliment you by them themselves being relay stations, while 890076.0965 is merely a transponder that acts as a continuum between you and the others, it holds the energy of humanity, the humanity that crosses it, and when a human approaches it releases it through a super conductive dynamic that is activated by your proximity.

890076.0965 is detectable, but it is not alterable, it merely absorbs energy like a sponge, and even as it absorbs energy/mass it does not gain weight nor does it magnify its appearance or essence. It is very much like numbers, their values if added in congregation multiply but are whole and fixed; the very reason why, not being as adaptable as a vocabulary composed of alphabet, numbers do not come in capitals or better put, they are maximized capitals that can not be altered in the way that say capital: “L” alters itself in dimension: “l”. So fused is the value in 890076.0965 that it is said that it is not composed of anything else; this even as just its name seems to hold some value. Of course it holds no value to itself so one may argue that it is inorganic and has no value.

890076.0965 is then to us, perhaps detectable, and I believe that scientists have already detected it, but since in posses no inherent value they can not explain it and scientists don’t bother with things that have no explanation. 890076.0965 however does have a none scientific explanation, which is what makes it so valuable to humans because humans themselves are not explainable by science. It is a relay for human energy. Energy has memory, when you touch someone your energy and their energy release into each other and alter the zeros and ones of your essence to a new sum. This new and magnified energy of memory gets absorbed and recombined by all the 890076.0965 in your vicinity and the next time another human being passes through that region 890076.0965 will release the combined energy of your memories.

890076.0965, like all good transponders, detects, absorbs, reabsorbs and emits. Normally 890076.0965 just sits there, doing nothing, human energy approaches, 890076.0965 detects it, and creates an instant superfluid channel between itself and the energy, this is a stagnant activity, meaning that it requires zero manipulation from either 890076.0965 or the human entity. There are no moving parts, at least of the observable and detectable kind, though if you put the energy equivalent of ten suns made up entirely of humans, you would not only see space warped, but you would also see that human energy can bend light and create superfluid plasma or what we call Los. It is the Los superfluity that fills all the in-betweens of humans, in other words there is no separation between you and I and the others, and any others; we are all held together by superconductive forces that are amassed by 890076.0965; 890076.0965 relays only when it amasses and it only needs two humans to do that, of course there has never been a condition of one human.

It is impossible for this universe, or any universe to produce one human. Hence the reason why there are impossibles. Individuality is precisely impossible because of the existence of 890076.0965 for it mandates that a whole human is equal to two and two humans equal a humanity. Now you will say but how can that be, we have been told in earlier chapters that everything is possible and now we are being told that the universe would never make humans in batches fewer than two? Well yes, but if everything is possible so too must be the impossible; it is impossible for any and all universes to create simply one human because to make a human you need a humanity; when a universe spontaneously generates a kind of human it instantly generates two. And that spontaneous creation instantly generates 890076.0965 and the superfluity between the two. Your not alone, your never alone, you only feel alone because you have neglected your ability to feel.

So the best way to perceive 890076.0965 is to imagine it like a sponge, but a weird sponge because it is rather easy to squeeze but equally impossible to squeeze. Why? Because only you can squeeze it, only your proximity can warp 890076.0965 so as to cause the superfluity transference between it and you and the others. 890076.0965 can be next to a massive blackhole or next to a sun ten times bigger than the most impossible sun, and it wont release any human energy, none. This is one of those strange and formidable cases in which weight doesn’t matter.

Gravity has its limits. There are dimensions that are created by gravity that gravity doesn’t affect. 890076.0965 lives in these dimensions. As you can see 890076.0965 is really an impressive impresser. And it has one more added value which we have hinted at but have not clarified. 890076.0965 is a mixer without presence. When human energy is in storage in 890076.0965 it does not age, dissipate or require sustenance. 890076.0965 is the ultimate in hibernation environments. The human energy enters into a timeless, weightless and zero consumption environment; but the energy memory is entirely recombined into a new memory every time that a new human energy touches the vicinity of 890076.0965. that is to say that a recombination takes place so that all the human energies are gathered into a singular humanity energy, and it is that energy memory which is transferred to any and all humans who, with proximity, induce an emission mission.

You have been updated.

Persistence & Consistency

Here is your universe: 890076.0965. The test doesn’t matter, why it doesn’t matter is interesting, why it matters is obvious. It doesn’t matter because the rest of the universe can operate and live without you, the universe does not need you to feel like a universe, or more pressing it does not need you to define itself which translates to, the universe does not need you to exist. If you and all of humanity were attacked by hugely horned rhinoceros and all squashed and horned to death, the universe would not blink. This would even be true at a more fatalistic level; if all of the possible and impossible humanities in the universe were to disappear, go back into the nothingness, the universe would not alter its character any. Nor would it take notice of the missing 890076.0965.

This is because the universe and you only have one thing in common, energy, once you get energy out of the way, you and the universe live in different dimensions, it is the separation of those dimensions that makes it impossible for you, to go as you are, to another dimension, going to the moon for instance is as complex and going to another galaxy, another dimension requires some transformations that might involved leaving your own body behind. Again, the cost of transferring yourself through places that have little or nothing in common with you is difficult, as well as it should be, because nothing between here and the moon wants to help you stay alive, everything between here and the moon and here and another galaxy lives without you. Your environment has to be like you in order for you to survive without major maintenance and hardship. A superconductor-supercollider, works very hard to recreate exotic particles that will not inhabit our environment, that is precisely why a superconductor-supercollider is so damn expensive, because it requires severe energy strain to accomplish things that are not even visible to the naked eye. You are an exotic particle. That is rare. But rare is not something that things can share in common, so while you are rare, that does not mean that you have something in common with an exotic particle that is also rare. Rare is not a transferable condition, the human race is rare, but it has nothing in common with an exotic particle that is also rare, and even more impressive, we have less in common with a rare anything, a rare exotic particle has less in common with us than even all the particles and space in the nearest galaxy.

This all matters because it determines your constancy in the universe. You probably have heard of the cosmic constant, or the background energy of the universe, a hissing sound, that constant is what tenses and radiates all universe energies to all universe energies at the lighter side of the spectrum, the hissing sound is merely a result of the infinite consultations that the mattress of the universe has with its springs and with the masses that try unsuccessfully in the long term, but in billions of years wholly tolerable, to sleep with it. Everything that affects the constancy of the universe inversely determines its on importance. Since you are the scum energy of the universe, your constancy ratio in the universe is really zero. Now some of you refiners and minders out there will argue that there can not be a zero constancy, well yes, we are not at zero constancy, and correctly can not be, especially if we are on the visible end of the spectrum, though this might actually mean that we are more invisible, a neutrino and a photon are both invisible and largely massless and have a greater impact and contact in the universe than you and I. But that is a whole other story, we are just talking about the constancy factor, then let us stay with that deliciously boring problem. Consistency means that you are a part of something, the bigger question is to what degree are you part of it, the greater your consistency level with your surroundings the greater your chances of persistence in the environment. Your consistency factor in the universe is almost zero, so it largely does not matter, you have a foot in the door, that is all, the universe is constantly trying to close the door, the universe only allows guests that push, pull, create friction, and force their way in. Anything using the force required to get in, usually has 100% consistency with the universe. That is a Sun, is very much part whole of the universe, safe to say that the sun feels at home in the universe. The sun is so much a part of the universe, that the sun doesn’t have to care about the things that are around it as it spins like a mad woman and hurdles its mass through the space-time continuum.

Everything in the universe is a guests, super novas are a preferred guest, so are black holes, you, I hate to say it, Rosa, will hate me to say it, you are scum, (from another more correct angle on your way out of the universe, and trying to get back in,) and you have to worry about everything in the universe, and specially feet away from you. The reason why you worry so much has to do with your consistency factor, your consistency does not allow for a high degree of endemic persistence which would allow for high degrees of consistency. So you worry a lot, “Oh no I am going to die!” “Oh no my great, great grandchildren are going to die!” Highly persistent things don’t have to ask themselves these type of questions, hence the reason why they don’t develop consciousness. You wouldn’t imagine the sun worrying about the fact that it only has five billion years left to live. This is precisely why the sun didn’t invent the clock, you did!

Things that have a high level of persistence have all one thing in common, they are not in conflict with any of their constituent parts. The sun allows for fusion and fission to coexist, this is not a simple accord, but when you allow for such fascinating fricticious frictionless dynamics you get the benefit of being the vessel composition of that dynamic, the sun, by character, is none of the things that it is composed of, but it is all those things.

If you wanted to have a high level of persistence, within the confines of your energy limitations, which could easily be expropriated by most things in the universe, a meteor for instance has a higher amount of purdah persistence than you, hence the reason for its ability to persist against you, and kill you. This is why scientists worry so much about the ozone layer, you don’t have a high amount of persistence, you are fragile, your ability to adapt is really intolerant, you don’t adapt, you have to change your surroundings to your conditional parameters, just like the universe. So if you want to persist, the formulae is really simple, you have to harmonize all of your parts, because to change your surroundings, and magnify your self essence, you require vast amounts of energy excretion and concentration. Persistency requires harmony with constituent parts. That is what it mostly requires, it also requires collaboration from the environment, but this is much harder to obtain. It’s easier just to try to agree with one another as impossible as that might seem.

For humanity the question of consistency rest then on the premise that we unite all of the humanities in the universe. A neutrino does not have to look very far to find another neutrino, though for a neutrino to crash into another neutrino is a very life defying and exotic act, but neutrinos are rather common, compared to humanities, extremely common. So your number one goal, to open more of the universe and your consciousness of it, is to unite with other humanities and to touch all the 890076.0965. The 890076.0965 will confer connectivity and raise and expand your consciousness to the ratio found in those humanities that have made contact with 890076.0965. But aside from that obvious requirement, if you meet other humanities, as there is only one, even if they are disparate in space-time, you must harmonize yourself with those humanities. And indeed, this is the difficult part. For you haven’t even harmonized yourself into the humanity that you can now visualize and touch. On the contrary, humans have done more damage to themselves than their surroundings. Humans have thought to mystify and make unique the concept quanta we call a human; so as to create a separation from the individual that in turn makes a humanity; and tragically the only part of that equation that truly matters is the humanity.

Part of the reason why we have been so slow to progress is due to the inner conflict that creates a disparate humanity based on sectarian values. Against a universe, the proportion of local value judgments and priorities makes the pettiness gargantuan in stature and has the sordid effect of adding to our cosmic insignificance.

Suburbia’s Insubordination Of Radicals

Averageness is conservative, this we know because in order for anything to be average it has to have massive appeal in the comfort category, it is therefore conservative because comfort is only found where the environment or condition has stabilized; that is lost most of its dynamic.

This is not to say that there are not, unstable environments and unstable conditions that are not in themselves conservative. If you look at Sun, the thing is pretty much the same molting, melting, cauldron for 10 billion years, very much the same thing, so rather average as far as activity is concerned, in that it is stable even as it is a reactive environment.

The only thing that is really not average then, is something that is changing dramatically, energetically, and mostly instantly, or very near real time. The composition of this is what we call radical, because the none average thing is molesting itself to reach unknown conditions, this because radically changing environments are self destructive, they are not so much banking on some precise futuristic determination, they are not attempting to evolve, rather they have not reached a comfort level with character and so continue to violate themselves and their surroundings so as to pursue nihilistic aims, which by pure accident might have edifying consequences.

Most environments that don’t stabilize, normalize have two things in common which we might dare say makes them average. They are all radically unstable and have poor relations with their surroundings. Radical environments also have one more thing in common which again might make them average, they are rare. Radical environments do not much occur, they are a rare circumstance. If you take a peak at the universe, the universe is mostly boring, mostly the same no matter which direction you look at, and the construction seems to follow a very comfortable and precise pattern and constancy. You have galaxies, you have solar systems, you have black holes, you have comets, and you have vast amounts of space, lots of space in-between the matter, all defined by light transversing to and fro. Anyone with any mindful knowledge of the universe, might just conclude that we have been sent to our room, the room is really mostly dark.

Radical environments settle as they mature their energies, that is as they run out of energy to kick things around. This is as much true of cosmic environments as it of teenagers. It is easy to send a teenager to war because they are still radically unstable of character, they are just kicking things around, they have not had the time to develop consciousness, to them the world is largely a kinetic experience, hence the reason why they are so amenable. You might awaken here and ask, what do you mean amenable, kinetic forces are hardly amenable? True indeed but equally wrong. Unstable radical environments have the ability of shock effect, but not of persistence, and persistence is what is truly powerful, even as is boringly average in nature; sadly averageness by its inherent comfort and stability has destroyed an infinite amount of radicals. Suburbia is mass insubordination against radicalism. A radical pierces, but has no staying power for the very simple reason that radical environments are inherently unstable, they have the tendency not to persist in any given direction, or character, radicals will not conform to march in a parade with other radicals; an intruder can disrupt the inconsistency that a radical environment possess simply by stimulating one of its constituent parts, thus inducing a chaotic reaction throughout the whole. In sum, conservative surroundings are a dangerous and active catalyst for inherently unstable radical characters.

Any questions?

Confined To My Mind

Illustriously there is nothing more defined, known and well documented than a moralist. When you think of a mystic, you might say “I don’t believe there is such a thing…” or “I am curious and plan to study them…” the truth is you won’t ever really get to know a mystic because they are so loosely defined, known, positioned, and categorized even by the civilizations that have bothered to record their movements. Russia’s Rasputin one example, but the same falls to Prophets; they accomplish the same ritualistic incoherence, prophets, might be able to divine the future, but they rarely acquire any substance essence within their times. One might say that prophets simply prefer longevity over mortal existence but it all goes to another level, the real reason that prophets, poets, and mystics have such loose career definitions has to do with the uncertainty of their destiny. A mystic might be a conflict and in pseudo harmony with a few hundred metaphysical forces at any given point. If the mystics were able to be as narrow minded as the scientists or a moralist, the mystics would be able to isolate metaphysical energies, create a table of metaphysical elements with all their weights and masculine interactions; mystics however don’t do this because their world is not that simple.

Definition gives local strength, but definition is simple, it has to be, complexity can not be tightened down, clamped and served on a textbook for the world societies to comprehend. This is precisely why scientists have come to the conclusion that the universe is simple and that it can be tied down with one grand glorified unified theory. This is the rough of it, science, and count any of them here, has come to the conclusion that there are four primary forces in the universe, the weak force, the strong force, the gravitational force and the electromagnetic. Really, only those, and from those derive all the other forces. No matter how you twisted, there is simplicity in science, there are four states of matter, liquid, solid, gas and plasma. Sure, it is possible that science will find another state of matter or more forces, etc… what is unlikely is that science will ever discover more than 100 unique and individual forces or states of matter. Why, because simplicity forces science to drill down the numbers to basic principles. Simplicity is truth, all of the universe is so damn simple it should make sense. The moralists for their part say that god is simple, only ten commandments, and love is the main recipe. Which is precisely why it is easy to be a moralist and a scientist, they don’t have any real mystery in their lives. One knows that nature is simple and consistent and the other knows that god I great and loves everyone.

For mystics, prophets and poets, there are too many realities to define them in any coherent fashion, which is why the message is so difficult to deliver. Nor, would I think, there be such a thing as a prophet that could claim to understand an infinitesimal iota about what they do for a living, much less make much money at it, and even less get an institution to certify that our mystic had official mystic powers. The idea is even more farcical for prophets, which by virtue of distance from the cause celebre have difficulty in completing their thesis.

Moralist however know their place in the world, and better yet, know your place in the world and mine too. This ability while enviable if it were true, is indeed false. What a moralist has made of himself is a local boy; and this he accomplishes by methodically setting out to trim his lawn every week, attend church, maintain a ritualistic order, and manage to believe that the entire universe is going to eventually conform to his deterministic endeavor. When a moralist trims the grass, he imagines the universe becoming more organized. This of course is contrary to the law of entropy, which I particularly like, because it messes things up inversely quadrupled & exponentially in relationship to how organized local boy is.

Land this plane now. Ok. What moralists fail to realize is that there are times when it is great and wonderful to be a moralist and there are times when it is great and wonderful to be irreverent and decadent. There have been plenty of times, for sure in my life, when I have been terrible and terribly good. Neither time seemed, for the most part, to contradict the other in any significant way, this thanks to the linear passage of time which makes moral exclusion possible. I mean that what terrible thing I did ten years ago, stayed within the context of the times and the character that I was a decade ago. It is very easy for me, and anyone with enough heart to imagine that at any given point they could accomplish any misdeed, equally, one has it in one self to be normal or spectacular depending on the circumstances, it would be fooling a great mind to think that it is reluctant to recalcitrant anomalies and change.

There is no point of reference that guarantees the reference point.

A moralist then is nothing more than a person that doesn’t know when to be bad. Don’t pose. Life is not about posing, anything that you do long enough and well enough ought get boring and stale. If you can be a Christian all of your life you haven’t lived all of your life. Finding the exact position of the universe somewhere inside of your head might be more interesting; then taking that universe and blowing it up, might be more exciting. Think about it.

Why You Cannot Impress Yourself?

In the conundrum of existence we have then made one unreasonable though reasonable mistake. We have wanted the universe, the world, our society and ourselves to be something of an understandable nature; this without realizing that understanding is just one facet of existence, one aspect of something, that depends on so may variables being eliminated that it could only reduce us to the coroner that we have become. Every day now we perform an autopsy, on ourselves, on our environment, and even on epistemology, the circular logic of this embarrassing enterprise is hilariously sombering.

We have washed ashore upon the beaches of our own deserted island. We have surrounded ourselves with the sea of our knowledge, trapped, unable to go anywhere where our sea isn’t, we remain stranded counting straws, measuring, day to day occurrences, which ought not to surprise us but still do. There are storms in other planets. Really! There are clouds in Jupiter’s moons. Wow! Whole galaxies have been observed crashing into one another. Incredible. Incredulously incredible. How could we have suspected so much uniqueness so as to be impressed by repetition? If there are billions of suns, and billions of galaxies what are the chances that there isn’t redundancy in the universe? None, I would venture to guess, I would be more impressed if we discovered something fantastic, discovering that at the center of a spiraling, swirling whirlpool of matter we call a galaxy is a drain, we call a blackhole, is not really much of a discovery. To be impressed by this is instead an absolute failure of the imagination.

But let us leave it at that, we want to be impressed by such things so that we can feel like we have done some spectacular service to humanity, by discovering yet another secret of the universe, by discovering yet another fantastic wonder in the wondrous cosmos. But if you dwell on the matter, discovering that the universe is resonating is not that fantastic, the universe has all this matter, and through some medium all of this matter is robbing up against each other, and it is probably going to create some persistent noise, that is bound to screw up any noise we wish to measure, so that we will have to calculate the intensity of this vibration, for that is really what noise is, simply a vibration, which is actually traduced into sound by the environment and more by the receptor, because if the receptor does not transmit sound then there won’t be any sound, at all, but in order to measure the intensity of anything else we actually have to cancel out the sound that already exist, by subtracting its load factor from any other noise out there, and thus we are able to calculate the true silence of the cosmic universe with a nullifying calculus.

By that very same principle we must ask what would happen if we stopped being so impressed with ourselves? Would we cease to exist? Would we cease to discover? Would the universe get bored with us and nullify our essence? Or would we just get bored? Is it boring not to measure how fantastic we are? Can we use some form of calculus to calculate our impressionistic impressions to zero out, so we could factor a universe where we weren’t impressed?

Imagine a calculation that would not require some unique comparison. Top ten best cities in the world. The top ten cities in the world will fluctuate based on the evolving accuracy of the measurers metric. Which means that at any given point the historical reference of the top ten best cities is invalidated by the most current measure. Leading to suspicious conclusions about the present most precise measure. It may come to such egregious propensity that at some point in the barometric future it would be imaginable that the entire measuring system of the top ten best cities is wholly wrong and invalid and thus bankrupt of measure. What then? Does that invalidate all of the events that transpired because of the measure? No, all those people that wanted to live in the top ten best cities still moved there, all of those top ten best cities still felt better and good about themselves because they were on the top ten best cities list, the measure itself is adopted by the measured. And hence, the newer and better and more pristinely calculated top ten cities become drugged by their predecessors.

This is because of the curvature of space time and the universe and more precisely because of the curvature of how you think, you are always landing yourself, you are always being terrestrial, you are always following the curvature of your “constraining.” The reason why you follow the curvature your constrains is wholly reasonable, it is because you require a reference point, familiarity is important to discovery, and so through the curvature of your vision, you are able to reference back your toes to your mind, and know that the body is whole and from there assume that there is something that isn’t there that is there and that you have to find it. However the reference point is what prevents you from discovering something unique because you can’t go in a straight line when you are looking at your own toes, thus creating a radius, and assuming that everything has to somehow embody the very things that embody your toes. Hard as it might be put, everything in the universe can be surmised from your toes: there is flesh, there is fungi and salt and odors, there are atoms and cells and mass, and water, there are nails that grow, there is toil in ingrown nails, and emotion in their pain, and even blood, there are patterns and bones, and there is movement, and restriction of movement; and all your toes are individuals but they all look like each other; but equally all the things that aren’t like your toes, can not be surmised from your toes. This is precisely why things appear to repeat themselves in the universe when in fact they might not repeat themselves at all.

Autopsy, negates the very understanding we are trying to comprehend. You can’t be an epistemologist and study epistemology at the same time, but you can appear to be that to yourself, and that is precisely what we have accomplished! We have accomplished the study of self observation.

Value Of Referential Reverence

In the grand spectacle of the grand there is one thing we need to acknowledge about the concept of civilization, it is merely human. I don’t want to understate this, equally I don’t want to understate civilization, it is daring to be human, it is daring to accept this type of existence and personification in the concept of being, it is therefore a human daring to make civilization.

Being, is the fundamental premise, a rat has to first accept the concept of “being” in order to be, that is in order to exist, once it does that, it can be a rodent, and then a rat. The same obviously applies to humans, they must first accept the concept of being, then accept the concept of humanity, and consequently accept the concept of being a human.

Ogle please the idea that before being a human you have to be able to exist within the conception of a humanity; you don’t get to be a human without an endemic consummation of your relationship energy with humanity, which can only be arrived at through humanity itself, you have to get the global and even universal implications of humanity, and indeed be apart of them, before your humanity gets broken down to the concept you comprehend as human. You are then always part whole of humanity first, and human through a reduction process, that minimizes the concept of humanity into a non divisible singularity of humanity, called a human.

This applies to all things, it does not matter whom or what you are, you must always accept the concept essence, which is indeed the fundamental essence, by which anything can dream itself a mode of being or/and existing. When you hear the seemingly paradoxical question of what came first, the chicken or the egg, the answer is neither, first you had to have the concept of birds, within the conscript of such a concept there are chicks and eggs, the eggs spontaneously become a masterful necessity of the concept, as much as an inevitable accomplishment of that necessity; yet this is not to say that there wouldn’t be birds that could come into being without eggs, eggs are a consequential circumstance of the concept of birds. But while both chicken and egg are of mutual requirement, you can rightly conclude that the chicken came first because the Idea Essence of chicken makes chicken eggs a reality.

To this, some will maintain that we are in a paradoxical condition, this is only true if you are a linear thinker, in the universe linearity is a most observable concept, but other than being very obvious it does not in itself comprise nor make up the norms or laws of the grander concepts which call the universe into being, or a chicken to hatch. This will be very difficult for you to believe particularly if you don’t have it in you to feel your self essence as it may have been arrested by logical straining. Thinking logically is not as natural as you might imagine, it is actually something that requires you to think a bit beyond your humanity and essence, it is in short a highly theoretical concept, created by the thing called human that id divine from the fundamental concept of humanity. When you get to thinking logically you have arrived at a concept that you have divined to resolve the things which your isolated entity can not resolve without your humanity. It is your lack of feeling your essence humanity that invariably gets you into this high level theoretical ground problem we call logic; which due to its very singular nature has to by essence be only linear. You being the starting point. Ironically for logic, you are also the ending point. This is why you can get yourself into paradoxical loops so easily. The processing brain for logic is you, the loop is as big as you can imagine the linearity, the faster you stumble into the loop, the lesser your ability to imagine the hypothetically linear concept of logic.

The concept of beginning and endings are largely logical constructs, this is you taking those baby steps into the realm of logic, yet there is no sillier question than “where did I come from?” a wiser question might be “where am I going?” Where you come from is an event, that event has obviously already taken place, hence the reason why you can ogle yourself, the origins of that event don’t much matter because those conditions already took event which implies that they are conditionally subject to occurring, and not your real problem. You exist, others will exist. Your real problem is persistence, “can you continue to be?” or “is it even worth it to continue to be?” Your real question is not then “why do I exist?” You may not be aware of it but the answer has already been given, you exist, that you exist is the answer to that question. You would not exist if you had not given yourself energy the required desire state for this existence within this being that you already are. In effect, you’ve already answered the question of why you exist by existing, that is the answer, if you want to ask yourself that question again, in order to validate its necessity you will have to commit suicide, the question can only make sense from the perspective of none being. If you don’t exist the question is “why should I exist or desire to exist?” when you answer it with an affirmative supposition then you come into accepting humanity, and onto exist in the being concept of human.

Which not accidentally leads us into another pregnant quandary, everything that divines its existence from you is wholly dependant upon your energy strain: Everything in that world we can call civilization. Humanity depends on a different energy strain than the one that you can observe, being you a cause of that, even as you might have had something to do with it, does not allow for much reflection; this is due to the subjective nature of all things, self examination is largely not possible, it is axiomatic that knowing yourself is only always a mere supposition. The universe invokes this quandary, not because the universe has anything to hide or even cares; hard to be a universe when you have something to hide, but rather it is because as soon as you know and are fully aware of your position in space time and nothingness, translate to this: as soon as you are fully aware of your self essence, as soon as you confirm your character authority, then wham! the universe and everything in it, immediately changes position in relationship to you and you to it, where then you might expand or fall or perceive a wholly different transmutated dimension. This is because comprehension is dizzying, comprehension always throws you out of the synchronized condition that you have eventuated; primarily due to a strange condition, you are what you are because that is truly what you already comprehend, further acknowledged comprehension disrupts your existing being, “as it is,” because it can not be that anymore because that is not what it now comprehends, nor could you really comprehend something that is already fully that comprehension by way of actual embodiment. Comprehension destroys the comprehended state.

With all that you may imagine that your senses are betraying you, but such is not the case, your senses merely reach an alteration point with every level of comprehension that you obtain. This is neither good or bad or morally sound, nor thus it reason that you will end in the hands of a mothering universe, or a god, or higher consciousness, its just an event, within the confines of the events that simply transpire throughout space time and nothingness. What is interesting then, is the parameters within these confines, which are really only interesting because you have access to them. Under those confines are the things that your self energy creates, they revert back to you for their reference point, and this is very interesting.

Imagine that the thing you call money, has only you for a reference point, in order for money to have any value, it has to refer back to you always, that is, in order to captivate its self essence. Much as your reference point is humanity, the reference point for monetary value is your individual ephemeral certainty of its value. Money is the capital of your labor and the labor done by others; that is first you must turn the energy that you posses within yourself essence into labor, that is kinetic energy, the reaction that your kinetic energy actuates creates a value called labor, which is in turn a catalyst for anything that you want to feel eventuate within the constrains of your being. Now, then, there is no value without your labor. If you don’t think it, don’t feel it, don’t nurture it, then the reference point for the thing we call labor and the thing of that we administer as monetary value will not be able to search back their value and will diminish in proportion to their diminished perception.

There is nothing illogical about this, in fact it is very observable thanks to the self gratifying concept of logic which works rather rationally well within the confines of anything that can be produced by the concept essence of civilization which is merely a minor consequence of some grander cosmic epic we call humanity; which ironically, has very little or nothing to base its own existence on that concept. The point of reference, is not necessarily dependant on the existence of the essence that it generates forward in time and space. Civilization as we know it, is not a requirement of the reference point Humanity. However the concept of civilization itself is indeed a microscopic anomaly or not of the reference concept Humanity. You can not necessarily surmise humanity from civilization but you can always conclude, from any angle, civilization from humanity.

The critical importance of this has to surmise the equal relationship importance of value, labor, capital, monetary unit, a nuclear power plant, chocolate production, etc… to the concept of individual. Stored up labor equals an energy factor of value. You can always reference the value of anything within civilization back to the concept of human. When the reference check is made by the perception of mass humanity, regardless of varying quantification, the end result will always equal the value of the aggregate reference value.

In summary, your proportional value to the concept we call humanity, is surprisingly calculated by your mutual acknowledgement of that value. Your value is wholly dependant on communal perception, your individual awareness is mandated by the communal reference point that ironically your individuality loathes. And most finally, your abstraction from your humanity creates theoretical practice.

Criminally Optimistic

The self can have a canyon, a grand canyon like a real grand canyon only it is within the self. The grand canyon might be an spectacular panorama, but within the self, a grand canyon in one’s character can be fatal many times. When you walk to one of the edges of the real grand canyon you can jump off only once, your dead. When your self essence walks off your inner grand canyon you can die many times, you can walk off that edifice of a grand hole often enough to tragic displeasures. This is because the grand canyon within is a renewable resource. You have the other side, which is inaccessible from any angle, and that inaccessibility is within you, further, there is something so beautiful about the inner inaccessibility, the grandeur of an abysmal obstacle within the self essence is immense and thus captivating, where you might not want to bridge it or to fill such abyss. This enormity is yours to contrive subconsciously, it serves you well to have your very own grand canyon.

The Greeks were great canyon builders, they never worried about being terribly wrong, they were convinced that theirs was the civilization of choice, from them spawn the modern world. As a result our self essence is the self essence of the seed that was Greece. Before Greece there were all these ideas, these concepts floating around without a home, or without any fundamental form, the Greeks, felt a grand canyon within themselves and decided to fill it with dung. The dung of a rational dialectic and knowledge through the exhaustive exploratory process of mental experiment. Socrates was the exemplar mental experimenter, he never grounded anything and yet he filled Western civilizations grand canyon with dung heaps of mental provocations.

When your inner ear nears the abyss it doesn’t know if to shut off so that you won’t panic or if to maintain receptiveness so that you can keep your balance, somewhere the Greek dung plugged our inner ear with external dung that became internal dung. What the Greeks managed to accomplish, not without a great infusion of energy, was to make the world that was near here, more here, here, so that no one could visit the grand canyon within. The Greeks soundly determined to lay concrete mind sets all over the place so that we could walk across any abyss because it would no longer be there. This little trick requires that you eliminate many things that you don’t know or even can’t know. The Greeks were determined to make sense of the world, this however took them many generations, and it wasn’t until Plato was able to document the first born Socrates, that it became clear that they had succeed.

Socrates in the simple and longest apology ever spoken, is saying to the Greeks, something to the effect of: “I know that I don’t know;” whereas the rest of the Greeks not being him: “don’t know that they don’t know;” and presumably for Socrates this was something that he could be proud of, when in reality it should have sadden him. See, the illusionary Greeks could conjure many things that didn’t exist because they did not know that they did not know them, they had a greater human potential for exploration of ideas; but when Socrates’ realized that he did not know, and was damn proud of claiming this suppose knowledge of his own ignorance, what he was really saying was: from here forward, we can proceed to know, to be truly aware with our sense faculties and to explore the here and there, the inner and outer and deep above, without the obstruction of “knowing.” Socrates killed the certainty of the Greek mind set so as to create on earth the real gods, made of material best referred to as: men. Plato could go on to write many seemingly idealistic things, which were in fact more platonic than idealistic. Platonic meaning absent, distant, void of love, void of fornication, this was a remarkable accomplishment, before Socrates and before Plato, everyone had to feel everything tender with romantic attachment, after the duo humans could express themselves without emotional attachments.

When the Greek subconscious begun to realize what Socrates was saying, thanks to the clarifications made possible by Plato, the Greeks, unaware of their own hand in the design, revolted and decided on execution; unfortunately at that point, the old man was so detached that he accepted his death, he was not romantically involved with himself, so he could reason out that this was the best route to greatness through posterity, the patriot surrenders his life for a cause that through his death acquires a longer life span, something later copied from a precisely different perspective by Christ.

Christ realized that the grand canyon within has been filled with dung and so he tries to mystify the place by bringing back passionate attachment through love, but Christ though certainly more famous because he was a populist unlike Mr. Elitist Socrates, but Christ was not successful, because there were by then more obvious benefits in believing in the secular mind than in the promulgated soul. If you expose your soul everyone can crucify you, whereas if you expose your mind, you can joust a bit, and even if you get a scratch the mind doesn’t feel; hence the victory of the rationalists, they could not feel their own pain so they kept on with dialectic diarrhea.

Once you are dialectically here, here, your no longer in proximity to this place, you are grounded. We are under the Greek tent of ideals, which unfortunately are very local in nature, so we have the ability to sense everything that is local, and not to sense everything that is unknown or invisible or distant. When you can’t sense the unknown, or sense the unknown you, it is because you are purely platonic which leads to fault proof secularization of the material world.

Today, this is where you are standing, in the middle of the abyss, held in place by the heaping pile of Greek dialectic dung. When you are standing in the here, here, and you can’t detach from it, because there are no Grand Canyons within, then you begin to make everything here a Grand Canyon magnificence. That is, if the Great Grand Canyon is not within, then you have to build the spectacular void in the material world that you can see and fee and touch. This is because in order to keep your bearing, without an internal compass, in the here, here you have to have sign post, lots of number ones, lots of first time evers, lots of big things to keep your eyes pinned here, lots of things that disturb you to keep you awake here, here, lots of magnificent possibilities here, here; and most important you must be outside of yourself, because the only way to be here, here, is not to be ogling within, at all.

In the here, here material world, you don’t really exist as yourself essence but rather you exist from the things that you manifest in the here, here. The precious irony in all this, is that in order to intuit the universe and even yourself, sense they are not separate identies, you have to be romantically involved with yourself, you have to be eating some opium, you have to be partly dreaming to divine the divine.

Yes! This is the spectacular and precious let me be more clear here, you would be better off being near here and thus nearer to far too, but for now you are just here, here being criminally optimistic about NOW!

Continuity Through Resistance To Change

In the event of a maddening circumstance everyone tries to hunker down, it is the logical proposition that makes sense in a mad, mad world. If feelings are on a rampage, when emotions decide to override the limits of reality, that is when you break your arm against the wall in a display of fury, you forgot the wall was solid, you forgot that your calcium fertilized bones are no match for cement, you dislocated your reality, you wanted to feel the pain and reality, the construct that is interminably solid in the present, though in ruins over time like the Roman empire, you forgot that reality largely a mental construct acquires a life of its own that suffers a resistance against you and against change and thus it normalizes you, it calms you down, it submits your dynamic to a proposition of stillness.

Sentient beings react only to emotion and build the logical world from the extreme reaction. A violent reaction to feelings is logic, and logical constructs are defined as we well know by now, as the straight jacket that one puts on one’s emotions when they become intolerable. No one feels more than a logician. No one is more warm than a cold hearted individual. They both of course represent the horror of emotions. This is very difficult to say, that a pragmatist or a puritan is a highly reactive and emotional construct gone to the extreme of horrors due to their ability to feel. While calmer mild artists that are not as obviously afraid to express their emotions are in fact the dull side of the world of feelings.

How can that be so? Are we not used to the cold blooded general, the heartless torturer, the fascist dictator, the rational philosopher are we not used to them being the unfeeling great. Well yes, but that doesn’t presuppose the concept to be right, most people think that anyone that doesn’t respond to them is a cold person. Yet this is probably not a sincere judgment, and no greater truth could make it more obvious than the fact that any, any type of greatness requires a gauntlet of emotions. You just can’t be Cesar the Great, Heinous Kung, Attila de Hun or Mussolini without suffering from intense emotional passions.

The locked up dictator is powered by lust and passion, both of which are mutually recyclable. An artist or a poet are quick to cry, they are quick to injure, they are quick to take offense, this is not because they are more sensitive but rather because they are more insensitive. That is they feel that they are the only ones that truly feel and suffer and that because of that they might have to burden the rest of us with their sad poetry, with their twisted love songs, with their allegories on the insensitivity possessed by the rest of us and the cruel world included. The reality is a little different, the artist is a cry baby. Artist want the world to listen to them and to save them and to understand them, but they themselves do not want to understand the world. It takes no great amount of perseverance to write a melancholic love song, or a dark hearted poem, or to wit-out all the nonsense of the social world in a novel, painting or sculpture. It requires a little more passion however to confront that world, to make it apart of the self, and to challenge it to change instead of towards humility and compassionate adventure and a suicide of happiness.

But if the mostly not so great are weak of feeling, then what are we to make of the fantastic rituals that are amassed in the mass. That is the glory of it, it is precisely in combined stagnant forces where one finds the continuity created by rituals which don’t change through the ages. There is the symbolic expression of the mass, there they are genuine icons of the word and the world, expressed in their most amazing, the power of the descriptive, the detail of the ritual.

Here is where you find the church of amazement, how the mass emotion repeats itself and hails down upon the unwilling by monumental representation that can only be represented through the agglomeration of the ages. A catholic church is a beating heart of repetition, the culture of a captive audience, held together by their non-thinking, resting propositions, there is no floundering here, when you step into the catholic mass you have come upon something so divinely eonic, some marvelously repetitive, and the minute hand, the grain of sand of this ticking cultural clock is a human being, and another and more until you have the aggregate of all the Catholics, Orthodox and Muslims that have through the ages kneeled to pray for their god to own them, sung to love their god, stood for their god to witness, glorifying the immensity of their cultural continuity that is based on witnessing the ages by acting them out in a recalcitrant judgment of the denial of change. We are closer to the Jews in Bethlehem because the ordained reactionary ritual refuses all change and adds the continuity from which all change can be perceived without adulterated mangling emotions.

The more emotional the harness the more it will be perceived as relentlessly unfeeling; there is nothing more beautiful and no better place to rest than in the continuity caused by dogmatic culture.

Prophetic Remorse

Can the universe be moralistic? Is it possible to wrong yourself? Is it even possible to wrong another?

Those are nice questions, they amount to many conniving patters, you won’t hit your bowling pins with any answer. Still you will ask them and more react upon them even though you don’t have the answer or even the certainty of the reality. When you feel remorse your feeling remorse because you know you have done something wrong or is it because you think you have done something wrong?

Obviously your feelings of remorse are only feelings, the problem with some serial killers is their inability to feel remorse in any substantive manner to prevent them from adding another victim to their bloodletting exercises. Remorse is a quality that you have the capacity to feel autonomously of anything else that corresponds to it. If you murder someone you don’t feel remorse you don’t possess that quality of feeling; if you do feel remorse then you have that quality of feeling. But the quality itself is not tied to the crime, only in so far as you connect it to it. “Remorse is something that you should feel when you commit a crime.” The connection is made by the thought process, which then instills in you the linearity of the feelings within the context of the events.

This applies in relationship to anything, the feelings of remorse, once connected to your psyche have the ability to serve you not only in so far as murder is concern but equally any other moral crime or sinful transgression that may fancy your fancy. More interesting is how remorse backfires too, for remorse may and does just as easily function to instill in you future fears or better put, future guilt of cheating on your wife, fear of killing someone with your car, fear of being discovered the pervert that you truly are; and this symptomatic aggrandizement is impervious to the associations that your inklings may possess within the social structure. In other words, visionary remorse has the capacity to isolate you from your fellows. It has the capacity to make you feel alone in the world even as it is impossible to imagine that your feelings are truly unique or that what induces them is genuinely something of which you are capable of accomplishing. Your feeling of uniqueness, in this aspect, induces negative reinforcement.

It is very complicated to explain away uniqueness since the world is so keen on believing in the whole thing. But at any moment that you are thinking that you are going to rape your neighbor’s daughter you can be sure that there are at least 150 others that are thinking the same thing. I say only 150 because I like some aspects of minimalism. The quartered idea here is that your not alone, alienation is something that you have to think to accomplish, and you think it, in this here particular, by feeling remorse, for past, present and future perceptions of ideas which you have incorporated into your personal psyche.

The universe of course doesn’t care if you do rape your neighbor’s daughter, nor does it care if you don’t rape her, it only cares about making you feel what you want to feel and what you need to feel and what you perceive those feelings to inspire within you. The universe is very flexible.

The universe is in fact so flexible that if the Pope, from the catholic church, wants the universe to make you feel remorse or and guilt, then the universe works out the formulae to make this possible within the social psyche of the Catholic and even Human species; maintaining a particular, obviously, to sentient beings; because rocks and amoebas, though not wholly inflexible to the idea of morality are still put off from it enough that they mostly refuse to feel it. However the point is that there is a substantial amount of the universe that wants to justify your feelings and so much so that the universe automatically creates an agglomeration potential for any and all your feelings and conceptions. That is if the Pope wants to make you feel guilty for pruning the altar boy, which normally he might not, then within the psyche of the catholic mass will, there will be the natural incentive for such a feeling to conceive itself. The universe doesn’t care and won’t care about the reality of the feeling nor if the feeling should and ought to have causation. The universe doesn’t need cause and effect, it can have cause without effect and effect without cause, the only thing that the universe requires and mandates is an observer. Someone has to see it happen and someone has to feel it happen, in other words as the universe feels itself wanting wants, it must feel itself being felt and being watched. This could be a criminal quality, the universe has no way of knowing what one hundred Hitler’s inspire in the universe, the universe only knows that they are alive that they feel and that they have a great impact, and all that leads to the rubbing that the universe needs to feel and to react. Between opting for a Hitler or for your local butcher the universe might opt to create more Hitler’s or that is, to create the conditions for more Hitler’s.

At our level of consciousness, we being the eyes and ears of the universe, the apparition of a Hitler becomes a menace to the “human” part of the universe, but once the universe has created the dynamic for such a despot the template is practically guaranteed never to perish within the possible universe. It could however happen in an impossible universe, one that is not like ours. To witness Hitler is to continue to promulgate his essence and his ideas and his template for future atrocities. History keeps the idea alive, and while some may imagine that witnessing the atrocities committee by Hitler will convince us not to repeat them, that is a very localize thought; the template is the universal, and in the universal any local energy that recognizes Hitler’s existence and studies it, is merely a maintenance worker for the essence template that is Hitler.

This is the nonchalant and folkloric reality of the cosmic consciousness which induces within us the creation of symptoms from templates. Of course I don’t expect you to believe any of it, your feelings of remorse would be to great for you to cope.

Analog, Dividing Instant & Digital

If they keep on measuring with rulers don’t expect to sum anything but mathematics.

It is a strange thing how everyone today is so impressed with digits, with Boolean algebra, with yes/no, 0/1, with the idea that our universe is just one large sum of information which can be calculated from any angle by anyone. I think one of the immediate reasons why I like God so much is that there is nothing mathematical about him, I argue that God might approximate fuzzy logic and that the uncertainty principle and quantum in general makes god possible, but it is interesting that there is really nothing in religion that I can surmise makes science possible.

Does the fact that Jesus turned the water into wine make him a scientist? No because the process used was not methodical and based on a formulae, it was miracle of god.

What about the resurrection? Well other than Frankenstein there is no process by which science today can bring back the dead. Again, there appears to be no experimentally verifiable process by which God performed this freakish miracle.

A virgin birth? There have been scientific suggestions that you can stimulate the egg to fertilize itself through a simple contaminant, that is, by adding a catalyst, say protein of some sort. Still this has not been replicated in the lab, the Virgin Mary appears to be an oddity and one that will remain so for some time to come. And again, there is no evidence that god pricked her with a stick or used any methodical process to instigate the birth of Christ, by all accounts she was unsoiled even by way of her husband.

The closes that I have seen science arrive at religion is through quantum, quantum particles can perform some very miraculous tricks that require a lot of faith, but I have not seen the reverse, religion’s proximity to science. Why is there such a huge disparity? Why was God or is God so void of the scientific method. And yet let us not forget that to get to science we first had to teach religion, the academics of science is purely based in the quintessential preacher.

There appears the linearity, religion came first and science followed. It has already been well argued by this book that science is not an evolution but rather a hardening of the senses and emotions so as to tolerate intolerable feelings which an immature human might not be able to emulsify in a sensually emulsifying manner. People become self destructive when they don’t know how to dispense with their emotions, science is a way to destroy your emotions without seeming obviously nihilistic. Yet there be no doubt that anything that sets as it standard to prove everything and to define the ultimate truth, and to eliminate miracles and god, has nothing but annihilation in its mind.

Oh some fine scientists will come to place a defense on the table, that it was religion that first persecuted science, that it was God that first forced scientist into the fighting ring, this is really not true, it was after all science that juxtaposed itself by saying that it could explain phenomena, religion instigated the study of the stars and the measuring calendar, but it was when science poised itself as the absolute truth, that religion revolted, that religion branded science a heretic. Sure don’t argue with Galileo, there is a Sun forming a concentric center for planets to roll around it, seems mostly true to me, but I wouldn’t go as far as to say I was certain of it. And why not, because the truth can change, my perspective might change, if I was the size of a quark the sun and its orbits would be so inconsequential to me that I would not even bother to notice it or its captive planets. Never mind that if I was a wizard I would have even less tolerance for the limits that science puts on physical properties.

But from another angle we still laugh that former theologians consumed themselves measuring how many angels could fit on the head of a pin and yet today we are oblivious to the obvious aggrandizement of measuring everything digitally. Science has now told us that we are merely a computer and that everything can be viewed and understood from the perspectives of a Theory of Everything that argues that the universe is merely a calculator, and that everything within the universe is merely a formulae, an algorithm of the larger computer, calculating the result which is, the universe.

How utterly interestingly simple. If there is something fantastically beautiful about science is how simplistic it is. Everything is organized in tidy little formulas and calculations and tables and elements and symbols, and you can correlate the rational between all the relations of any given thing to another thing. And of course one should not be surprised because if god created everything then it is equally obvious that god had to have something in common with everything he created and so the morphing elemental ability of all things into carbon and energy and subtracts of matter is only a logical correlation of: you are where you come from. All things come from God, all things have something in common with god and by virtue of descendancy something in common with each other.

So why are we having this discussion, science might be a reductionist but that doesn’t make it wrong, someone ought to explain the little world and if that is what science enjoys and it has a captive audience in those people that have limited ability to tolerate their passions, then what in the hell is wrong with that, and more why should we sit in judgment of that. Precisely correct. I am only pointing out that trying to make a computer out of the universe is merely a reflection of science’s own attempt to automate all of its compendium of feelings into operant conditioning charts so that they don’t have to feel bad that they are machines that neuter emotions.

Why is everything now digital? Why is your DNA now a data warehouse, why is the universe one giant supercomputer? Because if you use a ruler to measure something the results will be mathematics. The universe as one giant supercomputer can only make sense if you are a scientist, I applaud them on their minimalist quest, their idea of making everything simple is almost complete, even if my universe won’t comply.

Consider this, there is analog and there is digital, which came first: analog! Analog came first, analog is everything, the universe is not digital it is analog, if that is the case then what is digital? Digital is what humans measure as the optimum point of understanding required in order to formulate a world view. In the case of a song what takes place is very simplistic, we hear the song, we say this song has a wave representation, of that wave representation what the human ear hears is equal to Q, if we subtract everything that the human ear does not here and leave only Q then we have a digital representation of that song, that is the parts of the song that matter to the human ear, we of course define what matters to the human ear based on what matters to us, and when the song is released and published then the audience only hears what is worthy to hear, and they are pleased.

But then they don’t know what is missing, digital is a sampling condition, the universe is truly all analog and reports information in an analog format, even the digital world must conform to processing in analog and converting back to analog. Every piece of digital processing is eventually transferred back to analog so that it can report itself as information to the world. The processing is perhaps the most human made thing, the most artificial condition in existence, that is, there is a wave patter, the wave pattern is not firm, it is not steady, it has a medium which is somewhat flexible and precisely because of that distorting, when a particular technique decides to determine key points it draws a symmetric wave pattern, a mathematical pattern, nothing like the universe, and a reductionistic representation of the entire wave that the universe has conspired to create.

The interesting thing is how humans aim to make all points square out to finite and discrete points, and this is precisely why digital music sounds so crisp and so out in the air, floating without a medium, like a little hammer that keeps on hitting you, on and off, ones and zeros, no rippling allowed, no flow permitted, the magnificent opulence of isolated music patters, ticking away at a membrane that was designed to flow patterns that are full of analog based distortions.

Of course you don’t want to go out an arrest digital engineers, they serve their purpose, thanks to them more songs can be stored in a tiny memory disk, the full song with all its analog wonder composes too much space. Nor is it a fatal anomaly to subtract analog and break it up into equal and discreet units so that it can be used to move streams of data and processes through a topology of wires. The point simply made here is that anything that is a subtract of the analog world can not in any framework make a theory of everything, much less can it compute everything, nothing could be further from the true essence of anything than a digital methodology of computing the defining processes of the universe.

Of course digital is all the craze, but it is all the craze because it is simplistic, people love simplistic patterns, they love to imagine that the universe and your DNA and your mind and your soul and your reason for being are simple matters that can be further reduced into more simple matters. This of course is not the case, the universe is complex, your complex, I am sorry, I have to say it, you are very complex, even the biggest idiot amongst us all is a complex entity with an infinite number of indefinable aspects which have no footing on knowledge, or for that matter mysticism, reductionist might understand things when they reduce them, but they don’t.
The Dividing Instant required by digital, doesn’t exist. Your brain is analog.

Some people argue that our brains operate under quantum principles. I just said that they operate under analog principles. It would be rather easy to disprove a quantum theory of brain circuitry.

First if our brain was based on quantum principles we wouldn’t be asking any questions, we would not be measuring, quantum allows for such simultaneous operation that one does not have to even think, that our brain thinks is one argument against the possibility of its being quantum based. We could also argue that if our brains were based on quantum principles and quantum circuitry, then that our brains could think if they wanted to, hence in quantum thinking becomes a possible probability. However, the fact that we have to use supercomputers to number crunch would imply that we lack processing power, something that would never be an issue if indeed we were quantum brains. Neither can we decipher a simple 64 bit encryption pattern, why would we imagine that we have a quantum brain, I don’t know.

In point of fact, the first computers would then have been the first pure raw evidence of two things, one that we are not quantum brains, else why would we need computers. And two that we are indeed not based on mathematical principles. The reason why I say that we are not based on mathematical principles is because a computer is a purely mathematical construct. Yet most humans have a very difficult time comprehending the inner, the outer the all around workings of a computer. And even some that manage to understand the concept of these computer things, still have difficulty learning to operate them. And yet, many say that everything in the universe has a mathematical model and such is the language that you need to speak in order to be a quantum physics theoretician patrician.

Yet if we were mathematical constructs at any levels and mathematics was the language of the universe, you could in theory divine it from any angle and from any source and from any creature. Which is indeed what many believe, they believe that aliens will speak the same or something close to it, mathematical language and so adding and subtracting meaning we will be able to get along with the aliens; specially once we realize that we have mathematics in common. Never mind that we can’t get along with our own families or humanity but that is wholly another point.

Sticking to my point, the bottom line is that neither a sponge in the sea, nor the smallest sea horse, nor a turtle nor a dog not even my smarter than dogs cats, and not me, and most people, all of us, can not divine mathematics. Sorry, we can not, it is easier to learn how to punch a person in the gut, easier still to learn how to bake cookies, but mathematics has nothing intuitive about it save for how it remarks itself upon the frontal lobe of some geniuses. The fact that only geniuses can really talk the pure theorem realm of mathematics should have made it obvious to anyone that we are not naturally arithmetic. Hence the reason why working a computer doesn’t come natural to most of us and hence the reason so many geniuses have to work very hard to make computers easy to use.
But there is a bit more here, neither is our brain analog, analog is just less metallic than digital hence the reason that I used analog as a method of humanizing our brains. Our brains are really something else and that something else is quite incomprehensible.

Your biological brain is not your brain. Your brain is something else and some place else and not in your brain, your brain is just an interpreter of your brain’s brain. Fortunately most of my readers, if statistics are anything to go by, are religious, if so this part will be easy for the faithful and much more difficult for the rationalist.

Your body is not your spirit, one can assume that the body and the spirit are inseparable, but when you die your spirit separates from your body, and your body decomposes. Your body was the astronaut suit that your spirit uses to navigate through the corporal world and more accurately to tie itself down to it. A certain degree of your being corporeal has to be forced upon your spirit, and that is why there is a part of you that falls deeply in love with the material world much to the detriment of your spirit which is the dominant part of your being, as anything else is mostly temporary.

Your brain then is not in your brain as much as you would like to imagine it though. Your brain is in instead distributed throughout the entire consciousness of the sum total of the existing corporeal sentient humanity. It is how you tune it to those around you and how you synchronize yourself among their waves of actions and thoughts, that determines the effectiveness or not, or the discomfort and joys that you will experience within your existence. This life has limitations, everyone composes your brain, and the hegemony of thought throughout the humanity is a corporeal unfettered lock step.

The common bond of humanity is what you have as your operant limitation, but if you harmonize yourself with the corporeal humanity you will tap into the resources of the whole, which maybe positive or negative as they will include criminal as well as divine or constructive elements. The medium doesn’t discriminate completely but it does discriminate against anything that is not human, it is almost desensitize towards alien life forms and even local animal life.

The medium which projects thoughts on to your brain is the interplay that you have with your humanity. The more limited the interplay the more limited your experience of the moment, of the life, of the world.

There are things to fix here, but we fix them for posterity. Much of what you are is what you will always be, at least here, which is why being radical is such a destructive force. Being radical is a fight against the generational self being. Change however cruel is in lock step with humanity as a whole.

Your brain evolves in relationship to the whole, which is why your brain is not your brain, but only partly yours, and so use it as you would anything that you are barrowing from someone else, carelessly of course.

The Aspect Ratio of a Fool

The element of desire, a thing that makes something out of nothingness can make a fool out of anyone. It is easier to believe that rational is logical than to imagine it, as something the product of an aggregated desire. Yet everything must desire itself, even logic, the success of logic is due to the greatness of love that it has towards itself. But to one more important thing, logic is particularly successful because of how small its aspect ratio is.

In the vagaries and quandaries that mount a Universe and its composite structures, there isn’t a limit ratio to comprehension, but the conceptualizations which have smaller aspect ratios, (aspect ratio being the full context of what must be understood in order to conceptualize the idea of a philosophy, subject or and thing,) the aspect ratio determines the amount of concentrated belief that is mandated to grasp a concept and turn it into something that is usable, say for instance relativity, even as relativity is within the concept of space-time, and the concept of space-time entails dimensional structures, and those mandate a universe. And the pretty thing here is that the reverse is also true, the requisites are filled out at all levels and niches by the process of mandated desires.

The encapsulation of a concept within aspect ratio frameworks allows for hospitality, but hospitality is equally determined by aspect ratios of endemic comprehension, entities and things have to accept that they understand and embody parts or whole the aspect ratio of otherness. Logic then exist within the aspect ratio of a conceptualization we call human, the human brings about the possibility of comprehending the aspect ratio of a logic which can express a concept within the body of the universe. It is the simplicity of logic which makes it so easy for humans to fall in love with it. With logic everything can make sense. Never mind that everything can only make sense if it is portioned, quartered and maimed.

It is then an inherent tendency to simplify that generates linear conceptualizations of the non linear universe. Within the confined aspect ratio of the universe everything gets in the way of everything else and complexity and interrelatedness is inherent within the system, there is no simple way to look at the universe, and it is harder to understand, and impossible to explain.

We will of course attempt to explain the universe because the aspect ratio of a thing we call time is so miniscule that we think we have the time to figure it out. We don’t, the universe nor the things within and without care to be explained, they just happen to exist in the way that they happen to exist, the universe has one fatal flaw, and that is that it changes, and the hidden aspect ratio of the universe is always infinite % greater than any given understanding of it. Further, as quantum correctly surmises, observing the universe for what it is can only kill the observed objects present condition. Any attempt at understanding is deterred by the very attempts.

Women, for instance, intuitively comprehend this, which is why when they are being watch by a male they don’t bother to look back. They are aware that the fact that they are being watched automatically effects their atomic structures, at a quantum level they are able to perceive the effects of the agent that is observing them, including the degree of intensity, and that reflects his characteristics. This allows the passive feminine observer to detect the type of effect that the masculine observer has upon her without tampering with the information from her perspective. If the female were instead to gaze back at the male then the investigating energies would collapse each original essence into a new collage that would require a wholly different investigation, and external observers that were not willing to look. Such incident is called marriage, a hapless adventure for both, neither of which can genuinely ever observe the other.

The reason why a silent observer, or better put a non intrusive observer may acquire essence awareness its because once you accept that you are part of something then that something, strangely enough, becomes feel enabled. Everything naturally accepts something that is a part of it, a silent awareness of otherness gives insight.

The most difficult thing for entities to understand is the interrelatedness of things, events and subject beings. Yet it is the most common of things, interrelatedness that is. What do we mean by that, well that if you are in a market, competing to sell your products, and your brand is number one in the list of competing brands, that such maybe how the essence of the brand has placed itself based on your product definition and market assumptions. That is you are not in fifth place, you are in the place which the whole essence being of your brand, considering its interrelated aspect ratio with the other brands, is in. In other words, your brand and the other brands comprise a supra aspect ratio that does not take your individual willingness to be number one in the market but rather the global perspective of the brands as a single unit.

It is your inability to place yourself in a globalize supra brand perception point that forbids your brand from being number one. The number one brand undoubtedly has the greatest aspect ratio inclusion. Your brand is subjugated by its interrelatedness to the other brands and their combines perception of each other as a single brand. It is that simple.

Does all this mean that we are bound to fail in our endeavor to comprehend? Yes and No.

From the perspective of complete comprehension we will undoubtedly fail. The human race is one small aspect ratio of the universe. It is not the universe, nor was the universe centralized on the idea of humanity. It is therefore impossible for the universe to be within the confined aspect ratio of humanity which is how it would need to be positioned for us to reach absolute and unified comprehension of it all.

The relation of one aspect ratio to another determines the level of intuitive comprehension that we may possess over it, and our affiliation with supra aspect ratio induces leadership; a leadership produced ironically by communality. Communality of course is the essence of all leadership. But surprisingly, or better yet conclusively ironically, in our world, communality is deterred, everyone here wants to be original, without understanding that the grandeurs of the universe depend entirely on sameness, redundancy and repetition.

Finally from the perspective of our own comprehension, we certainly can satisfy ourselves. Our aspect ratio limits the degree of misunderstanding that we may comprehend. Moreover you must never forget to remind yourself that it is how you determine the composition of something that gives you the information, the information is deterred or influenced by the method you use to call it information.

Skipping to the greater cause, complete awareness; it is still more likely that we will comprehend the universe in its totality, to our satisfaction, from the frame reference of our aspect ratio. In blunt summary, it is the fact that we make the ruler that measures the universe that will keep us foolishly sane.

Self Adhesive Morality

Perhaps the only topic that I am truly qualified to comment on is technology. I have been a shy participant in the field and have come to regard it as a panacea. Something in between here and some alternative state which we still can not quantify nor assimilate.

We use technology to bound ourselves to the possibility of the other possibility. And that is what tickles us the most about technology, that is, that it is secretly aligned with another version of our condition which we still can not phantom.

The reality is perhaps a bit more cruel, though figuratively speaking anything can be true, there appears to be more of a philosophical element in technology than some inarticulate future human expectation. Technology is for instance agnostic, it is secular, it has as its core a seemingly apolitical and amoral character. Yet those very constructs betray an insane ritualism for a sterile mechanical complexity of what is human. It is as if we, when creating technology, were saying to ourselves, “I want to look away from humanity.” And in the process of looking away the world we see is a cold, inanimate perfection that won’t react to our emotions.

There seems to be some kind of madness in technology, it is as if it wanted to kill it and us with it. Technology aims to secularize its services register so that it can serve any master, but in the end its very secularity makes championing it a neutral aspiration. When we pin our hopes on technology we are still aware that it is not fundamental to our being that it merely serves a particular disposition of our daily being, and that it marches forward regardless of the altercations of the very being that creates it. In summary judgment technology contrives its own sterility to convince us of its neutrality so that we, and that is any of us, will promote it regardless of our primary cause.

For technology and even for us, the supra essence is more important than the individual expression of it.

If that is the case then equally is the case that like any self contrived cause, that is a cause that embarks in being greater than the humanity it serves, it will invariably become passé. Technology ought be looked at within the framework of its emotive environment, any humanity that is able to arrest its emotive nature should have fairly advance technology. Equally it should also, as it advances the technology, advance its own demise.

There are always those disruptive elements. Imagine for instance how fast telepathy would kill Instant Messaging. (As an aside I should ally the concerns of those of you that would think the world would go mad if we possessed the ability to read each others minds; that is however not true, constructively, reading each others minds would simply show us how human, and not unique we all are; thus bringing forward common empathy.)

Technology is thus on par with say religion that ended with the Inquisition; Or with Capitalism that ended when the cold war came to an abrupt halt; Or romanticism that did not survive the romantics. The signs are obvious, anything that commences to spend more of its energy of desire in aims that define security, indoctrination, self adhesive morality, and lamentations of the difficulties of self preservation, is bound to be on demise row.

Much to the comfort of many: The state of the reactionaries is evidence of their sure extinction.

Technology is thus an interesting but not a lasting thing. It should not be expected in any long term future composition of humanity, we may get as far as quantum computers, it can take a thousand years for philosophies to come to life, evolve, mature and die. But the relevant thing is that technology while seemingly something solid state, it is in fact no more than an highly contagious and highly applicable philosophy, and it should be treated as such.

It is worthy of note that no future has ever been anticipated by prior civilizations. The Romans, Mayans, Incas, Aztecs, Greeks, Assyrians, Persians, Mongols, Egyptians, etc, all shared one thing in common with today’s scientific fever, they thought that they were the matured, the chosen, and the future. A logical conclusion since the aspect ratio of comprehension within those civilizations was self-adhesive.

The Masses

The masses, the masses! Everything is about the masses, the ignorant masses, the following masses, the blind masses everyone puts everything over the head of the masses. They are utilized to farm corn, mine gold, fish, they can be trained to vote, they possess mass appeal, they have religion, they mass purchase goods, they are a band of followers and watch out where the mass leads with its stampede.

Marx was inspired by the mass, so was Jesus Christ, so was Thomas Jefferson and Mao. Even Adam Smith thought he was out to help the masses and Lenin was eager to liberate the masses from the freehand. The only people that have never said that they want to help the mass directly is the very self absorbed scientists and evidently the honorable Hirohito former Emperor of Japan, though the latter allowed his son to marry a commoner. We won’t even bother to mention that great disdainer of the masses Margaret Thatcher.

The problem with all the people that want to help the masses is the very same problem that all the elitists have. One group doesn’t want to help the masses because they are elitists and have little regard for them except when it comes as a means of production and consumerism. The other group, those that want to help only care about the masses to advance their appropriate cause or idealism. To an environmentalist or a human rights activist the mass has mass appeal. To a communist the mass needs to be rescued, to an academic the mass just needs to be educated. Does a mathematician really want more mathematicians? Not really but they give it lip service, you just have to believe how learning calculus is so important to everyday life.

They are all elitists.

I have a friend that went to school to study law so as to change the laws so as to change the government so as to free the people.

It is all very pretty, wanting to rescue the masses, only wanting to rescue anything is fundamentally condescending. Imagine the environmentalists for instance, they want to prevent climate change, the world we inhabit has seen ice ages, magnetic polarity flips, huge asteroids have made it pass the atmosphere and presumably killed the entire Dinosaur species, and undoubtedly there will be future conflagrations and floods, and the climate will be changed dramatically by mother nature or cockroaches, but the greens want to stop the earth from warming up a couple of Celsius.

Any geologist will tell you that mother earth is under more threats from mother earth than from us measly humans. And the same is true of the mass but in a different way. The mass is under less threat of extinction than philosophers or romantics or poets. Evidence the extinction of prophets, the last great appearance made by a prophet please? And please don’t count Joseph Smith.

Of course the mass doesn’t care if you are trying to rescue it, the mass realizes that it can’t be hurt by you or your philosophy or your altruistic heart. This is because the mass ebbs and flows and simmers in the most humane spot possible. The spot of averageness.

To you or me it might be a bad thing to be average, but if you have average taste things are cheaper, almost anywhere you can find something good to eat, and most people think like you do which means that most magazines and books will say the things that you want to hear and politicians will bid for your vote.

The mass rampages through anything, there isn’t a democracy or a dictatorship or a monarchy or a feudal lord that has ruled with out mass appeal. Never!

Some countries would prefer to disown their dictators, but their dictator’s successes betrays an organized fact!

Even scientists require mass appeal. The space program, Mars in particular is pure raw mass appeal for technological research. Even the Atom Bomb is a spoke person for nuclear power. Some people have wrongly argued that more science could be done here on earth instead of wasting billions in putting humans on Mars. They are of course wrong, the fact that Mars captures mass imagination guarantees that more science programs will be funded at all levels.

The theory of evolution has mass appeal. Relativity with its quirky play with time, something that the mass is linearly locked in, and through age experiences a one way ticket to death, can now fancy that through relativity there could be a way to see yourself arriving as a baby before being born.

Quantum has of course the greatest mass appeal of all because of uncertainty, the masses are bored, the uncertainty principle can turn that into an immediate optional crisis. To say nothing of teleportation and the most endearing quantum entanglement, action at a distance without the cumbersome geometry of space and time.

The masses don’t sit and think well in order to experience some of the most interesting relativistic effects I have to get myself near the event horizon of a super massive black hole. They don’t sit and think that Quantum is a particle level theory and that they are too fat for quantum effects to toss them into another dimension.

How important mass appeal is should give anyone cause not to worry about the masses. More worry about your own individuality if it doesn’t have mass appeal. The masses neither need saviors nor are they exploited by the elite clans of this world. Rather the masses constantly adjust the world to their liking and always as little as possible because radical change doesn’t appeal to them due to its high discomfort and energy requirements.

But there is another twist in the wet towel effect. Your not going to change the masses because the masses are the medium by which all the hyped up types communicate. The masses are the steady stream of repetition that absorbs and channels and kindles potential throughout our humanity. If we are absorbed into mass appeal we cease to be because we exist in action and not in thought. The mass expresses itself only through action, the mass doesn’t abstract itself from reality, it subjugates its will to the here and now.

How does that delete metaphysics? It doesn’t, when metaphysics is ready for prime time it will surge through us all as one singular divine mass of self conductive. The problem for metaphysics is that it has not matured to the point of expression in the here and now. And it might never mature to that level, it might not even been possible for it to do so.

The aspect ratio of any reality is exotically based on its desire to exist.

Anything can exist if it can generate critical mass of desire.

The masses will willingly grab any desire as long as it is not out of reach.

The fools will keep trying to make heaven on earth forgetting that the spirit is for the spirit world.

Pause here: Logic comes from a distrust of emotion. The masses always overcome all logic.

The Apology

“I come upon my cross of perdition.” Might a been what Jesus would have said if he had wanted to illustrate his inevitable reality. Of course he did not see it that way, his difficult path forward was a road to divine salvation; or at least he thought that. In this sort of situations the truth doesn’t matter and so I come upon my cross of perdition.

Then again, in any and all cases, the truth doesn’t really matter and that is what I have been trying to say all along, because what truly matters in the end is what one believes and more what the herd believes; hence the reason why being normal is easier than not. If one doesn’t respect Jesus because of what he believed one must for sure respect him for his irresistible sense of belief.

So here I come to apologize for waging an all out campaign against the entire scientific establishment. I should equally apologize to the capitalists for my incessant harassment but I refuse to invoke such apology not on any reasonable grounds just simply my own impishness.

Yes Darwin, I am sorry, it seems right my cats evolved from rats and rats from garden snakes, hence the eating chains; birds and oil from dinosaurs and personally I like monkeys. Copernicus, (was he really a scientist?) sorry none the less; Newton, I like to apologize not only for my rancorous accusations against your insensibilities, I would also like to apologize on behalf of the belligerent William Blake whom I might say is now dead and is not able to say sorry in person. Though as you might imagine he sent me a ghastly metaphysical apparition explaining that if I don’t apologize to Sir Isaac, Sir Blake is doomed to purgatory.

Yes, yes, I apologize to all, Einstein deserves an individual apology, I am deeply sorry subtracted from all points of reference. Max Planck, enviable institute, “Quantum” wished I thought of that susceptibly-touchy-feely theory, Planck length nothing short, and so my constant 6.6260755 x 10-34 joule second apologies. Need I mention Bohr, sorry too, and, though I can’t remember his name, that Monk that studied peas, and Tesla, he was a scientist too, alternating current wow, thank you both. Sorry Copernicus. Galileo (A man that took misunderstanding to the bank.) Hats off to you. All the fathers of medicine thank you for figuring out that it wasn’t ichor but blood running through me veins; oh and compliments for the very telling symbol you’ve chosen for your profession.

I reserve a special, I am so very, very sorry to all the technologists which have through the use of their method accomplished the acceleration that will sunder capitalism. Certainly email and the internet will undo themselves in time, but not before ending the idyllic separations that make capitalist thought possible.

Separately, I apologize to Sigmund Freud, a man who knew how to make an industry of his fear of women, and marvelously turned his inhibitions into a science. Very much like Director Woody Allen, a master of the concept: stay in your room forever punishment, has succeeded in locking people up in his cute masochistic-feminine-sterile psyche.

Karl Jung, his prodigal disciple wouldn’t want me to ask for an apology, he was trying to get away from science and performed Oedipus drama on Freud. Rather I admonish Jung as a faithless psychologist that was always trying to get something third-eye like into psyche; apparently wholly unaware that the mystical is beyond psychology for obvious reasons. To both Freud and Jung my apologies and compliments especially for pinning psychology to the experimental straightjacket. If not an accomplishment certainly magic.

I won’t apologize to Quantum, as a science, sense I have always believed that it is because of quantum that a universe without science may exist.

I don’t have to apologize to Leonardo Da Vinci because while he was a scientists he was also everything else human.

Oh, there are so many and my name calling knowledge so uncivilized, so I propose that all the living scientists, (the last of their species if this book is a success,) thank all of their peers and ancestors for all their time and fine contributions, for finding the edge of the universe, for discovering all of the elements, for measuring the speed of light, and more gratitude to the continental derailment of the metaphysical and the aesthetic and please beg with all atoms that they forgive my trespasses as I have learnt to forgive theirs.

I am aware that this is perhaps not necessarily a calendrical apology but it is well meant. See the other day, I was writing away and it hit me, damn them scientists! It is just that they are firm believers in their belief! Only in fact more proof that belief is everything, they irrationally believe that they can explain the entire universe from the macro to the micro, to why fifteen year olds are promiscuous. Just ask science. And I am complaining! No, no, I am the one that is wrong, there is no better evidence for my theories than the existence and persistence of science against all other factorable realities and truths.

Imagine me coming over to your house tonight, for dinner, to request funding for an atom smashing supercollider so as to prove the existence of particles that don’t exist anymore because they require the kind of cosmic energy that hasn’t been naturally around since the birth of the universe. And when I am done experimenting, you will see the primal origins evidence as jolly-proof-positive that I was right; even as you won’t comprehend it. That kind of backward thinking to the days of the Big Bang is faithful forward funding futurology.

After realizing the supra-grandness of all that I had to apologize to what can amount to exhibit A of successful irrationality. I then went on a lynching expedition to hang myself for considering science my true enemy. Trying to figure how I could have been so blinded to the evidence by pure hate; though Nixon had already graphically explained the emotional concept to an entire nation and world. I decided to use Nietzschean autoimmune destructiveness to seek my inner daemons and to skin them down to the gut and place them, as one might a good build of tea, against some desert sun.

What were my conclusions? Again to judge oneself is a primal wrong, but to judge others is even more wrongful, scientists do not pause to judge themselves, they instead see the discovery of their errors as a rational-logical corrective secular and knowledge bound approach towards the ultimate truth, hence why there is no need for personal reproach.

Newton might have been all wrong about gravity but he wasn’t all wrong about loving science. He used science to be wrong; whereas Jesus used religion to be wrong, scientists can’t see the point of Jesus; and probably for the same reason that Jesus can’t see the point of scientists. Any scientist is allowed to prove any other scientist wrong as long as he is using science to do it - he is being true to his peers, true to the organization, true to the institution and mindful of heritage. In much the same way, and no different indeed, Jesus could certainly forgive the Pope and the entire Catholic church for being unequivocally wrong as long as they continue to have faith in the ten commandments.

Every book has to come to an end, and this revelation and its accompanying apology must invariably end this one. It would be unfair to summarize the concepts behind these pages, each chapter is an isolated universe that composes all of the work and all of the work composes every chapter. Neither are possible without each other hence the reason why they each summarize all.

If you walk away voided from the need to comprehend, you are setting root to the antidote for something we can’t prove is a sickness, only that it makes us feel badly; the perfection of truth.