Science, Philosophy, Metaphysics, and Politics

What is what and where, how, and when does it go?  These are the questions of science and metaphysics.  Philosophy asks why does it go?  Psychology asks is it all in your head?  And there is the ground for the Great Debate between four (technically psychology is a subset of the three) schools of thought on the nature of reality.

What we know so far from the New Science is that the universe is made of electrons of all the same size and mass which expand at a certain rate determined somehow, most likely through fourth dimensional etheric density changes in my version of the New Science.  None the less, what follows from that is the paradigm of reality that the majority will study in the future of science itself.

There will still be a massive debate with the old quantum school of thought called Standard Theory.  I personally have no interest right this second in personally debating anyone as my level of trust in my fellow humans is a bit dim at the moment and I'm not interested in being personal attacked for being right.  Some other people I know are in a similar dilemma about psychology and that part of the Truth.

Still the questions remain and there will be those who have the time necessary to attempt to solve the unanswered questions that the theories suggested pose.  My metaphysical writings have been removed from this website except for what was left in the philosophy of knowledge essay though that is mostly philosophy and defining boundaries between things which is the primary purpose one should study philosophy.

I will add a few thoughts in this essay about science now because I want to primarily.  I believe electrons are created and destroyed under certain conditions.  I believe that parallel dimensions (not the time traveling or multiple versions of the same universe ones) exist in some capacity but I'm not sure if they exist on the same infinity physical plain or are co-axial through the 4th dimension existing in different nodes within that dimension.  Not that it matters that much for the ultimate question of why does any of it matter?

Much of my metaphysical work attempted to answer that last question by saying the cosmos is a giant infinite grab bag of stuff where beings get more and more and more over time through the work they do in their lives but everything is more or less programmed into the system dependent on the consciousness to wake up and do what it needs to do to fulfill the promise of eternal life in the living moment of their existing one.  If it sounds tough, it is a bit.  You can't both stare into infinity and live on the ground floor for too long without infinity getting to becoming a problem.

At the same time knowing of the infinite is a self provable philosophical series of reasoning that says your stuck with the infinite stuff but more importantly the people who are there sharing (what's that word mean says the vast majority) eternity with you.  These people are here to stay no matter what their condition in this life.  The eternal connection exists but outside of their consciousness because of the condition of their lives.

With the idea of eternal infinite connection, gridwork as it should be called, comes the idea that we should be doing good to each other because that connection exists everywhere and in everyone.  The catch is that we have a right to withdraw if we are unacknowledged.  Rejection exists to prove the right of assertion and the right of me or you.  The boundary is based on the problem of full knowledge.

Full knowledge is the idea that one must truly fully recognize another person before the gates to a real relationship can be created.  This applies interestingly enough to the contents of science, metaphysics, and philosophy.  Treat your teachers with kindness or watch all the content disappear and you are the one now who must create you own gridmap through science, metaphysics, and philosophy.  I did it.  I've left probably 50% of my original essays up especially the science ones.  The rest are gone due to lack of support and attacks.  I did alot of work to get where I am in my understanding of the universe.  The response to free content is not to attack the one giving it.  And so it is gone.

The questions still remain.  But those subtle enough to pursue the great answers again will have to realize that there is a game that unfortunately trumps free inquiry.  That game is politics.

I will not go further into that information as it is simply too dangerous to actually explain how politics works with people in its psychology but I will describe a bit on how it works in general.  Simply put, with politics, the devil is in the details.  It is because of politics that the personal becomes the political.  Truth is attacked!  Why, you might ask?  Because politics is about keeping the balance of power and maintaining privilege over the all important access to resources such as free information.  Formalists run this world, even if they are not so great at protocol, logic, or law.  But they do know one thing much better than the majority, that is how to silence dissenting voices efficiently using force, manipulation, and countervailing opinion.

Can we see past that pattern of relating?  This is the great question of consciousness.  Will we become consciousness enough of the game to stop it before science, philosophy, and metaphysics are gone?  And the game doesn't stop there we could lose art, music, and journalism too for all three of these are ideally representing science (journalism), art (metaphyiscs), and music (philosophy).  The game could also get rid of mathematics.  Where nothing is sacred, nothing is safe.

Will we live in a world where free inquiry exists?  More importantly will we live in a world where people can exist free from the threats of global warming, nuclear proliferation, nuclear reactors, and thought police?  Can a consensus be built without the later?  Increasingly the answer seems to be no.  Everyone must have their thought police because the stakes are everything.

This is where we stand.  Universalism is a doctrine that is created out of the fusion of globalism and multiculturalism in all its variants.  Yet without a final judgement on the question about what about the rest of everyone that doesn't agree, it represents just another version of the endlessly reemerging political beast in another form.  For this to work there must be no separation between anyone and anyone else.  We are all each other.  There is no middle ground.

Time is against universalism as it has too few adherents for right now.  The opposite schools of thought are anti-universalist.  Nationalism in all its forms is an example.  But so to is parochialism, tribalism, racism, classicism, and various sundry religious and ideological groups,   The battle is between division and unification and division is winning.  No amount of dividing will result in a unification.  Yet to get to unification requires philosophy and a tiny bit of metaphysics added for clarity.

Science is held up by politics, and metaphysics and philosophy are held up by the lack of interest in refined explanations of being caused by real life on Earth.  Hunger is the great adversary of meaningful conversation.  Today it seems as through cell phones are the new great adversary.   None the less, this is as far as we've gotten with the problem of everything as it stands.

Tomorrows debates may be my own, but everyone will need to find out what it is that they are going to do to save themselves and the planet.  That's really what it all comes down to.  The planet must be saved.  The people must learn to save themselves.  Will anyone give a shit enough for the real processes to start or is everything just too damn complicated now?  The time to start doing this work was 20 years ago when it was going to be easy.   Procrastination further pushes us towards the planetary end game, the end of the human species itself.  We are getting close to the end.

Humanity does not have any time left to talk about timetables.  Action is the only thing that matters now.  We've been through the bullshit plan stage of the science of climate change.  It's a delay tactic to prevent action so someone can milk it into a paper asset creating device.  Is that the future of the Green Front?  I think not.  What sort of weirdness is this?  How does anyone of those people who signed onto another version of "money making" schemes sleep at night?  No conscience, no problem?  Apparently no one confronts the current environmental "leadership" with their failures.  We don't have time for this crap anymore.  The first thing serious people should do is clean up the left.  The right has no clue though they'll have to understand eventually.

That's the science of it funnily enough.  The science of political art if you will.  Let's just paint them off the canvas.  Get rid of the old leadership, they suck.  Been holding that in for awhile.  The results of a clean house will be great.  What we should do is simply keep firing leaders if they don't take action within a timeframe.  I'm an unreasonable man about this I'd just do all the actions myself without bothering to fire them and then send them a memo or something if they wanted me to advice them.  No what everyone needs to do is basically set a one week action timetable and just do it (and if no action in one week fire the whoever it is).  And once they have done it, keep doing it.  Do that till the world is on renewable energy, the nuclear stuff is all gone in the best way possible, the Amazon is a protected parkland in its entirety with full native rights guaranteed by an effective UN (or even the US can do it), and no fossil fuels are used ever again.  In addition we have to technologically revert the CO2 in the atmosphere back to something reasonable I've suggest 375 ppm, others have suggested 350 ppm.  Whatever works from those two options.

So that's an action oriented do it now anti-plan.  It's easy, you just keep firing the jerks in charge until you get non-jerk who do things.  You can tell their good because they do things and get things done.  There are no excuses.  You don't wait till the next election, you get your collective voice together and say now, now, now.  And after you are done saying now, you say now again.  And after they attack you, you keep saying now.  And after they deny you, you keep saying now.  Together say now.  Together say do it now.  You do this until they get it.  That's the whole "plan".  As you can see it's very simple and easy.  The rest is up to you.

The Universality of Anti Fractal Reasoning

Simplicity is not a norm.  Words can only get you so far.  And yet the world believes that it can replace simplicity with complexity and remain happy.  But it is not so.  The elegance of simplicity is that it is singular in its emergence.  It cannot be reduced to something it is not.  That, in and of itself, testifies to the concept of anti fractality.

You'd think that the fractal is perfect.  But it isn't, otherwise the reality we live in would not be defined by the anti fractal nature of human existence.  For perfection must include part of itself imperfection itself, otherwise the symmetry of perfection is broken.  It is a sort of strange thing to be considering, but in order for everyone to understand what it is they must live within a fractal as an anti-fractal.  That is the nature of the world and our experiences.  The world and universe are fractals, but people aren't fractals.

You might ask why.  What the hell is an anti fractal doing in the midst of divine perfection, nature's harmony?  Doing it's job creating images of itself everywhere, but hardly of it's own choosing.  Therein lies the mortal confusion at the heart of everything we want to believe in that isn't real.  Truth is unpopular precisely because it reveals the anti fractal to be something that is not fractal.  This upsets the delicate balance of belief that says all things must be perfect now.  But that can't be either because to deny imperfection is to deny choice.

There is no middle ground between honor and dishonor either.  You have to have both to have a fractal.  But if you have one without the other you are stuck in the land of the anti fractal, a pattern in constant struggle between two opposites that can never resolve their differences.  Sound familiar?  It should, that is the whole story of human history and the whole of human psychology dissolved down to a simple basic formula.  Duality, the ultimate nightmare of being caught up between two irreconcilable perspectives.  And the whole of the social system is designed to erase and eliminate irreconcilable perspectives.

Hence was born the thought police.  They were necessary because everyone wants what everyone wants.  And everyone wants what they want to be wanted by others.  But the right to dishonor could not be erased from creation, so division emerges between the choice of one and the choice of the other.  Forever separated by their differing paths a wound emerges between souls that cannot be healed in time.  That results in grief, the unavoidable experience of bitterness caused by imperfection.  So the anti fractal is proven beyond a shadow of doubt internal to the individual.  It is here we live.  The causality of our suffering unerasable from our minds.

Dwelling on that fragmentation of divinity is maddening.  In place of finding a perspective that honors everything we construct instead a temporary solution.  A wall is built between ourselves and the other.  First it is built internally through avoidance of the responsibility to listen.  We justify this by saying, the other is not us, and we have a right to exist.  And so it is, but forever leaving us in that place that is momentarily self contained within the truth of our choices.  We validate our honor for ourselves.  And so it is.

There aren't enough words to really say what it is that is.  Reality exists as a state of flux between the things that are and things that aren't.  But we remain eternally vigilant only of our own state of being.  This is what prevents us from moving forwards.  The eye of the I in the mind, ever watchful, ever keenly observing our every move and creating an endless list of labels for ourselves to drench ourselves in our own dissatisfaction.

It seems inevitable.  The process of the wheel that turns within us reminding us of what we are and often as much of what we aren't that isn't even real.  It's a curiosity of nature I suppose.  But at the same time the wheel turns anyway.  We are inescapable.  We are unavoidable.  We are inevitable.

It is because of this that we continue to exist.  There is no escaping that fact.  Every morning we wake up confirms that indeed I am still here and that I am still going forward.  Writing doesn't really cut the feeling anymore.  There are no words for where we must all end up.  Connection exists only where it is received.  That is a terrible truth and yet we must bear it because that what honor is all about.

We are equal in our division.  We are not each other.  We live in island universes built of our choices, thoughts, feeling, notions, and self chosen identities.  What we create is a parcel of what we choose to create.  And there still really aren't enough words to describe what it is that we will create.  Everyone makes a difference that chooses to.  Motivation is that which is sought by everyone.  And here we are again needing that much more of it to go on.

Not for me though.  I don't need motivation.  I am already here.  I don't have any illusions about what is necessary.  I always have known.  Can a person or place exist that is not in conflict with itself?  That is the great question of our times.  We all want to be singular, to have the answer that will set us free to act.  That is what everyone is asking for.  The anti fractal nature coming up against the fractal itself.  I am, I act, and I do.  We all want to merge into a collective.  We want to lose ourselves in the fractal.  It is madness, but the drive is there.  It keeps calling us.  It keeps wanting us.

There are two types of people in this world who choose to merge through intimacy.  One group merges with ideas, they become their thoughts of their own choosing in their minds losing themselves in some form of illusion.  This is what births the state of ideology and results in ideological formalism, the surrender of the self to a series of rules and concepts that govern one's life as something outside one's self in order to make one feel as though one matters.  The vast majority are of this school of thought.  The other, more dangerous and risky idea is to merge with another person or other people as they are.  This results in the bitterness of the fact that one way mergers don't work.  Are we one yet?  They will asking that question for a long time.

But because the ultimate merger is with other people, it is only the second school of thought, the romantic school, that has any hope of surviving as ideology is cold and ruthless.  People are people, but who is ready to live that way? Who is really ready to surrender their hearts for someone else's dream of a better world.  But, then, what else do you got anyway?  Nothing, you've got nothing.