“Under natural law we don’t lose the priest domain. The priest domain loses deceit and fraud.”-Weinhagen

By Luke Weinhagen

GIVEN – (Deflationary Grammars) {Scientists}

– Logic

– … Math

– … … Algorithms

– … … … Recipes, Protocols

– … … … … Sciences

– … … … … … The Law (Descriptive Grammar)

– … … … … Narration (history)

– … … … Fiction

– … … Fictionaisms

– … Deceit

– Fraud

– (Inflationary Grammars) {Priests}

Under natural law we don’t lose the priest domain. The priest domain loses deceit and fraud. Instead of “Inflationary Grammars” they adopt “Transformationary Grammars” or “Transitionary Grammars”.

Facilitating the undeveloped into the developed. Supporting the exploration of the unknown.

Example: When we bring NatLaw to new groups it is an unknown to them, we teach/guide them through their exploration of that unknown – acting in the priest domain – while also fostering the transformation of individuals from undeveloped sovereigns under NatLaw to developed sovereigns under NatLaw.

(I keep looking for a better label because priest has been so undermined in our experience of the role but I keep coming back to priest as the domain of responsibility over care that isn’t compromised by the exclusion of the masculine)

From CURTD I think we might want to consider that priesthood in the sense of lying is a failure point like communism. and priesthood in the sense of wisdom (sage) is the success point. I think it might be really,r eally, really REALLY useful to create a triangle for wisdom archetypes to equal the triangle of political systems… yes.. in fact, that’s the fking answer….