When the constitution was written, spelling was often phonetic rather than canonized as it has been post-Webster. Capitalization and font size were used as emphasis – bold not available to the pen, as it is today in print. Grammar was more formal and still retained some academic latin influences – including longer sentence structure. And it was written in the context of traditional Common Law, which itself was written in the context of Anglo Saxon Law, which codified Ancient Germanic law, which preserved european (west indo-european) traditional law. This presents a conflict because natural law of reciprocity needs strict construction to eliminate interpretation and the constitution relied on familiarity with that tradition rather than strict construction – Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, and Markets in Everything are not stated, but assumed to the same degree as the existence of god and the perpetual existence of the church. Hence why the constitution must be rewritten with those definitions and with strict construction to ensure that that knowledge of that long tradition is no longer required, and also so that such a constitution is no longer open to interpretation.
Theme: Grammar
-
When the Constitution Was Written…
When the constitution was written, spelling was often phonetic rather than canonized as it has been post-Webster. Capitalization and font size were used as emphasis – bold not available to the pen, as it is today in print. Grammar was more formal and still retained some academic latin influences – including longer sentence structure. And it was written in the context of traditional Common Law, which itself was written in the context of Anglo Saxon Law, which codified Ancient Germanic law, which preserved european (west indo-european) traditional law. This presents a conflict because natural law of reciprocity needs strict construction to eliminate interpretation and the constitution relied on familiarity with that tradition rather than strict construction – Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, and Markets in Everything are not stated, but assumed to the same degree as the existence of god and the perpetual existence of the church. Hence why the constitution must be rewritten with those definitions and with strict construction to ensure that that knowledge of that long tradition is no longer required, and also so that such a constitution is no longer open to interpretation.
-
WHEN THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN… When the constitution was written, spelling
WHEN THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN…
When the constitution was written, spelling was often phonetic rather than canonized as it has been post-Webster. Capitalization and font size were used as emphasis – bold not available to the pen, as it is today in print. Grammar was more formal and still retained some academic latin influences – including longer sentence structure. And it was written in the context of traditional Common Law, which itself was written in the context of Anglo Saxon Law, which codified Ancient Germanic law, which preserved european (west indo-european) traditional law. This presents a conflict because natural law of reciprocity needs strict construction to eliminate interpretation and the constitution relied on familiarity with that tradition rather than strict construction – Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, and Markets in Everything are not stated, but assumed to the same degree as the existence of god and the perpetual existence of the church. Hence why the constitution must be rewritten with those definitions and with strict construction to ensure that that knowledge of that long tradition is no longer required, and also so that such a constitution is no longer open to interpretation.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 09:10:00 UTC
-
The Transcendent
by Neil A. Bucklew The Transcendent? Of course the idea boils down to unclear definitions and murky grammar. and none of us have the time to sort them all out. the transcendent cannot be consumed by definition, but there are plenty of illusions that trigger a neurochemical reaction that is expressed as a transcendent emotion. if the experience is what you want to consume, how is it transcendent? so mindfulness and fasting are more transcendent than illusory gods, who are symbolic guides at best, and ludicrous distractions as worst. What is generally called the transcendent is as you describe, an emotional quest of sorts for some idea that triggers a neurochemical reaction. this is incorrectly named as transcendent and should have a different term. i am of the opinion that this need and behavior is related to atomizing individuality, and the loss of tribal/community connection. our “gods” were our connection to our tribe, throughout time. But there is also a “real’ transcendent. there are real limits and boundaries. identifying and exceeding them could be called transcendent. Self improvement as well as community improvement is simply work done to improve the market value of the individual or community. but it requires identifying and potentially exceeding limitations, opening the path of Caesar, Aristotle, Odin, Zeus, and Tesla to those who dare. Tesla is an example we can look at because he is recent and well documented. There is no silliness involved. He had to eat and sleep just like everyone else, yet he achieved some sort of what i would tentatively call “real transcendent”.
-
The Transcendent
by Neil A. Bucklew The Transcendent? Of course the idea boils down to unclear definitions and murky grammar. and none of us have the time to sort them all out. the transcendent cannot be consumed by definition, but there are plenty of illusions that trigger a neurochemical reaction that is expressed as a transcendent emotion. if the experience is what you want to consume, how is it transcendent? so mindfulness and fasting are more transcendent than illusory gods, who are symbolic guides at best, and ludicrous distractions as worst. What is generally called the transcendent is as you describe, an emotional quest of sorts for some idea that triggers a neurochemical reaction. this is incorrectly named as transcendent and should have a different term. i am of the opinion that this need and behavior is related to atomizing individuality, and the loss of tribal/community connection. our “gods” were our connection to our tribe, throughout time. But there is also a “real’ transcendent. there are real limits and boundaries. identifying and exceeding them could be called transcendent. Self improvement as well as community improvement is simply work done to improve the market value of the individual or community. but it requires identifying and potentially exceeding limitations, opening the path of Caesar, Aristotle, Odin, Zeus, and Tesla to those who dare. Tesla is an example we can look at because he is recent and well documented. There is no silliness involved. He had to eat and sleep just like everyone else, yet he achieved some sort of what i would tentatively call “real transcendent”.
-
Reality consists of the following actionable and conceivable dimensions: 1 – poi
Reality consists of the following actionable and conceivable dimensions:
1 – point, (identity, or correspondence)
2 – line (unit, quantity, set, or scale defined by relation between points)
3 – area (defined by constant relations)
4 – geometry (existence, defied by existentially possible spatial relations)
5 – change (time (memory), defined by state relations)
6 – pure, constant, relations. (forces (ideas))
7 – externality (lie groups etc) (external consequences of constant relations)
7 – reality (or totality) (full causal density)
We can speak in descriptions including (at least):
1 – operational (true) names
2 – mathematics (ratios)
3 – logic (sets)
4 – physics (operations)
5 – Law (reciprocity)
6 – History (memory)
7 – Literature (allegory (possible))
8 – Literature of pure relations ( impossible )
8a – Mythology (supernormal allegory)
8b – Moral Literature (philosophy – super rational allegory)
8c – Pseudoscientific Literature (super-scientific / pseudoscience literature)
8c – Religious Literature (conflationary super natural allegory)
8d – Occult Literature (post -rational experiential allegory )
We can testify to the truth of our speech only when we have performed due diligence to remove:
1 – ignorance,
2 – error,
3 – bias,
4 – wishful thinking,
5 – suggestion,
6 – obscurantism,
7 – fictionalism, and
8 – deceit.
So of the tests:
1 – categorical consistency (equivalent of point)
2 – internal consistency (equivalent of line)
3 – external correspondence (equivalent shape/object)
4 – operational possibility (what you just described) (equivalent of change [operations])
6 – limits, parsimony, and full accounting. (equivalent of proof)
Those operations existed or can exist.
You can imagine a something with the properties of a unicorn, you can speak of the same, draw the same, sculpt the same … but until you can breed one (and even then we must question), and we can test it, the unicorn does not exist ***in any condition that we can test in all dimensions necessary for you to testify it exists***
This is just one of the differences between TRUTH (dimensional consistency (constant relations)), and some subset of the properties of reality (DIMENSIONAL CONSISTENCY).
Mathematics allows us to describe constant relations between constant categories (correspondence) by means of self-reference we call ‘ratios’ to some constant unit (one). The more deterministic (constant) the relations the more descriptive mathematics, the higher causal density that influences changes in state, the more information and calculation is necessary for the description of candidate consequences, and eventually we must move from the description of end states to the description of intermediary states that because of causal density place limits on the ranges of possible end states.
In other words, in oder to construct theories (descriptions) of general rules of constant relations, we SUBTRACT properties of reality from our descriptions until we include nothing but identity(category), quantity, and ratio, and constrain ourselves to operations that maintain the ratios between the subject (identity).
Mathematics has evolved but retained (since the greeks at least) the ‘magical’ (fictional, supernormal fiction, we call platonism) as a means of obscuring a mathematician’s lack of understanding of just why ‘this magic works’. When in reality, mathematics is trivially simple, because it rests on nothing more than correspondence (identity), quantity, ratio, and operations that maintain those ratios, and incrementally adding or removing dimensions, to describe relations across the spectrum between points(identities, objects, categories) and pure relations at scales we do not yet possess the instrumentation or memory or ability to calculate at such vast scales – except through intermediary phenomenon.
As such, operationally speaking, the discipline of mathematics consists (Truthfully) of the science (theories of), general rules of constant relations at scale independence, in arbitrarily selected dimensions. In other words. Mathematics consists of the study of measurement.
it is understandable why we do not grasp the first principles of the universe – they are unobservable directly except at great cost. It is not understandable why we do not grasp the first principles of mathematics: because measurement is a very simple thing, and dimensions are very simple things.
That mathematicians still speak in fictional language, just as do theists and just as do the majority of philosophers (pseudo science, pseudo-rationalism, pseudo-mythology)
Ergo, infinities are a fictionalism. Multiple infinities are a fictionalism. Both fictionalism describe conditions where time and actions (operations) have been removed as is common in the discipline of measurement (mathematics). Operationally, numbers (operationally constructed positional names, must be existentially produced as are changes in gears. And as such certain sets of numbers (outputs) are produced faster (like seconds or minutes vs hours) than other sets of numbers (outputs).
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-04 07:38:00 UTC
-
Neil A. Bucklew The Transcendent? Of course the idea boils down to unclear defin
Neil A. Bucklew
The Transcendent? Of course the idea boils down to unclear definitions and murky grammar. and none of us have the time to sort them all out.
the transcendent cannot be consumed by definition, but there are plenty of illusions that trigger a neurochemical reaction that is expressed as a transcendent emotion. if the experience is what you want to consume, how is it transcendent?
so mindfulness and fasting are more transcendent than illusory gods, who are symbolic guides at best, and ludicrous distractions as worst.
What is generally called the transcendent is as you describe, an emotional quest of sorts for some idea that triggers a neurochemical reaction. this is incorrectly named as transcendent and should have a different term. i am of the opinion that this need and behavior is related to atomizing individuality, and the loss of tribal/community connection. our “gods” were our connection to our tribe, throughout time.
But there is also a “real’ transcendent. there are real limits and boundaries. identifying and exceeding them could be called transcendent.
Self improvement as well as community improvement is simply work done to improve the market value of the individual or community. but it requires identifying and potentially exceeding limitations, opening the path of Caesar, Aristotle, Odin, Zeus, and Tesla to those who dare.
Tesla is an example we can look at because he is recent and well documented. There is no silliness involved. He had to eat and sleep just like everyone else, yet he achieved some sort of what i would tentatively call “real transcendent”.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-03 17:02:00 UTC
-
Grammars Always Tell the Truth
You can always make excuses for everything. Hence Astrology, Numerology, Theology, Pilpul and Critique, Rationalism, Formal Logic, Moralizing, Legislative Argument, postmodern (relativism) argument, and all variations thereof. All of these techniques consist of the Fictionalism “Pseudorationalism”. Just as Marxism, Socialism, Frankfurt-ism, Feminism consist of pseudosciences. Just as all Magic, Superstition, Religion, Occult, Mysticism consist of the fictionalism “Supernaturalism”. You can only testify one continuous grammar: consistently, correspondently, operationally, completely, and coherently. That means the only ‘Prophet’ that was not lying was Aristotle.
-
Grammars Always Tell the Truth
You can always make excuses for everything. Hence Astrology, Numerology, Theology, Pilpul and Critique, Rationalism, Formal Logic, Moralizing, Legislative Argument, postmodern (relativism) argument, and all variations thereof. All of these techniques consist of the Fictionalism “Pseudorationalism”. Just as Marxism, Socialism, Frankfurt-ism, Feminism consist of pseudosciences. Just as all Magic, Superstition, Religion, Occult, Mysticism consist of the fictionalism “Supernaturalism”. You can only testify one continuous grammar: consistently, correspondently, operationally, completely, and coherently. That means the only ‘Prophet’ that was not lying was Aristotle.
-
GRAMMARS ALWAYS TELL THE TRUTH You can always make excuses for everything. Hence
GRAMMARS ALWAYS TELL THE TRUTH
You can always make excuses for everything. Hence Astrology, Numerology, Theology, Pilpul and Critique, Rationalism, Formal Logic, Moralizing, Legislative Argument, postmodern (relativism) argument, and all variations thereof.
All of these techniques consist of the Fictionalism “Pseudorationalism”.
Just as Marxism, Socialism, Frankfurt-ism, Feminism consist of pseudosciences.
Just as all Magic, Superstition, Religion, Occult, Mysticism consist of the fictionalism “Supernaturalism”.
You can only testify one continuous grammar: consistently, correspondently, operationally, completely, and coherently.
That means the only ‘Prophet’ that was not lying was Aristotle.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-02 10:39:00 UTC