Friday, November 30, 2012

An Overview Of Sacred Geometry

Sacred Geometry is the theory of dimensional evolution which assumes the universe is a living system kept together by the existence of a sacred geometry that encompasses the entire cosmos and makes for the blueprint for the manifestation of what we know as our material universe and in addition organizes the context through which all love evolves.

Our universe was designed to be highly efficient and is capable of performing a wide range of multiple functions at the same time. The very same geometry which provides structure to physical reality also allows for the perceptual environments that people and civilizations must move through as part of a systematic learning process on the path towards evolution.

Each dimension of this sacred geometry holds a unique place of perceptual space and a context of learning both for personal and social evolution. As each new dimension appears a new set of perceptions and potentials is awakened which we are free to accept and act ualize or ignore. It is in understanding the dimensional structure which exists all around us that allows us to be able to understand the path and direction of personal and social evolution.

Even though our modern science generally believes there is nothing of deeper meaning to the dimensional geometry of the universe other than the actual physical aspects, there is a view that is almost diametrically opposed to this that began with the Greek philosopher Pythagoras in 500 B.C. Pythagoras believed and taught the theory or belief that all of the mathematical patterns in the universe were actually expressions of divine intelligence and signified a divine intention.

According to Pythagoras, we are surrounded by organizational intelligence that is shown in its purest from through mathematical formulas and musical harmonies and allowing ourselves to be at the center of our experience; we can know and share the organizing patterns and principles that pervade the univers e. This is a thought that was even held by Albert Einstein, who stated that he received his greatest breakthroughs after praying and sleeping. The answers to the questions he was seeking came to him from the Universe while he slept! This is also the way that it can be explained for someone who is blind to be able to sculpt and for a deaf person, such as Beethoven to be able to compose intricate musical scores.

Plato, who taught over a hundred years after Pythagoras, continued in the teachings of Pythagorean thought in espousing that the universe or cosmos as Pythagoras termed it was a place of harmonious and beautiful order and placed such a high regard on geometry that he placed a sign above the door to his academy stating, Let no one unacquainted with geometry enter here.

Gregg Hall is a consultant for online and offline businesses and lives in Navarre Florida. Get more information on sacred geometry at http://www.emerald-energies.com


Author:: Gregg Ha ll
Keywords:: sacred geometry
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

All That We Are... Are Labels

Within the confines of the known universe, a madness is present that taints all of the knowledge which every human being has aquired within their life, and within the lives of others.

Nothing is as it seems, and it only seems that way because the human being has labeled it as such.

Language is the remarkable tool which all philosophers great and small have at their disposal, and it is that very language which limits knowledge at all levels to that very element.

Indeed, Labeling begins with prehistoric man and continues to this day. The life and times of the hunter gatherer revolved around the daily exercise of Labeling this and Labeling that. Fire, wood, the animals which are hunted, are all a product of Labeling.

The reader may now ask...so what?....and they would be right to a certain extent. But from a philosophical point of view an important point is being made: what is knowledge? For that matter, what constitutes Intelligence? Because the more one explores that question, the more limited mankind becomes.

It is a critical observation that comes with the reality that all knowledge revolves around the act of Labeling, and with that Labeling comes a vague sort of Intelligence allowing the passing of thought and emotion. Clearly, reality is judged by the senses. What can be seen, heard, smelled, or touched constitutes how real something may or may not be. Along these lines would come an in-depth dialogue about dreams and the clinically insane, but that discussion must be for another day.

When one gets down to it, what is known? Does existan ce essentially consist of running around and placing post-it notes upon all that is sensed? This is 'milk', this is your father', this is the 'television'. Is everyone aware, as I am, that the know universe simply consists of Labeling? And since that is true, what is it that is achieved by mankinds existance?

One conclusion would surround the fact that this existance being experienced now is only the preliminary one of understanding. Perhaps it is like a martial art form: there are endless basic movements that must be mastered before one can continue and achieve. In fact, with martial arts, all who are involved with them knows the words black belt stands for excellence, but the reality is something quite different.

In most martial art forms, black belt means only mastering of the basics, which is significant because most outsiders believe that achieving the black belt is the end, when in fact, for the dedicated artist, it is only the beginning.

Perhaps that is the state of mankind today: we are only at the beginning of our contribution to this universe. We, as a species, are in the gathering of information area of existance. But that revelation (if that's what one might call it) is significant because it is an indication that mankind truly has an enormous way to go to achieve true intellectual enlightenment.

I attended Rutgers University and studied Philosophy, English, and History.


Author:: Christopher Graham
Keywords:: Philosophy, Labeling, human existance, Intelligence
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Pascal's Wager

My oldest brother professes to be a Catholic under the New Catechism which he thinks is able to reach out to people with many non-traditional insights. He suggested that I would possibly convert; if I read the book by Edith Romanes called The Story Port Royal because he saw Pascal and I have a lot in common. We do have a lot in common. Pascal was the voice for the Port Royalists but she admits he was not an adherent of their beliefs. I think she does not know Pascals science or what Christ studied.

I am sure if Pascal were alive today he and I would agree on most things once he was up to speed on the quantum reality and other researches that demonstrate a lot of things once called miracles. There is another element to my brothers comment which is derived from ego and the need people have to state their uninformed opinion as if they are privy to facts they know little or nothing about. I have had many discussions about Pascals Wager and I address it in greater detail under the heading The Doctrine of Probabilism later in this book (Taken from my book The Huguenots and the Cathar Continuum.). Many Christians do the same kind of thing when they claim Newton is a Christian because he wrote volumes on Biblical issues including Daniel. They even deny Newton was an alchemist and say their sources are right even after they are presented with obvious evidence about his alchemical researches and the need to keep these things secret in an era when peoples lives could literally be at stake. Einstein found people putting words in his mouth even as he lived and he had to set them straight in these matters eventually.

Let us take some words of Pascal and ask ourselves if he is a Christian or more of an alchemist like Jesus. Yes, Jesus was trained in the adept arts of Gnostic Hermeticism like most intellectuals of his time and in the millenia before him. The noted historian Michael Grant says this intellectual system was called Imhotep/Asklepios or Thoth/Hermes. There are other things studied by Gnostics and Cathars as you can easily see as you read this book.

This is what I see, and it is this which disquiets me. I look around on every side and see nothing but twilight. Nature offers me nothing that is not a cause of doubt, of uneasiness. If I saw nothing in Nature which in any way implies a Creator, I could make up my mind not to believe in one. If I saw on every side the traces of a Creator, I would rest in peace in the Faith; but as I see too much to make it possible to deny, too little to make me certain (of a Creator), I am in a pitiable state. A hundred times I have wished that if there is a God who upholds Nature, she would unmistakably indicate Him; but if the traces she points out of Him are but deceits, she would destroy themthat she would say all or nothing. (1)

Author of many books available at Lulu and World-Mysteries.com


Author:: Robert Baird
Keywords:: Pascal, Alchemy, Port Royal, Baird
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Explosive Power of Doubling

We have all read or heard the story of the Chinese emperor and the wise man who had helped him build his great empire. He wanted to reward the man for his services and asked him to name his reward. The man brought out a chessboard and asked the emperor for enough rice such that starting with one grain of rice for the first square of the board, the next would have two, and each succeeding square will have the number of grain multiplied by two, i.e. four, eight, sixteen, and so on. The emperor laughed and said that would be easy. When it came to meeting the request the emperors granary became empty, he went broke, and the easy became impossible.

Let us see the numbers involved. The chessboard has sixty-four squares. Starting from one grain for the first square the number of grains for the last square would be two raised to a power of sixty-three. The total number of grains to meet the requirement would be the sum of the geometrical series starting from one and ending w ith two raised to the power of sixty-three. This is a colossal number and we have no word to describe it, so let us use some approximations. Two raised to power ten is one thousand and twenty-four. Let us round it out and say it is a thousand. If we were counting money, twenty-four would still be significant but for our purpose it is not that important. After all it is done in Computers all the time when we use the term kilobyte.

Continuing with the numbers in the series the twenty-first term would be two raised to power twenty, that is a million (in order of magnitude). The thirty-first term would be a billion, forty-first a trillion, and fifty-first a quadrillion. We still have thirteen more terms to go but let us stop here because we do not have words for those numbers. Million and billion we a re quite familiar with and we are just getting to have an idea about trillion with our national debt, but quadrillion is still vague. To put it in perspective we have only to remember that it is a sixteen-digit number - one followed by fifteen zeros. When we get to term sixty-one we add three more zeros. Taking the remaining three terms and adding them all we add another zero. So the total number of rice grains for the reward is (in order of magnitude) one followed by nineteen zeros.

Do we have an idea how much will this rice weigh? Let us assume that one kilogram of rice may contain twenty thousand grains. One metric ton is one thousand kilos. So the number of rice grains contained in one ton will be two followed by seven zeros. The weight of the rice needed for the request will roughly be five followed by eight zeros tons, which is five hundred million tons. This is a colossal amount well beyond the resources of even a great emperor. However, if the emperor knew anyt hing about geometric progression, he would have responded to the request differently. He could have granted it with the condition that the wise man himself does the counting.

Let us assume that a person can count ten grains per second. The number of seconds in one year is approximately thirty one million, an eight-digit number. Even taking just an order of magnitude estimate it would take almost over thirty billion years for one person to count all the rice grains. The age of the universe is estimated to be around fifteen billion years.

Dharmbir Rai Sharma is a retired professor with electrical engineering and physics background. He obtained his M.S. degree in physics in India and Ph.D. in electrical engineering at Cornell University. He has taught in universities here and also in Brazil, where he spent sometime. He maintains a website http://www.cosmosebooks.com devoted mainly to philosophy and science.


Author:: Dharmbir Sharma
Keywords:: Geometric p rogression, Power of two, Chinese emperor and wise man
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Eastern Culture or Western Culture Which is Better

As we see the changing of the guard of the Worlds greatest civilizations from the United States to China or India we see history repeating itself as it has so many times in the human endeavors written history. It was not much more than 200 years ago when Great Britain was the greatest nation in the World. They kept the Great in their name but the United States clearly carried the choice after that. Next it appears due to our own follies and lake of forward progression we will be passing the torch again and in doing so taking our place as a footnote on the page in the annals of mankinds history.

As we pass are on the apex of the hand off, which is clearly a choice having drown our nation in bureaucracy, over regulation and disdain for change, innovation or progress; we see a difference in cultures which is vast indeed. It is obvious that Western Culture has its advantages, whether we take advantage of them or not. It is equally as obvious for anyone who studies culture that Eastern Culture has its own advantages. Some of these advantages are in conflict, while much is similar. Which is better?

Should we assume that since Eastern Culture is next up to bat with the bases loaded that Eastern lifestyle is more fulfilling than the Western Lifestyle? We know from our own short 200-year history in the United States that Western worlds; capitalism and Western culture lifts people up, who put in. We have seen in recent history how Socialism and Communism have tended to push people down and over run civilizations in debt and inefficiency. Yet all in all most of human history and the government structures they have chosen share many things. All these scenarios and all the hybrids of each or all, seem to involve people who are of the ruling class who are motivated by those things humans are motivated by, similarly to those they rule, who are equally motivated by such things.

So when we ask which is better; one government structure or one culture over another, it appears that one could indeed argue both sides of the point or be right no matter which side they argue. And indeed in such abstract thought it seems we are all of the same genes and all one in that regard. The only difference between you neighbor in the United States an d one of Asian Ancestry is probably not more than 3000-4000 years and certainly not more than 10,000 to 15,000. We all have similar needs to fulfill self and although have been pre-conditioned to believe one culture is better than the other is more nurture than nature isnt it? Have you thought here yet? You might next time someone says it is us against them, as that is more similar to punching yourself in the eye really? We all belong to a fairly successful species which has come quite a ways and whose future is very bright if we will dump these egocentric attitude and that goes for both sides.

In the movie about World War II a Japanese Political Prisoner in the United States was asked; Who do you want to win the war? In the movie his answer showed much wisdom as he said; If your mother and father are fighting, do you want one to kill the other or do you just want them to stop fighting? Well with that said and if you are a God fearing individual what do you think your God might say about this? Do you really believe that a God believes that these questions of which culture is better; Eastern or Western Culture are relevant? When Gandhi was asked what he thought of Western Culture, he said; I think it would be a good idea. You know so do I, I wish we would live as we promise ourselves rather than in hypocrisy, how about you?

Additionally had it not been for our long and strong history of capitalists, we in the Western World would have never achieved this level of civilization, yet we condemn those who got us here and those that follow in their footsteps. How many times have you heard that Bill Gates is the Anti-Christ? That is ridiculous and he and Melinda have given more to the World than anyone else in the history of humankind and what do we do as a society? Call him the anti-Christ and tell the government to attack his company, which is providing the communication to the world and opening up the world for cross-culture knowledge and commerce? So if Western Culture is better, why do we attack it?

We should not necessarily equate Red China to Communism or place a label like Imperialism as we did to the Japanese in the Second World War, but we should understand that as we live in hypocrisy in our civilization often th ose running other civilizations do the same. History shows many different styles of societies, but in critic of Western Civilization for Eastern Culture, we might wish to define which one. The Chinese Dynasties of days gone by, the more recent hard line Red China of three decades ago or the newest hybrid culture which is slowly emerging, which when finished will much resemble a larger and even more stable version of South Korea?

Currently I guess if I were a Chinese Peasant and the government was testing out N5H1 Bird Flu vaccine for a possible use for bio-warfare in my South Western Province, I do not think I would be a great su pporter of Eastern Culture over Western? I think if this was the case that I would rather have my family to be making Nike Shoes today and driving a Chevrolet and wearing Levis tomorrow. This is an interesting point on debate of which is better; Eastern or Western Culture, but the question in itself is wrong as we are comparing apples and oranges arent we. Some say that the Ugly Western Culture Capitalists in their pursuit of Globalism are causing other nations to r emain impoverished. Is Globalism really bad, or is it getting a bad rap? And does it really matter which is better Eastern or Western Culture as we do not even respect all we have in the United States and in our haste to point out worse problems in the world, we have taken our eye off the ball and China and/or India is ready to hit a grand slam home run, clean out of the park. So it really doesnt matter which you think is better; click here:

Learn Chinese while you drive, sure beats road rage, yelling at fellow citizens, may as well start today:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1888194170/104-0004098-8541509?v=glance

It would be wise to re-evaluate our nation, what we really stand for and move to fix those things which are not perfect now, before we allow it to all slip away embroiled in controversy, politics and chaos as we divide ourselves. Think about it.

Lance Winslow


Author:: Lance Winslow
Keywords:: Chinese, China, eastern culture, India, Imperialism, Socialism, red China, Communism, Western
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Gestalt: Law of Proximity

The law of proximity is one of four visual perception laws as theorized by Gestalt psychologists. Paul Martin Lester, the author of Visual Communication, an expert in the field wrote: The law of proximity states that the brain more closely associates objects close to each other than it does [when two objects are far apart.

We love to see people and things grouped together. Groupings and togetherness appeal to our inclination of wanting things to be neat and organized. Artistically speaking, by grouping people and things together, we are not only conforming to the law of proximity, but we are making room for other interesting information to be added to a layout that wouldn't fit otherwise.

There are other aspects to the law of proximity too. For instance, when we see two people next to each o ther in a photograph, we look to see what their relationship is or how they are communicating with each other. When birds are flying, we love to see how they group and fly in a *V* form together. At social gatherings, people tend to group together (even if there is plenty of space to spread out). Then again, we like to see groupings of the same species of plants in landscapes and find this to be visually pleasing.

In knowing about the law of proximity, designers, photographers, and artists are better able to create interesting, memorable images. When the law of proximity is used, viewers are more apt to take notice and interest in the visual messages being conveyed, because they are looking for underlying messages within the images and responding to them. The law of proximity somewhat overlaps with harmony. Harmony is the pleasing interaction or appropriate combination of the elements in a whole as described by Tim McCreight, the author of Design Language. When an im age is in harmony, it is pleasing to us because the elements or objects are supporting and complementing each other. We view this as positive energy. This type of image gives us closure and peace void of anxiety. It is no wonder why most people prefer harmonious artwork in home decor.

The law of proximity is another way humans organize their world. Look in the produce section of a supermarket and notice how this law takes on practical application. Visual clusters of stars are beautiful to view in the same way as seen with repetitive patterns and textures. At home, we have a place to stack our dishes and another place to hang our clothes. The law of proximity indicates that humans prefer to see groups of similar objects together. This explains why patterned material and grid-like designs are visually appealing. (revised 2/15/2006)

Debbie Jensen, Graphic Designer and Photographer http://www.debjensendesigns.com


Author:: Debbie Jensen
Keywords:: Gestalt, law of proximity, Gestalt theory, visual communication, sensual theories, debbie jensen,
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

What is It to be Human and is It Something to be Proud of?

Some contend that Humans are naturally wonderful loving creatures and we are full of good. Others look out at the French Riots or Machete and AK-47 killings and say you have to be kidding me? You call that a group of loving and caring; is this your wonderful Humans in their wondrous Humanity? Of course this debate is as old as religion itself and has been pondered by philosophers throughout time. That is to say is humankind Inherently good or are they Innately evil?

On the side that Humans are good are those who state things like:

What you and I see Humans doing on this planet, is in my view inhuman, that is it is not originating from human beings but from the mind programming that they have fallen prey. All of this programming can be purged from the species, and not with Technology, simply with a desire for personal honesty about what is happening here.

Yes indeed that is a good argument, that Humans are good, but along the way have been manipulated and taught to fear and hate. That today modern mass media hysteria and purported education, politics and society of our Civilizations is causing mankind to act out. That in part our own Technology is also partially to blame. But mankind is able to chose is he not? Have they chosen to accept this. Isn't religion indoctrination the same? What about nationalism too? Family honor or even the Your team VS mine, them and us scenarios, okay so they, we, us are acting out and sure, well we can call that inhuman? But who is to say that is not the norm of Humanity and that Humans are Innately evil, Bad or inhuman for that matter?

Is man Inherently good or is he Innately evil? That is the age old question and to cloud that question with excuses for why he is acting out like an animal is besides the point, as if man is so good, why cant he over come such brutal and violent behavior? Social programming aside, what is wrong with this picture. I leav e the last word up to you. Think on it.

Lance Winslow


Author:: Lance Winslow
Keywords:: Humanity, good vs evil, Bad, Inherently, Innate, Civilization, Technology, mind programming, Humans
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Einstein and Eirugena

ALBERT EINSTEIN: - I am satisfied with the Mysteries of life.

A human being is part of a whole, called by us the Universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings, as something separated from the rest--a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circles of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty.

The human mind is not capable of grasping the Universe. We are like a little child entering a huge library. The walls are covered to the ceilings with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written these books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. But the child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books---a mysterious order which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects.

The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing. One cannot help but be in awe when he contemplates the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality. It is enough if one tries merely to comprehend a little of this mystery every day. Never lose a holy curiosity.

What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism

The finest emotion of which we are capable is the mystic emotion. Herein lies the germ of all art and all true science. Anyone to whom this feeling is alien, who is no longer capable of wonderment and lives in a state of fear is a dead man. To know that what is impenetrable for us really exists and manifests itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty, whose gross forms alone are intelligible to our poor faculties -- this knowledge, this feeling ... that is the core of the true religious sentiment. In this sense, and in this sense alone, I rank myself among profoundly religious men.

Einstein saw there were people who sought to say he was religious in sense of being what they personally thought was God and he had to set them straight. Unfortunately many people have their memories tarnished by people succeeding in this propaganda that co-opts good people. He was a great man and fought most of his life for an end to standing armies. Despite the advances since his death he still makes sense in many areas of thinking including that for which he became most famous. I think this last simple quote by him says a lot.

Two things inspire me to awe -- the starry heavens above and the moral universe within.

Einstein died in 1955. He is best known for the theory of rel ativity, which states that time, mass and length all change according to velocity. Space and time are a unified continuum, which curves in the presence of mass.

The last three decades of his life were devoted to the search for a field theory which would unify gravitation and electro-magnetism.

Einstein always said that he was a deeply religious man, and his religion informed his science. He rejected the conventional image of God as a personal being, concerned about our individual lives, judging us when we die, intervening in the laws he himself had created to cause miracles, answer prayers and so on. Einstein did not believe in a soul separate from the body, nor in an afterlife of any kind.

But he was certainly a pantheist. He did regard the ordered cosmos with the same kind of feeling that believers have for their God. To some extent this was a simple awe at the impenetrable mystery of sheer being. Einstein also had an urge to lose individuality and to exp erience the universe as a whole.

But he was also struck by the radiant beauty, the harmony, the structure of the universe as it was accessible to reason and science. In describing these factors he sometimes uses the word God, and sometimes refers to a divine reason, spirit or intelligence. He never suggests that this reason or spirit transcends the world - so in that sense he is a clear pantheist and not a panentheist. However, this reason is to some extent anthropomorphic, and to some extent involves Einstein in a contradiction.

His religious thinking was not systematic, so he never ironed out this discrepancy. But it seems likely that he believed in a God who was identical to the universe - similar to the God of Spinoza. A God whose rational nature was expressed in the universe, or a God who was identified with the universe and its laws taken together. His own scientific search for the laws of this universe was a deeply religious quest.

Einstein's attachm ent to what he once called `the grandeur of reason incarnate' led him into the longest battle and the greatest failure of his life. He was implacably opposed to Niels Bohr's interpretation of quantum physics. Bohr believed that matter was fundamentally indeterminate, and our knowledge of it limited to probabilities.

Einstein's comment, God does not play dice, became notorious. The phrase uses the present tense, not the past. This suggests that Einstein was probably not referring to the fact that a creator God would not in the beginning have created a universe in which chance reigned supreme. Rather he may have meant that as God or reason incarnate, the universe could not be governed by chance alone. (1)

EIRUGENA: - John Scotius Eirugena (means Irish born) was a great philosopher in the late first millennium AD. Bertrand Russell seems not to know much about Irish culture when he expresses surprise to have to admit he is the greatest of minds in a very Dark Age. In fact he was just rephrasing Pelagius who was maintaining some of the remnants of Druidic thought as I see it. It annoys me to spend a day looking for a biography on a great man like this and find some fools have hundreds of links whereas he had nary a one.

Author of Diverse Druids

Columnist for The ES Press Magazine

Guest 'expert' at World-Mysteries.com


Author:: Robert Baird
Keywords:: Eirugena, Pelagius,
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

No Nation Can Remain Safe in Isolation

Is it possible to remain an isolated nation and therefore not have to worry about international terrorism because you are in a neutral country? Doubtful. That might have worked at one time a few decades ago, but not in the present period with travel and communication so abundant. Now no nation can remain safe in isolation and the bigger the nation the more apt to be totally impossible.

Some nations presently are attempting to use this tactic although it is not working so well for them. Some nations are playing both sides against the middle. Pretending to be in isolation but really helping in the solutions. In the age of International Terrorism some nations are drawn closer to isolationism, while other nations asset to help combat International Terrorism and decry nation states, which sponsor them.

A nation in isolationism does not get the main benefits of trade or the money flows from exports and thus it cannot join in the efficiencies of other nations who can sell to them cheaper than they can produce something or sell to other nations what they can produce cheaper and more efficiently due to abundance of resources or expertise. A nation in isolationism also will not have the necessary allies to protect it in the case of a hostile or rouge nation, which moves to destroy or exploit it. Consider all this in 2006.

Lance Winslow


Author:: Lance Winslow
Keywords:: No Nation, Can Remain Safe, in Isolation
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

An Overview Of Sacred Geometry

Sacred Geometry is the theory of dimensional evolution which assumes the universe is a living system kept together by the existence of a sacred geometry that encompasses the entire cosmos and makes for the blueprint for the manifestation of what we know as our material universe and in addition organizes the context through which all love evolves.

Our universe was designed to be highly efficient and is capable of performing a wide range of multiple functions at the same time. The very same geometry which provides structure to physical reality also allows for the perceptual environments that people and civilizations must move through as part of a systematic learning process on the path towards evolution.

Each dimension of this sacred geometry holds a unique place of perceptual space and a context of learning both for personal and social evolution. As each new dimension appears a new set of perceptions and potentials is awakened which we are free to accept and act ualize or ignore. It is in understanding the dimensional structure which exists all around us that allows us to be able to understand the path and direction of personal and social evolution.

Even though our modern science generally believes there is nothing of deeper meaning to the dimensional geometry of the universe other than the actual physical aspects, there is a view that is almost diametrically opposed to this that began with the Greek philosopher Pythagoras in 500 B.C. Pythagoras believed and taught the theory or belief that all of the mathematical patterns in the universe were actually expressions of divine intelligence and signified a divine intention.

According to Pythagoras, we are surrounded by organizational intelligence that is shown in its purest from through mathematical formulas and musical harmonies and allowing ourselves to be at the center of our experience; we can know and share the organizing patterns and principles that pervade the univers e. This is a thought that was even held by Albert Einstein, who stated that he received his greatest breakthroughs after praying and sleeping. The answers to the questions he was seeking came to him from the Universe while he slept! This is also the way that it can be explained for someone who is blind to be able to sculpt and for a deaf person, such as Beethoven to be able to compose intricate musical scores.

Plato, who taught over a hundred years after Pythagoras, continued in the teachings of Pythagorean thought in espousing that the universe or cosmos as Pythagoras termed it was a place of harmonious and beautiful order and placed such a high regard on geometry that he placed a sign above the door to his academy stating, Let no one unacquainted with geometry enter here.

Gregg Hall is a consultant for online and offline businesses and lives in Navarre Florida. Get more information on sacred geometry at http://www.emerald-energies.com


Author:: Gregg Ha ll
Keywords:: sacred geometry
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Crop Circles and Critical Mass

CROP CIRCLES:

The Learning Channel (August 7, 2003) just had a show about crop circles. Here are two major points that no debunker will be able to explain in addition to the designs themselves.

1. The seeds in 250 crop circles tested by a top biologist and botanist were no longer there. I suppose some might say the hoaxers made bread out of the seeds but the pods or husks had not been opened. This is the work of Doctor Levengood and his associates.

2. Many of the stalks were exploded from the inside out.

It is my belief that the forces of the earth and cosmos combine with the growing and more refining nature of the World Mind to communicate these wondrous designs. I do wonder how the seeds were missing or where their energized force went.

There is no better evidence of the coming critical mass and imminent change that seems to fit or be headed towards 2012 as the Mayans say. Please join the pantheon of RIGHT-thinking people and stop the compet ition or ONE PIE ideologies that create waste rather than creating wealth and wisdom for all. It can be an awesome future or it will be more of the same.

Author and activist seeking to help make the Critical Mass happen before the regressive forces of Empire win.


Author:: Robert Baird
Keywords:: Crop Circles, Critical Mass
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Purpose To Life

There is no God.

Belief is a stray sentiment; it functions furiously around its determination to survive. If it is healthy, it is impenetrable, if it is not, it is unknowingly so. Sadly, it also doesnt end with man; it ends with conflict and qualms. Men know perfectly to be courageous, they do not know but what to be courageous of, for or against. A belief is a second conscience overruling the normal one, it provides for all expectations of courage. It is difficult to confront a firm belief with the firmest of qualms, it is easier instead to assault it with them. One must never impress a doubt, one must induce it. Frustration is the first offspring of a belief losing its grounds. The firmer the latter, the superior the former.

No belief is entire, hence, no belief can be ended entirely; ridden by disparate proportions of an unapparent guilt, man, of what he believes wholly, holds desires against it. Belief is a personal satisfaction that justifies mans actions; it also appropriates it. We do what we believe in - to the extent of we must do what we believe in. People aspire towards their beliefs. Like they commit to their satisfactions, they also prefer to commit to the place where they find it. That is in itself the greatest injustice a man can perpetrate to rely on something uncertain and forge in oneself the assurance that it is not; and then expect it to yield.

Man is never totally satisfied.

Going back to the notion that there is a God helps us with another notion, that we arent it. The first notion is an indefatigably powerful alibi, or rather, an apology for the limitations we abide by. Outside these limitations we gain our satisfactions. Hence, we are never totally satisfied. Only in little whiles, the elusive points of Time when were Gods.

A conclusion such as that there is no god helps us to declare another that within his limitations, a man may rise so, that that satisfaction he aims for must be more than final. They must find a medium to breathe and exist in an inert independence where they can choose to surrender without the reluctance and indifference, typical of their import. When we talk of another kind of survival other than the primary one, with a greater nature of independence, a de facto downright unconditional and total submission, and where the transient satisfaction he aims for is more than the final ability in man or is a somewhat credible challenge to it, when we appropriately stop believing in God to succumb to believing in something god-like in us we talk of Purpose.

Between man and the obtainable, lies a cheap form of development motive; between a man and the unobtainable, lies the pursuit that searches beyond the compatible in him Purpose. Motive constricts man to his self; Purpose is all and any involvement beside and outside this. Motive and Purpose are close counterparts of the range of mans ability, almost like alibi and reason. Motive is a funnel for it, and Purpose, a gauge. Both are concrete definitions: motive, of a virtue in man and Purpose, of the peak of all his virtues. Both are also stalwart contradictions to that same range of the ability of man for motive becomes the exhaustion of one or more attributes, and Purpose, their last gesture.

Purpose is never real. It is so because it is higher than the obsessive human prioritization of reality. A man with Purpose is alive only to morality when morality is not a sense of right and wrong but merely a sense of direction.

To know how much we can expand is to understand a persisting relation with ourselves, but to know how much we can expand immediately after that obvious relation is to infringe an unfounded realm, much beyond the scope in us, and find, outside ones personal capacity and in an unnatural uniqueness, a paramount artificial strength (for the source is external) and a tantamount egoistical desire.

A man who finds Purpose discov ers a satisfaction more pure than any happiness and superior to all joy; this satisfaction rears further the implementation of the Purpose, and the pursuit of its result. A satisfied result engenders a threat to the world, to alter it by the means of a single man, by a change personal in one's individuality to a change impersonal in the collectivism of an entire breed.

Queries may be reverted to - mosaics12@rediffmail.com


Author:: Tushar Jain
Keywords:: Purpose, Philosophy
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Poverty is the Reason for Evil

Many believe that poverty is the reason for evil. Indeed there may be a basis for this comment, yet is it really the reason for evil? Recently sitting down with a group of folks in a little town on a not so busy cross roads in the middle of nowhere, we started talking about poverty and someone said that; Poverty is the Reason for Evil.

Now then as I interject those truisms to their finding that poverty is the reason for evil, which is evident from observation, we must also admit that Abundance makes humans weak and free from want and as many a former great Civilization can attest decadent. Is Abundance evil too? And if Abundance is evil and poverty is also evil then what is Good? Is there no Good only evil? Or is it the individual, which needs to take responsibility to them selves?

A life experience of one who has nothing is not necessarily unfulfilled and a person who has no thing is not necessarily seared from their purpose. Blooming where you are planted is practically a universal fact of life; in fact the famous Jurassic Park quote by the DNA scientist was; Life will find a way!

Poverty is not evil in its self, nor is it the cause. Evil is something that humans seem to develop along with hate. It is unfortunate indeed. However there are Wealthy evil doers and poverty stricken murderers. Is economic status truly the end all be all for labeling of Good or evil. Think on this in 2006.

Lance Winslow


Author:: Lance Winslow
Keywords:: Poverty is the Reason for Evil, Good, Wealthy, Abundance, Poor, Civilization, Society
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Two Differences between Art and Technology

One day as I was watching television about robotic manufacturing, one wonder has come into my mind; what the differences between art and technology are. So far, to me, two differences between technology and art are that technology seems to serve only one purpose and there is no any flexibility, whereas art is designed to serve more purposes and flexibility is contained inside.

Everyday, we see countless technological inventions or betterments; ranking from bicycle to the most advanced space shuttles; however, I see only one purpose behind these miracles: serving the pioneer purpose or purposes.

Lets us see the concrete example! A pioneer of a television may have a vision to see other parts of the world or to see any surrounding at any time he/she wants; this vision provoked him or her to produce what we call television. I think this one example is adequate and make you clear enough for other technological invention or betterment (space exploring device for expl oring the space, Computer for better storage and faster work, cars for more personal movement ...etc)

On the contrary, art does serve more purpose. For instance, the art of Socrates does serve almost every aspect of human life, ranking from family administration to international relations. The purposes are countless. History does not only serve the purpose of knowing the past, but it is also seriously read by politics or law students as school curriculum.

The second theme of technology that is different from art is inflexibility. Technology must be straight; robot must be robot, Computer must be Computer, glass must be glass, telephone must be telephone, and if changed just any gadget, that technological device cannot be used or be used for any specific purpose at all.

Art, on the other hands, is always flexible, because it allows interpretation. Interpretation is the clearest flexibility of art. For example, a criminal accused may be acquitted, fully sentenced or lessen the term of sentences, depending on the interpretation of his/her defense lawyer. Above all art is flexible and technology is not at all.

For art, anyone may come up with a new formula easily, because there is no right or wrong answer like in technology. Another concrete example is that an expert or student from the field of art may find it easy to swift from one department or one job to another.

Lay Vicheka is a translator for the m ost celebrated translation agency in the Kingdom of Cambodia, Pyramid Translation Co.Ltd.. He is now hoding other two professions: freelance writer for Search Newspaper; focusing on social issues and students' issues and Media Liaison Officer for Asia's first free on-line IELTS consultation website. Lay Vicheka is the expert author for ezine and prolific article contributor to other websites around the world such as articlecity, 365Articles, spiderden, talesofasia, etc (Just google him). He is also a volunteer Cambodian-newspapers columnist (Rasmey Kampuchea and Kampuchea Thmey). Lay Vicheka has great experience in law and politics, as he used to be legal and English-language assistant to a Cambodian member of parliament, migration experience (home-based business) and in writing. He is also member of a New York-based research company. Posting address: 221H Street 93, Tuol Sangke quarter, Russey Keo district, Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Tel: 855 11 268 445, vichekalay@yahoo.com


Author:: Vicheka Lay
Keywords:: Art and technology
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Religious Liars and Pretenda Researchers

So often we find very religious folks operating inside the realm of science. The problem is that these folks often apply their religious teachings to every single endeavor that they study. Obviously in doing this they are going to come to the wrong conclusions more often than not and it is for this reason we need to kick them out of the sciences as they are not of right mind.

Recently in arguing the fact that humans are 99% DNA similar to Chimpanzees and therefore if we classify Chimps as animals then so too must be humans; a religious nut case scoundrel claiming to be a researcher had a tiff with another think tanker and stated;

What you are reading and feeling is not so similar to the indifferences scientists face throughout the confines of the research work.

The think tanker who stated the facts said; But I have zero feelings for this entire issue. Only the obvious denial of observation and egocentric attitude of human beings is holding them back from reality and that is rather appalling indeed. Go re-read Matt Ridley and my other recommended reading in previous threads and stop arguing with me. Stephen Baxster who has discussed this at length basically is saying Humans are nothing more than another species of Incompetent Apes. I want nothing to do with them.

Rather than arguing the points of contention the religious brain dead follower standing in the way of scientific fact stated; Evaluating percentage between two linear DNA sequences is easy. but percentage of between two developing species is meaningless. What molecular genetics provide us with is a way to compare organisms in an unsuitable framework. Pair wise body comparison is simply nonsense.

Of course the fact stating think tanker stated more of the obvious; There is more difference between dogs; Chihuahua and Mastiff or Australian Shepard than a Chimpanzee, Guerilla or Human. And we call dogs breeds but classify them in the same species. I am sorry, there is nothing less I can do for you, as Humans maybe unique in some ways, but not by much. The Genotype determines the phenotype and phenotype development is 50/50 nature vs. nurture and you go and read the Foust book you see the Chimpanzees when raised with humans, drink beer, watch TV, like to dress up in clothes. There have also been humans raised in the wild who act just like animals when taught to communicate without human language. Read little wolf boy etc. They are more in-tuned with nature and their refined attributes are so keen and in touch with nature. One chimpanzee likes to go to the mall and try on shoes? Sound familiar. I am sorry anyone who denies this overwhelming evidence is WRONG.

And continued to state; I have no feelings for this issue, only observations. You are denying all the observation and spouting Science Terminology incorrectly and without consideration for reality. You are dangerous to truth. If the DNA sequence is the same then the DNA will fold the same and the proteins will be the same. I am not buying any of what you are saying.

You can see why the religious close-minded lunatic scientists must not be allowed to write papers or cloud the scientific world with their data or BS. We cannot allow the forward progression of the species to be screwed over by believers of Santa Clause any longer. So consider all this in 2006.

Lance Winslow


Author:: Lance Winslow
Keywords:: Religious Liars, Pretenda Researchers
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

We Cannot See Other Intelligent Life in the Galaxy Still It Could Be There

It is interesting indeed as our Mars Rovers cruise the surface of Mars that we cannot find life. Yet we have only viewed such a little area really. The Surface of Mars is a big place and so far we are only looking on the surface.

Indeed just because you cannot see something, does not mean it is not there. It is all in where you look and what method you use to search for it? For instance the new finding recently with Aercibo;

Arecibo Detector Is Discovering Thousands Of Galaxies

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/AreciboDetectorIsDiscoveringThousandsOfGalaxies.html

Recently in a think tank online a gentleman and fellow thinker stated; maybe intelligent life is smart enough not to want to allow us to see it? Is there intelligent life hiding from us? Interesting concept indeed, as we know that humankind devices methods and futuristic concepts to hide from itself doesnt it? For instance here are some thoughts I came up with;

http://worldthinktank.n et/wttbbs/index.php?s=72e6f05f3c75c9a262705caafcc8992f&showtopic=1046

Now then what if intelligent life is all around but kind of hiding out and observing us? Isnt that something we might do too? So obviously this is an interesting concept for a Sci Fi author to contemplate, but what if? Crazy stuff indeed, although fun to contemplate, so perhaps you will think on this in 2006.

Lance Winslow


Author:: Lance Winslow
Keywords:: Cannot See, Other Intelligent Life, Galaxy
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Why Are There Racist Attitudes In The First Place?

What is the point of Racism? ... Whats underneath it all?

Well those questions, as some of you are aware, have complex answers! Like an Octopus with a thousand tentacles! But lets attempt to answer them anyway!

Why are theyre Racist attitudes in the first place? Or to put it another way, what drove White European Christians to view themselves as superior to non-Whites and to go around the world conquering or enslaving them for benefit and profit?

I don't know why they did that! But I'm damned good at speculating!

When the Romans first invaded Northern Europe circa 500 AD, they encountered Germanic tribes wearing animal skins and living in thatched huts! The Romans wore fine clothes lived in eLaborate stone building, lived by written laws and legal codes and had a high degree of civilization (aqueducts, indoor baths, etc) They looked on the animal skin wearing, thatched hut living Germanic tribes, as savages! Sound familiar! Thats the how the Europea ns who first invaded, I mean discovered America viewed the Indians when they first encountered them! But in this instance you have Whites looking down on other Whites as inferior! The Germanic tribes populated England and most of Northern Europe!

To make a long story short! Roman civilization was the dominant culture and power in that region and the world for about a thousand years! But as time went on the ruling class became indulgent, corrupt and lazy until the wild war waging savage, Germanic tribes became powerful enough to over throw what was left of the Glory of Rome!

Now here's where my speculations get psychologically interesting (at least to me!)

As a result of being treated as inferior by the Romans for hundreds of years, when these savages finally did over throw Rome, they over compensated for the inferiority complex they had developed by putting in its place a superiority complex that masked their feelings of cultural inferiority! It's like some one having murderous envy toward another they secretly admire finally getting the chance to knock them off and take their place!

These savage tribes started feeling really good about themselves! Like they were the Big Dogs! And they were the Big Dogs! Hadnt they just knocked off the superior culture of the once mighty Roman Empire!

They started seeing themselves as superior and but still had the need to keep that inferiority complex covered up! So it was easy for them to act-out their distain without guilt, on those ethnic groups they viewed as savage or inferior, because they saw the savagery and inferiority as coming from those groups, not from themselves!

The Whites in the U.S. inherited this cultural legacy of White Supremacy from the descendants of those savage tribes who immigrated to North America before the founding of the Nation! Northern European history and culture was so affected by Roman culture that, around the 11th century AD, the pope of tha t period and Charlemagne create a Second Roman Empire, The Holy Roman Empire! Now ruled by the once envious savage tribes! Today England has a parliament and the United States a Congress because they are both patterned after the Roman judicial system created by the cultural descendants of these savage tribes!

Further Speculation On Why There Are Racist Attitudes

Some Whites grow up in Racist home and social environments! Some have been brainwashed with Racist propaganda throughout their whole early Social development as kids! I've seen documentaries on the Klan, Neo-Nazis and other Racist groups that show parents with their 3,4, or 5 year olds at these rallies dressed in Klan robes, Neo-Nazi uniforms or other Racist attire, chanting Racist slogans and beaming with pride and enthusiastic approval of their children for doing so! So these are some of the way Racist attitudes are passed on from generation to generation and why theyre there in the first place for thes e kids!

What's the point of Racism? What's underneath it?

Whats underneath White Racism in this country is (to reiterate) the ideology of White Supremacy! Certain White European philosophers perpetuated the theory (as a result of Darwin's theory of evolution, for some of the reasons I gave above and for others to complex to go into in this article) that White people (especially White men because they dominated White society) were the pinnacle of the evolution of the human species and therefore racially superior and more privileged than all other races!

That philosophy was behind the exploitation of Africans for free slave Labor and the economic gain of White businessmen during the era of the slave trade! Africans were seen as subhuman in the evolutionary scale and therefore they weren't really enslaving or exploiting humans but something more like cattle or other beasts of burden!

When the United States Constitution was created the enslaved Africans w ere (for political reasons) only referred to indirectly as only 3/5th of a person! Most of the so-called founding fathers if not all of them, including Jefferson and Washington were rich slaveholders! The Constitution was obviously created to protect economic rights of the founding fathers not African Americans, American Indians, White women or any other non-White group for that matter!

As a matter of fact, in the early days of the United States before White Supremacy became the dominant ideology of the country, the only people classified as White were, White Anglo-Saxon protestants, who were English or descended from the English! Italians and others weren't looked upon as White until well after the slave trade was in full bloom!

The White supremacist philosophy and economic gain was behind the civil war! The southern states, who imported most of the slave Labor, whole economy was based on the slave trade and lots of people were getting rich or doing very well as a result of it! So they weren't too happy when certain conscientious Whites (like Lincoln), who may have thought Whites were racially superior to Blacks, but didn't believe it was right to enslaved their fellow man, wanted to end the profitable importation of slave Labor! So rather then have that occur, the political leaders of the slave states decided that they would no longer be part of the United States! Lincoln and other leaders said, You can't break up the Union of the United States! The slave states leaders said Oh yes we can! And that's how in a simplified way the Civil War got started!

Hitler was a White supremacist! He called the superior Whites, Aryans. He learned a lot of his ideas about racial superiority from the Racist science and philosophy of the slave trade and Jim Crow practices of the United States!

Another less familiar source of Racism is the Old Testament idea of the Chosen People of God who are more special to God than all other people! An d of course through much intellectual rationalizing by Racist Judeo-Christian intellectual Gods Chosen People were deem to be White! They convinced themselves and others that it was Ok to deprive Africans of their rights because they enjoyed a special privilege from God, a manifest Destiny, to dominate Africans and other non-White groups because they were God Chosen people!

But the underlying core of Racism is that White Supremacists dont want Blacks or other groups they view as inferior, contaminating their superior gene pool with their tainted blood! And White Racist men jealously defending their sexual dominance over White women! These two issues have sparked the most vehement White violence and hatred toward Black men! It made supremacist men feel sexually inadequate and inferior and an affront to their sexual dominance and pride if their White women preferred, what they saw as subhuman, genetically inferior men to themselves! They become enraged with hate filled, envy and jealousy toward Black men! Thus the formation of 'the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan as Chivalric order to protect the virtue of the flower of the White race (White women) from all those degenerate Black men whose only desire was to deflower them (Rape them)! Thus the thousands of lynchings of Black men during the late 18 and early 1900s in the United States (mainly in the southern states)!

You can see how over time this hate-filled jealousy would continue to reinforce its self and how it would be attractive to other White men, who wanted to see themselves as this chivalrous order of knights valiantly protecting the flower of the White race from the threat of deflowerment by the black beasts and the even greater threat of the tainting of their familys gene pool with the blood of these genetic ally inferior beasts of burden or predators!

These feelings, supported by White supremacist Christian doctrines, sent them on a religious crusade carrying out Racist violence with religious zeal against black men and any White women who dared to have sex or become romantically involved with them! (But it was ok if White men had sex with Black women!) The flaming cross of the Klan is a Christian cross! They see themselves as Christians and Jesus as their Aryan brother!

Now I went through all of that to give you some idea of the underlying concepts and ideology behind the point of Racism and what's underneath it from a psycho-social-historical point of view!

From a psychological view, the point of Racism is to make those groups who hold this view feel they are superior, better and more privileged than all other ethnic groups! It's kind of like one little kid saying to another that my dad is better than your dad! Sometime those who latch on to Racist ideas hav e unfulfilled needs for self-esteem, self-worth or some other lack that they're unconsciously attempting to fill or over compensate for but may not see in themselves or want to see in themselves! For others, it's just brainwashing, plain and simple! Or a combination brainwashing and other factors! There are usually complex factors involved in the genesis of any problem rather than just one! Especially a problem like this one!

That, in a very simplified way, are some of my thoughts why there are Racist attitudes in the first place but definitely by no means all of my thoughts on the subject! Or all of my knowledge on the subject! I've studied, pondered and researched this topic for about 20-30 years because, I was puzzled by all this racial hatred and why it keeps raring its ugly head and wanted to find out what it was is about! Why its so resilient!

Thats my thoughts!

What are your thoughts on my thoughts and speculations?

Copyright 2006 El-Veasey Pub lishing Inc

El Veasey has PhDs in Social-Politics, Psycho-Social Relationships, History of the Human mind and Religious Politics, from the University of Hard-Knocks, Ghetto Town, USA

Email: elveasey at yahoo.com

Blog1 http://el-veasey.blogspot.com
Blog2 http://lveasey.blogspot.com


Author:: El Veasey
Keywords:: Racist, Racism, White, Supremacy, Klan, Nazi, Slavery, Lincoln, Consitiution, Labor, God, Destiny
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Government is Good at Only One Thing Well Actually Two!

Many people in the United States of America are trying to rely on the government for more and more every year and they vote for all the podium pushers and politicians who promised them things that the government can neither afford or that the taxpayer is willing to pay for.

Nevertheless, people rely on the government for all kinds of things such as health care, when what they should be doing is eating right and exercising more and they would not need pharmaceutical drugs or free health care at all. I am over 40 years old and have not been to a doctor in 28 years and I am in perfect shape and health and always will be.

I do not take drugs of any type pharmaceutical or otherwise and I eat healthy; you cannot rely on the government for such things as many of the things that people are relying on the government for our something that they should be responsible for themselves.

Most everything the government does it does inefficient and they do nothing very we ll. Well actually the government is good at only one thing; well actually two. The government is extremely good at lying to the American people.

And the government is very good at spending our money on wasteful endeavors in a very inefficient manner. In fact they are so good at both of these things that they probably deserve some sort of an award. Please consider this in 2006.

Lance Winslow


Author:: Lance Winslow
Keywords:: Government is Good at Only One Thing
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Blackboards

Before we talk about blackboards, we need to talk about Existence and application, and on another level, we need to discuss coExistence. This essay requires for it to be philosophical, and Philosophy is not about how we elaborate a point, it is about how we reach it (objectivity through subjectivity). No matter what we discuss, well never be far off from the process of justification of a blackboard.

A thing that does not carry a function is against everything that does. This implies that Existence has no identity except a very basic identity that comes from the acknowledgement that it is not non-Existence. Application is strictly not non-Existence. Thus, application solely determines Existence. Actually, the application of a thing determines its substance and the substance conveys its Existence.

The substance of a thing is the extent of its purpose. The purpose of a thing is the lowest level of its function; substance is the highest. The variation held between both these ends is application. Existence hence becomes a very fundamental generalization of application. Or in more precise terms, as believed earlier, application determines Existence. A thing devoid of application is non-existent, i.e., for a thing to be real, it must be, even in the least sense of possibility, usable.

A blackboard solely serves no application. Without a chalk, there is no variation or extent of its purpose. It constantly portrays a need to gain substance. A chalk and a blackboard must combine in identity to render application. They do not commit the same application; they commit the one application only. This calls for an accurate understanding of coExistence. The basis of coExistence is a demand on dependability. When we depend on something, we are subverted by it. The subversion comes from the things vantage point to control our need. It gets more complex when this dependability is absolutely mutual. Two things that are reliant on each other can neither exceed nor escape a common state of subversion. They become a means to one common application. A thing that finds itself in a coExistence is nothing except a partial end-product. CoExistence is a minimal sort of Existence. When something coexists, it resorts from actually existing to subsisting as a situation. A chalk and a blackboard subsist in a situation as such that without inter-dependability or coExistence, their individual Existence does not make sense. A blackboard is a blackboard is a blackboard. A chalk is a chalk is a chalk.

To the human intellect, a thing shall only make the basest sense when it is productive. A blackboard hence, theoretically speaking, does not exist. However, a blackboard and a chalk, do exist, almost as wholly as the human torso.

All queries to be shot at - mosaics12@rediffmail.com


Author:: Tushar Jain
Keywords:: Philosophy, Existence, Life
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Choice and Social Acceptance in Human Organizations

Lets discuss choice and social acceptance. I had the most interesting conversation the other day with a friend at a coffee shop. I was working on a quote and read it out loud and then we discussed it for hours. First here is the quote:

It is interesting how many groups, religions, teams, military organizations, etc. offer: Social Acceptance all in trade for you giving up your ideals, thoughts, personal observations and dreams.

This of course later after the conversation had two qualifiers.

First; You actually have to have formed ideals, thoughts, personal observations and dreams (Many perceive they have formed such, but in reality are brainwashed like the masses through media bombardment and the nurturing within the false land of political correctness. These poor souls have merely convinced themselves that they believe rhetoric which has been purported as fact throughout the history of mankind).

Second; The person must be somewhat similar to the oth ers already in the group in various attributes. (for instance a black person cannot join the KKK, even if he were to agree with there premise and a Jewish person cannot join a NEO-Nazi group. A skinny person cannot join an organization of Line Backers and a Chinese person cannot join the Mayflower Society). This is because mankind in order to form social groups usually picks enemies that in turn bond the group together in a common cause. Such enemies are predetermined by the group and continually change through a gang mentality, which mankind is all to good at promoting when it serves a group they wish to control.

Now then when discussing these observations we had some other thoughts.

With such a set of choices for an enlightened individual, why bother joining any group at all? Why would you join any group that would have you as a member? Which indeed is an excellent question. If you are willing to give up your values, views and observations in trade for joining simply to be socially accepted then perhaps you are unworthy as an individual to give much to the group except numbers which increase the power of the leaders. If most groups amongst the human species are set up in such a fashion it would appear that belonging to no groups is could in fact be a greater noble calling. So then the character of the followers of the most benevolent of organizations may not be noble at all. Giving up ones self seems to be a waste of a very large cranial cavity and potential brain capacity which mankind has available for cognitive reasoning. This is why we say it is very interesting how many of these clubs, religions, groups require blind following and even more interesting how many people are willing to deny their own observations, beliefs and dreams to satisfy the innate characteristic need of belonging, social acceptance and respect from their fellow man.

Obviously mankind is a social animal, which means we naturally form groups and work with each other for the benefit of the group. Maslow in his comments would agree that such a need of man is so great that they would follow into a death march, just to belong. Muslim suicide bombers comes to mind. Life itself and the essence of all we are while we are here is in jeopardy is all but wasted when we fail to question authority and blindly follow those who use our human needs against us. We also took into consideration Gangs in inner cities, kids doing drugs from peer pressure, accountants cheating to belong to a company, etc. In about an hour we came up with about 40 examples, which seemed to correspond to most of societies major current issues and problems. In the franchising industry, we believe one should keep the local community atmosphere and local feel, without having to give up their values, dreams, ambitions, self or observations.

It would behoove people to join groups to solve the needs of the human spirit that do not require one to give up their value system, dreams, aspirations, principles, personal belief system based on real observations. Any group of the sort does not serve humankind or its participants and certainly not those who become enemies of the group or are used as something to be against. We as a species ought to get along and understand that the problem is in the way we form social groups. The problem is not the fact that humans do form groups, that is clearly innate and possibly the reason that our branch of upright walking homo sapiens was the one which got this far in the first place. There appears to be some needs out there for us to continue in this tradition so we must think about what we are doing, who we are doing it with, what we have to give up to belong before we give away the greatest gift in trade. Choose both. Choose a group, which fulfills your needs as a human being and a groups or groups, which do not require your giving up your individuality or mind. After all this is a free country, soon to be a free world and we are granted freedom of choice, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of thought and it is worth all we have sacrificed to date. Something to think about. That is all for Coffee Shop Philosophy today. Any ideas along this theme, please post them below.

Lance Winslow


Author:: Lance Winslow
Keywords:: Social Acceptance, Human Organizations, Philosophy
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Monday, November 26, 2012

What Makes a Person Creative or Brilliant VS Intelligent or Smart?

Often we consider an Individual or person a Creative mind or Creative person. Yet in common use language that can mean quite a lot. A Creative person who solves problems, which are important to us, can be considered a possessor of a Brilliant mind. Often some one in our civilization who does solves problems in a multi-disciplinarian way repeatedly in industry, government, science or military we will label as a Genius. Many of us can pass as Intelligent, bright, cunning, Smart or problem solves, but yet the additional labels of Brilliant, Genius and Creative, is something else. And whether we can define it or not in standard terms, we certainly know it when we see. In my life I have been fortunate to have been involved with many a Brilliant Creative Genius and you can feel it from even the briefest of conversations.

Simply being Smart, knowing data or memorizing facts is not enough to make the grade of the next level of the Genius, Creative and Brilliant souls. Only using your knowledge is worthy, simply possessing it is common of many an Individual; the key is to use that knowledge in over coming, problem solving, innovating, entreprenuering, designing and WINING. So often we say people are Smart, without having ever done anything with it?

Hard to say why we do this, as to many of the observers that is a waste time and should be consider ignorant and not even making the Smart level. Most do not understand the Creative thing, it makes no sense to them for instance I myself have been perceived as Creative. Yet often those using the label do not understand the other uses of the labe l. Often people will have misread one they call Creative or have a screwed up sense of what Creative is? Being Creative in the true sense of the word should not be difficult as it is a natural thing, every one should have it.

On a scale of the over all population, there are those who are more Creative than most and perhaps do deserve the title or perhaps the next level of title; the Brilliant or Genius level. An Intelligent or Smart person with a strong presence of attributes for instance human intent, will, energy, cross pollination in problem solving, athletic ability, stead fastness, perseverance, etc. coupled with creativity, will usually more resemble what we consider to be Brilliant or Genius status.

When you call someone Creative what do you think of? What is most fascinating about these terms is so often Creative people have a sense of lacking when they cannot solve a problem, or do not know an answer. Many a Genius has toiled for years trying to solve a problem and cannot accept giving up or quitting on that problem, in fact they get quite angry at themselves if they do not muster the creativity to solve the problem.

Somehow these Brilliant minds cannot except not knowing the answer and yet so seek it or feel inferior in their own self-evaluation. Many a Creative Genius goes to the grave unfulfilled in this regard, thus it is true that with brilliance comes baggage. Some spend a lifetime convincing them selves that they are not good enough in the creativity arena yet. Sure their colleagues will tell them they are Creative and Brilliant and they may even get an award or two, saying how much of a Genius they are, but often they simply wonder why is everyone telling me I am Creative, Brilliant or a Genius? If you search out the most Brilliant minds of past periods you will find this to be the case. How fascinating it is to see that the words we use to describe others have no affect on these minds?

It is also quite amazing that the Creative Genius in all their brilliance do not see such things as a compliment, they consider the complimentor wrong. If people tell them these things they assume that those who speak such words must live in a box with so many limits that they see the Genius as Creative? To the Brilliant Genius it would appear that they are not Creative necessarily, only the others are not applying themselves and others just live in a box and buy the line of BS purported to help them believe it is okay to live within such stringent limits? In the Creative Geniuss mind with all their brilliance and baggage believes that living outside the cave is not being Creative, it is simply living and thinking? It is natural and it is suppose to be that way. These Brilliant and often unreasonable Individuals kno w of no limits and cannot comprehend why we live in mediocrity and label them as Geniuses. Do you think they are laughing at us? Think on that.

Lance Winslow


Author:: Lance Winslow
Keywords:: Creative, Brilliant, Intelligent, Genius, Smart, problem solver, Individual
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

With Religion Good People Can Now Do Evil Thing

Recently in a very heavy debated political Blog the personal attacks became overwhelming to the point of wondering what was wrong with these people. The debate took an issue of International Terrorism and turned it into a religious brawl and a literal free for all. In the heat of the conflict a gentleman [Sam posts;

Food for thought... without religion, good people will continue to do good things and bad people will continue to do bad things. With religion....good people can now do evil things!

Sam, I very much appreciate that comment. May I use that saying in the future and where did you come across this quote for the record? The way I see it is that when humans get together in groups that require you to give up your belief system to join, they then in turn replace it with something else. Then in order to build unity in the group they pick an enemy. Then they label their enemy evil, making it okay to kill them?

Kind of an unfortunate and problematic situ ation for humankind, and all religions seem to partake in these destructive ways? And although this is not on topic, I am grateful you bring it up. You see, Sam makes a very good point about the problems with religion in our world and how it is so easy to hate, when religion proclaims an enemy of another culture. Consider this in 2006.

Lance Winslow


Author:: Lance Winslow
Keywords:: With Religion Good People Can Now Do Evil Thing
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

All That We Are... Are Labels

Within the confines of the known universe, a madness is present that taints all of the knowledge which every human being has aquired within their life, and within the lives of others.

Nothing is as it seems, and it only seems that way because the human being has labeled it as such.

Language is the remarkable tool which all philosophers great and small have at their disposal, and it is that very language which limits knowledge at all levels to that very element.

Indeed, Labeling begins with prehistoric man and continues to this day. The life and times of the hunter gatherer revolved around the daily exercise of Labeling this and Labeling that. Fire, wood, the animals which are hunted, are all a product of Labeling.

The reader may now ask...so what?....and they would be right to a certain extent. But from a philosophical point of view an important point is being made: what is knowledge? For that matter, what constitutes Intelligence? Because the more one explores that question, the more limited mankind becomes.

It is a critical observation that comes with the reality that all knowledge revolves around the act of Labeling, and with that Labeling comes a vague sort of Intelligence allowing the passing of thought and emotion. Clearly, reality is judged by the senses. What can be seen, heard, smelled, or touched constitutes how real something may or may not be. Along these lines would come an in-depth dialogue about dreams and the clinically insane, but that discussion must be for another day.

When one gets down to it, what is known? Does existan ce essentially consist of running around and placing post-it notes upon all that is sensed? This is 'milk', this is your father', this is the 'television'. Is everyone aware, as I am, that the know universe simply consists of Labeling? And since that is true, what is it that is achieved by mankinds existance?

One conclusion would surround the fact that this existance being experienced now is only the preliminary one of understanding. Perhaps it is like a martial art form: there are endless basic movements that must be mastered before one can continue and achieve. In fact, with martial arts, all who are involved with them knows the words black belt stands for excellence, but the reality is something quite different.

In most martial art forms, black belt means only mastering of the basics, which is significant because most outsiders believe that achieving the black belt is the end, when in fact, for the dedicated artist, it is only the beginning.

Perhaps that is the state of mankind today: we are only at the beginning of our contribution to this universe. We, as a species, are in the gathering of information area of existance. But that revelation (if that's what one might call it) is significant because it is an indication that mankind truly has an enormous way to go to achieve true intellectual enlightenment.

I attended Rutgers University and studied Philosophy, English, and History.


Author:: Christopher Graham
Keywords:: Philosophy, Labeling, human existance, Intelligence
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips

Preference and Culture

Introduction

In our present society, there are few educated individuals who will make the argument that a person's Preference is either moral or immoral. This belief has become so deeply imbedded in the philosophies of certain people, that the term Preference or preferencial is now almost synonymous with amoral. For instance, if someone were to state that HomoSexuality were immoral or unethical, one could respond, HomoSexuality is a Preference, just like HeteroSexuality. Neither is inherently good or bad, as they are decisions that do not cause tragedies or atrocities. Yet, this is an example of the modern sexual attitude responding to other cultural superstitions. Another example would be someone claiming that strawberries are immoral to eat, and another may respond, If a person's diet includes strawberries or bananas, or apples, or any fruit, it is only a question of Preference, and certainly does not enter the realm of Ethics. And by Preference, I mean that it is something that a person finds appeal to. It is thus believed that a person is not good or bad if he finds more beauty in the stars than he does in the sunrize, that a person is neither of rich or poor character if his heart is warmed most when among friends and least when among strangers -- a person is not good or bad for the food that they find to taste the best, because that is their Preference. That is the subject of this piece of writing.

A Foundation For Right And Wrong

It is not difficult to discern from the introduction that I used the least controversial topics when saying that Preference is amoral. There are some moral philosophers who will go to the extent to say that every action is amoral, and simply a matter of Preference. Then, there are those theologians and moralists who argue what qualifies as Preference, and what qualifies as an act of imMorality. For instance, in the Introduction, I gave an example of an act of Preference by citing H omoSexuality. Even today, in our very prejudiced times, it would seem that the population will not agree that this is almost wholly Preference. There are moralists who will claim that HomoSexuality is an abomination, an act of indecency and wholly immoral. Similarly, though it may be a bit of amusement, I would not be entirely shocked to find a philosopher who believed it was immoral to prefer the taste of an orange over the taste of an apple. I believe, though, as far as my moral philosophy supports, that a person's Preference to HomoSexuality or HeteroSexuality is equalled to a person's Preference to the taste of oranges or the taste of apples. My essential philosophy in matters of Ethics can be found in numerous of my pieces. Simply put: I believe that an action which causes suffering is immoral. Just one look upon this sentence alone is enough to raise one hundred doubts, and for each one, one thousand questions accompanied by hypothetical scenarios. It is not m y intent to prove this thesis in this paper, though I have intentions to fully elaborate upon it with evidence and answering arguments in a longer piece. The purpose of this essay is simply to understand the concept of Preference and the concept of Culture, as they relate to Morality and Freethought.

Culture -- A Preference

Among those of us who may be referred to as the Underground -- the various assortment of squatters, people versus corporation shoplifters, urban guerillas, protestors, activists, reformist writers, political and social dissidents -- the Culture seems radically different than that of modern society. The Communists, for instance, differ greatly from the mainstream, in that we do not believe in the bourgeoise right to property (or, in other words, the idea that one man may become rich by the labor of another). Animal Rights activists differ in that they believe in the right of all conscious beings on the right to life. All of these subsects o f the Underground differ from the mainstream in their political agenda, as do those who work for drug policy reform, those who work against foreign sweat shops, Civil Rights activists, among others. These are the obvious differences that constitute these groups in their own particular ways. Yet, still, there are cultural differences, sometimes leading from their ideology and sometimes not -- or, a particular individual of this subsect adopted a cultural attribute, and it soon followed suit with others of that group. For instance, Communists are notorious for using the word comrad in addressing each other, but it was first used in the late 19th century as an alternative to Sir, Mister, Madam, Misses, or Miss, in that a person was recognized not as a male or female, but as a person. It cannot be denied that these Communists were Feminists, believing that a person's gender does not determine the content of their heart. But believing this was not enough, so the distinction in titles between males and females (an arbitrary distinction) was entirely removed from the Culture of the Communists.

The example that I draw from the Communists is perhaps the best. However, today it is almost uniform for a Communist to refer to another Communist as comrad. The Culture of Animal Rights activists, though, may differ from group to group, or even from individual to individual. I have talked with friends about using a word that would simply indicate a conscious being, because that is the only object of our belief in justice. Scientifically, using the words animal, or creature, would be inaccurate, as jelly fish show little signs of consciousness, yet they fill the prerequisite of being an animal. These are only examples of Culture, though. Ultimately, the Culture of the members of these Underground groups varies drastically from the main stream, but only in varying degrees from one another. The essential premise is this... Culture is something t o enrich our lives, allowing us everyday to become more aware of art, creativity, and ingenuinity, but Culture is not a substitute or alternative to a code of Ethics; it is only a result of the rise of an independent civilization.

Centuries of repression of the sex act -- of the most natural instinct of any organism -- has led all Freethinkers to hold different opinions on this matter, every one regarded by the society as a heresy. Those who conformed to the rules of society, at the first sight of a gentle touch of another's face or belly, this has led to immediate revoltion. Intimacy, written with the whisper of affection in the ear of a lover, has been reviled, held as the ultimate sin. The people believed these lies, and they committed a most unjust betrayal to their children by repeating the prejudices. The brilliance of compassion has never shined so bright, as when two friends are enjoy the pleasure of love with each other. In regard to sex, I have met a gre at deal of varied opinions. I remember once conversating with a friend, telling him of how I longed to be with a lover, stating, I enjoy the affection and intimacy of it, and the orgasm or pleasure of it is not really an end to physical love for me. My friend responded that I held such an opinion, because I was a good person. Yet, at hearing these words, I found myself greatly perplexed. A person is not made good or bad by how they Personally decide to treat sex. I met one Vegetarian female who never wanted to have sex, because it simply didn't interest her, but she certainly must have had consideration for others, because she refused to eat meat. I have known certain males who preferred a quick engagement of sex, simply to orgasm -- but when they proposed sex to another, they never tried to hide what they wanted or what they were aiming at. They have been, also, charitable individuals, friends of humanity. I have known, on the other hand, individuals who I would com e to regard as unworthy of the air they breath, and yet some were more predisposed to careless sex than violence, and others weren't. Simply put, it was a Preference. The song, Mind Sex, by the artist Dead Prez -- an Anarcho-Socialist, rap group -- despises the attitude about sex that it is something to go after, without regard to any sense of decency or fairness. I agree with this attitude by Dead Prez, and when I saw people acting in a reckless manner trying to obtain sex, without any regard towards the hurt feelings of others, I despised them as well. The attitude of not lying to others, inherent in this song by Dead Prez, is an equally justified Culture as that of those of us who enjoy affection more than pleasure, or those who enjoy pleasure more than affection, or those who find that the whole sex act is too cumbersome to be considered any benefit to themselves. A person can hold any of these Preferences (Cultures, if I may be so liberal), and it is how honest, ju st, and fair their dealings are with others that determines whether they are good or bad -- as far as their Culture of sex, it is as much a question of Morality as is the question of the taste of an apple over an orange.

When we come to the question of drugs, there are certain sights and images that immediately come to mind. We think of the countless of thousands filling our jails. We look behind the bars that man has made for his own kind, stare into the dark, and we see ourselves: imprisoned in a society that looks at happiness as addiction, that sees freedom as a virulent plague, that looks upon every scientist as a pawn to tyranny. As we approach the question of drugs, before any argument is raised, we are taunted by the unrelenting moans of suffering of those who have been imprisoned, those who had never done wrong to anyone. There is not one Freethinker who can honestly condemn a drug user. However, even among psychonaughts -- whose primary goal in life is t o experiment with as many substances as possible -- there is a certain apprehension of certain drugs and their users. Allow me first to examine those groups with a least liberal opinion of drugs. To those who believe in sort some of social, economic, or political reform, who still hold a more conservative creed of drug use, will inevitably hold myths. For instance, they may believe that drug use is unhealthy, that it destroys mental ability, that all drug use eventually leads to a person becoming a junkie. When a person comes into their presence and wishes to aid them in their reform, and makes their habit known, they typically will be regarded as a second-class person, if not outrightly rejected. Among psychonaughts, there is a near deathly fear of heroin and crack, the harder drugs. Most are stemming from the movie Trainspotting. Though I have met a great deal of heroin and ex-heroin addicts, I found that they hardly resembled junkies: they were kind and charitable, paying for food and alcohol (as well as drugs) for their friends, and they always paid back their debts. I have heard more stories of a person neglecting their entire life so they could worship a drug when it was not heroin. But regardless, call it a vice or an interest, drug use is simply Preference, and a person is more likely to be heralded as virtuous if they enjoy building model airplanes as opposed to shooting up. Inevitably, a man who attends to his duty of compassion for his fellow human beings -- regardless of whether he uses heroin or psychodelics -- is a matter of character and not of Culture.

Among all Freethinkers, there is a certain appreciation of art and science. These fields of creativity have expanded the understanding of mankind in all realms. We no longer look to the natural world, full of questions. The last day that we saw it rain and wondered why it rains has come and gone. The last day that we looked for a human expression of emotions, o f feelings, of sadness and joy, the last day that we looked for human expression and could not find it -- this day, also, has come and gone. Freethinkers, then, look to poetry, painting, drawing, and literature, as an expression of mankind. The painter not only paints for his audience, but he does so to appease his soul. The same can be said of the poet or the author. It is not just a means of conveying an idea, but also the means of telling the story of your spirit. With all the virtues and merits of art, and the consequence of its appreciation, all underground thinkers and Freethinkers (I use these two terms synonymously) will find a certain inclination towards it. Similarly, as though ignoring a great absurdity, those who do not read books, or appreciate art, or enjoy music, will sometimes be treated with a secondly manner. Perhaps, to a certain extent, this prejudice may be justified. A man who does not worry himself with books (be it literature, science, or poet ry), or does not concern himself with what others think, this person will tend to be in a much more degraded state, intellectually, than a man who is interested in what others say. But regardless, if a man does not find poetry to give him inspiration, he is only slightly different than a man who finds only Shakespeare's poetry to be inspiring. The only difference is that while the second man has ignored every poet but one, the first man has gone one step further and has ignored simply every poet. If a person were to take no time to appreciate the art that painters have draped the earth in, or to not hesitate for a moment to hear the beauty of music's sweet melody, I would not call them of a lesser grade of person, any more than I would consider someone of a lesser grade if they enjoyed a different type of music or art. The profound disdain that a Freethinker gives to a person unCultured is unjust in its assertion, because every person ought to seek the Culture and Prefer ence that gives them the most happiness.

The only purpose of Culture is this: to enrich the happiness and the understanding of the Cultured person. When a Culture fails to do this, then there is no reason to continue practising it, as it is a deterent of the only intrinsic good. Though it may be difficult for a person to strip themselves of the ideology and creeds that they have believed for a great deal of time, to remove beliefs that they logically know to be flawed, it may occur sometimes only under time and duress. Yet, the ultimate purpose of it is productive of happiness: Personal development. There are some attributes that Freethinkers will find among each other, unabridged. The trait that causes a person to strive for goodness, to commit an action only so that it increases the happiness of the men around him, to be just and fair in all decisions -- this trait can be found among all reformers and Freethinkers.

www.punkerslut.com

For Life,

Punkerslut (or Andy Carloff) has been writing essays and poetry on social issues which have caught his attention for several years. His website http://www.punkerslut.com provides a complete list of all of these writings. His life experience includes homelessness, squating in New Orleans and LA, dropping out of high school, getting expelled from college for subversive activities, and a myriad of other revolutionary actions.


Author:: Andy Carloff
Keywords:: Preference,Culture,Morality,Ethics,Choice,Personal,Desire,Lust,Sexuality,Psychology,Psychiatry
Post by History of the Computer | Computer safety tips