Sign Up!
Login
Welcome to HiddenMysteries
Sunday, July 21 2019 @ 05:59 AM CDT

Three Steps to Recovery?

Age of Reason

by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.

A Note to the Reader:

Since the February 1763 "Peace of Paris," the dominant history of the world has been chiefly divided, for most of that time up to the present moment, between two leading, contending, English-speaking currents of the history of the planet. These two have been the British empire, on the one side, and, on the other, our own United States' republic.

Should the British empire, the implicit adversary of our United States since 1763, continue to be arrayed as the controlling force on this planet still today, the entirety of the planet would plummet, very soon, into a nightmare far worse than a planet-wide "new dark age." This has threatened to be the end of the line for a trend which had been operating since the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert. Unless there were a change away from this still present trend since the two Kennedy assassinations, the collapse of the economy of the planet as a whole were, probably, the option presently in sight now.

Soon, our U.S. quarrel with the British Empire will be settled in one way, or another. The outcome of this quarrel will depend upon considerations which must take into account issues in which leading nations on Earth, such as the United States, Russia, China, and India, must work in concert, to meet the challenge of the presently oncoming turn in our galaxy. On that account, we find ourselves as if locked, for the moment, in a time during which we are now threatened with a continuation of the recent trend of worsening failure by the present government of our United States. A failure to check the pro-genocidal impulses of the British monarchy now, would virtually assure the descent of the planet into a planet-wide "new dark age."

Therefore, I restate what I have said above. Our role, presently, must be recognized in the immediate challenge of defeating a British-empire-led threat to the continued existence of our United States' republic. It is, in fact, a present threat by the British Empire to the existence of our human species. The defeat of that British threat to civilization, is now still the crucial strategic mission before this planet as whole.

A sad outcome for those among us dwelling in earth's near future, is, fortunately, not yet inevitable. Nonetheless, that danger must be presently considered as a threat for the near future. Heaven help us, if the now plummeting British puppet, U.S. President Barack Obama, were not to have been ousted from office, in disgrace, during the days ahead.

Therefore, that being our concern, let us now make a forward leap for mankind. Ask, what are the forces which are to be assigned duties benefitting the present future of the human species? For a hint of the answer to such questions, start with attention to modern European history since the role of Nicholas of Cusa in the preparations and conduct, and beyond, of the wonderfully hopeful, A.D. 1438 Council of Florence.

What Did Columbus Discover?

Consider the virtual prophecy of Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa in that light. The foresight of Cusa back then, had prompted Christopher Columbus to promote voyages across the Atlantic into the Caribbean, and had, in that way, brought about the present division between "Old Europe" and what thus came to be identified as a triumphant United States.

So, it has come to be the present fact of the world in these modern times, that the failures among the leading nations, had left the fate of the present, post-Renaissance, modern world, largely within the hands of what were to emerge as the two great traditionally English-speaking powers of the world: a fate left within the hands of the rapidly waning means of the British Empire, or, possibly, a triumph of our own United States against Britain.[1]

Unfortunately, that power currently represented by the heads of state of the British kingdom today, has been largely spent under the global reign of British imperialism.

So, we have lived throughout the relatively recent past, under the domination of the planet by the hands of such as either British tyrants such as the Empress Queen Elizabeth II, or, in the too rare, better moments, under the alternative represented by the leadership of such opponents of imperialism as specifically the Twentieth-century U.S. Presidents, such as William McKinley (very briefly), Franklin D. Roosevelt, General Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and "Bill" Clinton.

Unfortunately, since the close of President Clinton's two terms in office, his two successors have brought upon us the worst prospects for our United States, that which we have suffered under such ruinous Presidents as George W. Bush, Jr., and the British Empire-controlled, U.S. puppet-President, Barack Obama.

For the remainder among the actually leading heads of state among great powers, during the post-World War II 1946-2011 interval, there had also been, chiefly, the Soviet Union (until its fall), India, and China, which had, or have been the "great nations" on account of the history of their territories and cultures, and on the account of the number and rising power which the U.S.A., Russia, China, and, potentially, India, have come to represent, as in aggregate, today.

Presently, the leading hope for mankind is centered, chiefly, on the possible roles of the United States, Russia, and China in their own right, and with India soon after the establishment of the practical unity among the initiating three. India as a notable power, once freed from the still persisting residue of British influence, remains a power with pending, near-future claims to rising leadership in the world, that in its own right.

Therefore, that consequential four, the three-plus-one, are the leading partners on which the world's peoples must rely for those immediate years now ahead, and for the quality of such cooperation from among leading nations in bringing humanity into a system of emerging world-wide initiatives expressed as sovereign nation-states of our planet and expressed as what must also emerge as the role of mankind in the Solar system and beyond.

Unfortunately, the currently menacing role of the British Empire still exists. It continues to exist, presently, as during the recent past decades, as with such diverse British agents-in-fact as Margaret Thatcher, François Mitterrand, and their rather foolish, but nasty accomplice, U.S. President George H.W. Bush, the latter a son of one-time Adolf Hitler sponsor Prescott Bush. The latter collection of such awfully bad leaders, has recently deprived the other nations in western and central Europe of their own claims to enjoying a truly continuing, future sovereignty: a loss of sovereignty recently renamed under the category of that reign of the bastards called "governance."

So, in summary, for the moment when these and the following words have now been written here, the initiative for the planet as whole, now appears to depend, for the moment, upon the hoped-for cooperation sparked among three of the leading powers of this planet, our own United States, Russia and China. Those three represent, for the moment, the immediate prospect of a trio of nations whose peculiar, immediate importance for the nations of the planet as a whole, is crucial in a very much particular way, as during this immediate moment of crucial decision in the present and immediate future history of the world.

Soon, we expect that India shall quickly join those three to define a fourth leading nation of the same group and its shared intention.


Preface:

Worse Than Hitler!

Only mankind knows, and lives, or suffers, the experiencing of history.

Once upon a time, there had been an ogre named Adolf Hitler. However, that Adolf was, virtually, a mere puppet, which had been created, and then steered by a British imperial monarchy. That British monarchy has functioned as a "Fourth Roman" empire, an empire which has turned out, since Hitler's death, to have been a far more evil, but also more durable creature than a Hitler.[2] Such has been the current Royal-household crew of imperialist lackeys behind the pro-genocidal World Wildlife Fund (WWF).[3]

The problem was plainly illustrated by the case of that nasty successor to President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the "Harry S Truman" who had been better recognized for his role as a Wall Street variety of Winston Churchill devotee.

The cases of a murdered, truly American patriot, President John F. Kennedy and, also, his assassinated brother, Robert, should remind us of the effects of the kind of roles played by the British imperialists and their U.S. lackeys of today.

For example, take the case of the wretched Harry S Truman who had been, essentially, of a "Wall Street vintage." He had been a true successor in a role akin to such outrightly treasonous, anglophile louts as Confederacy-heirs Theodore Roosevelt and Ku Klux Klan fanatic and President Woodrow Wilson. Both of which latter pair had walked in the tradition of British agent Aaron Burr, and also of Burr's asset, and sometime U.S. President, Andrew Jackson. All of those regrettable U.S. figures, including Jackson himself, were, similarly, creatures in the footsteps of Jackson's Wall Street patron, backer, and his successor in the Presidency, Martin van Buren.

The defeat of Truman's re-election, by the election of patriot and President Dwight Eisenhower, had blocked the most noxious effects of a Truman legacy for a time. The later election of a President fully devoted to the Roosevelt tradition, John F. Kennedy, relaunched the President Franklin Roosevelt commitment; but, the Liberal establishment's role in covering up the facts of the assassination of that President Kennedy and, then, of his brother and leading Presidential pre-candidate Robert, had launched that process of destruction of our United States which has continued, more or less aggressively, to the present date. The worst of such calamities came with, first, two terms of President George W. Bush, and, then something even far worse, that of the plausibly insane, British-created puppet-President, Barack Obama.

President Barack Obama himself has certainly been the worst, the most treasonous-in-effect President of the United States ever; but, there was nothing accidental in the fact that a significant number among U.S.A.-elected Presidents, such as Obama himself, had been, de facto, outright British agents working against our United States and its people.

Presidents Whom Money Did Buy

The list of implicitly treasonous, or insane, Presidents or Vice-Presidents, has included such cases as the treasonous Aaron Burr who took his direction from that boss of the British East India Company known as Lord Shelburne and from Shelburne's lackey Jeremy Bentham.

There is a list of those U.S. Presidents who have been under the influence of treasonous or kindred types, including the type of Lord Shelburne's handy-man, Bentham. Bentham directed the Aaron Burr who was a British agent and a traitor to the United States. Similar cases, in effect, have been the lackeys, or merely wimps who have been employed in working against the United States, as "from within," still today.[4]

The Lord Shelburne who is also notable for his sponsoring of Edward Gibbon's The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, had emerged from the February 1763 "Peace of Paris" as a key figure in the "Seven Years War," and had come to represent the power of the British East India Company of his time. It was that British East India Company, which was already in the process of virtually digesting a putative sort of British national monarchy. The effect was that the actual British realm was submerged in what emerged from the combination of Shelburne's rule and the defeat of the Emperor Napoleon, which was a "New Roman Empire," an empire cast, still today, in the adopted tradition of the Caesars.

This present British Empire had been, originally, and still remains as the "fourth" in a series of the successive Roman empires, which included the second: Byzantium; (the third), the Venice-directed Norman Crusaders (who dismembered the remains of Charlemagne's legacy); and, (the actual "fourth,") the modern British (a.k.a. "New Venetian") Empire. All among these were, in principle, the enemies of the intention of the Fifteenth-century, Great Ecumenical Council of Florence. The "British Empire" became the first actually global, modern empire which has been virtually in existence as a pretender-form of empire since that time, up to the present date of a ruined Western and Central continental Europe which has been now nearly reduced to that lackey-like status of ridicule known as a state of mere "governance" today.

The consequence of that succession of bad developments, is presently, that the British empire itself is now in a virtually terminal state of disintegration. The question so posed, is whether the collapse of the British empire will lead into that empire's richly deserved "new dark age," a dark age presaged by the tenures of Presidents George W. Bush, Jr., and the evil Barack Obama; or, whether the U.S. recovery through the immediate ouster of the ostensibly insane Obama, will enable the revival of the intention of the U.S. Federal Constitution's influence as a leader among equally sovereign nation-states. A U.S.A. failure to meet that challenge immediately, now, would condemn civilization to collapse in its entirety.

In the case of a U.S. failure to effect the richly warranted ouster of Obama now, the United States would soon vanish from the world's political map, even immediately.

To prevent such an outcome, a Europe of sovereign nation-states, with their respective languages, could be, and must be restored. It could be restored, in principle, as by means of a return to the intention which had once inspired the great ecumenical Council of Florence of A.D. 1438. That means, presently, employing the present day's language, an attempted return to an intended world-wide condition as a system of a composed set of cooperating nations of respectively, perfectly sovereign quality of nation-states. This corresponds, for example, on that particular account, to the implicit intention of the original Federal Constitution of our own United States.[5]

Now, when for this moment, a momentarily triumphant British world-empire is ripe to be displaced by the recently threatened sovereignty of our constitutional United States and such among the U.S.A.'s new allies as Russia, China, and soon after that, India, there will be a U.S. reoriented to a trans-Pacific revival of our planet. The present threat to mankind lies in the risk, that the nation-states throughout the planet, regrettably, might have vanished as if by the resonance of a single blow. Such a threatened blow were likely to be struck by a British-monarchy-led process of pro-racialist mass exterminations among the great majority of the population of our planet.

As the alternative to such an evil destiny for this planet which would be represented by the influence of the British empire today, we must accept the intention which is implicit in the U.S. Federal Constitution.

We are thus left, at this moment, to react by means of an urgently needed global fraternity of a set of respectively sovereign nations, nations which have, respectively, specific distinctions in culture, but which are nonetheless destined to emerge soon as perfectly sovereign nation-states each devoted to a common purpose for their unity. The purpose of such a unity is that of being already, or becoming states as nations which will have the shared enjoyment of a roster of a newly recreated set of nations. These would be nations typified by an alliance among the Pacific states of the United States, Russia, China, and others, sharing an efficient common interest in respectively perfect forms of sovereign personalities, but which are also devoted to a common purpose for the achievement of common ends befitting the uniquely designed, innately creative nature of human sovereignty.

That latter intention could now be efficiently enacted and maintained within a common prevalence of certain principled terms of definition of the practiced meaning of such a notional quality of sovereignty, as such. The realization of that historical intention, is the subject of the following pages of this report.

I. The Human Principle

We must count as the most common obstacles to a notion of specifically human creativity, the failure, as among nations, to recognize three required, principal qualities of the characteristics of living human personalities. These are the ordering of their intrinsic interests which are in accord with the fundamental scientific progress of our species. These characteristics should be considered as being those in accord with the most essential facts respecting the inferior three, of a total of four steps in a successively ordered sequence, as follows.

Our subject here is the true nature of the human mind.

The lower three of that four are fairly represented by the following array of their faults:

  1. A mistaken faith in sense-certainty;
  2. A mistaken belief in the existence of space;
  3. A mistaken faith in the existence of simple time.[6]

The fourth, nominally "transcendental" step in that ordering, is defined at an appropriate point, below.

The first two among those initial three facts were clearly noted as being such by Bernhard Riemann, as said by him in the concluding, third principal section of his 1854 habilitation dissertation. The choice of the third step had been affirmed, as the implied conclusion of Albert Einstein; this would almost surely have been affirmed, on reflection, by Riemann's assent.

Here, on this point, I shall now insist on the added, fourth item for this listing, which I shall now merely note for later treatment in this present report. The first three listed above, are no better than merely the shadow-like experiences cast by a quality of reality (the fourth item) which supersedes all notions of mere sense-perception as such. Hence, on account of this fourth consideration, we must also focus on the crucial nature of the distinction of the brain (as the practical pinnacle of sense-perceiving), from the vastly higher authority of the mind, or, as it may also be said, the quality radiated as the human soul.[7]

The nominal objects of sense-perception, and the like, have an essentially ironical connection to sensory reality, as such irony is best typified by the notion of metaphor. There is no "sensed" object as such which qualifies itself as that principle of action known as "metaphor;" "metaphor" is not an expression of a set of fixed objects of sense-perception; it is a principle of action.[8] It is the highest quality of human consciousness, beneath which all functions of sense-perception are subsumed as being merely as if the kaleidoscopic moments of a continuous process of absolutely non-linear action.

Hence, the hierarchy of the objective world, including the unsensed powers such as the principle of a really efficient world, may be configured in the realities of ontological ordering, of, highest, metaphor (e.g., the Classical poetic imagination); then what is derived from the adduced physical principles of science; and, on a still lower level, the human sensory experiences as such.

Hence, what may tend to be ranked as the least tangible experience, is, each, ranked uniquely in order, that according to the sense of what is the immediately "relatively truthful." Even if also wrong in part, it is, actually, relatively "nearest to our presently known reality," and, then, hopefully, "the most nearly truthful" known to us thus far.

Thus, we have the relatively superior powers of the human individual mind—the uniquely and truthfully creative powers of the mind, the creative means of metaphor. All of these are to be located in that which subsumes the inferior faculties of sense-perception per se, as by the influence of the higher experience of true principles of science. This view of science is that which subsumes the otherwise deceitful experience of what is merely the shadow-world of sense-perception as such. Such is the import of the noëtic (e.g., metaphorical) quality of the concluding, extended paragraph of Percy Bysshe Shelley's A Defence of Poetry.

It is an amusing, but, nonetheless, a practical reflection of the aforesaid specifications, to recognize the distinction of the sensory functions of the human personality from those of the lower species of life. Imagine, for example: "Do birds actually sleep during much of their time in migratory flight"—since they are, in effect, usually on "autopilot" when following the pathway defined by the magnetic field?

In that just-stated perspective, and the like, the only really thinking creature presently known to us, is the human individual as a type —wherever, or however that likeness in effect might be shown to have been replicated. Only the human mind makes the noëtic [e.g., metaphorical] quality of decisions which craft a choice for action which has the quality of effect, in principle, of a voluntary formation of a choice of the virtual "invention" of a profoundly new quality of behavior which is other than being a previously experienced, or otherwise "built-in" type.

In respect to speculations on such matters, consider the exemplary case of a (superficially) merely seeming-to-be-human-like effect, as to be considered when seeking to treat the behavior of a mobile sort of electro-magnetic toy, then considered as the to-be-contrasted exhibition of such toy-like, living, or other objects which are to be contrasted to the characteristically insightful behavior of the purposed pre-choices of the science-driven, human inventor.

In a certain kind of summary of the points so arrayed, the human mind expresses the effect of that quality [of "human mind"] which must be considered by us, as if from "the top down," rather than random-like "search-and-find" patterns typical of the implicitly experience-bound habituation shown among the lower forms of life.

Creativity as Uniquely Human

Creativity, as a strictly defined, tell-tale influence, has characteristics which are essentially distinct as the specific qualities which cause the functions of human reason to differ, in essential respects, from the actions of the type of either mechanical reactions, in one type, or, instead, that other type which might be expected among apparently voluntary actions among living creatures other than mankind. Each categorical type, including the highest quality of state, that of specifically human creativity, has certain systemic distinctions from the other categories of topics. In the case of the human species, in the ability of the human specimen, or as like those found among human specimens, there exists a crucially significant, categorical distinction, a distinction which is fully as great a distinction as that between, on the one side, inanimate action of non-living creatures, and that of living creatures on the other, as that line of distinction, lies as an absolute division between the categories of what are merely animals and those who are actually human.

The distinction of animal from human behavior has a range of expressions which are, actually, qualitatively greater than that between electro-mechanical responses and animal species other than mankind, a distinction of humanity which is not merely quantitative, but distinct, as the work of V.I. Vernadsky attests, ontologically (e.g., metaphorically) beyond that met among the merely animal species.[9]

As I have indicated, the putative objects of sense-perception as such, are intrinsically shadows cast by an imperfect expression of reality, a reality which is invisible to actual sense-perception, except in respect to its likeness of a "shadow cast." The best representation of the nature of that difficulty is to be considered in reading, first, Johannes Kepler's argument for, and use of what he presented as a "vicarious hypothesis," as that usage was extended to his related, later discovery of the unique principle of universal gravitation.

Thus, once that reality is actually taken into account by the student of physical science, we must find ourselves immediately troubled, that in a thoroughly profound way, by the misguided suggestion that sense-perceptions might be images of a "physical reality,"[10] rather than some shadow-like creatures which bear nothing actually belonging intrinsically to the mere image of the sense-impressions being referenced. Obviously this fact should not impel us to a rejection of the function of sense-perceptions. Exactly contrary. By giving up the confusing effects of attempting to defend "sense certainty" as representing a fixed quality of an ontological certainty, we gain confidence in the relatively truthful aspect of sense-impressions, as their being merely moving shadows cast by the light of a sense of an entirely different quality of object, an actual, transcendental truth expressed as in non-linear realms of action.

Which is real? Is it the object to be known as a sense-perception, or the object of the human imagination as defined by the ontological quality of metaphor: Percy Bysshe Shelley's imagination, for example? Let us recommend Shelley on this account.

An Hypothesis on a Relevant Point

For example: take the case of Kepler's uniquely original discovery of a principle of gravitation. Take the case, again, of his recognition of the necessity of considering a vicarious hypothesis, as introduced in The New Astronomy, and as echoed in the standpoint of the method which Kepler employed for his discovery of a principle of gravitation.

There are three profoundly great principles of physical science which are most clearly pesky for a perplexed reductionist. The one is the notion of a principle of the "time related" relativist's notion of action per se; the second, the principle of the quality of action by life per se; and, the third is the principle of, specifically, the distinct quality of action by the living motive of human creativity (i.e., V.I. Vernadsky's notion of human creativity).

Taken into account as a whole, we have the kernel, thus, of the essential argument against the notions associated with the conceit known as "reductionism." That consideration refers us back to the qualified, shadowy unreality of the first three of the four notions of ontology (or, what might be regarded as "quasi-ontology") presented in the opening portions of this present chapter.

As troublesome as my argument, taken as a whole, here, might be, tending to spoil the party of the stolid believer in the likes of "sense-certainty;" so Shakespeare, for example, might chide that reductionist whose prejudice deprives him (or her) of the metaphorical ontology of that pleasure which deserves "the name of action per se."

You might be tempted to ask: "What might be gained from those reflections?" What must be gained, is a clearer insight into the ontologically superior reality of the concept of the human mind as being the most fundamentally "physical" experience, as being expressed in the notion of the principle of the human mind itself, or, in other words, the "soul," rather than as an expression of "the flesh," as the only real expression of the living human identity.

The distinction of human from beast, lies, essentially, in those specific kinds of creative powers of the imagination, the which are expressed as the specifically creative powers which distinguish the human individual as a type absent in the existence of all lower forms of living objects.

At this point, you must permit us the luxury of what might appear to some as merely speculation. Let us negate the simplicity of the reductionists, so that we might thus discover to what naughty ends merely apparent speculation misleads us. Are not those four categories of action, listed at the beginning of this chapter, expressions of physical actions, at least in the effect of all among them?

Thus, in this manner, we have introduced the paradoxes which the succeeding chapters of this report must treat.

A Word of Caution to the Reader:

From this moment onward, through to the close of the concluding passages of this report, the reader, whether professional, or layman, must take into consideration the fact that the views presented here belong not only to a leading, long-standing, and outstanding professional economic forecaster in the field of political-economy; but, that his record of long-standing, extraordinary successes as a professional forecaster has depended on considerations of physical principles which are unique in their successful attention to certain ironical characteristics of the human mind which have been excluded from the attention of not only bookkeepers, but have been excluded from the needed attention of otherwise competent leading economists.

The result is that the treatment of the subject here requires attention to parameters which have been virtually unknown even among relevant professionals generally, and are now becoming known only among a still smaller ration of them. Success in the field of economic forecasting today, now requires different sets of parameters to be considered than have been known even among some leading professionals so far today.

The report presented here employs those parameters which represent a different set than have been used by even most leading economists. The most crucial of those distinctions are expressed as the distinction between sense-perceptual and deeper factors in categories of human behavior. Those distinctions are presented and discussed at length in the following pages; they should be recognized, and the categories of distinctions recognized for their authority in defining the categorical terms specified for the reading of the text.

II. The Matter of Principle: Fighting Reductionism

The present avalanche of collapse in the trans-Atlantic financial community, became virtually inevitable with the blocking of my draft legislation for a Homeowner's and Bank Protection Act of July-August 2007. The blocking of that legislation cleared the way for the subsequent swindle known as hyper-inflationary "bail-outs," an outright fraud which came to the surface a year later. That series of international "bail-outs" brought on the 2008-2011 onset of a global, hyper-inflationary, "chain-reaction" explosion throughout the entirety of the trans-Atlantic region, and beyond.

The present, 2007-2011 pattern of this presently hyper-inflationary breakdown-crisis, has now mimicked the pattern which struck Weimar Germany during 1923. The present, hyper-inflationary blow-out has now become a catastrophe far worse in its intended effects on the trans-Atlantic system as a whole, than the condition which Weimar Germany reached in the closing months of 1923.

The understanding of the possible remedies for the presently on-rushing, present, virtually terminal, trans-Atlantic breakdown-crisis presented in my present report, is to be recognized in my own, unique successes as the world's leading forecaster in the development of a modern, actually physical science of economics premised on the principle of credit, rather than money. The root-causes of the present crisis are a matter of a very long story concerning the history of European civilization itself going back to a time before the founding of the Roman Empire; the cure of the present form of the problem, seems to be a less-complicated matter when one begins from the standpoint of modern physical science—but, merely seems to be less challenging than that.

Take the case of my relationship to the work of Bernhard Riemann.

The Encounter with Riemann

My adoption of Bernhard Riemann's 1854 habilitation dissertation, as supplying the basis for economic forecasting, was essentially completed in outline, by February 1954. Deeper implications of physical principle became clear later, step by step, as you shall encounter these, in part, in this present chapter of the report.

For example, there had been many relevant evening hours spent on struggling through references to the work of Riemann followers Max Planck, Albert Einstein, and related authors, in the Boston Public Library during my first exposures to this subject during 1940-41, and, later, 1946-47. Notably, these were not as much merely academic, as also war-time years, part of a span from what became known as the transition from the setting of "World War II" through the transition into the so-called "Cold War." As it has turned out, the two warfares were for me, ironically the same.

This passage of time, during the early 1950s and later, was, again, as for me, the setting of another kind of war, a war which had been first launched by me during the mid-1930s, expressed then as an adolescent's rejection of the reductionist follies of Euclidean geometry. I exaggerate nothing when I insist that the two kinds of war, that of economy and combat in warfare, expressed the same issue in the end. My point is as follows.

Essentially, it was my adolescent rejection of anything resembling Euclidean geometry which worked to my own relatively greatest advantage in choosing, in effect, that course of style of life which I have led. This juxtaposition needs some explanation here, but, as I shall now make clear enough in due course, I do not exaggerate in the least in making that juxtaposition.

Probably, some readers would presume that my comparison of mathematics and warfare has something to do with money as such. I do not mean financial gain or the like, but, rather, the notion of a successful net physical outcome of a choice of culture as measured over a span of entire kinds of what we might term "cultures," as, for example, as a successful species, as contrasted with such a "test case" as the famous outcome for the dinosaurs.

Take the case of the four successive phases of the Roman empires, each of which has been either entirely a catastrophe either from the past, or, as in the case of the fourth, the British Empire, an entity presently sliding down into its own probable early extinction. What is the ultimate direction toward which the practice of a species of life, or a type of human culture is destined? What kind of life is to be mourned, and which should have become despised?

To illustrate the definition of a failed society, consider the miserable failure which has been represented by a believer in the ideology of the notorious British swindler Adam Smith. Smith insisted that human life had no provable meaning in the sense of a foreseeable sort of rightness or wrongness. As in the case of the Roman emperors and their successors, such as Byzantium, or, also, the old Venetian system, or the New Venetian Party which established the British Empire, the first three had turned out as useless in the end, while the fourth, the present British Empire of Queen Elizabeth II, is on the verge of achieving a similar demise.

In the end, there have been either successful or failed, past, present, and future cultures, whose measure, as I explain here, is to be sought in what we might term "their souls."

In the case of our United States, for example, our national culture is to be traced to modern civilization's standard of the intended accomplishment represented by the Great Ecumenical Council of Florence. That Council may seem to have been crushed, in one sense, but, nonetheless, the launching of our United States came about through nothing different than that intention of that Council, an outcome steered prominently by the genius of Nicholas of Cusa, an outcome of his efforts, as this is expressed by the initiative of the Plymouth settlement, and of the Massachusetts Bay Colony before its crushing by the invading forces of the New Venetian Party of usury. In such matters, "success" must be measured by the legacy it hands on to the future of mankind, even if that party had been crushed, or not, in the meantime.

Thus, despite the uncertainties which may prove to have been beyond the reach of preference for certainties, there is the clear idea of a good culture, as distinct from an intrinsically failed culture. That works to such an effect, that, some time in the future, results will tell. As the Great Ecumenical Council of Florence demonstrated, Jeanne d'Arc did win for her cause over those evil Norman perverts who cooked her to death.

For example: among the earliest, and most crucial of my own notable gains on this account, was my good fortune in recognizing the ontological implications of what was, for me, the connection between the relevant, systemic implications of my wrestling with the relationship between the most notable of the barely fragmentary remains of the work of Heraclitus, and the relationship of those remains to the comparable implications of Plato's Parmenides dialogue.[11] That latter connection was probably the most crucial among my reportable experiences bearing upon the ontological aspects of my successes in physical-economic forecasting.

To the best of presently shared sources of knowledge of physically efficient principles, "space" is, ironically, super-dense with cosmic radiation throughout: which is to emphasize the indicated view that there is neither a finitely bounded, nor an "empty" space. In the beginning, as in Classical artistic composition, there is a yearning for distinct ideas; which is to say, that there is metaphor. Then came searches for what one might hope would prove to be efficient notions of physical principles. Then, on a lowest, least stable level of investigations, comes the effect known as discrete action.

To sum up the reflection on the meaning of life and its struggles, the society of merit is a knowable conception. There are societies whose merit is clearly knowable, even when that society might have been crushed. That is a value which endures, despite all else.

Similarly

In order that we might free ourselves from such a mere illusion as that of elementary sense-perception per se, consider this. Your commitment must become rooted in that which is not to be considered as, for example, the merely literal notion of a mere sight, or sound, in and for itself. The principle to be kept in mind, especially in matters of science and morals, is that associated with the notion of metaphor, rather than emphasis on so-called "fixed," "discrete" objects.

To restate the point: your goal should have become a devotion to treating mere sense-perceptions as merely a sometimes useful, but, nonetheless, a discrete image of the slice of a passing shadow cast, rather than regarding acquired habits as the habituated reductionists do, as being the cause of a sensed, discrete effect in and for itself.[12] To be human, is to be passionately creative in an intention never to be less than the agent of a continuing creative process of development: to be creative, rather than entombed as a victim of the stagnancy of gossip-ridden reductionism.

The characteristic trait attributable to humanity is, at best, "willful creativity." In such a case, we create a condition which had not previously existed, and we do so as a voluntary act of creating. It is that process of willfully creative change effected by relevant human intention, which best distinguishes the human individual, and also distinguishes the human species from the beasts. It is what we cause the outcome of our lives to have been, which is the legacy which is what we are actually.

True, species evolve; but, the willful change of human nature, that from one generation to a next, is the change of the characteristic of the human species from one generation to, hopefully, a rise to a higher quality of existence, that through the means of willful creativity. This is to be expressed either as a qualitative change in a mere species, or as the expression of the willful creativity of the human species as a willfully self-creating species.

Consider the example of Johannes Kepler's success in his willfully creative discarding of what had been treated, erroneously, as virtually eternal notions, thus enabling himself to discover what the dupes of Isaac Newton, later, seemed never capable of doing: discovering an actual principle of gravitation, as Kepler had done.

In stating what I have just argued here, above, I mean that in the way in which gravitation, as discovered by Kepler, represents the being of a principle, rather than a merely discrete event.

For those like the dupes of Sir Isaac Newton, almost anything becomes experienced essentially, as functionally, as merely an arbitrary symbol, as a mere marker, a merely dead and stagnant shadow of that of which it is purposed to become and to remain a shadow without any active meaning except to admire that as a mere symbol for itself. The whisper heard by the soul, rather than merely the object seen by the eyes, by the ears, or by their dream-like companions, must express a subtle passion which comes to us as if radiated from a distant and higher place, a place found amid a passion of silence which conquers all mere sight or sound as such.

It is the sound heard in the mind, if not as if in the ear, which must serve as the gentle shadow of a kind of a softly imagined, but actually powerful voice, for which the suggestions of even mere whispers, are the most powerful ideas, ideas as heard, actually in the mind. That is so, for reasons of irony which I have already defined, earlier in this present report, as a principle of metaphor.

The belief in "sense-certainty," is to be attributed, in effect, to the reductionist doctrines of the British hoaxster Adam Smith, who would, if he were able, have limited permissible human knowledge to merely discrete and utterly irrational forms of sense-perception as such. Smith had forbidden any foresight into the consequences of an efficient action. Whereas, in an efficient practice of physical science, we rely on the discovery of universal principles whose intention changes our world, even our universe, rather than the meaninglessness of what are foolishly presumed to be random sensory effects as such.[13]

Should we be like the fools who believe the hoaxster Adam Smith? Intelligent people will not presume to actually "know" what they merely sense; what we actually know is the experience of changing of the efficient principle of action, such as by the discovery and use of a universal physical principle, as contrary to Adam Smith's arbitrary dogma of "the unknowable truth" within the universe.

To understand a part of the experience of the universe, one must gain knowledge of the principle which runs the universe, as from top down, rather than accruing particular sensory experiences. What is that which makes universality an integrable whole-in-the-making?

A Lesson from a Personal History

For example:

I had already become consciously committed to my choice of the functional meaning of "physical intention," on this account, when that had first occurred to my present memory over the span of my fourteenth and fifteenth years. This recognition had occurred, when I had first come to recognize something to the effect of "telling me, that that time had arrived" when I should have come to despise Euclidean geometry as being a noisy classroom's sort of nasty frauds. Thereupon, I soon gave up the attempt to attribute intentional action to that merely nominal phenomenon as such. "What the soul expresses on that account, belongs less to the keyboard, than to the power expressed by soundlessly insistent whispers of the mind."

So, as early as during my fifteenth year, any attempted attribution of meaning to Euclid, was already becoming, for me, the intolerable demand that I worship the hateful Olympian Zeus, or his likeness. I refused to believe in lines drawn to a non-existing endlessness of a merely formal geometry of a boundless and emptied space. Similarly, I knew pain, but sensed that neither pain nor pleasure were the outcome of the truthful meaning of our lives, as if in and of themselves. Pleasure or pain, are to be regarded, each, as merely varieties of sense perception, which must be made useful to us in their fashion, when either were needed as goads for appropriate passions; otherwise, each were a lying nuisance. Nonetheless, I emphasize that Euclid's hateful text is the lie it was.[14]

The lie which is the dogma of Euclid has often been taught by the unscrupulous for the edification of the credulous. It a belief which has been typified by its effect of cultivating the fraudulent teaching of the credulous. Whereas, the proper foundation for teaching of geometry as a science today, requires what Bernhard Riemann had demonstrated on this point.

Euclid's heritage of definitions, postulates and axioms, is a lie which provides, thus, the boundary-conditions for the worship of a Euclidean hoax, a condition which is not to be attributed to the honest notions of sensory experience. It was, and remains, a hoax, a sometimes useful concoction of what has been, otherwise, sheer, noisy, empty imagination.[15]

Thus, in such a fashion as I have just summarized here up to this point, the belief in what never actually existed, the belief in the empty space beyond nowhere, has served us when it were useful as the prompting of those beliefs which have never actually been proven, but, in the end, are therefore akin to imagined footprints left behind by a footless traveler into nowhere. The more that many people worship such merely symbolic, conditionally adopted beliefs, the more often they believe that which, in the end, had never meant anything for the true meaning of our lives and their outcomes; they were the echoes of the mistaken, even merely arbitrary faiths of sense, space, and simple time.

So, the victim of Euclid had believed, as did those who adore those beliefs which he, or she, has never imagined a competent reason to disbelieve. Thus, for many, the unimaginable chasm, such as the Euclidean delusion, is therefore considered all the more self-evident because nothing seems to contain it! Such is the proof which is called the "self-evident;" such is the thunder hidden within an inflated, but empty purse! Such "self-evidence" is the relatively widespread viewpoint, under the conditions of the presently ongoing general breakdown-crisis of the markets of the presently wide-world system. It is the overview of the emptied, and the virtually useless, the person whose understanding of life itself has become, in effect, an eternally parallel pair of lines, and, hence, a virtual nothing.

So, therefore, in first approximation, let us consider the clinical truth about what are called "sense perceptions"—or, perhaps, what you heard was the high-priced sounds resonating from within what had already been your lender's emptied purse.

To sum up that point, I restate the principle of my argument in the following historic case.

The Conflicts of Eratosthenes & Archimedes

In a fair estimate, the so-called principles of so-called

Euclidean geometry, are essentially a hoax wrought upon those victims who should be described as "the credulous." The more the certifiably educated person attains the highest academic, or comparable honors, the more likely is the proof of his, or her tendency of the person of acquired ignorance to play the charlatan. There are exceptions to such a rule; but, in a real universe, such tolerances tend to be in the minority. All of the thought along presently customary lines, expresses, in a large degree, a condition of ignorance which serves as the outgoing "bad doctrine" delivered to the credulous.

That much said on this subject thus far, now consider a certain case or two which I have introduced to make my point.

Take, for example, the contrasted, but actively associated cases of Eratosthenes and Archimedes, those respecting the principle of the generation of the circle.

Eratosthenes had been justly famous among the truly learned, for his ostensibly original, physical measurement of the approximate size of the planet Earth (and of the distance of an approximately great-circle arc from the capital of ancient Egypt, to the city of Rome).

Thus, the corruption of an otherwise gifted Archimedes' frankly silly error of his blinded faith in his apparently pro-Euclidean fantasies respecting the origin of the circle, was doubtlessly born of someone's certainly political motives of the relevant time. This error attributable to Archimedes, was later exposed by Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa. Cusa who had been the relevant author of his relatively earlier, leading scientific work, his De Docta Ignorantia, presented a conception on which all practically competent taught science since that time might be seen as having depended.

Those matters taken into consideration, why should we become so foolish as to believe that a merely arbitrary, reductionist's set of relatively empty presumptions, such as those premised on the bare notion of the extremes of the "rather large and rather small," or "loud or silent," should have been predefined as proposed on meager premises, that by those who had a limited, merely shadowy grasp of the reality of what we imagine to have "heard," or "seen," or which were "silenced." Such were the actual experimental extremes of the ideas of such suggested extremes as the very large and the very small.[16]

Thinking along lines similar to those of Bernhard Riemann, one must ask oneself today, why do silly people insist on the efficacy of an alleged "Second Law of Thermodynamics" when the conclusive evidence accumulated from about a half-billion years of the residual evidence of living processes' "histories," demonstrates the direct opposite: the "principle" of the universal as being a fixed sort of bounded value,[17] is to be discarded as a fraud which were worse than merely incompetence, and, therefore, a matter to be considered as superseded by the recognition of the persistently higher degrees of "energy-flux density," that without notable exception.

So, it is the case, that entire clusters of species are rendered extinct. To our mind's eyes, they are premised upon the presumption of the widely accepted, but utterly fraudulent standard for the reading of an array of living processes. That error demands that we must, rather, adopt the truth of the necessity of our sundry species' evolutionary progress of adaptation to higher states of relative energy-flux density.

Why is that so often the issue?

We tend, thus, to adopt the silly notion of a downward "progress" toward the starting point of a relatively lower level of mean "energy-flux density" per capita of population-growth, when we should, instead, have relied upon the fact of relatively higher quality of general platforms, as that might have been considered in respect to the flow of successively past, current, and future living systems. The evidence which shows the upward evolutionary transformations of living species, is the evidence that reality runs from relatively lower, to the relatively higher species of per-capita, or comparably more advanced degree of existence, and to the by-products of their upward development to higher levels of what might be fairly measured as rises in energy-flux density.

The fact is, that the only notable basis for the credulous folk's being taken continually for the poor fools who believe in the outrightly fraudulent "Second Law of Thermodynamics," is not a result of any actually physical-scientific proofs; but, it is, rather, a result of the mass-brainwashing of those credulous persons who seem to know nothing more important for them than the emptied passion of their own, pitiably credulous lust to believe. This folly occurs as being a result of fraudulent conditioning which tends to persuade them to believe in what is not merely a fraudulent, but an insane form of religious worship, the worship practiced by the believers in a presumably de facto image of an oligarchical, virtual "Satan."

I mean, here, an image of Satan, as that is to be found as a commonplace among those who have degraded themselves into submission to becoming perverted subjects of the "oligarchical principle," an appellation, for the worshippers of the Satan, for the oligarchical systems' principle. The same "Satan" was the relevant figure of Dostoyevsky's The Brothers Karamazov, or of Wall Street: the worship of Satan, or the maniacal figure of President Barack Obama as a maniacal caricature of a baldly Satanic figure, or a would-be Olympian Zeus.

'De Docta Ignorantia'

It remains uncertain, to the best available knowledge in this matter, how much of the actually creative achievement of Nicholas of Cusa, had been discovered earlier as some significant portion of the discoveries of the same Filippo Brunelleschi who had discovered that the funicular curve (i.e., the catenary) is a universal physical principle. Brunelleschi's proof had come before the later argument to this same effect was to have been introduced by his relatively youthful contemporary, Nicholas of Cusa, but the question whether or not this had been a coincidence is not known to me presently.

There is no controversy in this matter of fact; it were sufficient, for our purposes, that the effect of their known actions converged on a common principled outcome, and that their arguments on this matter were rooted in original discoveries by each.

For an illustration of this point:

I, for one, had come to understand the physical principle of both Brunelleschi's and Cusa's actually physical principle of the catenary more clearly, while I was returning, by train, back during the mid-1980s, from Florence to my Frankfurt-Wiesbaden destinations of that occasion. This occurred at a time, when, during that particular travel, the notion of the principle underlying the cupola of Santa Maria del Fiore, flashed into an electrifying realization in my mind.

This occurred during the same day during which a relevant collaborator of that time, a Florence-based scientist "back there" in Florence, had come to the same conclusion during that same interval of a lapse of time. Actually, both that Italian associate and I had echoed a nearly ripened proof we had shared in that imperfect condition prior to the time of my boarding of my train to Frankfurt, a proof of the physical principle shared between us on the subject-matters of the catenary and its complement, the tractrix, as the latter was illustrated for us by Leonardo da Vinci's construction. It had been an experience with the unique physical principle of the catenary which coincided in the same time of my experience in which occurred a freshly heated debate respecting Kepler's discovery of gravitation in which I was embroiled as a proponent, which had occurred, for my part, during two relevant, highly excited. successive, mid-1980s sessions of the Fusion Energy Foundation (FEF).

There was a very special significance of that insight, which I share, in memory, with Brunelleschi, Cusa, and Cusa's follower Leonardo da Vinci, an insight which I had come to share respecting my recognition of the fact, that the catenary is the expression of a universal physical principle, a principle which persists as superior in order to the circular curvature's expression. The proof was that of a universal physical principle of the universe, a principle to be as known to us by such and related physical experiments.

As for the indicated discovery by Brunelleschi, the physical proof of the principle of construction is built into the uniqueness of the "free-hanging constructability" of the cupola of Santa Maria del Fiore, a construction (otherwise known as the funicular hanging curve) of the construction itself.

The significance of the catenary's role as an expression of a universal physical principle of that same principle of the catenary, is not only that it represents the same notion of a universal physical principle which had been developed to a further degree in Cusa follower Leonardo da Vinci's discovery of the complementary character of both the physical principle of the catenary and of the tractrix.

That fact persists, as in the instance of Cusa's De Docta Ignorantia, to the effect that Cusa's work defined the uniquely competent approach to all the underlying epistemological manifestations of the principles of modern physical science, from Cusa through Einstein and Vernadsky, and beyond; it persists, as amplified, and that in a crucial way, by Johannes Kepler's uniquely original discovery of the principle of universal gravitation and the consequent original discovery of principle of Albert Einstein: that the principle of gravitation, as that had been discovered, uniquely, by Kepler, led to the crucial discovery, by Albert Einstein, such that Kepler's discovery implicitly defined our Solar system, or the galaxy within which we must regard it, as "finite, but unbounded."

Although I have added some things of significant usefulness for me, to the insight into the implications of that body of knowledge, as in my argument introduced in this current writing, these considerations remain only what I have recognized as implications of what had been known to me as the leading accomplishments of such outstanding geniuses of our modern age as the exceptional followers of Riemann, Albert Einstein and V.I. Vernadsky, as such are to be recognized in the resonant memory of Bernhard Riemann's celebrated 1854 habilitation dissertation.

The actually small refinement among the observations which I have actually added to that vast store of modern scientific progress, as I have done in this present report, has been merely to have drawn out what I must regard as a needed conclusion for me. These were conclusions such as those which might have been drawn from any sympathetic soul who recognized such implications as an expression of something from Riemann's standpoint in that location, as for that which I have just summarized in the preceding chapter of this report.

"The greatest scientific principle" since the work of Filippo Brunelleschi and Nicholas of Cusa, found its resonance in the voice of a modern contributor to the emergence of the later, successive stages of progress in development of science's most recent predecessor respecting systemic contributions to the body of that science, Academician V.I. Vernadsky. It is a fair estimate, that the justified excitement of every true discoverer expresses what he, or she, experiences, in each instance, as a moment of the relatively greatest personal experience of any significant, greater or lesser contributor to such a lesser or greater quality of an earlier or more recent discovery, or even rediscovery, when it has been sensed at a similar moment of realization.

My modest, but nonetheless crucial, rediscovery during what I have referenced, as being the creativity of Brunelleschi and Cusa, as that experience was echoed in a specifically relevant train-ride from Florence to Frankfurt, was inspiring, and important, as such exercises go, although, admittedly, not awfully profound on my part in this case; but, nonetheless, it also resounded as something which was practically very important, in and of itself. In such cases, the essential importance lies in the experiencing of any kindred sort of experience of a discovery of such characteristics. I mean the characteristic of what is essentially a discovery of what should have recognized as if under one's nose. It is the what-should-have-been-obvious, except that it had not been experienced in that same way, with not quite the same, richer meaning, before.

It is another case of exactly the same way in which I came, years past, to the conclusion that the notion of sense-perception, when employed for the definition of the use of language, has no necessarily efficient connection with the subject-matter to which the notion of a certain quality of language is applied. That is the importance of the subject of the present report, when it is taken properly into account as what may be fairly described as a wholly rounded experience.

The Principle of Metaphor

To recapitulate the leading elements of what has been presented here this far, consider the primitive, erroneous notion of what could be considered as the paradoxical essentials of what is accepted as the notion of implicitly physical-perception, thus far: it is the notion of "reality" which is mapped onto a kernel which ranges, conventionally, from a narrowed band of what are termed five "physical sense-perceptions" to a range of about twenty. Al


Story Options

Main Headlines Page


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
A word from our sponsor

   

Check out these other Fine TGS sites

HiddenMysteries.com
HiddenMysteries.net
HiddenMysteries.org
RadioFreeTexas.org
TexasNationalPress.com
TGSPublishing.com
ReptilianAgenda.com
NationofTexas.com
Texas Nationalist Movement

0 comments



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
A word from our sponsor

   

CNBC's War on America


My Account





Sign up as a New User
Lost your password?

?

Latest Lineup of Hard to Find Books

Think!

?

Look at Me

What's New

Stories

No new stories

Comments last 2 days

No new comments

Links last 2 weeks

No new links

Media Gallery last 7 days

No new media items

FreeThinkers


For Mature Thinkers Only


Add this News Scroller to your Website



Just use this snippet of code!/