|
Back to the 1st principle. If all I know is simply a piece of the truth rather
than the whole truth, where might the whole truth lie? Allow me to present to
you an idea. The whole truth lies in pi.
What is pi? Good question. Feel free to look it up here.
In a nutshell pi is the ratio of the circumference of a circle
to its diameter. In other words it is used to estimate the circumference
of a circle given we know where its center is and where its edge
is. If a circle is basically containing a whole it is called a
pie..as in pie chart or apple pie. The diameter of a circle is
the length from the center of the circle to the edge. This is
usually interpreted as a line. If I know the diameter of a circle
I can draw the circle by taking the endpoint of this line and
moving it around the center. The circle is complete when the circumference
is complete. So if I take a string and tack one end down and tie
a pencil to the other and draw a circle I can measure the length
of the arc I drew to determine the circumference. Note that a
circle is an arc. It moves in three dimensions. It moves across
and down relative to the center. When the line is stretched from
the center to the edge it is never separate from the center, only
if we choose to quantify space and time can we imagine an edge
or a center. So that this arc we make, although it is represented
on a two dimensional field we bring to it a third dimension. Without
our conceptualizations this arc and these lines do not exist.
So what are we doing when we imagine a circle being drawn around
a center. We are creating that center. We are imagining that line.
And we are using these imaginings to create a whole. Ok. So what?
So this. If truth be true it must apply to everything..ie it must
be whole. It must contain the center. And by imagining the center
of truth as ourselves we can draw a line to an imaginary edge
that includes everything. An edge that we experience as the present.
A point along an imaginary arc that exists between us and those
around us. Our relationships exist in this imaginary world of
cause and effect as though they were true. However their truth
is relative to our own truth and our own existence. The point
being that in order to maximize the truth we must maximize the
whole. The whole consisting of nothing but our ability to imagine
its limitations as our own limits of imagination. It is we who
create by imagining a relationship between our center and the
whole.
In other words truth must encompass the whole of everything.
If we think of the whole truth as a circle we can imagine ourselves
as lines cognizant of only that piece of the truth that relates
to us. All we know is our own particular angle of the truth. It
is only by communicating with the rest of the whole can we determine
the whole truth. Without communication we are nothing. When we
perceive the whole through our senses it is the whole that speaks
to us. We are in constant communication with the whole whether
we perceive the whole or not. The whole as it relates to our experiences
and our ability to communicate with the rest of us. So when we
define our selves what we really are doing is defining our whole.
Back to pi. Pi is a fun number in that is undefined. However,
just because it is undefined does not mean it is not useful. In
fact one can argue it precisely because pi is undefined that we
can understand ourselves as undefined. Why is pi undefined? Remember
that arc we drew was defined and is always defined according to
its completion. We draw the circle, we measure the arc we drew
and we determine the circumference. There's only one problem.
It is impossible to measure an arc precisely. Our minds are not
capable of closing the loop. Our language does not allow pi to
exist. In order to measure a line it must be straight. Bend the
line and its all theoretical. Now here's the funny thing. Man
has built himself a civilization which revolves around pure assumption.
We assume we can measure an arc by applying the theory of pi to
our equations. The theory of pi states that we can know pi by
approximating pi. In other words we can approximate the whole
without ever closing the loop. How do we close the loop? With
faith.
We can only estimate the whole. We can only estimate the differences
between us. The whole becomes fractured when we imagine the distance
between us takes us outside the whole. Anything that tells us
we do not share equally our own perspective upon the whole is
lying to us. In order for the whole truth to become manifest we
must all be an equal part of it. Like points on a circle I have
no clue what lies between us. It is not by reason I assume there
is a circle. It is by faith. It is not by reason I believe in
truth, it is by faith. I don't know about you. I am sure you have
your own version of truth that may be closer to mine however I
have yet to find a version of truth that closes the loop. All
I know is that I lie on that same circle as all other things that
communicate the whole to me.. i.e. the truth. And in order for
me to maximize my self I must maximize the whole. If I keep anything
else back on the circle I restrict the whole and thus myself.
Therefore I choose never to judge another human being. I believe
each of us must be allowed the liberty to connect with the whole
as they see fit. If that means an individual wants to risk his
life for love, I say 'go for it'. Be all you can be and resist
the lie. In fact, those who take risks are those who create. To
make things better requires risk. I can not promise a thing. I
can only hope for the best and that is a choice I have made by
making these ideas clear to you. We can not maximize ourselves
until we are all free and equal and responsible for ourselves.
This is not science. This is faith. From my faith in the whole
I derive my faith in myself. And my faith in you that you always
use your best judgment and it is for me to see how that is so.
I respect you as I respect myself. I believe my presence within
the all is divine as is yours. I will not settle for less than
complete participation by each and every piece of the pi. To deny
one is to deny all and to deny all is to deny my self. That is
my philosophy and that is why I want to be my last president.
I am sick of the scam. We are
being fed lies constantly that we shouldn't blame the system.
That we should love the system. Without the system where would
we be? I accuse the system of being a scam from day one. And from
day one the individual has been fighting an uphill battle for
recognition and respect. We are told to divide history according
to war and dynasty and power. We are told to call the period between
1914 and 1918 World War One and 1939-45 World War Two and we all
hope World War Three doesn't roll over us. At this point I would
like to focus your attention on whose wars these were. Was is
it between men on the field? Did they hate each other or did they
hate what the other stood for? And who gave them that idea? Where
do these ideas come from that another man may stand for something
other than himself? Who benefits by suggesting such a thing? And
who exactly do we remember most about these periods? They seem
to be the same people who told us they were worth dying for. And
because we didn't know any better, we believed them. Without our
belief in ourselves we become fodder for those who do. Of course
the powers that be love it this way and can't understand what
I am griping about. Their pillars of understanding rely on their
ability to separate themselves from the whole. To raise themselves
above the whole so as to believe they are worthy of dominating
it.
From a Christian perspective this can be seen as the serpent's
temptation to consume the tree of knowledge. The tree of knowledge
can be seen as a metaphor for your belief that your version of
the truth rises above another's in some self inclusive way shape
or form. Jesus can be seen as preaching the denial of this. The
truth is that we are all worthy regardless of whatever anybody
says. There is not a soul on this planet that deserves any more
or less respect than I. If I see anybody being humiliated by the
lie it makes me furious. I believe religion uses the truth against
us. Religion in all its ways shapes and forms encourages judgment
on the non religious. The irony for Christians is that Jesus was
anti-religion too. If you call yourself a 'Christian' does that
allow you to condemn the atheist? Or the Jew? Or the Buddha? Or
me because I do not? I believe the message of Jesus and the Buddha
and the Bible is that the past was fucked up because of God. And
just because the past is full of misery and injustice and tyranny
doesn't mean the future needs to be. I have a message for Christians,
Jesus loves you despite the fact you choose to use him as club.
Jesus wants you to know that I can say whatever I like about Jesus
and it just doesn't matter if you believe in the message rather
than the messenger. We are all equal despite the labels we diminish
ourselves by. We may even choose to judge another in a court of
law however until the criminal condemns himself he is a free man.
We can put the free man behind bars. We can torture the free man
to tell us what we want to hear. We can even execute the free
man and effectively deny him his own judgment. But we can never
condemn the free man. Only the free man can condemn himself. Only
the living can condemn the dead. Truth is in the eye of the beholder.
As long as we choose to see each others as opposites we will pull
against each other. This is the message of unity that has passed
down through the ages via myth, legend and poetry. All of these
stories require a listener. An individual to relate to. These
stories survive because they are repeated. They are repeated because
they represent truth that transcends their time and place. They
may talk about kings and queens and gods and popes and saints
and sinners but what they are really talking about is you, the
listener. These beings are historical not because they are literal
but because they are spiritual. They are spiritual in that they
are true despite themselves. Despite the fact that they defy reality,
there remains a message in them that speaks to the individual.
The same can be said of all that exists, including us. We derive
our own truth from the degree to which we represent it. This is
the truth that rests behind the lies. The lies represent the idea
that we are not equal and are not worthy to represent ourselves.
That we need representatives to tell us the difference between
right and wrong or good and bad. From the beginning this has been
the problem. The individual gets pushed around by a system that
denies his right to be. A system that says the individual can
not exist independent of a representative. This is the farce of
politics. Relying on representatives to represent us is getting
us nowhere. I am not judging the past. From the bullshit springs
the flowerbed.
What I am saying is that the time has come to take responsibility
away from our misbegotten representatives and bestow it upon the
individual regardless of who they are, where they are from, what
they believe in, how they old they are, etc. etc. etc. This is
the path to peace. You may choose to see things differently, I
don't doubt that you will. That is the beauty of our existence
together. I encourage you to resist. I encourage you to stand
up for yourself. Laugh, scoff, rail, bemoan.. I don't care. Just
react. Be a participant to the fullest degree your heart desires.
If at any time the system says 'kill in the name of me', follow
your conscience. Don't let the system or anybody push you away
from your conscience. Your conscience is simply your best judgment.
It is your right to be. So be it and make it happen not for me,
but for yourself.
If you still haven't had enough of my spiel, weed through this.
| Democracy is a conversation |
|
| 
