Previous William Thomas Sherman Info Page quotes, observations, etc.
It's dead, dead, dead right now -- don't you think? They say the economy is booming, yet except in isolated pockets of culture, music is dead, films are dead, humor is dead, romance is dead, honor is dead, religion is dead, science is dead, education is dead, and freedom is dead.
But don't blame me. I'm not one of those who listen to the drearily departed in order to understand what's going on.
If the Big Bang theory is true it may be that God, though infinite (i.e. inwardly or toward himself), is nonetheless smaller spatially and materially speaking than anything in creation, and gives added meaning to the statement "the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve."
History shows that when the men in the pews are better fathers than those at the altar or in the pulpit, then you have the makings of a new denomination.
How can we attune to Nature in the city and in what way is the city against Nature? And if a city is somehow against Nature, or antagonistic to Nature, from whence did it arise?
Can we speak of God being all qualities, and if so all qualities in right proportion, or all qualities which exist and have existed, or are these the same thing?
"Since we know about these things a certain way we are going to move into your life.."
Hold on there demonist, you are not moving into anybody's life. The plain fact is when such as you come around people say run for your lives. You don't want to hear it that way, but that's how it really is. If you knew how inexpressibly good things are when you are not around, you wouldn't flatter yourself about knowing as much as you pretend to.
Why a vow of poverty? To prevent one's being tempted to make more of material things than they should is one obvious explanation. Yet as or perhaps more significant is the fact that because of the way these people are the odds are very high that if you do the right thing they will make a point of wrecking or stealing what you have, if for no other reason than to show others that goodness does not pay.
Christian moderation is forgiving, but understandably up to a point. For example if the party in question is utterly incorrigible; or situations of imminent self-defense. Or those who persist in recklessly abusing or destroying others in our midst, can we casually forgive and say what they are doing is of no great consequence? Now of course if that person repented, stopped doing those things, that would count for something. But if they don't, can you just accept what they are doing as an alternative lifestyle, and one which they are continually in your face with?
Judges, 6:31: "So that day they called Gideon 'Jerub-Baal,' saying, 'Let Baal try contending with him,' because he broke down Baal's altar."
In openly defying the autocratic spirit people, Gideon did something extremely bold. Yet then Baal (presumably it was he, or at least someone acting in his behalf) got his revenge. For (so to speak) it seems the pagan "deity" slipped by God's protection (of Gideon) by means of Abimelech, Gideon's concubine son, and who then slew all Gideon's other sons except Jotham. This at least is the kind of thing one can read into the text. But in what way was God not there for previously favored Gideon in this? Perhaps, but not necessarily, because of Gideon's marital looseness being pushed beyond the brink. Or is that only or mostly a coincidence? Alternatively, if we choose to see God as a spirit person, either he became incapable of aid because of Gideon's lapsing in some way. Or alternatively Gideon failed to live up to the Right in himself, with this failing leaving him open to attack by Baal. These are just some possible ways we might interpret or explain what actually took place.
At this juncture if a person can't (or at least attempt to) talk about spirit people honestly and intelligently the simple and plain fact is they really can't talk much about anything at all of a serious nature. The implications of the subject are truly that great.
There are levels where someone can be so inured to extreme evil that it does not affect them and they can encounter it indifferently, especially if it is someone else suffering. While this might in one sense be seen as a strength, it can be a damning weakness which will ruin their happiness forever if not counterbalanced by a sense of fairness, compassion and justice toward others.
The more people and life become things the more degraded they become, or at least are treated as being. Love and Truth are what make life not merely a thing, and this is why the demonists do not speak out for these principles, instead preferring the eternal durability of robbery, secrecy, and lying.
Oh I see how it is. You got in with this ghost governed group. They murdered, raped and tortured some poor people; effectively assassinated those who could out perform you, and you by your silence and cooperation were made a rich, successful pillar of the community.
How can you blame or think badly of something (say for example Christianity, or patriotism for the land you were born to) when what you see and know of it is a false image created by its enemies, or else a false image adopted by well-meaning people and yet who are dupes of the latter?
People who will not listen to honest truth and reason, and yet who think themselves wise, listen to the brainwashed dead.
Evil does not exist for the sake of evil. Rather the purpose of evil is to enslave us.
My plate is full when it comes to difficult and unusual subjects to address, such as and not least of which "spirit people" for example. For this reason I sometimes avoid certain topics lest what I say sound even more fantastical (for some) than it does. One such is the war in Iraq. Yet given what is at stake, I thought I would at least mention a few things, though I hope you will pardon me for speaking in a general way for brevity's sake.
First I have no reason to think or assume that either President Bush and his administration don't mean well either for Iraq or this country. Yet the problem is that for some time now human rights and democracy have most decidedly been on the wane in the U.S. at the same time that we have been trying to kick start them in the Middle East. The main culprit for this down turn in our freedom is (what I call anyway) "witchcraft people" who have come to control so much of the greater wealth and power in this country. It is they for example that are the ones behind the more overt sadism we've seen and heard about, including the "Gitmo" horror stories, not to mention the sick degradation that regularly comes up in television and films. Think then of what has happened to prisoners and detainees in Iraq and Cuba as a sort of "unrated" version of "Cops," or "Rodney King at Abu Ghirab." And they have this great wealth and power because they listen to spirit people, very similar (if not identical) to the idea of someone selling their soul to the devil for riches. You can very much see and discern them, for instance, in the morally degraded media culture of the last 20 years, and which they obviously control.
They also have their hand in governmental affairs, including the war in Iraq. Needless to say, they are no real friends of freedom and democracy, indeed are America's true worst enemies, seeking merely to expand their influence and control overseas, using the administration (when it can) for this purpose. Of course when I say they, it is much, much more the spirit people they listen to than themselves as such.
In sum then, what is needed is to get at and root out these rich domestic terrorists, much like we got at this Zarqawi person, and the place you'll as likely as not find him is in Hollywood or at Time-Warner. At just about any other time in history, I am sure what I am saying would sound crazy. But things have been so bad and bizarre in recent decades, that I think those who would before have scoffed roundly at such a suggestion, are much more prepared now to see that there is a lot more to it than they hitherto would have thought was possible.
A feelng is not a belief because a feeling most of the time is involuntary. Yet there are levels of awareness and volition where feelngs can affect beliefs and, alternatively, beliefs can affect feelings.
There is this person or persons on the TV, internet, and magazines, etc. who is always promoting and talking about sex, and I encounter this so much its gets to be absurd. One odd thing I noticed is that he never seems to catch himself making a fool of himself, but goes on from one thing to the next driven by his mania, never at any time quite able to see himself.
And so I ask any of you, name someone whom demonism worked for ever? I defy anybody to name a single person. One advantage of our side is that we can explain what we are about, give arguments in public for all to see or hear who will. They on the other hand claim to a secret higher knowledge, yet a secret knowledge of course which they cannot explain or present in a way that is in the least comprehensible or communicable (though this is not say they are therefore entirely without argument.) So it is, for example, that they prefer sign language to open, polite, rational discourse. Does this not say anything to you about them? Does their prohibiting direct communication as matter of their fundamental policy suggest superior or inferior intelligence? You be the judge.
Today, June 9, 2006, the following statement of (purportedly) Bertrand Russell's is given as Google's quote of the day:
"In the part of this universe that we know there is great injustice, and often the good suffer, and often the wicked prosper, and one hardly knows which of those is the more annoying."
I myself have never seen the wicked prosper as to cause me any great jealousy or envy. The only thing that ever really bothered me was their murdering, tormenting or hindering the good. Otherwise I myself could care less and desire only to get away from them. Let them keep their billion dollars, their fame, their prestige, their (consenting) women, their God, their Heaven, etc. -- just get me outta here!
In chess the piece entering the square (unless capturing in the process) counts as nothing. Yet every other piece which could (in that same move) advance or retreat to that square counts as 1. So add up his 1's and your 1's and determine whose is the larger total. 3 is probably the optimal number, since 4 or more might suggest being overly concentrated in one portion of the field. Additionally, one will factor in the given value of the individual pieces, and then arrive at an even more intelligent basis on which to make a decision.
* The road out of Hell is the truth. The road into it is lies.
* Never get your ideas about God and religion from a Devil.
* Never get your ideas about happiness from spirit people.
* That a person is an angel does not of itself prove anything.
* Don't do to someone else what you don't want done to you.
* Most any of us is not as fooled as others think we are, still we can often be more fooled than we ourselves think.
* Good never needs Evil. Yet Evil always needs Good.
* If you won't be rational, others will be rational for you, and not necessarily in your best interest.
* A false image, by definition, is not a true image.
* Images themselves are a means, not an end. Seek not the image of someone or something, but rather the experience, the justice, or reality of them.
* The person whose judgment matters is the one with good judgment. Don't bother yourself too seriously or too long then with anyone else's judgment, regardless of how many or how determined they are.
* Don't ever think of yourself as going to heaven. Rather think of those who most deserve it, and how you would serve them there (or here.)
(Goomerton and Oafmore are privately responding to the complaints of some disgruntled share holders.)
Goomerton: If they don't get cheated and ripped off as we did (by listening to spirit people), they have to be robbed (in this case against their will) and have things done to them. Otherwise if we don't do it like this, people will think that what we have and are about isn't as valuable as they were led to understand it was.
Oafmore: (addressing the share holder) Indeed and how would that help the economy if that happened?
Goomerton: He means seeing as how we effectively own and can control most of it.
Oafmore: Yes, that's right
Cracking the Michelangelo Code, or more baffling questions of our times
* Why is it (except in the case of merchandisers and regular web search engines such as Google), it seems like ninety percent of individual website search engines (including "Help" topic searches) don't work properly?
* Why is it you can't you get evergreen or pine tree air freshner at places which normally sell air freshners?
* Who was it that coined those ubiquitous terms "blog," "carb," and "Gitmo"?
* Why does General Motors go under but not (current) Hollywood?
* How does Windows Media Player "automatically" rate songs?
I thought, when reading the following passage from Two Years Before the Mast, Ch. 15, by Richard Henry Dana (1815-1882), how very timely. You know what they say about how power tends to corrupt...
"For several days the captain seemed very much out of humor. Nothing went right, or fast enough for him. He quarrelled with the cook, and threatened to flog him for throwing wood on deck; and had a dispute with the mate about reeving a Spanish burton; the mate saying that he was right, and had been taught how to do it by a man who was a sailor! This, the captain took in dudgeon, and they were at sword's points at once. But his displeasure was chiefly turned against a large, heavy-moulded fellow from the Middle States, who was called Sam. This man hesitated in his speech, and was rather slow in his motions, but was a pretty good sailor, and always seemed to do his best; but the captain took a dislike to him, thought he was surly, and lazy; and 'if you once give a dog a bad name'-as the sailor-phrase is-'he may as well jump overboard.' The captain found fault with everything this man did, and hazed him for dropping a marline-spike from the main-yard, where he was at work. This, of course, was an accident, but it was set down against him. The captain was on board all day Friday, and everything went on hard and disagreeably. 'The more you drive a man, the less he will do,' was as true with us as with any other people. We worked late Friday night, and were turned-to early Saturday morning. About ten o'clock the captain ordered our new officer, Russell, who by this time had become thoroughly disliked by all the crew, to get the gig ready to take him ashore. John, the Swede, was sitting in the boat alongside, and Russell and myself were standing by the main hatchway, waiting for the captain, who was down in the hold, where the crew were at work, when we heard his voice raised in violent dispute with somebody, whether it was with the mate, or one of the crew, I could not tell; and then came blows and scuffling. I ran to the side and beckoned to John, who came up, and we leaned down the hatchway; and though we could see no one, yet we knew that the captain had the advantage, for his voice was loud and clear --
"'You see your condition! You see your condition! Will you ever give me any more of your jaw?' No answer; and then came wrestling and heaving, as though the man was trying to turn him. 'You may as well keep still, for I have got you,' said the captain. Then came the question, 'Will you ever give me any more of your jaw?'
"'I never gave you any, sir,' said Sam; for it was his voice that we heard, though low and half choked.
"'That's not what I ask you. Will you ever be impudent to me again?'
"'I never have been, sir,' said Sam.
"'Answer my question, or I'll make a spread eagle of you! I'll flog you, by G -- d.'
"'I'm no negro slave,' said Sam.
"'Then I'll make you one,' said the captain; and he came to the hatchway, and sprang on deck, threw off his coat, and rolling up his sleeves, called out to the mate-'Seize that man up, Mr. A -- -! Seize him up! Make a spread eagle of him! I'll teach you all who is master aboard!'
"The crew and officers followed the captain up the hatchway, and after repeated orders the mate laid hold of Sam, who made no resistance, and carried him to the gangway.
"'What are you going to flog that man for, sir?' said John, the Swede, to the captain.
"Upon hearing this, the captain turned upon him, but knowing him to be quick and resolute, he ordered the steward to bring the irons, and calling upon Russell to help him, went up to John.
"'Let me alone,' said John. 'I'm willing to be put in irons. You need not use any force;' and putting out his hands, the captain slipped the irons on, and sent him aft to the quarter-deck. Sam by this time was seized up, as it is called, that is, placed against the shrouds, with his wrists made fast to the shrouds, his jacket off, and his back exposed. The captain stood on the break of the deck, a few feet from him, and a little raised, so as to have a good swing at him, and held in his hand the bight of a thick, strong rope. The officers stood round, and the crew grouped together in the waist. All these preparations made me feel sick and almost faint, angry and excited as I was. A man-a human being, made in God's likeness-fastened up and flogged like a beast! A man, too, whom I had lived with and eaten with for months, and knew almost as well as a brother. The first and almost uncontrollable impulse was resistance. But what was to be done? The time for it had gone by. The two best men were fast, and there were only two beside myself, and a small boy of ten or twelve years of age. And then there were (beside the captain) three officers, steward, agent and clerk. But beside the numbers, what is there for sailors to do? If they resist, it is mutiny; and if they succeed, and take the vessel, it is piracy. If they ever yield again, their punishment must come; and if they do not yield, they are pirates for life. If a sailor resist his commander, he resists the law, and piracy or submission are his only alternatives. Bad as it was, it must be borne. It is what a sailor ships for. Swinging the rope over his head, and bending his body so as to give it full force, the captain brought it down upon the poor fellow's back. Once, twice;-six times. 'Will you ever give me any more of your jaw?' The man writhed with pain, but said not a word. Three times more. This was too much, and he muttered something which I could not hear; this brought as many more as the man could stand; when the captain ordered him to be cut down, and to go forward.
"'Now for you,' said the captain, making up to John and taking his irons off. As soon as he was loose, he ran forward to the forecastle. 'Bring that man aft,' shouted the captain. The second mate, who had been a shipmate of John's, stood still in the waist, and the mate walked slowly forward; but our third officer, anxious to show his zeal, sprang forward over the windlass, and laid hold of John; but he soon threw him from him. At this moment I would have given worlds for the power to help the poor fellow; but it was all in vain. The captain stood on the quarter-deck, bare-headed, his eyes flashing with rage, and his face as red as blood, swinging the rope, and calling out to his officers, 'Drag him aft!-Lay hold of him! I'll sweeten him!' etc., etc. The mate now went forward and told John quietly to go aft; and he, seeing resistance in vain, threw the blackguard third mate from him; said he would go aft of himself; that they should not drag him; and went up to the gangway and held out his hands; but as soon as the captain began to make him fast, the indignity was too much, and he began to resist; but the mate and Russell holding him, he was soon seized up. When he was made fast, he turned to the captain, who stood turning up his sleeves and getting ready for the blow, and asked him what he was to be flogged for. 'Have I ever refused my duty, sir? Have you ever known me to hang back, or to be insolent, or not to know my work?'
'No,' said the captain, 'it is not that I flog you for; I flog you for your interference-for asking questions.'
"'Can't a man ask a question here without being flogged?'
"'No,' shouted the captain; 'nobody shall open his mouth aboard this vessel, but myself;" and began laying the blows upon his back, swinging half round between each blow, to give it full effect. As he went on, his passion increased, and he danced about the deck, calling out as he swung the rope;-'If you want to know what I flog you for, I'll tell you. It's because I like to do it!-because I like to do it!-It suits me! That's what I do it for!'
"The man writhed under the pain, until he could endure it no longer, when he called out, with an exclamation more common among foreigners than with us-'Oh, Jesus Christ! Oh, Jesus Christ!'
"'Don't call on Jesus Christ,' shouted the captain; 'he can't help you. Call on Captain T -- -, he's the man! He can help you! Jesus Christ can't help you now!'
"At these words, which I never shall forget, my blood ran cold. I could look on no longer. Disgusted, sick, and horror-struck, I turned away and leaned over the rail, and looked down into the water. A few rapid thoughts of my own situation, and of the prospect of future revenge, crossed my mind; but the falling of the blows and the cries of the man called me back at once. At length they ceased, and turning round, I found that the mate, at a signal from the captain had cut him down. Almost doubled up with pain, the man walked slowly forward, and went down into the forecastle. Every one else stood still at his post, while the captain, swelling with rage and with the importance of his achievement, walked the quarter-deck, and at each turn, as he came forward, calling out to us,-'You see your condition! You see where I've got you all, and you know what to expect!'-'You've been mistaken in me-you didn't know what I was! Now you know what I am!'-'I'll make you toe the mark, every soul of you, or I'll flog you all, fore and aft, from the boy, up!'-'You've got a driver over you! Yes, a slave-driver-a negro-driver! I'll see who'll tell me he isn't a negro slave!' With this and the like matter, equally calculated to quiet us, and to allay any apprehensions of future trouble, he entertained us for about ten minutes, when he went below. Soon after, John came aft, with his bare back covered with stripes and wales in every direction, and dreadfully swollen, and asked the steward to ask the captain to let him have some salve, or balsam, to put upon it. 'No,' said the captain, who heard him from below; 'tell him to put his shirt on; that's the best thing for him; and pull me ashore in the boat. Nobody is going to lay-up on board this vessel.' He then called to Mr. Russell to take those men and two others in the boat, and pull him ashore. I went for one. The two men could hardly bend their backs, and the captain called to them to 'give way,' 'give way' but finding they did their best, he let them alone. The agent was in the stern sheets, but during the whole pull-a league or more-not a word was spoken. We landed; the captain, agent, and officer went up to the house, and left us with the boat. I, and the man with me, staid near the boat, while John and Sam walked slowly away, and sat down on the rocks. They talked some time together, but at length separated, each sitting alone. I had some fears of John. He was a foreigner, and violently tempered, and under suffering; and he had his knife with him, and the captain was to come down alone to the boat. But nothing happened; and we went quietly on board. The captain was probably armed, and if either of them had lifted a hand against him, they would have had nothing before them but flight, and starvation in the woods of California, or capture by the soldiers and Indian blood-hounds, whom the offer of twenty dollars would have set upon them.
"After the day's work was done, we went down into the forecastle, and ate our plain supper; but not a word was spoken. It was Saturday night; but there was no song-no 'sweethearts and wives.' A gloom was over everything. The two men lay in their berths, groaning with pain, and we all turned in, but for myself, not to sleep. A sound coming now and then from the berths of the two men showed that they were awake, as awake they must have been, for they could hardly lie in one posture a moment; the dim, swinging lamp of the forecastle shed its light over the dark hole in which we lived; and many and various reflections and purposes coursed through my mind. I thought of our situation, living under a tyranny; of the character of the country we were in; of the length of the voyage, and of the uncertainty attending our return to America; and then, if we should return, of the prospect of obtaining justice and satisfaction for these poor men; and vowed that if God should ever give me the means, I would do something to redress the grievances and relieve the sufferings of that poor class of beings, of whom I then was one."
"But if we tell the truth, they will kill us!"
If they will kill you for just telling the truth, shouldn't you be prepared to kill them -- if necessary-- in justified self-defense?
Test Your Logic
(ethereal rapture & a splendorous throne & dazzling lights) & (cruelty & falsehood & injustice) = ?
T & F = ?
And yet pardon them for acting and believing as they do, for how can they possibly know how infinitely better it is when they are absent?
You have what I need. I have what you need. He has what we need. She has what he needs, etc. So what's then the problem?
So-and-so, the one who controls all the money, law, and communications, sold his soul to the devil and ghosts, which latter as you know (as part of being dead) have little or no heart worth speaking of. As a result if the rest of us don't do the wrong thing ("a certain way") we can't communicate or do business. In further consequence, as you can also see, no one, generally speaking, can really do much of anything -- except commit crimes (at least if you are so inclined) or else put on the show of doing something. Hence the present state of things.
"Of all the tyrannies on humankind,
The worst is that which persecutes the mind.
Let us but weigh at what offense we strike,
'T is but because we cannot think alike.
In punishing of this, we overthrow
The Laws of Nations and of Nature too."
~ John Dryden (1631-1700), from "The Hind and the Panther."
There are websites which address the subject of "brain torture radios." Yet though ostensibly well meaning, their approach is rather depressing. They will for example talk about secret cults, the CIA, Masonic orders, Satanism, and the like. I normally try to avoid these, unless necessary, as being understandably disagreeable avenues of approaching the topic of the aforesaid radios, or (and as well) that of spirit people (which is very much connected with the former.) Though some of those things they discuss may very well be true, you are also normally inclined to suspend judgment unless prepared to go into the matter more closely and thoroughly yourself.
What is heard on these actual brain radios are these people. They sound like young people, though in this I may be mistaken (as to their being young). In addition there is a Goomer ghost who might, simultaneously, communicate separately to me by means of a spirit person kind of radio. The first reportedly (by these people themselves) involes actual radio type technology, while the second is evidently the normal means some spirit people have of communicating with such as us (pictures can also be transmitted by the same "spirit radio.") Most all of the time spent is either gingerly ranting or gossiping. Evidently the "young" people radio operators read from a bit of script, reporting little news or gossip, for on one occasion one of them said "LY-am Neeson," rather than "LEE-am Neeson" the correct pronunciation.
On my end I will sometimes joke with them, while directing derogatory remarks, indeed sometimes something quite like cursing, at those in charge of what's going on. For what else would any of you do if you were so aggravated? Remain always silent? Believe me, I can and do try to be that way as much as possible. But to do so all the time a person must be the most patient and self-restrained person in the world (which I admittedly am not.)
It sounds utterly hellish and horrible. But that is what it is -- and that's what it's intended to be. That's why it works for these kinds of organized criminals. And that's why so many people can't or won't even try to deal with it. Its very horrifyingness and incomprehensibility scares them to death, while at the same time they might be frightened off from helping for other reasons. But I ask you. Look at the utter decrepit sleaze on television and the movies. Look at the lurid crime stories which have seem to proliferate exponentially in recent times. Look at how many new billionaires there are now out there (and who is really in control of a lot of that sort of money?) Look at how witchcraft and sorcery have been brazenly promoted by the often shamelessly manipulative mass media. Harry Potter for example appeared as a set of decorations at a White House Christmas party in 2003. And do you wonder then that such a thing is so entirely impossible as brain torture radios?
From childhood I have recollected and adopted Thomas Jefferson's statement, "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility to every form of tyranny over the mind of man." Perhaps there was no "brain radio" technology in Jefferson’s day. But clearly there were those who wanted to control people's minds, so much so as to provoke in an highly intelligent person "eternal hostility." I encourage people to use the term "brain torture radios" as a way demystifying and familiarizing everyone that there really are such things out there, and being used in the United States by some quite frankly psychotic rich persons who are deep in it with spirit people. And even if you don't believe me or you think I am simply misinterpreting, if such a thing were literally true, and you found yourself a victim of it, how pray do you think you would describe it to others?
In one of my last, the subject of animals came up. Well, here are a couple personal vignettes of dealing with some of them, and at spring time in and around my domicile.
In the very early morning I sometimes go out to feed the local birds in the street in front of the house where I live. The birds can include seagulls, ravens, starlings, pigeons and sparrows. There are other birds in the neighborhood. But the more exotic and shy types invariably keep to the trees and bushes. Usually, and except for the seagulls, they will fly off momentarily when I throw some read crumbs to them. That is the crumbs will fall and then they will alight and fetch to eat them. However the other day I was getting ready to throw them some when one little sparrow landed as if in anticipation. Now this is strange, I said to myself, because though he naturally wants the bread, if I throw the crumbs he will fly away. Nonetheless, he sort of hopped there looking at me waiting to throw the food. Yet sure enough, when I did -- he flew off!
There is a little alcove in the back of my house where starlings have nested in recent years. After they have their chicks, the baby birds in the nest will chirp regularly together (except in evening and at night of course) for about something which seemed like every fifteen minutes. It is quite enjoyable because it sounds like singing chimes, and amusing as well because when they did it (they are grown and gone by now), and tiny as they were, it was so loud the music would fill the whole house! Just as I joyed and was amused by the din, it seemed their parents were as much or more so in nursing and taking care of them. Or at least it sounded that way.
Another little anecdote about local animals concerns some possums. My front door has an additional facing screen door, the wire mesh of which is damaged on the bottom so the cat can get in and out. Some times at night I will have left the main door open and an odd neighbor cat or some possum would come in the house to eat left-over cat food -- which neither I nor my cat mind as long as they don't make themselves too much at home. Well, for a while, this one possum actually started showing up in the daytime. I didn't like this because I thought she was or would be making things too cozy for herself around here. So I chased her off. Yet a little while after I did so, she kept coming back. And I in turn kept chasing her off till it got to where I was actually rather angry with her. But finally she left.
Then later that night she came in while I was sitting at my laptop, and went into another a small office off my kitchen. I wasn't in the mood to fuss about it so I let her go as she pleased. After she was there a while, she reappeared with about eight baby possums astride her back. She approached near to me (on her way out the door), stopped, and then almost smiling, looked up at me as if to say, "see -- that is why I tried to come in before," that is because all the while she had her babies lying in my small office. If you see a mother possum carrying her litter from a distance, it looks very strange, even perhaps hideous. But this is a distortion. Up close the sight is actually very cute because they look like little babies all riding together seated (or in this case clinging on to the mother) in two alternating rows, as if on a little bus.
Not Interested -- Never Was
After these many years, cut the nonsense already. The bottom line is this. Now Steve you have Bud (i.e. Bud the Magician). Bud you have Zombo the Great God from beyond. And Zombo you have yourself, as well as Bud and Steve, not to mention a billion dollars. What then on earth do you need me for?
It has been a point of no small annoyance to me that for all their numbers, material wealth, and extraordinary worldly power, my adversaries have never been able to face me on matters of disagreement and contention. Some will say wisely so -- taking to their heals so as to live another day.
But for 13 years???!!!
Yet let us give the devil his due, for there have been those who have tried to articulate what these people are about and what they (knowingly or not) stand for. In addition to Hobbes, and some of the Enlightenment, (among a few we might name), we have John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester (1647-1680), of the court of Charles II. His "Satire Against Reason and Mankind" includes a numer of arguments you might get from a literal devil. Such as this are (psychologically speaking) somewhat peculiar in that to a philosophical novice his case seem so intimidating. Yet to a more reasoned and seasoned thinker, one comes out of the debate actually feeling sorry for a person making such largely absurd and contradictory remonstrance (though with Rochester, respecting him for his talent of wit and command of expression otherwise.) Indeed so much so (as far as I am concerned certainly) you have to cautiously fear yourself from inadvertently becoming the insensitive bully. And no less so should, in a given instance, the arguments be emanating from a stupendously mighty ghost (of perhaps purported religious significance as well) from ancient times.
What follows then is what seems to me the more common sense response to Rochester's "Satire."
"Were I (who to my cost already am
One of those strange, prodigious creatures, man)
A spirit free to choose, for my own share,
What case of flesh and blood I pleased to wear,
I'd be a dog, a monkey or a bear,
Or anything but that vain animal
Who is so proud of being rational.
Here Rochester is being admirably forthright and consistent, and expresses his clear preference, only it is pity he does not see a greater latitude of alternatives.
"The senses are to gross, and he'll contrive
A sixth, to contradict the other five,
And before certain instinct, will prefer
Reason, which fifty times for one does err;
Reason, an ignis fatuus in the mind,
Which, leaving light of nature, sense, behind,
Pathless and dangerous wandering ways it takes
Through error's fenny bogs and thorny brakes;
Whilst the misguided follower climbs with pain
Mountains of whimseys, heaped in his own brain;
Stumbling from thought to thought, falls headlong down
Into doubt's boundless sea, where, like to drown,
Books bear him up a while, and make him try
To swim with bladders of philosophy;
In hopes still to o'ertake th' escaping light,
The vapor dances in his dazzling sight
Till, spent, it leaves him to eternal night.
Then old age and experience, hand in hand,
Lead him to death, and make him understand,
After a search so painful and so long,
That all his life he has been in the wrong.
Huddled in dirt the reasoning engine lies,
Who was proud, so witty, and so wise...
The argument is perfectly sound. Intellect without a sold basis in compassion and sincerity is indeed vain and empty.
"But now, methinks, some formal band and beard
Takes me to task. Come on, sir; I'm prepared...
"What rage ferments in your degenerate mind
To make you rail at reason and mankind?
Blest, glorious man! to whom alone kind heaven
An everlasting soul has freely given,
Whom his great Maker took such care to make
That from himself he did the image take
And this fair frame in shining reason dressed
To dignify his nature above beast;
Reason, by whose aspiring influence
We take a flight beyond material sense
Dive into mysteries, then soaring pierce
The flaming limits of the universe,
Search heaven and hell, find out what's acted there,
And give the world true grounds of hope and fear."
"Hold, mighty man, I cry, all this we know
From the pathetic pen of Ingelo,
From Patrick's Pilgrim, Sibbes' soliloquies,
And 'tis this very reason I despise:
This supernatural gift, that makes a mite
Think he's the image of the infinite,
Comparing his short life, void of all rest,
To the eternal and the ever blest;
This busy, puzzling stirrer-up of doubt
That frames deep mysteries, then finds 'em out,
Filling with frantic crowds of thinking fools
Those reverend bedlams, colleges and schools;
Borne on whose wings, each heavy sot can pierce
The limits of the boundless universe;
So charming ointments make an old witch fly
And bear a crippled carcass through the sky.
'Tis this exalted power, whose business lies
In nonsense and impossibilities,
This made a whimsical philosopher
Before the spacious world, his tub prefer,
And we have modern cloistered coxcombs who
Retire to think, 'cause they have nought to do.
Here he condemns presumption, and what we might today call species-ism -- which Aristotle himself implicitly censures. It is excellence which makes man great, if he is capable of being so, and not his being a man in and of itself. Alternatively we could substitute "God" for excellence. Same thing. Yet he has not even touched reasoning, but rather specious reasoning.
"But thoughts are given for action's government;
Where action ceases, thought's impertinent.
Our sphere of action is life's happiness,
And he who thinks beyond, thinks like an ass.
Thus, whilst against false reasoning I inveigh,
I own right reason, which I would obey:
That reason which distinguishes by sense
And gives us rules of good and ill from thence,
That bounds desires with a reforming will
To keep 'em more in vigor, not to kill.
Your reason hinders, mine helps to enjoy,
Renewing appetites yours would destroy.
My reason is my friend, yours is a cheat;
Hunger calls out, my reason bids me eat;
Perversely, yours your appetite does mock:
This asks for food, that answers, 'What's o'clock?'
This plain distinction, sir, your doubt secures:
"'Tis not true reason I despise, but yours.
I agree with him here.
"Thus I think reason righted, bur for man,
I'll ne'er recant; defend him if you can.
For all his pride and his philosophy,
'Tis evident beasts are, in their degree,
As wise at least, and better far than he.
Those creatures are the wisest who attain,
By surest means, the ends at which they aim.
If therefore Jowler finds and kills his hares
Better than Meres supplies committee chairs,
Though one's a statesman, th' other but a hound,
Jowler, in justice, would be wiser found.
"You see how far man's wisdom here extends;
Look next if human nature makes amends:
Whose principles most generous are, and just,
And to whose morals you would sooner trust.
Be judge yourself, I'll bring it to the test:
Which is the basest creature, man or beast?
Birds feed on birds, beasts on each other prey,
But savage man alone does man betray.
Pressed by necessity, they kill for food;
Man undoes man to do himself no good.
With teeth and claws by nature armed, they hunt
Nature's allowance, to supply their want.
But man, with smiles, embraces, friendship, praise,
Inhumanly his fellow's life betrays;
With voluntary pains works his distress,
Not through necessity, but wantonness.
Yet in more common experience does not such depravity on the part of man far more arise from the absence of reason rather than its surfeit or excess?
"For hunger or for love they fight or tear,
Whilst wretched man is still in arms for fear.
For fear he arms, and is of arms afraid,
By fear to fear successively betrayed;
Base fear, the source whence his best passions came:
His boasted honor, and his dear-bought fame;
That lust of power, to which he's a slave,
And for the which alone he dares be brave;
To which his various projects are designed;
Which makes him generous, affable, and kind;
For which he takes such pains to be thought wise,
And screws his actions in a forced disguise,
Leading a tedious life in misery
Under laborious, mean hypocrisy.
Look to the bottom of his vast design,
Wherein man's wisdom, power, and glory join:
The good he acts, the ill he does endure,
'Tis all from fear, to make himself secure.
Merely for safety, after fame we thirst,
For all me would be cowards if they durst.
And yet fame and glory for which a hero strives, and without utility, are not of themselves an empty bubble? That one should be courageous merely for the sake of security and peace -- so that one and ones family can work and be happy in tranquility -- seems by far a more eminently sensible justification for bravery.
"And honesty's against all common sense:
Men must be knaves, 'tis in their own defence.
Mankind's dishonest, if you think it fair
Amongst known cheats to play upon the square,
You'll be undone.
Nor can weak truth your reputation save:
The knaves will all agree to call you knave.
Wronged shall he live, insulted o'er, oppressed,
Who dares be less a villain than the rest.
Continual dishonesty is a necessary tool of survival. We have encountered this elsewhere, have we not? As also with the others, we can safely assume from what he argues that Rochester himself is not to be trusted.
"Thus, sir, you see what human nature craves:
Most men are cowards, all men should be knaves.
The difference lies, as far as I can see,
Not in the thing itself, but the degree,
And all the subject matter of debates only:
Who's a knave of the first rate?
Being a knave one assumes is at least as praiseworthy as being courageous.
"All this with indignation have I hurled
At the pretending part of the proud world,
Who, swollen with selfish vanity, devise
False freedoms, holy cheats, and formal lies
Over their fellow slaves to tyrannize...
"Is there a churchman who on God relies;
Whose life, his faith and doctrine justifies?
Not one blown up with vain prelatic pride,
Who, for reproof of sins, does man deride;
Whose envious heart makes preaching a pretense,
With his obstreperous, saucy eloquence,
To chide at kings, and rail at men of sense;
None of that sensual tribe whose talents lie
In avarice, pride, sloth, and gluttony;
Who hunt good livings, but abhor good lives;
Whose lust exalted to that height arrives
They act adultery with their own wives,
And ere a score of years completed be,
Can from the lofty pulpit proudly see
Half a large parish their own progeny;
Nor doting bishop who would be adored
For domineering at the council board,
A greater fop in business at fourscore,
Fonder of serious toys, affected more,
Than the gay, glittering fool at twenty proves
With all his noise, his tawdry clothes, and loves;
Yet are not such prelates and churchmen as much as the very same knaves he praises earlier? And how is it we can expect a knave to tyrannize less than a misguided churchmen?
"But a meek, humble man of honest sense,
Who, preaching peace, does practice continence;
Whose pious life's a proof he does believe
Mysterious truths, which no man can conceive.
If upon the earth there dwell such God-like men,
I'll here recant my paradox to them,
Adore those shrines of virtue, homage pay,
And, with the rabble world, their laws obey.
Once again we concur. Yet surely Rochester does not mean to adopt such a position of virtue himself.
"If such there be, yet grant me this at least:
Man differs more from man, than man from beast."
But in reality man, when he is evil, is more a beast than any animal. And of course, no animal is evil, unless perhaps for man's influence. Indeed, would that we could be as virtuous as many animals are! If this is so what then Rochester should say is -- if man is rational and virtuous he is actually more like an animal than an ordinary man, who according to his own view is more commonly a knave. So perhaps at the outset of his monologue he was more right than either we or he thought. Yet did not he later as much as contend that to be a knave and liar was essential to life and happiness?
Life is where infinite mind and infinite heart, in a point, converge. So that though we may be a part of life we are not life itself except inasmuch as we are part of God. But who then is God?
Infinite heart and infinite mind.
But what heart is that which regularly lies, dissembles, and keeps secrets? (Surely not His.)
I came across the above yesterday, and without wanting to wax polemical or propagandistic, I thought what I saw was curious. Who was this man? I myself could not really tell you. What did others see in him that made him chief of the secret police? What did such a mild mannered looking person know that gave him such supreme confidence? Rather than think he listened to some crude devil, it looks more to me as though he would have listened to an angel. And perhaps that is what it was.
Some say God can be known largely or exclusively by means of scripture. Yet it is only fair to ask, where does one acquire the knowledge and proper approach to hermeneutics that makes scripture accessible? Here a decision must be made at the outset what the status of logic must be as it applies (or not) to the method of interpretation to be selected.
Not X is distributed
All X is distributed
* No X is Y
ergo: Y is distributed
* All X is Y
ergo: Y is not distributed
"Not" has the power of a universal, or at least seems to.
"All" is expressed by us more awkwardly than a negative, and even then an all is known ultimately by what it is not, that is by way of something else. All then, in a certain logical sense, denotes something that is small or inferior to something else. It seems one can conclude from this that (something that is) all is never nearly so universal as it might seem, such that, for example to speak of all infinity sounds contradictory (i.e. "all that is not finite.") Here also we see again that the term "infinite" requires a negative reference (as in "not finite.") In a casual sense, "all" can be used as a synonym for infinity. But note how infinite (the negative based term) is perhaps more explicit and meaningful. Yet must this be so, or is this merely a result of convention?
Atom Age Vampire
It was as I recall Lester Theroux who said something like environmentalism is a luxury of the middle class. Even if this is true being natural isn't a luxury, because to be otherwise is to be calculatingly ravenous, gluttonous, willfully cruel, and zealously selfish -- all of which I think anyone can see leads only to self annihilation.
The Ghost King, the Righteous Angels, and the Monster People
"Do you dare defy the Ghost King?"
Hey I fought all the righteous angels and monster people he sent my way. That I defy him is no question. No, the real problem is rather: can he face me, i.e. without an army (or even with?)
Where E'er I Go
The world takes my body somewhere,
And my body somewhere my soul.
Although my soul prefers to stay in place,
It goes where e'er they roll.
Then Reason calls me to my Mind,
Saying is world and body all?
Ah thou soul without kind Love
World and body pall.
Oh then body, Oh then world,
Where ever now we go,
Comes with us dear true heart,
Though you care not, nor know.
You have to hope the churches are picking up on the kinds of things I am talking about, though understandably it may be a while for some of them (given the nature of ancient political institutions) to speak about these issues directly and publicly. Yet they must sooner or later, because if they don't what are they supposed to be doing anyway?
When you hear of some appaling outrage or some gruesome atrocity much of modern psychology and criminology will say it was chemical in its origin. But consider the matter realistically and I think you will see that as or more likely than not the tragic crime can be traced through causal stages ultimately to some greedy and materially wealthy person who is very jealous and feels sorry for himself. The crime as such arises from his deliberate choice to exert his influence on others. And how can people be in awe of such a one if, for all his terrors, he is really just a childish person? For how can he put on such airs when isn't the winner, after all, the one who can truly and really help others the most?
Put the boot into demonism and you will just about take care of everything else. This may sound over simplistic. Perhaps so. Yet I more than bet it is more true than you realize or appreciate.
We have previously remarked how it does seem to be the case that certain spirit people can affect meteorological and geological events. Historically we hear references to Natural gods, such as Poseidon. But does Nature need spirit people to function? One rather assumes not, and that these were positions created and taken over by spirit people, though not necessarily with bad intention, and with perhaps also with beneficial result (or perhaps not.)
Yes, You are right But you can't afford to be haughty or self righteous, or assume your being right necessarily and in and of itself makes you a superior person.
What they should yell at these people is: "if you can't compete at being interesting, at least get out of the way and let those who can do so!"
What is more impressive, no matter how poor or wretched they are otherwise, than a person who is rational, contented and at peace -- and rational, contented and at peace in adversity no less?
Some will continue to dispute that there are spirit people or that such can be comprehended rationally. But for those who do know of their existence, yet who still prefer their point of view to my own, how do you explain:
* why they need to function in secret and will not come forward to let themselves be known and communicated with publicly (or in the public arena)
* why do they need to cheat and mislead so much
* why are they not vehemently opposed to censorship and human rights abuse
* if they are higher authority, then what is the purpose of the truth, honesty, and reason, and from where then do these (and which spirit people are evidentially not overly concerned with) derive and originate
* why is it other people can persuade others by means of competitively offering greater good, when it is typical for these spirit people to rely on fear and terror (to have their way)
* if (certain) spirit people are not the chief source of Evil in the world, where then does the worst Evil (most) come from
* if they lie and deceive others, how can you be so sure that for all their friendly appearances they are not lying to and deceiving you?
On Pagan Heaven and Christian Purgatory
Some who have first hand experience with spirit people, including such regular people who themselves are atrociously guilty, will think to gainsay my earlier remarks by declaring, "what Sherman says isn't entirely true because these spirit people have great powers of ecstasy and splendor."
Yes, it is true, some spirit people, including even the most evil, do have these powers to create in you feelings of awe and rapture. Yet the reality is these things are (inasmuch as you are capable of thinking) very superficial really, only the witchcraft and deluded religious (in their current state) don't have the intelligence to realize this is the case. Nor is this helped by the fact that they tend to let these spirit people do their thinking for them. But make no mistake. I myself have experienced countless spirit people wonders, and while I won't say that such powers are in and of themselves necessarily a bad thing, still they are the kind of thing an ignorant person could easily be led to overrate, and exorbitantly so, especially if they are being made the subject of behavioral conditioning and mind control. For this reason it comes as no great surprise to me that a number of the well known billionaires, whose fortunes (I personally would surmise) are tied to some kind of direct involvement with spirit people, are themselves, and for all the phenomenal wealth and power they possess, shallow and usually exhibit very poor taste and judgment -- usually. Yet in others and their own mind they will, on the contrary, see themselves as possessing superior understanding and intelligence, and indeed will be made to seem society's trend setters.
I have said as much before, but this is one set of observations that is worth repeating. I have said as much before, but this is a set of observations that is worth repeating. While it is certainly not for me to tell someone what they should (let alone must) like, I make the foregoing remarks in light of the fact that such persons as I speak of, because they are so friendly with spirit people, are also connected with serious crime, falsehood, and injustice in consequence of such association.
"If you lie, steal, and murder, the greatest power and riches of this world will be yours."
Sounded good, only of course little did they understand and reckon that there is another group which lie, steals, and murders for the sake of lying, stealing and murdering. In order then for our Heroes of Might and Magic to pursue riches and powers through lying, and the rest they found they would finally and ultimately have to act in cooperation with this second group. With what result, you can probably guess yourself.