The American left shouldn't have a Nazi attitude about Jews and Jerusalem

 The American left probably is ill-informed about the history of Jerusalem and the Jews that have lived there during the past 4000 years. They really aren't invaders. In fact not only have Muslims persecuted them and driven them from the city, so have Romans, Persians and Europeans especially the crusaders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_and_Judaism_in_the_Land_of_Israel#Byzantine_period_(324%E2%80%93638)

Christians of the middle ages misunderstood the message of Jesus Christ (the prince of peace) and acted with Christianity as a political-military banner; most were illiterate. Of course Muslims had invaded Europe from one end to the other and were a constant threat to European existence. In 1099 when the first crusaders took the Holy land they slaughtered Jews mercilessly. Even so Jews continued to live in the region of Israel even while Jerusalem was off-limits.

Jews must have been accustomed to being banned from the Holy city after Romans, Byzantines and Sassanians enforced that edict. Mamluks and even the Umayyad proscribed select Jewish activities and foisted a temple of Muhammad onto the temple mount.

Israel was occupied by empires that sometimes tolerated their existence in the area yet sometimes razed coastal cities. Modern Euros and American leftists tend to think of Jews as an invading, colonizing force because they essentially are daft and devoid of historical depths.

Palestinians could from the beginning have lived peacefully with Jewish in a two state configuration of 1948 and they instead began their 70 years of hate mongering at that time dedicating themselves to the destruction of Israel. Yet Palestine had never been an independent state for itself and was generally under the rule of empires- lastly the British after they defeated the Muslim Ottoman Empire that was allied with imperial Germany during the First World War. Fundamentally hate groups like Hamas (it means violence) could have at any time selected a path to peace for-themselves. As the closest neighbors of the Jewish state they likely would evolve greater prosperity than most of those nations of the Middle East and hold jobs in Israel more so than now. Some borders can fade into trivialities when nations have non conflicts and similar economies.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/555458-jewish-democrats-call-for-ambassador-to-combat-antisemitism-condemn-colleague

It is quite likely that Jews are smarter than Palestinians. World chess champions like Fischer and Kasparov were half Jewish. It is difficult to recall all of the great Jewish chess players because there were so many while the best Palestinian player at the last chess Olympiad rated somewhere around 1600. Jews could mentor their Palestinian brothers and sisters if the Palestinians weren't teaching hate to their children and if Hamas' gangster leaders could discover the value of peace.

If the American left just prefers to be wrong that is their free choice. Plainly the Republican Party hasn’t an ecological economic bone in its body and seek only to concentrate wealth. Democrats though also pursue that policy it should be noted, and socialist seek merely to make a bureaucracy of corporatism that is following Hitler’s economic agenda before the start of W.W. 2 to a certain extent.

I will point out that one of the scenarios for world economic evolution is for concentrated wealth and a planet full of wage slaves. Even space colonization of mars and etc. will be led by elites who can greatly assist the process of concentrating wealth. The left should have other realistic concerns than persecuting Jews as if they wanted to be Nazis too.

Terms of mapping the Universe (s)

 If space is a substance rather than plain nothingness as has been traditionally thought, it should have a universal composition and nature that would in a way be comparable to quantum structures. If inflation is an expansion of space rather than some other cause, because more space substance seems to be created and fills an increasing volume, that seems opposed to the idea of nothingness expanding.

Nothingness as space in the absolute sense should neither be created or destroyed. It ought logically to have existed infinitely forever and isn’t capable of increasing or decreasing. Space as a substance on the other hand could have been initially finite to alternatively infinite and existing within the underlying host of nothingness.

There are several definitions of space as well as Universe these days that help to confuse the topics one is addressing for others. There are logical modal universes and alternate universes such as one finds in multi-universe theories derived from eternal inflation.

I wanted to point out that if inflation of space occurs forever as a localized process that moves on leaving nonexpanding space in its wake, that it is just as likely that the boundaries of substance-space move on through already existing infinite space, or bring more substance space within its moving boundary region as that substance space itself upsurges into being from nothingness. Of course one might infer that if substance space upsurges into being that it must be from somewhere other than the present region of its expansion.

The Universe is everything that exists. It is generally regarded as being made of energy or converted to mass, yet it is everything and logically infinite. Modern science has provided a wealth of confusion concerning what formerly was simple and given humanity the ‘multiverse’.

   When I was a kid the Hoyle hypothesis was still hanging on although heavily tattered. Einstein believed in a  static universe. I would guess he believed it infinite as did I when I first learned about those things at age 6 or 7. The profusion of Multiverse jargon since then has required a rethinking, yet ultimately the meaning of Universe remains intact as everything that exists rather than one part of a vast structure with an infinite number of others similar  to it connected by space or even juxtaposed in Hilbert space with infinite dimensions. Just because scientists discover new facts about the Universe concerning its structure that doesn’t mean they have discovered alternate Universes; it just indicates they did not know what the structure was of the Universe they were in.  The Universe is everything that exists including a goggleplex of other units inconveniently named universe 1 through infinity.

  Most people including scientists didn’t know the real structure of the Universe in 1950 yet most people probably assumed it was infinite and unbounded. When cosmologists, theoretical physicists and astronomers inducted, discovered and theorized about an expansion of their knowledge of the Universe and extrapolated  about other regions of space forming from inflation proceeding the Big Bang that may have continued after this observed Universe formed some 13.3 billion years ago more or less as the crow flies they choose to call those hypothetical regions of unobservable space universes too; primarily because they lacked a term for a meta-universe or greater universe that included all possible hypothetical universes of which there might be an infinite number. Basically they lacked a name for the new units of universe so they called it a Multiverse; and that was a bad choice though convenient for scientists at that time.

  Most people had an existing concept of an infinite unbounded Universe already yet lacked knowledge of its distant structure. Modern cosmology has been mapping in fact and with theory, hypothetical structures of space that include possibly an unlimited number of regions of space like the one scientists  knew before the rise of Multiverse theory. In a way a universe has been downgraded comparatively to the status of a galaxy. It as if scientists believed there was just one galaxy (Universe) and having found more or hypothesized about more existing galaxies existing they have developed multigalaxy theory. That is fine for galaxies yet doesn’t work with a Universe that should rightly be defined as everything that exists including that which cannot be observed. Plainly there isn’t a word existing presently for the unit that includes all of the galaxies and mass existing in a contingent expanded spacetime from an inflation or big bang that would disambiguate it from the infinite other potential units like itself. The Universe that includes all the universe-like units could be called the Metaverse reasonably well yet it would be better to name it the Universe and find a named for structures that are like the observable universe humanity lives in. One could call them big units, big bang units, second tier units, temporal verses, boroughs, legally defined regions of largest scale, etc however about any serviceable designation would be better than calling them universes. A universe is a good concept to retain. It is simple and suitable for an infinite and unbounded structure that is unmapped and perhaps unmappable. One day people may find a way to journey transcendentally beyond the boundaries of physical spacetime before death, and if so it might be useful to still regard oneself as being in the Universe when relocating to another unit.

  For an example of the circumstance, compare the Universe to a chess board. A chess board has sixty-four squares and the grid coordinates are labeled columns A through H and rows 1 through 8. Consider that in the past humanity lived in square A1 and thought of themselves as being located in the center of the universe in the middle of square A1. Though their knowledge of the chess  board universe did not exceed beyond square A1 the popular belief was that the Universe square had no limits and was infinite in extant (some humans did have other beliefs). After a few thousand years- within the past century and a half, scientists have learned more about the chess board and have observed the visible horizon limits of square A1 where they lived and developed  theories  concerning a vast number  of squares like their own existing beyond the edge or boundaries of A1. They call those new squares universes instead of regarding them as distant and almost inaccessible areas of the infinite Universe. It would have been useful to rename the new squares or theoretical squares as different areas of a universe without limits or for this analogy, a chessboard in Hilbert space with infinite dimensions and without an edge for-itself although it hosts/contains all space-time unit big banged squares.

 Physical space and energy quanta plus fields may not be the sole form of being; scientists seem willing to believe so though because it is observable and spirit or divine content generally aren’t. The Universe or Metaverse could be a though in the mind of God; who can say? Human language should at least keep a word  to define everything that exists and not regressively dispose of a word (Universe) for the all-encompassing Universe though it can have complex, distant and infinite areas difficult to map with different physical laws and non-contiguous space-time content events. Reducing the Universe comparable to meaning a small county amidst an infinite number of counties makes it challenging for people to understand the actual state of things of cosmology.

 

If Joe Biden's agenda ends 7 Nov 2022 shouldn't he get stuff done now?

 If Republicans retake congress President Biden's opportunity to reform government a little will end. Sure maybe he should rush Covid 19 vaccines to Taiwan and Japan so computer chip making and the U.S. economy can move forward better, yet he needs to get domestic items accomplished now or never.

Those could include building new infrastructure like a vast Mexican border fresh water making canal security boundary desalinating Pacific salt water siphoned or pumped up with pipelines (gosh they can build oil pipelines) and letting solar power evaporate and a plastic lid capture condensation fresh water. He could lead with new hyper-loop high speed (1000 m.p.h). tube trains for passengers and cargo from sea to sea and border to border- to demonstrate how newer faster ground transport can help make autos and select roads obsolete.

He could form a cheap Manhattan project to convert all U.S. road surfaces into sunlight photon capturing and converting surfaces with vast center left-right research, and then find a way to create new wilderness areas without roads and with limited human entry in some places.

It would be good to reform the patent process and limit exclusivity to seven years with 10% royalties to patent holders after that from others then free to manufacture the item. That would speed up economic innovation so some could happen before the end of the world from global warming and federal deficits.

The President could form a truth commission to investigate how much money the Federal Reserve has really let the rich mint via bank loans 5x that of every zero interest loan it gave to big banks exploiting the margin reserve and e-dollars for loans gambit.

Mr. Biden could establish a basic minimum annual income for all Americans so people don't get permanently caught in economic undertows and socially adverse currents of repression.

College education could be made free through graduate school to allow intelligent Americans to pursue interests equal to their capacity.

The poor should be ale to get free medical service nationally without the state quilt of baloney technical paperwork.

Those earning more than a million annually should have a 60% tax rate.

Some day a President with an advanced degree in ecological economics may appear to lead the country in a transition to a sustainable economy. Yet it seems that just lawyers run on the demo side and Republicans don't really want the job of President unless to get richer and make the rich richer.

President Biden hasn't too much time to avoid becoming retrospectively another business as usual kind of top political leaders. Well, maybe he could stimulate production of wheat and soy pasta and noodle products to let the poor have some protein as well as carbohydrates in their diets.

Why God created mankind and why mankind is responsible for things in the world-paradigm

God created everything so why not intelligent beings? He apparently found that they cannot obey His will (in the garden). Instead mankind (Adam and Eve) were willful and disobedient. What to do with willful people that had ate of the tree of knowledge and would eventually eat of the tree of immortality?  God shortened their days (life span) and put them into a thermodynamic world where they had to work to input energy and had to reproduce sexually like the animals. That was all a consequence of the original sin that required correction. So all mankind has the problems of mortality and is condemned for being so willful and disobedient. If people are called and saved by the Lord Jesus Christ then they can have their sin nature cleansed or shielded from the perfect God's view. In a divine economy how could sin be tolerated for eternity? Hence hell and etc. From I Corinthians 6 "9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God." and Thessalonians 5:6-9 "6 So then let us not sleep, as others do, but let us keep awake and be sober. 7 For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, are drunk at night. 8 But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation. 9 For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, "

Canceling Socrates, Plato and Aristotle

 Some people would like to cancel Socrates, Plato and Aristotle became they didn't seem to support democracy. The Athenian democracy had a lot of slaves. Plato or Socrates supported the oligarchy rather than the demos, and the Romans developed the republic reasonably well while Greece became overrun, It hadn't occurred to me though that anyone was thinking about cancelling Socrates so we are left with the three stooges in regard to political philosophy In an age when empires were the norm; even the Republic was very much to the left. It's the sort of thing that the radicals that wrote the Magna Charta might have thought about.

I asked someone how many universes can dance on the head of a zero dimensional singularity. He might have replied; 'God knows'. Maybe it's an intersectional concept, whereat one awakes in the will of the One.

Maybe everyone is an economic prisoner of the federal reserve bank chained to the social ladder economy as mute approved beings-of-interest watching the shadows of billionaires cross high above, trying to interpret the weird shapes.

Realm of forms with spirit

 Plato's realm of forms is about pure, essential ideas that are like blueprints for everything actualized in any universe. Ideas can fit in a thought of God. Plotinus named God ' the One'', and elaborated the realm of forms in his book named The Enneads

Ideas of spirit exist eternally for The One. Yet like an entire universe that is designed and static in a zero-dimension singularity, no space-time is required to contain it. Space-time is part of the kernel of the Universe that unfolds dimensionally- though one wonders about the time in which time is encapsulated at a singularity.

Every quantum form is pre-determined from alpha to omega in any possible universe among the multiverse of possibilities God deems possible. An infinite number of thoughts that comprise forms are known unto the omniscient One and have always existed even as the sentient beings that occur within them wonder about space-time and the quanta and qualia of a Multiverse and of God likening it unto a simulation.

Select philosophical comments

 A few philosophical comments…

If one finds a well ordered and logically put together system, universe, multiverse or machine- that does not imply that it wasn't designed. Subtle and infinitesimal quantum uncertainties may enliven art and being like pictures at an exhibition.

Ok so God is omnipotent. He has made every possible universe in every possible form

and stage in his thought. Everything is possible for him that he wills possible.

In one universe a rock is movable and in another it isn't. Every infrastructural form of everything can be super-positioned like quanta in all possible lines God determines possible.

Modal logic allows one to populate a universe with whatever forms and relations one prefers, including temporal positions. One may make their own system of logic (ref Elements of Logic by W.V.O. Quine) concerning where and what is possible in possible locations. It is a mistake to assume that a particular logic structure exists in all places universally, as it is wrong to assume there is one universal time across a multiverse except in relation to eternal God.

If a universe can be defined as space-time with the same physicals laws or patterns of order, thought and logic in that area likely conform preponderantly to the forms that function in that space-time. An eternal being whom constructs those systems from eternity might be regarded as the unmoved mover by sentient contingent beings moving about.

Quine refuted the dogma of empiricism that just empirical statements about the world had valid data, and that wasn't subjective. He showed that all statements have a subjective element including scientific

Quine was one of the best logicians and philosophers of logic of his time

In Word and Object he examines subjective epistemology. In Ontological Relativity he examines modal logic word lexicons from a nominalist perspective.

Someone cleverly noted that the thesis-antithesis dialectic is a good way to trick people into doing stuff as reactionaries. Besides that, the dialectic has numerous applications via analogy as stimulus-response loops, natural algorithmic cycles of increase, challenge response and baloney.

Hegel thought the or a world spirit was trying to realize itself in history. Logically though humans had realized themselves in history for at least 100000 years and the or a spirit of the universe isn't retarded like a drunk trying to wake up after a binge

The spirit probably pre-existed the universe

Human wickedness and many other issues follow after the fall. I believe Adam and Eve when found unable to follow the will of God flawlessly were sent onto a containment facility known as the Universe today with its second law of thermodynamics, births toil etc in quest of energy and pleasure.

Human nature is depraved and the elect are saved through grace. Because God is eternal and Universes temporal the individual soul has a chance for salvation and salvage from the human condition

If uncorrected wicked humans as eternal spirits could run amuck plenty- hence the need for a temporal universe and a chance to sort things out.

I am not certain about nihilism being a first-person activity or just a point of view. The idea that reality is an illusion and belief in God is a heresy are part of Buddhism and consistent with nihilism in some ways, yet not in others. political nihilism could be a practical effort simply to destroy a government and leave nothing to replace it, or no one, and that would differ from anarchy. I am not sure that meaninglessness is necessary for nihilism. Consider people that hate western civilization and believe that it should be destroyed- they are partial nihilists if they want to annihilate the traditional American way and replace it with something else, foreign and non-specific, and plain nihilists if they want to leave scorched Earth and let the environment recovery (even if short sighted because without engineers to safely shut down all the nuclear plants and chemical dumps the environment would be a mess for quite a number of years left to themselves when they broke down.

Anti-particles just have an opposite spin. That is anti-matter spin is a mirror reverse image of matters spin. So anti MC could be like anti matter and annihilate MC or matter when it is incompatibly infused with it

Maybe it's like forcing a left threaded device into a right threaded device thereby breaking both objects.

That reminds me about the one concerning the Universe meeting it's long lost anti-universe rival...

Max Tegmark's book 'The Mathematical Universe' describes a Multiverse up to a level 4 Multiverse, and further posits that pure math may be the basis of everything, literally. Tegmark makes a mathematical Universe Hypothesis (MUH). Great book to read. https://www.amazon.com/Our-Mathematical.../dp/0307599809

Sartre writes about the reef of solipsism in Being and Nothingness. It is part of the human condition as an individual observer embedded in the Higgs field temporally.

Bishop Berkeley wrote about idealism in The Three Dialogues of Hylas and Philonous. The human experience could be just an idea of God or a simulation. Berkeley probably was inspired by and developed Descartes' Meditations.

. have you never read that? it started the thought examined logically in the first person school rolling.

https://oll.libertyfund.org/.../descartes-the-method...

Jesus wasn't nihilist in bringing the end of the old covenant. He said he came to fulfill the law, not destroy it.

When the prophet Jeremiah said that one day the laws of God would be written on the hearts and minds, that occurred with the work of Jesus Christ.

Marx on the other hand was raised with Jewish ideas of millennialism and seems to have fused Feurbach's atheism, Hegelianism and Darwinism with Zionism and socialism. As has been said a million times, Marx was a great sociologist and a rather bad political philosopher. His economic analysis of England was pretty good and the corrections he envisioned poor and sparse

He had strengths and weaknesses in equal measure.

Not all political or religious change is nihilistic. Maybe Kropotkin's Russian anarchism was neo-nihilistic. Trying to understand Christianity without faith in Jesus as the Son of the Trinity will result in misunderstanding much. A spiritual transformation is to occur and one must love God, and thy neighbor as thyself. That does not imply lazy, corrupt or moral relativism.

Socialism as an economic system of the state differs much from free enterprise and self-directed work. The volunteerism and unselfishness of Christians would tend to cap capitalist acquisition and invest excess profit in social development. A Christian society should be economically more egalitarian yet does not require state socialism. Socialism can be an oppressive, atheist dictatorship. Hitler rose to power as leader of the German socialist workers part with help from a large majority of former socialists in the storm troopers. Any sort of tribe or group can use socialist economics. The challenge is to defend individual rather than collective 'rights' the devil would defeat everyone if it could, in the details.

Much of the political conflicts of the USA occur because people don't care about evidence or faith. They have a will to believe and do so as a part of being a member of a group of like minded people. The race riots aren't about faith and peaceful change does not invariable follow YouTube video evidence of a police crime, neither does exculpatory evidence send protesters and rioters home

In some cases there is a lot of evidence to support faith and in others people have faith that their evidence is valid, comprehensive and uncontroverted by unknown facts.

People aren't generally working matters of belief and politics as logicians replete with lifetimes of learning and wisdom. Consider abortion, homosexual marriage, global warming, ecosphere decay, tax rates and attacks on faith. in God- People tend to reinforce what they want to believe and force social morality to conform to desire and political preferences.

The evidence of the good book is very good. Even jurors need faith that their verdict is true if they are honest. Einstein said that he just wanted to know the thoughts of God- the rest are details.

Philosophical certainty is difficult to attain

Socrates said that he knew that he knew nothing

Epistemology and pragmatism lead one toward dead reckoning judgements of necessity. Certainty or even true knowledge as of The Timaeus or Tractatus Logico Philosophicus and The Blue and Brown books leave one with words about words and short of knowledge of things for themselves or Kant's noumenon. Faith, reason and inference lead some to belief in God. The problem of the criterion as Chisolm mentioned, afflicts all judgments of sentients embedded atop quantum entangled energy as mass in the Higgs field

Interestingly the sub-luminal status of. otherwise classless two dimensional energy packets when not getting that important 3rd dimension in the Higgs field may be the reason why time is experienced at all.

Jesus said to let the dead bury the dead

It was an oblique reference to the need to be born again. Complex topic.

If one finds a well ordered and logically put together system, universe, multiverse or machine; that does not imply that it wasn't designed. Subtle and infinitesimal quantum uncertainties may enliven art and being like pictures at an exhibition.

There are numerous truth theories. I like correspondence theory and disquotation theory. Truth is about relationships of words. The sole being in itself that is true is God it might be said. For God is truth and anything else contingent and relative