What people want for evidence of God

 People are sometimes confused about reality and language in regard to naming points of cosmology, metaphysics, theology and so forth; they have expectations about God and how He should be and expect categories of ‘evidence (things evident) to appear to them. Generally they have no training in formal logic nor in epistemology and would like a McGod’s to be on the corner with golden arches to offer bite-sized and tasty evidence to them for a reasonable price. With such great expectations they are disappointed to find that franchise missing.

It is as if a waiter is absent from the table in a French cafe’ described by Jean Paul Sartre in Being and Nothingness. Some even believe the waiter needs to be God serving them up information, or that the waiter should have proof that he is God-like if he is Christian having developed a Christ-like character through faith.

There are some troubles with the paradigm of faith and pre-destination that make it difficult for those without any evident relationship in or faith concerning God to see any evident artifact of God as if he left dinosaur fossils about the landscape if they just dig a little deeper. One cannot see the origin of the Higgs field so one has no certainty regarding its extent or if it was created or not by God even indirectly. It is as if every bit of the cosmos that exists even theoretically has just a middle and no beginning or end that is evident…nothing more than faith that it isn’t just a hologram or a deception by a wise-guy super-physicist playing with the sentient beings inhabiting a Universe he whipped up.

A thickening plot like a thickening of massless particles encountering the Higgs field to slow down and become mass so a contingent field of mass locked in a steady condition of particles can exist phenomenally brings us to the problem of finding evidence for and evidence against a creator of the entire uncertain phenomenal field and one-dimensional points that maybe were an uneven or fluctuating dimension of a vacuum between -1 and +1 with absolute zero energy lacking energy to stay balanced.

It is as if the plot of infinite series of quantum points fluctuating between all possible locations in an infinite number of theoretical dimensions was just a figment of the imagination of a lizard sunning itself on a rock rather than God who could set values to agitation and quantum jitters thinking about it. Some people just demand answers they cannot get reading the Bible and natural history and considering how an eternal God might have described some of his work to rather primitive people that believe they are terribly smart at any given time since they climbed down from the trees, or at least their ancestors did.

A plot with evidence for vs evidence against requires a start- an argument maybe stimulated by Darwin’s Origin of Species set with proximal causes and pieces of proofs concerning model universe and the philosophy of logic showing that the beginning and end of time are just arbitrary places to start in the temporal middle of nowhere theoretically speaking, with the relativity of space-time in the combined Higgs field phenomenality of sub-luminal quarks and forces of gravity and massless particles set above and apart from mass being apparent primary- secondary effects of an unknown primary sponsor or agent of the Higgs sub-light show.

If the Bible is a process of understanding and correlating knowledge, those without evidence lack the content wherein with faith they might discover evidence or at least understanding meaning in a deeper sense. It does save time though to make summary though error prone judgments about things. It may be that those that were pre-determined to salvation encounter evidence and those that weren’t, don’t. It might be necessary to think on such things for a while to develop an informed opinion, yet McDonald’s calls.

Thickened Higgs field interactive content, stellar synthesis, melted and cooled magma- some expect to find evidence of God in such structures like clever little message written with advanced theoretical physics tools on the spin-states of sub-atomic particles, or maybe on clay tablets from an alien civilization that encounter God with faster-than-light starships that made it through to an alternate universe. I think that if one considers the Bible deeply one can not only form a good opinion on eschatology so they know the difference between pre-millennialism, post-millennialism and amillennialism, they can form better ideas about the creation in the scriptural paradigm in regard to all times and periods of human knowledge so people of each era might understand it, and that God created the Universe. Whatever mankind finds that is true about cosmology, it is not in contradiction with the information imparted in Genesis. Natural history is not in conflict with scripture, it confirms it paradigmatically. God has not set any sort of deceits between the natural history of the Universe and the content of Genesis. The problem is in human understanding of either.

One can get beyond Pascal’s wager or James’ pragmatic reasons for belief and know that anything that exists does have at least half a chance of being created by someone.

I wrote an ebook that is free to download that has some of my efforts to clarify the topic. It was put together some years ago, before the Higgs field knowledge became familiar, and there are always new things to learn about Biblical, archaeological and natural history that should go into another edition.

God, Cosmology and Nothingness-( Lulu)

The cabin was silent (poem)

 

The cabin was silent
like the world below sparse trees
striving for growth
something future

  Day escaped from shadows
captured night like a fugitive from never
being anything more than illusion
ocean sloshed prime reality

  Olding human being
looking about at chains of mortality
so everything changes the neighborhood
with noise of creative destruction

  Flesh multiplying itself in forms
mathematically structured processes
flowing complex answers
without question

Ever disappears into possibility
objectivity may then regard circumstance
chords of being
silenting away.

Karl Marx; philosopher or sociologist?

 Marx studied philosophy- especially Hegelianism like so many others in his era (as well as law) before setting out on his life’s work. Primarily Marx contributed to sociological analysis at which he was quite good, and not so much so at metaphysics or designing an ideal economic system.

German idealism of the 19th century had influences from Hegel and romantics that discounted ordinary social structures and instead felt themselves a little above the worldview and rote, somnolent lives of the masses of society. Nietzsche was one of those, yet so were so many others, and they were influenced by Darwinism, prominent atheists (i.e. Feurbach) and anarchists (i.e. Kropotkin). Marx was a Jewish intellectual and Jews of 19th century Europe had been victimized by pogroms and so forth going all the way back to the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 70 a.d. when a million were killed and the remainder scattered in exile (diaspora), hence Jews sough a Jewish homeland- so even in Europe, and were revolutionary catalysts in Germany, Russia and elsewhere. Some of the Jewish intellectuals of the day were atheists- like Marx, who had no regard for the Christian religion of the nations in which they had sometimes been unwelcome. Marx had many influences that drove him toward adapting atheism, Hegelianist dialectics and Zionism into a fusion that definitely met the criterion of social philosophy. Marx formalized the first modern state theory of communist economics.

Adam Smith had published the Wealth of Nations (Capitalism) about 1775 so Marx’s Das Kapital was something of an ungrade to that economic tour de force as well as a revision. Marx’s great sociological ability was found in his analysis of the British economic and social structure of the time that described the plight and problems of the poor pushed off rural farm jobs and into cities where they were exploited and labored long hours in factories. He was correct in finding some of the downsides to capitalism that were far less than ideal from the viewpoint of workers not profiting from the system. Generally he was pretty far off at inventing a practical economic alternative to capitalism- it was early in the development of sociology and economics and Marx had to rely on his own ideas in those fields for modern and futurist synthesis and that wasn’t sufficient to create a practical theory of ideal economics for his era or any other.

Karl Marx discounted Hegel’s spiritual dialectic and transformed it entirely in to materialistic economic evolution with clash and counter-clash or thesis-antithesis (as he wrote). As an atheist metaphysics with spirit were rubbish to Karl Marx, so he killed the Hegelian spirit and like Frankenstein made a monster from the corpse that walked the Earth during the 20th century primarily.

Free enterprise is the kernel that brings life to economic progress- not top-down bureaucratic management. Corporatism can oppress free enterprise as readily as communism and other forms of totalitarianism. Writing with the Socratic irony that Kierkeguaard found to be an implicit aspect of society in that it does move along unthinking philosophically about what or why social structures are the way they are, a modern economic philosopher might have a reason to experiment with myriad political economic models packaged in a variety of ways in order to fuse progress into the current ecologically devastating state of the world economy that over-concentrates wealth, leaves a large percent of poverty at the base and does not support the maximum intellectual development of all of mankind to the real limit of their abilities.

Maybe the bottom 25% of society could have socialism and the upper 75% capitalism; with the rich obligated to provide free education through graduate school, enough money for free health care, dental and living they would be motivated to employ and promote the poor out of poverty to reduce their tax payments. Perhaps capitalism should have limited corporate size in order to promote competition and business should have tax incentives for being less entropy causing to promote ecological sustainability. There should be an infinite number of economic packages in limitless forms to model that would be improvements on the present system.

Writers like Nietzsche...

I didn’t encounter anyone that wrote much like Nietzsche in reading western philosophy of the 20th century. He wasn’t a popular professor at college with the janitor being about his only regular student attending his class.

In my opinion mainstream philosophy went into linguistic and analytic philosophy from Russell and Wittgenstein to Quine, Strawson, and other logicians that could apply rigorous logical parameters and the development of the philosophy of logic to fields like ethics, computer science and etc.

People like Sartre, Husserl and systematic rationalists tended to fade a bit in popularity in comparison to specialists with a variety of logical tools and scientific, cosmological and quantum knowledge that allowed reformation of metaphysics and ontology to a certain extent.

Sartre called his Existentialism a continuation of French rationalism. I guess it might be reasonable to say that the existential viewpoint is that of first-person analytical ontology. Developing that sort of thing is quite difficult today. His Critique of Dialectical Reason is a very good tool for thinking about how individuals and organized individuals interact phenomenally and then modeling particular elements of those with philosophy of logic tools. Dewey and Derrida, deconstructionism and post-modernism that reduced language and epistemology to a level of subjectivity that caused some to virtually conflate meaning with meaninglessness objectively as if truth and falsehood were entirely relative and subjective (and not just as nominal variables) might be a kind of dilute version of the grand weltanshauungs of people like Hegel.

Nietzsche on the other hand was a 19th century writer who worked hard yet was limited to what Kant might have called a posteriori social-circumstantial analysis. He was probably influenced by Darwin and Zorastrianism. The philosopher of the eternal recurrence paradigm might have been stimulated by syphilis yet is admired by ‘we have all been here before’ rock and rollers. A band called ‘Spandau Ballet’ wrote a popular song about the eternal recurrence. Spandau prison was where the last famous Nazi (Rudolph Hess) spent the remainder of his life. His work was liked by the Nazis because of the anti-Semitism in some of his aphorisms and of course the development of the Superman. With regard to the latter maybe comic books and graphic novels continued Nietzsche’s idea of super-men and super-beings best.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8naoe1YYFak

Republicans are two parties in one these days

The Republican party seems to independents to have two parties for-themselves...one, the Mitch McConnell branch, is that of corporate bimbos agreeable to concentrating wealth, and the other are workers opposed to the immorality of Democrats, illegal alien job and wage displacement and taxes on themselves as working people. The two parties can sometimes form a majority at least of semi-conservative states in presidential elections.

One cannot easily examine the make-up of the Republican party without considering their Democrat opponents and methods. One need also regard corporate social media policy inclusive of their right to censor independent writers. What is it that Democrats want?

Democrats to worker Republicans seem to be an anti-white male party that is pro-affirmative action for their members and Orwellian to the point of eliminating language like 'alien' from laws to force discussion within boundaries that deletes opposition language. Democrat moderators at social media can find hate speech and bigotry in virtually any opposition expressions and downgrade or delete it and ban the writer once identified as non-Democrat.

Democrats are in a period of canceling white male culture to promote a brave new world through government compulsion and the ballot box; they would rather have white males live on food stamps and make citizens of illegal aliens to replace them because the aliens are likely Democrat voters in support of non-white political power. Democrats have their own corporate bimbo branch that would expand homosexuality globally as if it were a social equivalent of Covid 19 virus. That is regarded as an ally for the promotion of women's economic power. It is a confused conflation of issues in conflict and ignorance of history regressive inasmuch as it deflects rational and equitable political development that would be satisfactory to Americans generally instead of onerous evils foisted by 'crats of craziness unto coalitions of the unwilling.

Republican workers have legitimate political grievances with Democrats; they are marginalized by social media and called bigots for defending their own class interests. If there were no Negroes in the United States Republican workers voting for Trump would still have voted for Trump- that is, there were numerous other divisive political issues-opposing racial equality was not on the agenda for the vast majority of them. Corporate is preponderantly in support of the Democrat platform of downgrading the U.S.A. to the status of an international neutral runway for globalists, therefor Republican workers are generally betrayed by their leadership with the recent exception of the environmentally anachronistic Donald Trump.

Republicans will tend to seem like an obsolete party to youth because of it lacks any ecospheric health creds and thus is regarded as dumb and dirty. The corporate bimbo branch doesn't actually need the office of President so Republicans seldom run quality candidates and certainly none with environmental economic education with a program of nationalism and a strong safety net for the bottom 25% of society. With good poverty elimination and environmental restoration policies Republicans could rise to a new majority status and defrappe some of the godless agenda of globalist Democrats.

It would be silly to expect anything of real benefit from either major U.S. party though. Democrats need Mexicans to be eligible for a draft to serve in future wars, to tend their lawns, build their sheds and puff smoke up their asses generally. That policy development could allow Mexico and even China to dominate U.S. politics while corporatists are amused from future gated communities in Tibet and Mars while ordinary Americans- the 99% - are left holding the bag of vast public debt owed to globalists, Martians and the unessential 1%. Blockchain currencies that are encrypted and hidden offshore and off-whirld will enable the rich to avoid paying taxes to any of those obnoxious national governments.

The KKK act lawsuit against Trump et al

They can sue yet I think their chances of winning aren’t very good. The plaintiffs would need to prove the defendants colluded or acted together for some reason to cause intentional harm to some group in a proximal way, and I think that finding they sought to harm the N.A.A.C.P. or some other racial group is unrealistic and improbable.

NAACP sues Trump, GOP over alleged disenfranchisement of Black voters

Democratic Rep. Bennie Thompson sues Donald Trump, accusing him of inciting riot at US Capitol, conspiring with extremists

Democrats seeking to marginalize Republicans by associating them with racism primarily miss the point on the numerous other political issues that brought American populism to support Trump as the rest of the Republican party seemed to be global corporatist ‘deep state’ people. Democrats have drifted a long way from the Occupy Wall Street movement of correction toward the k-ass Wal-Street side of things. Not all people that vote Republican are rich.

Someone wrote a diatribe enumerating all of the things Democrats hate loosely in response to a question I asked. I won’t try that here, yet I encourage Democrats to think and use sober logic in regard to the fate and security of the nation, its people and borders. Even political philosophy and political economy could change. What about socialism for the bottom 25% of Americans and capitalism for the 75% above? Maybe the two could coexist instead of being portrayed as mutually exclusive. If the poor had a national safety net with guaranteed minimum income, health and dental care and education through graduate school no-one would be excluded from a productive life and the well-off would be motivated to find a way to employ the poor instead of deploring them, so the rich would not need to pay taxes to support them.

Reading this historical sketch of the KKK act of 1871 it seems the purpose was to stop intimidation of the 4 million southern blacks that were freed former slaves. Grant gave some southern states the right to suspend habeas corpus and other measures to reign in the Klan terror. That situation doesn’t seem especially relevant for the capitol riot at all. Maybe it could be used equally superfluously to contain Black Lives Matter rioters or Antifa intifadah. Suspending habeas corpus is a pretty extreme measure in a free society today.

It is an interesting juxtaposition of issues; if there wasn’t a real insurrection- that is one that meets a U.S. legal description, and Democrats brought a bogus charge and technically met the criterion of breaking vestigial elements of 42 U.S. Code § 1985 - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights was it o.k. to do that using a legal tool with a false premise in order to actualize a pre-existing condition of conspiracy to take down Trump by any means.

 The Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives

Even more curious is that the martial law and suspension of habeas corpus measures might have been the cause for SCOTUS declaring the act unconstitutional in 1872. 

Ku Klux Act passed by Congress

Congress should form a commission to investigate the real cause of Covid 19

During the cold war I took an Army NBC course on defense against nuclear, chemical and biological attacks. Finding out the cause of any kind of vector that harms the troops is usual I would think- the same principle should apply to civilians too. Then again I enjoy the newer Sherlock Holmes movies , so determining the real source of what could have been low level biological war (or not) would seem to be de rigueur for competent government in my opinion. In other words what was a biologically caused homicide of more than a million people and greater than a half million Americans (isn’t that roughly the total now) should have enough investigation that there isn’t any doubt about the source.

If that is beyond the ability or interest of the U.S. Government, well, that’s just the way it is. A commission should find the source beyond a reasonable doubt, and evaluate the competence of the response as well, with the goal of doing much better in any possible future incident of a similar nature. Alternatively, it may be better to be happy idiots and move on to more cheerful topics knowing that the pandemic could not possibly have been caused by malevolent human agency. If the pandemic was a human trial it might be happier to ignore that chance and wait like cattle for a more serious national biological emergency to wrap the nation blissfully like a warm blanket some day.

Genetic engineering and biological weapons

https://fas.org/irp/threat/cbw/nextgen.pdf

Next generation agents (synthetic agents): Emerging threats and challenges in detection, protection, and decontamination

The Label of 'Insurrection' was wrong

It is the label of insurrection that was wrongly used. An insurrection is an armed attempt to overthrow the government fundamentally. It is a stage on the road of revolution, and plainly an armed insurrection or revolution wasn’t anything like what did take place. People died by the lethal weapon of a fire extinguisher that should not have been so publicly placed as a dangerous weapon (possibly placed by conspirators or collusionistas) and were crushed by a herd pushing through doors- plainly revolutionary devices.

The problem is that Americans are used to making pejorative b.s. and even advertising b.s. using terms like treason or revolution far too easily. They will say that speaking about a different brand of coffee is treason, or that buying a foreign car is treason, or that supporting Speaker Pelosi is treason although Mitch McConnell gets off on that unless a Democrat supports something that he has said publicly. The term has been so adulterated and watered down that the watered down paradigm is normal. So the good sales point of going from the ‘treason’ of Trump’s ‘Russian collusion’ to that of ‘insurrection’ for an out of hand mob element that stormed into the capitol without a snowballs chance in hell of erasing the electoral college results from the 50 states was natural to promote in the environment of a friendly press and a corporatist political economy that hated the ‘insurgent’ Trump candidacy and administration. If an actual insurrection occurred it would look quite a bit different.

An insurrection is a phrase and paradigm used to describe an armed uprising or possibly one through other means such as internet war on the grid that takes it all down, that cannot be contained by local authorities, and is for the purpose of ending the government (so anarchy may be a paradigm as well as revolt and replace). John Brown’s armed attempt to take over a Federal armory and arm slaves to revolt barely qualifies as an insurrection since it didn’t have popular support. Robert E. Lee incidentally was part of the federal response. There were other famous people their too.

So I don’t dispute most of the facts, just the label for what happened at the capitol. With the democrat pejorative use of insurrection the term could be applied to virtually any urban riot that requires the national guard and federal troops to put it down, even though the riots are not intended to get rid of the government or police forces so anarchy or mob government can replace it- that sort of demonstrating that gets out of hand is just part of American historical tradition and it is never labeled ‘insurrection’. Those Americans that remember the 60s anti-war movement may comprehend that more conservative protests can get raucous too and isn’t any more of an insurrection that their movement was an continues to be in Portland. Democrat leadership just retreats from that to a certain extent so they don’t need to ‘put it down’.

Writing a vomit scene

 Vomit is an important regurgitating output of mal input. One may induce projectile vomit with a constellation of causality from getting a bad burger from the dumpster to taking chemical remedies for cancer. One should use sincerity in writing on vomit generally, although sarcasm is sometimes appropriate too, such as when comparing select Democrat priorities such as forming a commission to further continue divisive U.S. politics over one to investigate the source of Covid 19; in such a political circumstance one might elaborate the ad nauseum nature (until it makes one sick) of the congressional flow of legislative malfeasance; the dog returning to its own vomit.

Projectile vomiting has the potential to make vomit scene writing great again. Vomiting might bring up from the gut a bad hard French fry that gets stuck sideways in the throat if one was careless about eating the day old stuff. That is, may double down with sickening nostalgia memories of projectile vomiting from food poisoning. One shouldn’t try experimenting with that at home though hoping that it could bring first-person information for writing.

The 'Insurrection' Fake News Label for a Mob Invasion of the Capitol

Apparently people don’t know that legal experts have determined that the Capitol Hill mob action wasn’t an insurrection. It just wasn’t a solid threat to the existence of the U.S. Government. Legal experts have said that it wasn’t an insurrection. I posted the federal definition of that above and will repost it here. Insurrection Act of 1807 - Wikipedia John Brown planned to start an insurrection and revolt in 1859 in comparison the Trump mob of 300 or so couldn’t be taken seriously as a real insurrectionist possibility  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist) . The military could have erased them with a single squad, one navy seal or maybe a pair of 11 bravos that passed basic training. There are Posse Comitatus issues that would make military intervention for less than a very serious situation difficult.

Therefor I wonder how the Congress could even bring that article of impeachment against the President when it was self-evident falsehood. What was the purpose of that, and what was with the fake news that called it an insurrection ad nauseum. Today Steve Inskeep at N.P.R. interviewed a legal scholar who said that it wasn’t an insurrection and explained why. Why did the question get asked by the media so long after it should have been asked, after months of pretending the mob invasion of the capitol was an actual insurrection? Because insurrection sells better and is more inflammatory?

PDF file download on the Federal Insurrection Act https://policy.defense.gov/portals/11/documents/hdasa/references/insurrection_act.pdf