Order
Out Of Chaos
by Laura Knight-Jadczyk
sott.net
How can anybody be sure of anything in this day and time when
the world seems to have gone mad and we find ourselves
collectively in the position of the hero/heroine of the
horror movie who hears a noise. Indeed, the audience can see
that the monster is lurking in the bushes (no pun intended)
just outside the door, the soundtrack is heavy with ominous
portent, and with innocent naïveté and a handy flashlight,
the star of the movie puts his or her hand on the doorknob.
The audience groans with the agony of knowing and
collectively shouts "DON'T OPEN THE DOOR!" But,
unfortunately, the movie world is not connected to the world
of the audience, and no warning can cross that divide.
In the old days, movie heroes and heroines generally always
survived such mistakes by dint of clever scripting. In more
recent years, you can never be sure anymore: the hero or
heroine is likely to die - reflecting real life - because of
their stupidity.
Admittedly, when I was much younger, I only liked the kind of
movies where the hero or heroine triumphed in the end. I was
always upset and angry - I felt cheated - if the movie ended
as real life often does: no haven, no help, no hope. Only
later did I realize the usefulness of such movies; that they
could be teaching tools that help us to analyze our hopes,
our beliefs, our wishful thinking that "right will prevail"
no matter what, so that, if - indeed - we ever found
ourselves in similar situations, we could circumvent the
"failures of intelligence" that led to failures in awareness
and strategy. In short, observing how wishful thinking most
often leads to disaster in real life, could teach us how to
think rationally, how to analyze and predict, and thus,
formulate an adequate response to any situation of danger.
It's a useful concept.
But it still doesn't bridge the divide between the actors in
the movie and the audience that can SEE.
We get a lot of letters from readers and entries in our forum
by people who complain that the SOTT Team sound like they are
"frustrated" or "insulting" or "repetitious" or they don't
understand that it is all just a cosmic game and we can go
home at the end and have a party with all the bad guys. They
aren't aware, of course, of the many discussions we have
trying to figure out what may or may not work to get the
attention of the reader in a way that will truly serve to
galvanize them to wake up. One day we may try one thing, and
another day, we will try something else.
At the present time, it seems that much of the outside world
is watching America in the same way an audience watches a
horror movie. The audience, of course, has the benefit of a
"bird's eye view," and all the clues of music and privileged
perspective granted by the movie maker. The actors are in a
state of "fantasy," or "wishful thinking," if you like. They
have agreed, individually and collectively, to engage in
acting out the drama. They have agreed to "forget" all they
know about the script so as to more effectively "get into"
their roles. When the movie making is over, they all have a
cast party, toast each other for how well they managed to
fool the audience, and agree that it was a great movie and go
home to read another script.
The audience, on the other hand, if they are knowledgeable,
will agree that their favorite actors sure had them going
there for a bit! They will declare sagely how good the
monster was, and how evil the villain was because the actor
or actress was such a master of their craft.
Such analogies as audience and movie are often used by
philosophers as a way of suggesting that all that happens on
earth is exactly that: a grand play and everybody is all the
same when the show is over: actors and audience are simply
two sides that have agreed to play "parts" in the life of
humanity. Certainly, at some ultimate "level" of reality,
this may be true in a certain way, but we suspect that it is
not at all exactly that simple. I wrote a bit about this in
my book: The Secret History of the World. It is a bit
esoteric, but I'm going to quote it anyway. It's my page, I
can do what I want.
The great Sufi Shaykh Ibn al-'Arabi explains that
"imperfection" exists in Creation because "were there no
imperfection, the perfection of existence would be
imperfect." From the point of view of Sheer Being, there is
nothing but good.
But Infinite Potential to BE includes - by definition of the
word "infinite" - the potential to Not Be. And so, Infinite
Potential - The ALL - "splits" into Thought Centers of
Creation/BEing and Thought Centers of Entropy/Non-being. It
can be said that Infinite Potential is fundamentally Binary -
on or off - to be or not to be. That is the first "division."
Since absolute non-being is an impossible paradox in terms of
the source of Infinite Potential to BE, the half of the
consciousness of Infinite Potential that constitute the IDEAS
of non-being - for every idea of manifestation, there is a
corresponding idea for that item of creation to NOT manifest
- "falls asleep" for lack of a better term. Its "self
observation" is predicated upon consciousness that can only
"mimic" death. Consciousness that mimics death then "falls"
and becomes Primal Matter. [...]
It has been represented for millennia in the yin-yang symbol,
which, even on the black half that represents "sleeping
consciousness that is matter," you can see the small white
dot of "being" that represents to us that absolute
non-existence is not possible. There is only "relative"
non-existence. [...]
At our level of reality, the understanding that "nothing is
real," as has been promulgated by gurus and teachers down
through history, is as useless as saying "gravity isn't
real." Such considerations are useful only for expansion of
perception. They are not useful for practical application
since the energies of creation apparently transduce through
several "levels" before they meet in the middle, so to say,
in our reality.
Organic life exists at the "crossroads" of the myriad ideas
or thought centers of being and non-being. As such, they have
the capacity to transduce energies "up" or "down" depending
on the "consciousness energy directors" of that unit. [...]
Against the opposition of those forces seeking to "capture"
energy of consciousness and induce it to the "sleep of
non-being," which is gravitational in a certain sense, the
energies of consciousness seek to "inform" matter via
awakening the self-awareness of those organic units on earth
that are capable of resistance to the gravity of non-being.
As self-aware "transducing units," the human being has the
potential for going either way - toward intensified being, or
toward intensified non-being. [...]
God creates the good and the evil, the ugly and the
beautiful, the straight and the crooked, the moral and the
immoral. Between these traits lie the manifold dangers of the
path of the seeker of Truth.
Many modern day "teachers" and "gurus" tell us "Since there
is only One Being which permeates all things, all we have to
do is see everything as only light", and that will transmute
the darkness, and we will "create our own reality of light."
Such a statement ignores the fact that the statement "God is
One" describes a reality that is a higher level from which
our own "mixed being" manifests. The man who assumes that he
can become like God at this level just by thinking it,
ignores the facts of Being vs. Non-being which outrays from
"God is One" at a level of existence that is clearly several
levels above our own. Evil is REAL on its own level, and the
task of man is to navigate the Cosmic Maze without being
defiled by the Evil therein. This is the root of Free Will.
Man faces a predicament as REAL as himself: he is forced to
choose - to utilize his knowledge by applying it - between
the straight path which leads to Being, and the crooked paths
which lead to Non-Being.
Human beings are required to discern between good and evil -
consciousness energy directors - at every stage of their
existence in this reality. Because, in fact, they must
understand that God is consciousness and God is matter. God
is good, and God is evil. The Creation assumes all the
different properties of the many "Names of God." The Cosmos
is full of Life-giving and Slaying, Forgiveness and
Vengeance, Exaltation and Abasement, Guidance and Deception.
To attempt to assume God's point of view and "mix everything"
at this level, results only in STAYING at this level.
Therefore, human beings must always separate God's point of
view from their own point of view and the fact that all
creation assumes the divine Names and Traits.
Thus, the first Divine Command is BE! And that includes Being
and Non-being instantaneously. Therefore, the second law is
"follow Being or Non-being according to your choice and your
inherent nature." All creation is a result of the engendering
command. So, in this respect, there is no Evil. But the
second, prescriptive law determines to which "Face of God"
one will return: Life or Death. [The Secret History of the
World]
Sure, in the ultimate Grand Scheme of things, everything goes
back to source. The difference is that those with the BEing
nature of Creativity don't like the idea of Entropy and they
reserve the right to make a choice.
It is easier to resist evil at the beginning than at the end.
And it is oh, so easy to excuse yourself from resisting by
just saying: "Oh, it's just a movie! We can all go home at
the end and know that everyone played their parts well..."
There is more than a little scientific support for the above
ideas that consciousness - the root of existence and BEing -
has two fundamental states: on, or off. In the final
analysis, it seems that the metaphor of humanity and its
collective "higher selves" being a movie and an audience, may
be simply anthropomorphizing creative and entropic forces of
the universe for the purposes of "self-calming." The stakes,
it seems, are a lot higher and more real.
This brings us to the issue of subjectivity vs. objectivity.
In recent weeks, I have been queried by several people who
want to know just HOW "Knowledge protects." My response was
too lengthy to reproduce here, but I said in part:
As the C's have said, and this is echoed in the most ancient
traditions: "It's not where you are, but WHO you are and WHAT
YOU SEE that counts." This "who" and "what you see" have been
somewhat problematical as research subjects, and it has only
been in the last three years that clear understanding of
these concepts have been articulated. I discuss both
extensively in my lectures on Alchemy.
We must regard the present state of the universe as the
effect of its past and the cause of its future. Consider an
intelligence which, at any instant, could have a knowledge of
all forces controlling nature together with the momentary
conditions of all the entities of which nature consists. If
this intelligence were powerful enough to submit all this
data to analysis it would be able to embrace in a single
formula the movements of the largest bodies in the universe
and those of the lightest atoms; for it, nothing would be
uncertain; the future and the past would be equally present
to its eyes. Pierre Laplace
Certainly, such an intelligence as Laplace describes would be
"Godlike," you agree? And certainly, no one of us human
beings is capable of such "seeing," you will also agree.
However, what does seem to be true is that this is a
significant clue to the solutions to the pressing issues of
our day: knowledge that leads to awareness.
Here I will insert a major clue: As the brain interacts with
its environment, synaptic circuits combine to form synaptic
maps of the world perceived by the senses. These maps
describe small segments of that world - shape, color,
movement - and these maps are scattered throughout the brain.
As the brain's synaptic network evolves, beginning at birth -
or even before - these maps process information
simultaneously and in parallel.
Based on our synaptic maps of the world, we are enabled to
have e more or less objective view of reality.
Classical physics asserts that the future already exists, as
do the present and past. Everything that ever will happen has
already happened. But for some unknown reason our minds can
only experience the future a piece at a time in what we call
the present.
Quantum physics, on the other hand, says that we can never
predict the future with absolute certainty. The future does
not yet exist in a single definite state. Quantum uncertainty
does not deny us all knowledge about the future. It gives us
the tools to make predictions, but only in terms of
probabilities.
Bohr and other leading physicists of the Copenhagen School
say that objective reality is an ambiguous concept at the
quantum level. In physics, our knowledge comes only when we
actually measure something, and even then the way we decide
to perform the measurement affects the results we obtain.
Asking the same question in different ways may give seemingly
contradictory answers, but no single experiment will itself
provide contradictory information. Some experiments will show
electrons as waves, and others will show them as particles.
In no single experiment do electrons display wavelike and
particle-like behavior simultaneously. Bohr called this
complementarity.
Quantum mechanics leaves the observer uncertain about the
actual nature of reality. Are they really waves or particles?
We don't know and no experiment will tell us. Detecting one
of the attributes automatically excludes knowledge about the
other.
There is a striking similarity between life and thought. Just
as there are more potential life forms than the planet can
hold, there are more potential ideas than our minds can
possibly absorb and remember.
Just as evolutionary natural selection may generate change by
choosing from among the many potential forms of life, so may
thought be able to generate evolutionary change by choosing
among many potential thoughts.
The master evolutionary mechanism is found in the wave
function of the universe. The observer guides the selection
from an infinite number of potential arrangements that the
universe may assume from moment to moment.
The universe has many possible future states or
potentialities represented by the wave function. The wave
function is constantly collapsing into the present as the
many possible states become a single state as the present
unfolds and possibilities become actualities.
Many individuals have decided that this Quantum Uncertainty
means that you can "create your own reality" by what you
believe, or depending upon what you give your attention to.
This is a popular idea among many New Age types, and is
actually the foundation of most religions whether they
realize it or not. Let's have a look at what can be done with
a little twist of scientific knowledge:
Now we come at last to the heart of darkness. Now we know,
from their own words, that the Bush Regime is a cult -- a
cult whose god is Power, whose adherents believe that they
alone control reality, that indeed they create the world anew
with each act of their iron will. And the goal of this will
-- undergirded by the cult's supreme virtues of war, fury and
blind faith -- is likewise openly declared: "Empire."
You think this is an exaggeration? Then heed the words of the
White House itself: a "senior adviser" to the president, who,
as The New York Times reports, explained the cult to author
Ron Suskind in the heady pre-war days of 2002.
First, the top Bush insider mocked the journalist and all
those "in what we call the reality-based community," i.e.,
people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious
study of discernible reality." Suskind's attempt to defend
the principles of reason and enlightenment cut no ice with
the Bush-man.
"That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an
empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality," he
said. "And while you're studying that reality, we'll act
again, creating other new realities, which you can study too,
and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors
... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we
do."
Anyone with any knowledge of 20th-century history will know
that this same megalomaniacal outburst could have been made
by a "senior adviser" to Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini or Mao.
Indeed, as scholar Juan Cole points out, the dogma of the
Bush Cult is identical with the "reality-creating"
declaration of Mao's "Little Red Book": "It is possible to
accomplish any task whatsoever." For Bush, as for Mao,
"discernible reality" has no meaning: Po litical, cultural,
economic, scientific truth -- even the fundamental processes
of nature, even human nature itself -- must give way to the
faith-statements of ideology, ruthlessly applied by unbending
zealots.
Thus: The conquered will welcome their killers. The poor will
be happy to slave for the rich. The Earth can sustain any
amount of damage without lasting harm. The loss of rights is
essential to liberty. War without end is the only way to
peace. Cronyism is the path to universal prosperity.
Dissent
is evil; dissenters are "with the terrorists." But God is
with the Leader; whatever he does is righteous, even if in
the eyes of unbelievers -- the "reality-based community" --
his acts are criminal: aggressive war that kills thousands of
innocent people, widespread torture, secret assassinations,
rampant corruption, electoral subversion.
Indeed, the doctrine "Gott mit Uns" is the linchpin of the
Bush Cult. Tens of millions of Americans have now embraced
the Cult's fusion of Bush's leadership with Divine Will. As a
Bush volunteer in Missouri told Suskind: "I just believe God
controls everything, and God uses the president to keep evil
down ... God gave us this president to be the man to protect
the nation at this time." God appointed Bush; thus Bush's
acts are godly. It's a circular, self-confirming mind-set
that can't be penetrated by reason or facts, can't be shaken
by crimes and scandals. That's why Bush's core support --
comprising almost half of the electorate -- stays rock-solid,
des pite the manifest failures of his administration. It's
based on blind faith, on poisonous fantasy: simple,
flattering ("We're uniquely good, God's special nation!"),
comforting, complete -- so unlike the harsh, bewildering,
splintered shards of reality.
This closed mind-set is constantly reinforced by the
ubiquitous right-wing media -- evoking the threat of demonic
enemies on every side, relentlessly manufacturing righteous
outrage -- and by Bush's appearances (epiphanies?) at his
carefully screened rallies, where even the slightest hint of
demurral from his Godly greatness is ruthlessly expunged. For
example, three schoolteachers were ejected from a Bush rally
under threat of arrest las t week. Not for protesting -- they
hadn't said a word -- but merely for wearing T-shirts that
read, "Protect Our Civil Liberties." Thus the faithful
"create the new reality" of undivided loyalty to the Leader.
Let's consider that crucial paragraph:
"That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an
empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality," he
said. "And while you're studying that reality, we'll act
again, creating other new realities, which you can study too,
and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors
... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we
do."
The view of the Bush Reich is, as it happens, diametrically
opposed to the view we promote at Signs of the Times. This
view has been stated quite economically by the Cassiopaeans:
Life is religion. Life experiences reflect how one interacts
with God. Those who are asleep are those of little faith in
terms of their interaction with the creation. Some people
think that the world exists for them to overcome or ignore or
shut out. For those individuals, the worlds will cease. They
will become exactly what they give to life. They will become
merely a dream in the "past." People who pay strict attention
to objective reality right and left, become the reality of
the "Future."
Human
beings are both fascinated and repelled by what is called
"evil." The fascination stems from the fact that "good"
people find it difficult to comprehend how evil can exist in
a world that is allegedly overseen by a benevolent and loving
creator. And so, they struggle to identify it, quantify it
and understand it.
Throughout history, different individuals or groups of
individuals have been labeled "evil" by the "authorities" of
the time. In our own period, we often find that the mass
media will display photographs of murderers with the caption,
"The face of evil." The viewer shudders with fear and thanks
his lucky stars that such an individual is not a part of HIS
of HER life!
At the top of the list of the 20th-century's most evil
people, we find an ordinary looking guy named Adolf Hitler.
Like George Bush, he was more comical and absurd than
frightening. There are many surviving photographs that show
him dandling babies and fondling pets.
Nevertheless, when we gaze upon these old photos of Hitler,
our perceptions are automatically conditioned to produce that
frisson of fear: this is HITLER, the FACE OF EVIL. We see, in
retrospect, that the dandling of babies and scratching the
dog's ears were undoubtedly the propaganda of the time. We
know that because we know the history of what Hitler did.
What we all tend to forget is that Hitler could not have come
to power and committed Germany to its policies of war and
genocide without the tacit consent of the German people and
without the rest of the world turning a blind eye to what was
going on in Germany. In a certain sense, this makes the
entire world responsible for the crimes committed in Germany.
Would the German people have been so susceptible to Nazi rule
if there had been a concerted effort on the part of other
peoples to assist them in waking up, in seeing their folly?
Why did everyone think "it's not my business," most
particularly those governments that could have acted more
strongly to curtail the rising power of Hitler? How much
responsibility do they hold for the 65 million deaths of the
Global Holocaust that was World War II?
Knowing that the German people were the foundation on which
Hitler stood, his soldiers and workers and assistant killers,
is one thing; understanding how it came to be is another.
If other countries did not forcefully object, surely the
German people thought that the direction Hitler was taking
them was at least their own solution to their particular
problems, even if not exactly the solution other countries
would have chosen.
There was no real consensus of rejection of the Nazi ideals
conveyed to Germany in an effective way and certainly, the
German people were suffering a variety of serious internal
problems to which Hitler's answers seemed to be good ones.
There was no single moment in time when the German people -
as a whole - suddenly "became evil." The Germans - the people
susceptible to Adolf Hitler - were a people desperate for
identity and economic prosperity. Germany was a country torn
apart by overwhelming economic, political and social blows:
World War I, the treaty of Versailles, hyperinflation and the
Great Depression, were all blows that ruined or diminished
the admirable qualities of Germany as a whole. These
disasters left the way open for a truly horrifying ideology.
Hitler tapped into this desperation, whipping the people of
Germany into a religious, messianic fervor. Little by little,
they were induced to close off their consciences as the price
that had to be paid for their dreams; they were induced by
clever fear tactics and propaganda to incrementally realign
their collective morality so that, in the end, the Face of
Evil was the face of every supporter of Hitler.
The story of the rise of Adolf Hitler is the single most
important story of the 20th century. With this event, in less
than a single lifetime, one of the most civilized countries
in Europe was reduced to moral, physical, and cultural ruin.
The rest of the world was nearly gobbled into this black hole
of evil. This should give everyone something to think about -
and think about it long and hard.
At present, the model of what transpired in Germany can quite
easily be seen by many people as unfolding in the United
States today. There were other ways that the history of
Germany could have unfolded in that time. There are other
ways the history of the United States can unfold.
Complicity does not mean that you have to actively support
evil, it simply means that the only thing necessary for the
triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
At Signs of the Times, we are not in the business of telling
anyone what to do. We are only here as a lighthouse, a
constant sweeping illumination that goes around and around
and says, basically, the same thing over and over again. Our
readership is growing by leaps and bounds, and we know that
there are new readers every day who have not read every daily
report for the past couple of years. We also know that there
are regular readers who, after reading the page, go back to
sleep and think "it can't be THAT bad." And so, again and
again we shine the light, ring the alarm bell, and try to
think of different ways to get through to others the extreme
peril in which we stand. This brings us back to the issue of
how does Knowledge Protect?
In the past three years, as I noted above, we have made some
considerable progress on our mandate of discovering what
really makes reality tick and how does humanity fit into it.
Much of this work is pure science - physics and mathematics -
but I'm not going to give you the formulas or the computer
simulation codes, I'm going to explain it to you in simple
terms.
Our universe seems to be made up of matter/energy and of
consciousness.
Matter/energy by itself "prefers", as it seems, a chaotic
state.
Matter/energy by itself doesn't even have a concept of
"creation" or "organization". It is the consciousness that
brings to life these concepts and by its interaction with
matter pushes the universe towards chaos and decay or towards
order and creation.
This phenomenon can modeled mathematically and simulated on a
computer using EEQT (Event Enhanced Quantum Theory). Whether
EEQT faithfully models the interaction of consciousness with
matter, we do not know; but chances are that it does because
it seems to describe correctly physical phenomena better than
just the orthodox quantum mechanics or its rival theories
(Bohmian mechanics, GRW etc.)
What we learn from EEQT can be described in simple terms as
follows:
Let us call our material universe "the system". The system is
characterized by a certain "state". It is useful to represent
the state of the system as a point on a disc. The central
point of the disk, its origin, is the state of chaos. We
could also describe it as "Infinite Potential." The points on
the boundary represents "pure states" of being, that is
states with "pure, non-fuzzy, knowledge". In between there
are mixed states. The closer the state is to the boundary,
the more pure, more 'organized' it is.
Now, an external "observer", a "consciousness unit", has some
idea - maybe accurate, maybe false or anywhere in between -
about the "real state" of the system, and observes the system
with this "belief" about the state. Observation, if
prolonged, causes the state of the system to "jump". In this
sense, you DO "create your own reality", but the devil, as
always, is in the details.
The details are that the resulting state of the system under
observation can be more pure, or more chaotic depending on
the "direction" of the jump. The direction of the jump
depends on how objective - how close to the reality of the
actual state - the observation is.
According to EEQT if the expectations of the observer are
close to the actual state of the system, the system jumps,
more often than not, into more organized, less chaotic state.
If, on the other hand, the expectation of the observer is
close to the negation of the actual state (that is when the
observer's beliefs are not TRUE according to the ACTUAL state
- the objective reality), then the state of the system,
typically, will jump into a state that is more chaotic, less
organized. Moreover, it will take, as a rule, much longer
time to accomplish such a jump.
In other words, if the observer's knowledge of the actual
state is close to the truth, then the very act of observation
and verification causes a jump quickly, and the resulting
state is more organized; pure. If the observer's knowledge of
the actual state is false, then it takes usually a long time
to cause a change in the state of the system, and the
resulting state is more chaotic.
In short, everyone who "believes" in an attempt to "create
reality" that is different from what IS, adds to the increase
of chaos and entropy. If your beliefs are orthogonal to the
truth, no matter how strongly you believe them, you are
essentially coming into conflict with how the Universe views
itself and I can assure you, you ain't gonna win that
contest. You are inviting destruction upon yourself and all
who engage in this "staring down the universe" exercise with
you.
On the other hand, if you are able to view the Universe as it
views itself, objectively, without blinking, and with
acceptance of the reality and appropriate responses to how
things really are, you then become more "aligned" with the
Creative energy of the universe and your very consciousness
becomes a transducer of order energy, and your actions are
consonant with what is. Your energy of observation, given
unconditionally, matched by the appropriate actions, can
bring order to chaos, can create out of infinite potential.
In the Adventure Series, I concentrated to a great extent on
the problem of psychopathy in our world today. I was
motivated to do this by the fact that we had been victimized
by a psychopath whose behavior was utterly incomprehensible.
As a consequence of this research, I was much better prepared
to understand George Bush and his Reich and that served to
"inoculate" me against the fear tactics that are utilized by
the psychopath to paralyze their victims. I realize that
Americans who are "stupid" are that way by design. In a
sense, it is not their fault. They are no more capable of
thinking on their own than the mouse is capable of escaping
the claws of the cat determined to eat it.
But not everyone is a mouse. It is for those who are evolving
that we continue to keep the lighthouse going. But be aware,
the day may come - and sooner than you might expect - when
the storm is so violent that the keepers of the flame will
abandon the task, knowing that no light can be seen in such
Stygian darkness.
In the Adventure Series, I wrote the following:
Could it ever be an evolutionarily stable strategy for people
to be innately unselfish?
On the whole, a capacity to cheat, to compete and to lie has
proven to be a stupendously successful adaptation. Thus the
idea that selection pressure could ever cause saintliness to
spread in a society looks implausible in practice. It doesn't
seem feasible to out-compete genes which promote
competitiveness. "Nice guys" get eaten or out-bred. Happy
people who are unaware get eaten or out-bred. Happiness and
niceness today is vanishingly rare, and the misery and
suffering of those who are able to truly feel, who are
empathic toward other human beings, who have a conscience, is
all too common.
Nevertheless, a predisposition to, conscience, ethics, can
prevail if and when it is also able to implement the deepest
level of altruism: making the object of its empathy the
higher ideal of enhancing free will in the abstract sense,
for the sake of others, including our descendants.
In short, our "self-interest" ought to be vested in
collectively ensuring that all others are happy and
well-disposed too; and in ensuring that children we bring
into the world have the option of being constitutionally
happy and benevolent toward one another.
In short, if psychopathy threatens the well-being of the
group future, then it can be only be dealt with by refusing
to allow the self to be dominated by it on an individual,
personal basis.
Preserving free will for the self in the practical sense,
ultimately preserves free will for others.
Protection of our own rights AS the rights of others,
underwrites the free will position and potential for
happiness of all.
If mutant psychopaths pose a potential danger then true
empathy, true ethics, true conscience, dictates using
prophylactic therapy against psychopaths.
It seems certain from the evidence that a positive
transformation of human nature isn't going to come about
through a great spiritual awakening, socio-economic reforms,
or a spontaneous desire among the peoples of the world to be
nice to each other. But it's quite possible that, in the long
run, the psychopathic program of suffering will lose out
because misery is not a stable strategy.
In a state of increasing misery, victims will seek to escape
it; and this seeking will ultimately lead them to inquire
into the true state of their misery, and that may lead to a
society of intelligent people who will have the collective
capacity to do so.
And so it is that identifying the psychopath, ceasing our
interaction with them, cutting them off from our society,
making ourselves unavailable to them as "food" or objects to
be conned and used, is the single most effective strategy
that we can play. [...]
To allow oneself to be conned, or used by a psychopath is to
effectively become part of his "hierarchy" of feeding. To
believe the lies of the psychopath is to submit to his
"bidding" (he bids you to believe a lie, and you acquiesce),
and thus, to relinquish your free will.
In strictly material terms, this doesn't seem to be much of
an issue, right? After all, somebody lies to us and who
really cares? Is it going to hurt us to just let them lie? Is
it going to hurt us to just go along with them for the sake
of peace, even if we know or suspect they are lying? After
all, checking the facts and facing the psychopath with truth,
and telling them "no" is generally very unpleasant. Remember,
the game is set up so that we pay a lot for being ethical in
dealing with the psychopath. In material terms, it really
doesn't seem to be worth it because we suffer all kinds of
attack - verbal, psychological, and even physical abuse - so
it's just easier to let sleeping dogs lie, right? [...]
At best, we can only really penetrate to the level of the
psychological reality, observed behavior that is discordant,
or self-destructive. And we are thoroughly programmed to help
by giving until it hurts, or trying to fix, or to make nice.
All of these things, all of these accommodations of
psychopathy, on just a practical level, can be seen to
"select for psychopathy" in terms of the gene pool.
But on another level, considering the great amount of
evidence we have that there is something very mysterious
going on that has to do with "controlling the minds of
humanity," and covering up something that may affect every
single human being on this planet, we find that the issue is
crucial. Refusing to accommodate the manipulations and
maneuvers of the psychopath may, indeed, be critical to the
positive transformation of our planet. [...]
And we see that the ultimate aim of the psychopath, as living
representatives of the Universal forces of Entropy, of
Non-Being, is to MASTER creative energy. To assimilate it to
the self, to deprive others of it by inducing them to believe
lies.
Because, when you believe the lie of the psychopath, you have
given him control of your Free Will - the essence of
Creativity. [...]
As I quoted above: Thus, the first Divine Command is BE! And
that includes Being and Non-being instantaneously. Therefore,
the second law is "follow Being or Non-being according to
your choice and your inherent nature."
All creation is a result of the engendering command. So, in
this respect, there is no Evil. But the second, prescriptive
law determines to which "Face of God" one will return: Life
or Death. Do you observe the world based on truth,
objectivity, as the Universe views itself? That brings life.
Or,
do you view the word based on lies, subjectivity, and do you
seek to shut-out, control, or force the world to bend to your
will? If so, you have chosen Death.
It is only Truth and actions based on Truth that will restore
Life and order to our world.
FAIR USE
NOTICE: This site may contain copyrighted material, the use
of which has not been specifically authorized by the
copyright owner. This website distributes this material
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use
of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C
§ 107.
NOTE TO AUTHORS: If you are the author or owner of an article
or video that I have made available through THEINFOVAULT.NET
and you do not wish to have your article or video posted on
theinfovault, please contact me and I
will remove the item.