| abstract
| - I write these words to a world that is too late to escape its fate. I write these words through the faith alone that the destruction that awaits this failed construct of global consciousness called super-rationalism will not be the end of this great race. This race that the planet earth once deemed great enough to rise above all else, to be given the ability of abstract thought. To be given the hand to rule all creation, in hopes that we would understand the gravity of the blessing given to us, and understand that it is a responsibility as well as a privilege. The problem is not a mistake on our part depending on any given issue, or even number of issues. For by choosing a side of an issue, you are making a stand saying that the other side of the issue does not have the right to exist. The problem itself is that judgment leads us to separation of the self. Through judgment, we lose our connection to the infinite . The problem is that we believe that we are not that, or we are not this, we are only us. If we could only understand that self-hood was in direct connection of every other possibility on the planet, progress would be possible. What needs to happen is a complete and total paradigm shift. Before the modern age, the idea which tied together thoughts was different from our weighing and measuring. That which was similar was tied together, calling upon a power which transcended similarities of those which were alike to a place where they were the same. All chairs were ruled by the idea of 'chair'. Likewise plants, animals, even ideas came together as connected by what Plato explained as the 'forms'. these forms were generated through life, and all life was the expression of myriad different forms interacting. that even though some physical manifestations of these forms seemed imperfect. Their imperfection was merely an illusion caused by the interaction of so many forms in one entity. At the onset of modern science this outlook was done away with, because it could not be proven from a materialistic viewpoint, it was regarded as another piece of old fairy-tale. This idea, while bringing with it a cold feeling in the belly of those who believed in it, taught those who accepted it much faster how to deal with the physical phenomena, science and technology accelerated at increasingly faster rates every year. Now we are at another cross-roads. The technology continues to speed up, but our lives have not become more easy and carefree, for all our knowledge. It has become instead more stressful and searing. Everyone searches for an escape for the boredom and banality that haunts everyone. Meaning is found in family, success, or in doctrine. Yet the overpowering doubt which is at the core of this experience is something which no one can escape. With closed eyes we rush towards an uncertain fate. Filling ourselves with the empty pleasures of materialism to satiate our fears. Yet there is escape, if we take up these parts of experience that we have done away with, examine them and understand what and why anyone would have ever chose to believe in them, we may still have a chance. What I am proposing is not a destruction and desertion of that which have learned to this point, all of our scientific and intellectual knowledge which has given us more power over our existence than any other civilization known to us at present date. What I am proposing is not even what other mystics of our time suggest, which is an amalgam of old and new thought patterns to create an enlightened rational stance. All that I ask of you is to merely subject your own perception to a set of ideas and constructs in which I will present to you in the book you presently hold in your hand. Turn them around in your head a while, and decide what it is you believe about them. If the powerful rationale that I believe I have discovered does not change or challenge your thoughts about the nature of the universe, and the extent of law and order therefore. Then at least you will have some idea as to what the new age actually believes, and can properly refute metaphysical from inside the constructs of their reality. If anyone has ever studied even remotely the possibilities of quantum physics, you could see the widespread results on the rest of existence are gargantuan. As Scientists began the study of light (or particles under 1/1000 of an inch) they began noticing some extremely odd tendencies. Things such as one particle being in two places at one time, or one particle moving from once place to another without actually passing the space between the two. Most spectacular of all was the discovery of the subjectivity of light experiments. When a scientist attempted to discover the position of light, it would show up as a particle. Yet when he tried to discover its motion, the particles would turn up as waves. This discovery overturns almost the whole paradigm of our materialist society. (though many say that this principle, along with most of the quantum realm, have no bearing on the actual physical world.) That the way in which we interpret our reality actually helps to co-create our reality. As if all of existence was a great communication between all that exists within it, with each thing that exists' propensities and opinions affecting each thing in turn. Now what I am supposing is much more complicated than just the idea of direction and position. What I am proposing is an extrapolation of this idea to cover all of phenomena. What if our own rationalization of phenomena actually affects the the workings of said phenomena, while not destroying some core part of what it is that makes the phenomena work, and that even that could possibly be changed by the the proper rationalization. This would mean that those societies which had different philosophical constructs than us where not wrong, they had just come to different rationalizations, thus existence responded to them differently. This also returns us to our society in which ultimate materialism has become the paradigm, making our society thusly become controlled not by the most just, or most true, but by those who have the best grip on what is practical, leading to desperation and pain to the heart of those who strive for such things as to there uselessness in todays 'marketplace'. If this is true it even shows the full extent of positive thinking, that those that believe that good things will happen attract good things into their lives, while those that think negative attract the latter. If something as this where true, along with all the knowledge we have amassed up to this point, then an understanding of this phenomena would truly have us on the threshold of godhood. If something like this where true now, at a time where finally our minds are logical enough to grasp the fullness of this phenomena, then those prophecies and dreams of a utopian society may actually be in our grasp. To solidify the theory that will be the basis of this book, I refer to my title: Algebra and Archetypes. What I have brought together in this book are the constructs of western, along with some eastern, mystery schools of thought, and the ways their logic interacts with the universe. Explaining in philosophical terms what these tried and true methods of metaphysical understanding are actually trying to explain through their maps and symbols. So one may possibly reach new understandings of the possible logic of divine law rationalized throughout time. This will hopefully cause complete paradigm shifts in a choice few (and possibly many) which would help to turn the tides before they come crashing down on what may be our final chance at human existence on earth. One fact that I want to emphasize before I begin is the idea that none of this is 'real'. (a fact that I fear even many within metaphysical schools lose sight of over time) Instead these are merely different rationalizations of this construct we call reality, or existence. This is important, because if this truth is not assimilated, and one, or even all of these constructs are taken as a true explanation of reality, then we have missed the point and we are right back at the beginning of the path with a different map. And I hope that if you've followed up to this point you understand that we just don't have time for that. Now that we have covered that oh so important fact, we return to archetypes. As many of you may know the Archetype is a term coined by Carl Jung to stand for the idea that mankind has a set of ideas which exist in and in between each persons subconscious. Then each persons subjective view of these archetypes create his psyche. What I am proposing is that these 'archetypes' extend beyond the reaches of the human psyche, that they pass on to place that is actual existence in some form and from this place they create reality, as we create them. What I am proposing is Plato's theory of the Forms, is actually the same theory as Jung's Archetypes, seen from their appropriate philosophical and psychological perspectives, made thousands of years apart. These 'forms', while not being conscious (according to theory) are instead a sum of all of our conscious thoughts, feelings and attitudes on the given subject of the archetype. Thus the archetypes are just a mix of all the subjective viewpoints ever to exist, with those of the highest cultural prominence given the most strength in the archetype at the time(although prominence of past, and theoretically even future, play an important part as well). This is the algebra mentioned in the title. Yet there is another meaning to the algebra in the title. To begin I will pose a sort of riddle, those of you who read this book, may consider yourself an agnostic, or a philosopher, or an intellectual, or a student, or for that matter, any other archetype that one may choose to place themselves, or be placed, under. Now, would you say that such a label explains who you are completely? I'm sure I can see most of you shaking your heads in a condescending 'no'. Yet before you throw this book away and add another writer to your 'he talks too stupid' list, I understand most people fall under many labels, such as student and mother and artist and lover and daughter. Yet at the same time, each of these is a single entity, you cannot split apart the idea to make room for the others, yet it would be silly to say that each of us does not have many of these in which we fall under. Yet this begs a very important question; student+mother+artist+lover+daughter= ? . Yet in logical terms we cannot answer this question, for it does not fall under any vocabulary which we have. It is impossible to explain the sum of our parts with words, because the mixtures would rise unto infinity. So to answer questions such as these we must go beyond means of casual labeling, and sometimes even beyond the constraints of usual rationality. My own theory as to how to solve this conundrum is something I first ran into in the study of astrology. In astrology, you enter a date for a person place or event (anything that has 'begun' really) and what you are given in return is a map, full of different symbols whose different labels are 'houses', 'signs', 'planets' and 'aspects'. Each of these different symbols is meant to convey a specific ancient archetype, in which can be seen the philosophical constructs of what those who created it (which is unknown, by the way). The purpose of an astrologer of course, is to take all of these different archetypes spread out across this map, and make a coherent structure out of them which explains the entity according to the the spaces of the heavens and the stars. Now to one who does not understand this process, this seems an impossible task. We have returned to the student+mother conundrum. Yet what I understood quickly after study of the charts along with a book, is what is needed is what I have dubbed "emotional math" where one moves back and forth between logic and intuition (oooooh, spooky...) to decide what it is that these symbols mean when they are added together in the way that they are aligned. For example: a taurean mars in the sixth house could possibly mean that the entity involved would put lots of their energy towards work in a slow and practical way with emphasis on the big picture of how this would practically help the situation or situations. Yet once again this is only one interpretation and each astrologer has slightly different interpretations because they each have different philosophies and feelings on the subject matter. The point is that this 'emotional' math is something in which mass society has no understanding of at all. Thus if a few good minds spent some time working through this emotional math, see its inner workings and make some theories, we could have a whole new scientific field on our hands. Albeit the use of intuition makes most 'objective' scientists shy away, so as of yet we still have no ability to reach into this ancient frontier which is liable to be a veritable pandora's box of new information of reality. Thus explains the place of algebra in said title. This book has been created so that whatever may interest you is at hand whenever you choose to explore. It is an amassing of knowledge, the likes of which I have never seen. So I felt that, just for lack of properly represented information on the subject. That it was my duty to these, these indigo and crystal children, these pluto's in scorpio, these souls of atlantis, these young people at the dawning of the age of aquarius, along with this threshold of the apocalypse, need to hear these things. Need to understand them, and need to assimilate them into the culture, for soon, we will be the culture, and we are the ones we've all been waiting for. Again I cannot stress how important it is to remember that NONE OF THIS IS TRUE! it is merely a rationalization of mans perception of reality. My hope is that you read all of these chapters and learn to read between the lines. Find the truth the lies underneath these secret schools of magic and metaphysics, in hopes that you will find your truth, and maybe, a bit of yourself. In this book I have placed my spirit, heart and soul just for the chance that maybe, I could get to you.That just maybe, I could add what I could to help put the future in your hands, because now, more than ever before, we must take the future in our hands, before our current world philosophy destroys our only home and us with it. Please, won't you help to sing these songs of freedom?
- A manifesto is a list of one or two goals that an incumbent president says they'll accomplish if re-elected. If the president is re-elected and their manifesto goals aren't accomplished, voter cynicism will increase and people will be more likely to vote against the president, either for failing to meet their goals or outright lying about them. Democracy 2 has 11 possible manifesto goals.
* Reduce Violent Crime by 15%
* Increase Lifespan by 10%
* Improve Air Quality by 20%
* Cut Corporation Tax by 20%
* Increase Equality by 10%
* Abolish the Car Tax
* Abolish the Inheritance Tax
* Abolish the Airline Tax
* Abolish the Alcohol Tax
* Abolish the Tobacco Tax
* Abolish the Property Tax
- O Manifesto foi uma proclamação dada pelo Presidente Wilford Woodruff, quando a Igreja Mórmon descontinuou o casamento plural. Embora o Manifesto seja muitas vezes referido como uma Revelação, ele era realmente um comunicado a imprensa que foi dada pelo Presidente Woodruff revelando suas experiências. Uma versão do Manifesto aparece hoje, em Doutrina e Convênios como Declaração Oficial – 1. A quem interessar possa: Notícias da impressa, provavelmente de Salt Lake City foram amplamente divulgadas com propósitos políticos, declarando que a comissão de Utah, em seu recente relatório ao Ministro Interior, alega que ainda se realizam casamentos plurais e que quarenta ou mais casamentos dessa ordem foram celebrados em Utah desde junho passado ou durante o último ano; e também que em discursos públicos os líderes da Igreja ensinaram, incentivaram e estimularam a continuação da prática da poligamia – Eu, portanto, como presidente de A Igreja de Jesus Cristo dos Santos dos Últimos Dias , pela presente e da maneira mais solene declaro serem falsas tais acusações. Nós não estamos ensinando poligamia, ou seja, casamento plural, nem permitindo que qualquer pessoa adote tal prática; e nego que quarenta ou qualquer outro número de casamentos plurais tenham sido celebrados durante esse período em nossos templos ou em qualquer outro lugar do Território. Relatou-se um caso em que as partes declaram ter sido o casamento realizado na Casa de Investiduras, em Salt Lake City na primavera de 1889, mas não consegui descobrir quem realizou a cerimônia; o que quer que tenha sido feito nesta questão, foi sem meu conhecimento. Em conseqüência dessa alegada ocorrência, a Casa de Investiduras foi, por ordem minha, demolida sem demora. Sendo que o Congresso promulgou leis proibindo o casamento plural, leis essas que foram pronunciadas constitucionais pelo tribunal de última instância, eu aqui declaro minha intenção de submeter-me a essas leis e de usar minha influência junto aos membros da Igreja que presido, para que eles façam o mesmo. Nada há em meus ensinamentos à Igreja nem nos de meus companheiros, durante o tempo especificado, que se possa razoavelmente interpretar como imposição da poligamia ou estímulo a ela; e quando algum Élder da Igreja usou palavras que pareciam transmitir tal ensinamento, foi prontamente repreendido. E agora declaro publicamente que meu conselho aos santos dos últimos dias é que se abstenham de celebrar casamentos proibidos pelas leis do Pais. Wilford Woodruff - Presidente de A Igreja de Jesus Cristo dos Santos dos Últimos Dias. O Presidente Lorenzo Snow apresentou o seguinte: "Reconhecendo Wilford Woodruff como Presidente de A Igreja de Jesus Cristo dos Santos dos Últimos Dias e atualmente o único homem na Terra a possuir as chaves das ordenanças de selamento, proponho que o consideremos plenamente autorizado, em virtude de sua posição, a expedir o Manifesto que foi lido em nossa presença, datado de 24 de setembro de 1890; e que, como a Igreja reunida em Conferência Geral, aceitemos a sua declaração concernente aos casamentos plurais como oficial e obrigatória." O voto para apoiar a moção foi unânime. Salt Lake City, Utah, 6 de outubro de 1890.
- [mid 17th century] From [[w:|]][[Category: derivations|Manifesto]], from manifestare, from [[w:|]][[Category: derivations|Manifesto]] manifesto (“‘to make public’”)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)