The Money Trust

TO THE JOKER:

HERE I HOLD A GOLD COIN

What a false illusion thou art to human mind ! How cruelly thou deceivest thy possessor and those who covet thee ! Thou buyest for me by thy betrayal of mankind. Thou didst tax my energy to gain thee, and thy discount has lost to me and my fellow-men the greatest blessings of a continent, as well as the principal products of our toil. Few indeed are they who know and understand thy seductive power. We shall expose thy falseness so that our children shalt not be deceived by thee.

General Observations-Charles Lindbergh,
Banking and Currency and the Money Trust

What has been transpiring in the economy as of late is a wonderful exercise for me.

When you see the credibility of scientists and an economist open themselves to scrutiny "to wonder", if they are just replaying the inevitable and not really offering anything new?

The market prices of commodities vary from day to day and often several times a day. This occurs when there is no radical difference in the proportion of the supply and the natural demand. This fact is conclusive proof that our system is controlled by manipulators and fundamentally wrong. I have sought to elucidate this problem within this volume and have suggested a plan which, if adopted, would make the people the master of the world, instead of the present master—THE MONEY TRUST.

I am repeating the article the article here for consideration.

Is it more astonishing that a God created all that exists in six days, or that the natural processes of the creative universe have yielded galaxies, chemistry, life, agency, meaning, value, consciousness, culture without a Creator. In my mind and heart, the overwhelming answer is that the truth as best we know it, that all arose with no Creator agent, all on its wondrous own, is so awesome and stunning that it is God enough for me and I hope much of humankind.

BEYOND REDUCTIONISM: REINVENTING THE SACRED

Stuart Alan Kauffman (28 September 1939) is an US American theoretical biologist and complex systems researcher concerning the origin of life on Earth. He is best known for arguing that the complexity of biological systems and organisms might result as much from self-organization and far-from-equilibrium dynamics as from Darwinian natural selection, as well as for proposing the first models of Boolean networks.

Kauffman presently holds a joint appointment at the University of Calgary in Biological Sciences and in Physics and Astronomy, and is an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Philosophy. He is also an iCORE (Informatics Research Circle of Excellence) [1] chair and the director of the Institute for Biocomplexity and Informatics.

BEYOND REDUCTIONISM

See:Reinventing the Sacred: A New View of Science, Reason, and Religion (Hardcover)

Well now, I have followed the work of those whose ultimate destination has been by seeking results from LHC as to the nature of some Higg's field that would bring together an organizational effort to the particle of nature. Now I should be much clearer here just as Stuart Kauffman should.

Higgs Fields

A Higgs field (named after a Scottish physicist Peter Higgs) is a field supposed to be responsible for the genesis of inertial mass (and, because of Einstein's equivalence principle, gravitational mass). When the universe is extremely hot, a Higgs field (which is supposed to have a certain curve of potential energy; as regards the shape of this curve, there is no unique consensus, except for a certain general feature, among the physicists) exerts a wild influence; but we will neglect this here. Once the universe cools down enough, below a certain temerature, the Higgs field assumes a certain value (i.e. a value of the Higgs field) which corresponds to the lowest energy level (i.e. the potential energy is zero, but the value of the Higgs field is nonzero; this level may be called vacuum). And this energy level continues to prevail throughout the whole universe (uniform, nonzero Higgs field).

So here I am alone thinking about this self organization that goes on and I picked out Stuart Kauffman's book because I know that such a view is garnered by the likes of Lee Smolin, that it presents a challenge for me.

Been at it long enough to know there are opposing views and methods to determination that shall judge one's approach as too the "nature of reality." I am not going to go into the definition of this nature of reality but to assume that such a definition will become apparent in the selection of this title and the consequence of choosing Stuart's book. My reasons for expanding here under this title of the new Garden of Eden.

How it it that I could ever compare the very nature of the "Arch Model" to the insightful development of us as participants in the nature of reality that we could shape our destines and not think us less then a participant in this adventure called life.

At 9:15 AM, August 18, 2008, Blogger Plato said...

Experimentally, this became a basis for exploration which implanted experimental choice departures from euclidean space, which is flat.

This was a mathematical adventure of "pure thought" toward the process of interpreting this mathematics in the natural world.

How could one say the experimental process was first when such thought had to exist? It had to already exist in nature for us to test the theorization by definition.

So we emulate the process by experimentation. Oh sweet "spooky action at a distance?"

One should not think that such an avenue of research had not taken me down this road in regards to spooky, that I would not have adventured too, entanglement, or scattering amplitudes, that I would not of looked at Young's experiment and thought about the photon's travel. The combination or how calorimeters have been used to discern this interaction in the decay process.

Has Reductionism run to it's limit?

This is what Stuart Kauffman did not realize when thinking about reductionism or what Robert Laughlin spoke of toward the idea's of self organizational attributes of those things that gather, while we take them apart. It's not that they ever came to a definition of this limit, but tried to explain reductionism away, by the introduction of new ways, new approaches.


The Keystone

ON one side of this arch is an approach to Reductionism, and on the other, is emergence. The keystone, is the Equivalence principal.

Zeitgeist the Addendum

I am interested in what people think of this Movie.

For me it is the issue of differences between a monetary system, and a resource based system. The Resource Based system was held in my mind, much more relevant to the way the world should be going. If your of an opposing opinion why would you think the monetary system is better over the resource based one?



See:Zeitgeist the Movie
Also see:Zeitgeist: Addendum on Google Video

Welcome to the Official Site for 'Zeitgeist, the Movie' (2007) & its sequel 'Zeitgeist: Addendum' (2008). Since the emergence of the project in late June, 2007, many other websites, organizations and posts have fallaciously claimed connections to the works. Please note that these two productions are our only media expressions.

Likewise, Zeitgeistmovie.com and its developing activist site:TheZeitgeistMovement.com are the only web entities we have produced.

'Zeitgeist, The Movie' and 'Zeitgeist: Addendum' were created as Not-for-Profit expressions to communicate what the author felt were highly important social understandings which most humans are generally not aware of. The first film focuses on suppressed historical & modern information about currently dominant social institutions, while also exploring what could be in store for humanity if the power structures at large continue their patterns of self-interest, corruption, and consolidation.

The second film, Zeitgeist: Addendum, attempts to locate the root causes of this pervasive social corruption, while offering a solution. This solution is not based on politics, morality, laws, or any other "establishment" notions of human affairs, but rather on a modern, non-superstitious based understanding of what we are and how we align with nature, to which we are a part. The work advocates a new social system which is updated to present day knowledge, highly influenced by the life long work of Jacque Fresco and The Venus Project.

I am not after encouraging sheep but of opening the door to a creative faucet of experience that is promoted to one of sharing and not one that caters to fear.

The economy needs to be looked at under a "different light" in order that we see what has happened. So that we may free ourselves from the illusions we have fallen under. I am not advocating cultist idealizations here but a truthful look at what we can do to change the way we want this planet to go.

Operational Definition Regressed to the Arts

It is necessary at this time to show that such a procedure evolved here in Dialogos of Eide had to be taken to be interpreted as a an acceptance and assumption of the way the world "is" according to scientific elaborations given in the interpretation of the "back ground."

For example, the weight of an object may be operationally defined in terms of the specific steps of putting an object on a weighing scale. The weight is whatever results from following the measurement procedure, which can in principle be repeated by anyone. It is intentionally not defined in terms of some intrinsic or private essence. The operational definition of weight is just the result of what happens when the defined procedure is followed. In other words, what's being defined is how to measure weight for any arbitrary object, and only incidentally the weight of a given object.

When observe and held in face of the scientific valuation and spoken to in the science world, the veritable conceptual acceptance of any model is its amalgamation into the way one would move into the world. This is a bold step, because you have accepted the way in which such a proposal has been put forward to demonstrate how one may now see the world.

Operational definitions are inherently difficult — arguably, even impossible — to apply to mental entities, because these latter are generally understood to be accessible only to the individual who experiences them and are therefore not independently verifiable. According to this line of thinking, a person's mental image of a brick cannot be operationally defined because it cannot be measured from outside that person's mood. Philosopher Daniel Dennett has argued that first-person operationalism is possible and desirable, using the anthropological version of the scientific method to bring the mind fully into the third-person realm required by science. As part of the Multiple Drafts Model of consciousness, Dennett defines a process he calls heterophenomenology, by which the mental is defined operationally in terms of the observed behavior of the subject.

Held in relevance to use of the word background it is necessary to consider the depth and potential of the human being in light of the bulk perspective assigned to that background to demonstrate that the depth and generation of the human interaction is more defined by more then just the compartmentalization assigned to human action.

Ir was necessary in my own mind to recognize the greater foliation of the response to stimuli as a governing factor in the emotive expressions of the human endeavour then just to let it r,main as a consequence without a possible course of direction, as an effect.

Heterophenomenology ("phenomenology of another not oneself"), is a term coined by Daniel Dennett to describe an explicitly third-person, scientific approach to the study of consciousness and other mental phenomena. It consists of applying the scientific method with an anthropological bend, combining the subject's self-reports with all other available evidence to determine his or her mental state. The goal is to discover how the subject sees the world him- or herself, without taking the accuracy of the subject's view for granted.

Heterophenomenology is put forth as the alternative to traditional Cartesian phenomenology, which Dennett calls "lone-wolf autophenomenology" to emphasize the fact that it accepts the subject's self-reports as being authoritative. In contrast, heterophenomenology considers the subject authoritative only about how things seem to him or her.

In other words, heterophenomenology requires us to listen to the subject and take what he or she says seriously, but to also look at everything else available to us, including the subject's bodily responses and environment, and be ready to conclude that the subject is wrong even about his or her own mind. For example, we could determine that the subject is hungry even though he or she doesn't recognize it.

The key role of heterophenomenology in Dennett's philosophy of consciousness is that it defines all that can be — or needs to be — known about the mind. To quote Dennett, "The total set of details of heterophenomenology, plus all the data we can gather about concurrent events in the brains of subjects and in the surrounding environment, comprise the total data set for a theory of human consciousness. It leaves out no objective phenomena and no subjective phenomena of consciousness."

Dennett stresses that heterophenomenology does not dismiss the first-person perspective, but rather brackets it so that it can be intersubjectively verified by empirical means, allowing it to be submitted as scientific evidence. This can be seen by how heavily heterophenomenology relies on adopting the intentional stance toward subjects.

An Artistic Valuation of Science

If I can't call it science, then what shall I call it?:)


Yellow, Red, Blue by Wassily Kandinsky 1925; Oil on canvas, 127x200cm; Centre Georges Pompidou, Paris

See:An Artistic Valuation of Science

The Library

AS some of you know, earlier, I made reference to a new blogging place that I was working on that I may be moving too. The idea here is that the current blogging place called, "Dialogos of Eide" only reflects the work to materializing ideas that I have had about "information and the back ground" that it supplies for a philosophy that was developing from very "ancient ideas" in regard to not only to Plato, but of the thoughts about the Pythagoreans that has stayed with me throughout as well.

How unscientific it may seem that I have taken a long journey through many science blogging sites to learn of what makes a scientist, to see the behaviour throughout that industry, to have it reflect more the general population, then to say that it sits alone, as a 5% representative of what most do not look at or even concern themself from a general societal point of view.

It is well known the procedural methods adopted to say that herein then, I move forward with the developmental artistic valuation I have assign this new endeavour to illustrate what some may say is subjective in regard to only what scientists can offer in an essay, to say that Einstein's thoughts actually carried some weight with me.