a new understanding of today, time and space.

did your parents teach you about god?

did your parents teach you nationalism?

did your parents teach you American exceptionalism?

do you still hold these beliefs?

if so, then you haven’t grown or change or become something new…
since childhood… sad actually… that you haven’t changed since childhood

you have no courage of challenging your beliefs and no
strength of character…….

relying on old, tired, worn out clichés of how great America is
and how white is right and of American exceptionalism……

you small person who bleats of hate and anger and biases of childhood…
USA, USA, USA, USA, USA………… and the Jews control everything
and hate everything different than you… because you are weak and a coward…
afraid to challenge your childhood biases and myths and prejudices………

proud of the courage of your convictions…
but lacking the courage for an attack upon your convictions……

take away your hatred and your childhood biases and prejudices and what
do you leave behind? nothing… nothing at all…and that is your fear…
you hope no one ever figures out that outside of your childhood indoctrinations,
you have nothing… nothing at all…not courage, not bravery, nothing…
just weakness and cowardliness…

Kropotkin

so we return to existentialism… and its understanding of
the “authentic” life…….

and this revolves around the question of our childhood indoctrinations…

if we accept and act upon those childhood indoctrinations of
myths, biases, habits, prejudices and superstitions…
then we operate under the tenants of the past…
the truths of our grandfathers and great grand fathers
exists within those childhood indoctrinations…

but can you call living with the myths and biases and prejudices
of the past, being authentic? I don’t see how…if we believe
in the myths of nationalism and the myth of American exceptionalism,
then what exactly is “Authentic” about you? you don’t have thoughts or
understandings of the world based on your experiences and your interpretations of
the world… someone else has given to you, your understanding of the world…
how is that “being Authentic”?

the false, phony distorted understanding of the world you have is from
your society and your state and your church and your parents, but
what is yours? and without bringing something of you into this mix of
childhood indoctrinations, what exactly is your contribution?

your very beliefs you act upon and willingness to die for, isn’t your beliefs
or myths or prejudices or biases or superstitions… those beliefs and myths
and prejudices were given to you by someone else as your means of
orientation into the world…what your place in the world was given to
you by others…….your parents, your state, your church, your culture…
and because you lack the courage of overcoming your limitations,
you live and die by, the childhood indoctrinations you were given…

and living and dying by childhood indoctrinations isn’t what I would
call, “Authentic”…… to be “Authentic”… one must bring to the table
the understanding of the world brought by your overcoming your childhood
indoctrinations……….

only in overcoming can you really and truly be “Authentic” because
now the beliefs and thoughts and prejudices and myths are yours
and yours alone…… derived from the blood, sweat and tears of
the overcoming of your childhood……….

there is no way to overcome without being in the Zen moment…
where everything is tossed up and down and all around…
you can only reach being truly “Authentic” by the path of most
resistance…wrestling with god… as the ancient Hebrews said…….
it is a tough road to follow, to overcome and find out who
you truly are…to become who you are isn’t easy and it isn’t
very pretty and it is full of dark days of doubt and fear……

but to become “Authentic” one must pass through the darkness into
the light of becoming who you are……….

to find your possibilities, not other people or myths or prejudices possibilities…
but your possibilities…that is what it means to be “Authentic” to discover who you
are……and that is only possible taking the high road into the mountains of self learning…

the path of least resistance is the path to being “Inauthentic”………

you want to be “Authentic”, take the least traveled road… and be ready to
suffer… for the only path to be “Authentic” is the hard painful road of
overcoming……

Kropotkin

Peace and silence is our birthright.
It’s something men flee from.
They fight, and pull, and scream, rather than embracing peace and acceptance.

I consider it a memetic disease of sorts.
It spreads faster than it is overcome.
Therefor it exists.

Our original, undivided, silent, wordless mind, is an authentic self.
It’s still there, but you have to de obstruct it.

K: this “original, undivided, silent wordless mind”

think about it… you are born…for that second and it is only a second…
you are that “original, undivided, silent, wordless mind”…

from that second to the second you die, you have incoming
sensations, events, experiences that your senses record and
and transmit to your brain…… a newborn doesn’t have the tools
to interpret these experiences as recorded by the senses…
the ear hears and the newborn doesn’t have the experience or
knowledge to understand that noise… it is just noise and nothing
more to the newborn… the newborn has nothing to judge or
understand that noise…we who are older and have experience,
might know that noise as talking…but it takes a while to make
sense (from a newborn perspective) what talking is and what’s its
purpose…so that is why dad’s and mom’s will talk to the newborn
and say, “da-da” and point to themselves… its an attempt to
have the newborn understand that the noise, “da-da” means
something…and the newborn won’t understand what “da-da”
means because understanding requires connections from the
experience or event or person to another experience or event or
person……

I say “da-da” to a newborn and point to myself…now am I pointing out that I am a man,
or a father, or someone without hair, or have facial hair or wear Hawaiian
shirts? what exactly does “da-da” mean? to understand what a “da-da”
is, what a father is, actually quite a sophisticated piece of thinking…

now think back to our original thought…

that we must return to our “original, undivided, silent, wordless mind”

how does that “original, undivided, silent wordless mind” understand
such concepts as “da-da” or father or what talking is?

how does an “original, undivided, silent, wordless mind”
understand the world? how does comprehension work
in a “original, undivided, silent, wordless mind”?

this concept of the “original, undivided, silent wordless mind”
really strikes me more of the metaphysical, mysticism that
people like to engage with…instead of just sticking with the
facts as we know them…………

there is no evidence of any type for a “original, undivided, silent, wordless, mind”
it is more of the wishful thinking school of thought…it reduces the
problem of existence down to “just simply become what one once was”…
simple become, “original, undivided, silent, wordless mind” just become that
once again……. but we were never that in the first place……

there is no evidence that we were once, “original, undivided, silent, wordless mind”
so there is nothing to go back to…the point is, the journey of life, is forward…
always forward… that is the problem of existence… the path is forward, never
back…you can’t solve anything by looking back or returning to something that
never was………….the problem of existence is always ahead of us, never behind us…

what am I to do? what is the moral life? what are my possibilities?
who am I? what is my place in the universe?

all questions of the forward kind… now the past may provide clues to
your understanding of, who you are………and the past may provide clues
to, what are my possibilities? and what is the moral life? is certainly
something the past may help us answer, but the question itself faces
forward, not back…the past experiences may aid us in understanding
but is not a guarantee of future performance or understanding……

we strive forward, but understand looking past……

it is rather hard to explain, I will grant you…but it is important to
try to understand………

there is one direction and one direction only for human beings…
and that is forward, into the future… and that is where our
mind and thinking and understanding must lie…to return
to some mystical “original, undivided, silent, wordless, mind”
is to reject one of the basic problems of existence…
everything flows forward, never backward…………
and our understanding of who we are and what are
our possibilities must also flow forward, not backwards…

who am I? what is possible for me? what is my journey?

answers that require, demand us to look forward, not backwards…

Kropotkin

after posting the above, a sentence came to mind…

Deus ex Machina……a plot devise whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem
in a story is suddenly and abruptly resolved by an unexpected and seemingly
unlikely occurrence……

so we have an seemingly unsolvable problem in a story that is suddenly and
abruptly resolved by an unexpected and seemingly unlikely occurrence…

so we have the problem of existence…… and how do we like to solve this
problem? a Deus ex Machina is the answer… we have metaphysical
and mystical answers to the problem of existence……….
god or perhaps this return to the “original, undivided, silent, wordless, mind”
or perhaps we return to some original state of mind……
whatever your answer is to the problem is, it must, must come
from the original experiences…….in other words, we must fashion
an answer to the question of the problem of existence to something
within existence…within our experiences…we cannot resort
as Greeks plays do, to some Deus ex Machina which is an outside plot
device… like god or being saved or confessing one’s sins or throwing yourself
on the mercy of god or some other plot devise to solve this problem
of existence……….the answer to the problem of existence lies within
existence, within experience… within our reach… and not in some
outside plot device…

to say, we must reach some metaphysical and/or mystical state or becoming
is to say, our only answer to the question of existence is the Deus ex Machina………

I emphatically reject this notion… the answer and the only answer that
matters lies in this life, in our experiences, in our existence……
therein lies the answer to the problem of existence…

Kropotkin

But Peter, does the thought ever occur to you if you’re aware, that maybe the machine that may work, is one where. at death, the thought of what’s at the other side, there may be something or some One ?

K: and that is the classic idea of Deus ex Machina…
on the other side “may be” something or someone…

so your thought is to that something or someone instead
of, on the here and now… you neglect the present time
and place for a “may be”…… in hopes of being saved or seating
at the right hand of god… which by the way, sounds really, really,
really boring………

not me…I stand with the here and now, instead of some
“may be”…

Kropotkin

Peter,

I meant it literally, thoughts. in the here and now about what your thougjtsay be , when faced with imminent death, - whether Then, may you be thinking about the other side.

Your tho long now about it does not exclude your thinking about THEN, even if you believe that living in the now does exclude the Then.

think about what has happened in your life…

think about how much happened by the already set programming
you have as a human being…and think about how much happened
without any input from you…you have very few choices in life…

you are born… not much of a choice there… you grow from
a newborn to a toddler…no choice there…you learn langague,
and you learn to crawl and you learn to walk and you learn to say no…

all of this follows the programming set in the DNA…
it is instinctual… and you grow all the while…
nothing to think about there… it just happens…

and as you grow, you more able to do more things…
again, as set by your programming…math, langagues,
science, the humanities… all things you learn as you grow up
you don’t teach a 4 year old science because they won’t be able to
understand it just yet, they aren’t developed enough…but you can teach them
stuff they can handle at 4 years of age…again, per programming…

and you grow into an adult… you have a certain height and weight
and hair color and skin color… and none of which you have any control over…

as you age, you change… your body changes…at one point in time,
I could run 15 miles a day and do a 5 minute mile… at one point in time…
today, I can’t… simple as that… I have aged to the point where I can’t do these
things anymore…and none of it is within my control…

and I face other things out of my control… I am slowly balding… I still have
hair… but nowhere as much as I used to…I have become an old man…
and I cannot control that… and I shall get grow older…

the simple tasks I can do today, will become harder and harder to do…
and then one fine day, I shall be on death’s door… another thing I had
no control over and another thing that is a part of this thing called life…

death is just another step along the line of life… like gaining hair and then
many years later losing hair… like being 5 foot 8 inches tall… I have no control
over that and I have no control over that next step of death…

I can wail and moan and cry over my fate… but it is a fate every single
human being has faced and will face… it is just another step…
one I cannot forestall or change……….it will happen…….
I will just be another name in the obituary column…
I will cease to exist and a few years later, be completely and totally
forgotten……. it is as if I never existed…
and there ain’t a dam thing I can do about it…

it is just another step in being a living creature…

being at death’s door……… I will knock and boldly open that door…

what else can I do?

why would I be afraid of something that is as natural as losing my hair or
being 200 pounds or being 5ft 8……… it is just another process that I will
go through as I have gone through many, many other processes in my life…

to be afraid of death is to be afraid of growing my hair or having my nails grow…

and it is as natural as growing my hair or having my nails grow………

just another step…maybe the last, maybe the first… who knows…
and frankly who cares… because you have no control over that either…

being at death’s door doesn’t frighten me…

and it shouldn’t frighten you because it is just another natural step
we take as human beings and a step we have no control over anyway…

so at death’s door, knock… and boldly enter………
it is just another door and you have passed through thousands
of doors in your life… death’s door is just another one…

Kropotkin

True, but its also instinctual to fear, and even animals fear each other, but underneath that fear is the sub instinct for continued existence and although animals don’t know what that is, it is the fear of losing it which is bothering them.

No human can admit to not to fear the unknown

K: an what exactly is the unknown?

and can we have any control over something that is unknown?

and as far as fear goes, we can control our fear… and we can even
rise above fear… we needn’t allow fear to control us…

as I have grown older, I have feared less…
when I was younger, I had fears, oh my, did I fear…
I was afraid of death and afraid of life and afraid of heights
and afraid of young republicans… I had all sorts of fears…

now that I am old… I see no reason for those fears…
ok, be afraid of young republicans… they are fucking evil…
but the rest…ahhh, whatever…

my problem is no longer fear but pure lazyness…
little seems to be worth the effort it takes…

but that is another problem for another day…

Kropotkin

as I have been sick for a couple of weeks, I had to call in sick
the last couple of days and most likely will call in sick tomorrow…
I have been laying low and resting… doing some reading…

and I have noticed something… I jumped ahead a bit… instead of
David Hume, I have been reading 19 and 20 century writers…

and after so much reading Hume and about Hume, I have noticed that
the writers of the 19the and 20th century are so much more complex
then Hume… compared to later writers, Hume is complicated but not
complex… in other words, Hume is pretty simple compared
to later writers… compare ummm, Heidegger to Hume…or Hume to Kierkegaard…
Kierkegaard was writing less then a 100 after Hume’s death and yet it seems to
be a million years after his death… Hume’s concerns are rather simple
and straightforward compared to Kierkegaard or to Heidegger………

the problem of existence for Hume is nowhere as complicated as the
problem of existence is for anyone in the 19th or 20th century including
Kierkegaard or Heidegger…and why is that? I have suggested that
it is in large part to the changing modes of production as Marx would call them…
in other words, the Industrial revolution…

the world is simpler for Hume and it shows in his writings……

by the time of Kierkegaard, the world had dramatically change
and become far more complicated………

and today? we have so many things going on that we can’t even focus
on one or two… how we can philosophize when we can’t even keep up
with the many events and experiences going on around us…

for that is, in part, the point of philosophy, to understand experiences
and events…but as I have suggested before… I believe philosophy is
about understanding experiences in terms of values…
science can tell us about a certain experiences…for example thunder…
and what created thunder… and religion can say, thunder
is a result of god’s displeasure with us……. but thunder is not
a philosophical matter because it doesn’t involve values…

science can tell us that love is a chemical combination
in the brain and religion can tell us that love is a gift
from god… but philosophy can tell us the value of love…
and philosophy can tell us that love has a greater value then
hate or anger and philosophy can tell us why love has
a greater value…………

so we have two points, one is the world is a far more complicated place
today, then in the time of David Hume and we must face this complicated
place in our philosophy and second, philosophy deals with values…

so, the values that Hume dwelt with are simpler then the values
we deal with today because the world is a far more complicated place today…

and we must change and adapt to the far greater complicate world of today…
but this is why we haven’t had a “great” philosopher of late because the
the task at hand is a massive undertaking…what values are the values
of today and why should we pick certain values over other values…

given the complicity of today, our understanding of values is
far too limited…and that is too bad… we must expand our
thinking and wondering to the very edge of what is philosophy in
order to encompass all the values that are possible today…

a tall order indeed…

Kropotkin

I admire You, but a very basic dear is related to the question. ’ to be or not to be’

That is before the door is crossed. It is an unknown, and could not be answered then, nor could it now. It’s alike asking a fetus in the time of conception, whether it wants to keep on developing. Even now, with the unresolved issue of early assisted termination of life, the question remains.

The answer I feel will never be solved . as it hasn’t with abortion .

M: I admire You, but a very basic dear is related to the question. ’ to be or not to be’

That is before the door is crossed. It is an unknown, and could not be answered then, nor could it now. It’s alike asking a fetus in the time of conception, whether it wants to keep on developing. Even now, with the unresolved issue of early assisted termination of life, the question remains.

The answer I feel will never be solved . as it hasn’t with abortion .

K: several points… first a fetus has no understanding because it has no experiences
to judge upon… to judge requires context and context is just another word
for experiences… secondly don’t be too sure what the fetus might say about being
asked to keep on developing… for I was an fetus that was damaged by German measles
and lost most of my hearing and if you had asked me if I wanted to continue to
“developed” I might have said no, because trust me when I say, life as
a handicap person is very, very tough and I wouldn’t wish that fate upon
anyone… Ok, maybe IQ45 but that is to so he might get a conscience or
develop some feelings about his fellow human beings… but him being
a narcissistic psychopath, means he will never develop a conscience
or an understanding of what it means to be human…

Kropotkin

Peter, by now we can perhaps talk in a manner which befits friends. And that is, our conversation. Includes certain things we may have learned from ea h other. At one point in time when we were both going to Europe , we exchanged some items relating to our families , that of our relationship ships with our respective daughters, the substance of which escapes me, thank god perhaps because my recent memory has always been very deficient in terms of instant recall.

At any rate , the reason for this mention , is that I recall principles and not particulars, and as it happens to relate to our particular discussion here.

So it struck me , that the question. of recall may effectively block existential and teleological problems, in particular the recall of fetuses and ordinary experienced people , here in this context.

The big issue here, has to do with inherited and experienced types of mindsets, and this puts am entirely different spin on our conversation .

How can we assert without doubt that the genetic inheritance does not include large general neuron pathways, which pre form functions have to do with major decisions in later life, whether and irrespective to the stage of a human finds, or, is found to be determinate in his later development?

Must the standard of Darwinian supposition preclude the mind as opposed to the brain function?

Darwin was shown to have undermined a very credible showing,neural adaptation as the primal function of.coding , as opposed to biological natural selection? : causing that particular Viennese biologist’s suicide.

These last.two paragraphs , omit as You wish, they may be out of.the general context of discussion.

So, what the fetus possesses in scripted neural pathways is not to say what the fetus ‘knows’ . but what he may come to know, if it is allowed to develop. If knowledge is qualified by what is signified as.conscious knowledge, then the objection has been properly summed into acceptable definition

Until then, we really do not know, even the minimum issue worth examining. that pertains to minimal understanding of a newborn child. There is no way as of yet to techno-interfere with living fetuses, although along the way,medical ethics objectively may overcome even that threshold.

I’m glad You brought in Trumpism, for.there’s no way any one could guess the high degree of a higher sense of public acceptance to his ideas: easily showing a new higher collusion between the general public with Congress and the Judiciary.

A year ago , this could not be even imaginable

The point taken fits Lambigous’ higher subjective notions, based on guesses that limits of tolerance to understanding may entail

These issues interface, and why not? They are philosophy, one’s perception perches on the high ground, another’s in the low, teleological AND/OR QM ( it primaryl logic)

A sensible middle has not yet developed, although by the same token, they have perhaps been already neuro scripted.

I want to answer Your next blog but since my blog and and Yours came through almost a.split minute apart, I’d rather edit my version rather than set up a faulty implication.

The Authority is suspect, because it can be scripted genetically, in many cases, and cannot be altered even with the aid of whatever: psychoanalysis, past life regression, or levels of experiencial gain of knowledge. It is not an either or logical acquisition, but an undifferentiated primal script, which can go either way.

we often understand by authority… which is to say,
we use authority to help us understand our experiences…
we might use god or the bible or Aristotle or capitalism
or communism…all of which is authority…
and which is used to explain who we are and what
is our purpose…

but is authority really an good means to use when
understanding? for example, we have the authority of
the bible…and many still proclaim its priority in leading
our lives… but, but think about the bible…the new testament
was written 2000 years ago and the old testament is much older…the
old testament was written by rural, farmers and sheep herders…

now my life today has nothing to do with rural farming…
how can the authority of the bible explain our modern age?

it was written for a rural, farming community… not our modern age
of cars and the industrial revolution and Hiroshima and Auschwitz…

I used to love this show called “connections” which followed
connections from one event to another event…
these connections were often obsure and took many different paths…
but some events and experiences are so far apart as to defy
any attempts to make a connection…and the authority of the bible
is so far apart from my experiences that to be useless…

so for me to use authority to understand my life is to
use very tenuous connections to connect my life to
said authority……. for example, to use Aristotle to understand
my life is a rather tenuous connection…… it might work if
I understand that Aristotle wrote for a Greek society over 2500 years ago…

context is everything… and context means experience……
so for me to use authority is to understand that authority
in context for me…even to use, say Descartes as an authority
is to know/understand that Descartes wrote over 300 years ago in a totally
different environment…….

so which authority should I use then? Marx or Freud or Adam Smith or Nietzsche?

or should I use some ism or ideology as authority? Capitalism or communism or
fascism or democracy? which recent authority should I use? as a modern man,
I can see the failure of the ism’s and ideologies of today…when the history books
are written about today, they will comment on the total collapse of our current
ism’s and ideologies………they, ism’s and ideologies, have failed because they are
about context and experiences which don’t match our current situation…
in other words, our ism’s and ideologies are about context and experiences
that no longer exist today…for example, capitalism has clearly failed…
how can we use that authority to base our lives upon if it is a failure…

we cannot depend upon authority because our current situation
has no other precedent… we cannot look to the past for solutions
because the past has no examples of our current situation…

we are facing problems stemming from the industrial revolution
that have never existed before… and so the past or authority won’t
solve our problems because the problems didn’t exist in the past…

the solution or solutions must come from the context/experience
of our times and not from authority……………

for example, biblical examples like, “be fruitful and multiply”
are not only no longer possible, but downright dangerous for
us… given our current situation…… we must find another solution
besides “be fruitful and multiply”…in the context of our times,
one of the overwhelming problems is overpopulation and that leads
to massive pollution and massive use of resources and the extinction of
species that we need in order for us to survive…

but ism’s like capitalism lead us to forsake intelligent solutions
in the name of the authority of the past…….

holding to authority like capitalism or the bible leads us to
take actions that endanger our generation and generations after us…

so what is the solution? learn to forsake those authorities
that we are taught like the biases and myths and prejudices
and superstitions of our childhood…

Kropotkin

Meno: Peter, by now we can perhaps talk in a manner which befits friends. And that is, our conversation. Includes certain things we may have learned from ea h other. At one point in time when we were both going to Europe , we exchanged some items relating to our families , that of our relationship ships with our respective daughters, the substance of which escapes me, thank god perhaps because my recent memory has always been very deficient in terms of instant recall.

At any rate , the reason for this mention , is that I recall principles and not particulars, and as it happens to relate to our particular discussion here.

K: ok…

M: So it struck me , that the question. of recall may effectively block existential and teleological problems, in particular the recall of fetuses and ordinary experienced people , here in this context.

K: ummm, not sure exactly what you mean?

M: The big issue here, has to do with inherited and experienced types of mindsets, and this puts am entirely different spin on our conversation .
How can we assert without doubt that the genetic inheritance does not include large general neuron pathways, which pre form functions have to do with major decisions in later life, whether and irrespective to the stage of a human finds, or, is found to be determinate in his later development?

K: these question of “inherited or experienced mindset” as of right now, lies outside
of our knowledge… we cannot assume for or against…

M: Must the standard of Darwinian supposition preclude the mind as opposed to the brain function?
Darwin was shown to have undermined a very credible showing,neural adaptation as the primal function of.coding , as opposed to biological natural selection? : causing that particular Viennese biologist’s suicide.

K: not sure again what you mean?

M: So, what the fetus possesses in scripted neural pathways is not to say what the fetus ‘knows’ . but what he may come to know, if it is allowed to develop. If knowledge is qualified by what is signified as.conscious knowledge, then the objection has been properly summed into acceptable definition
Until then, we really do not know, even the minimum issue worth examining. that pertains to minimal understanding of a newborn child. There is no way as of yet to techno-interfere with living fetuses, although along the way,medical ethics objectively may overcome even that threshold.

K: You at least acknowledge the number of assumptions made in these two paragraphs…
I try to avoid assumptions… often failing…….

M: I’m glad You brought in Trumpism, for.there’s no way any one could guess the high degree of a higher sense of public acceptance to his ideas: easily showing a new higher collusion between the general public with Congress and the Judiciary.
A year ago , this could not be even imaginable

K: I try to connect my thoughts with current events/experiences…

M: The point taken fits Lambigous’ higher subjective notions, based on guesses that limits of tolerance to understanding may entail
These issues interface, and why not? They are philosophy, one’s perception perches on the high ground, another’s in the low, teleological AND/OR QM ( it primaryl logic)

K: once again, I admit to failing to understand what you are saying…

M: A sensible middle has not yet developed, although by the same token, they have perhaps been already neuro scripted.

K: this is not clear to me…

M: I want to answer Your next blog but since my blog and and Yours came through almost a.split minute apart, I’d rather edit my version rather than set up a faulty implication.
The Authority is suspect, because it can be scripted genetically, in many cases, and cannot be altered even with the aid of whatever: psychoanalysis, past life regression, or levels of experiencial gain of knowledge. It is not an either or logical acquisition, but an undifferentiated primal script, which can go either way.
[/quote]
K: people like to follow authority because it is far easier to follow someone else
then to take control over one’s life… it is easier to follow someone else because
then blame can be shifted to the authority instead of where it belongs, at one’s
doorstep…this is the battle of the Enlightenment all the way through
existentialism…taking responsibility for one’s life…often begins with
denying authority and seaching for oneself as what is the correct path to
follow…in part, in part, is why I reject god and the bible and any
religious authority… because to follow the authority of god or the bible
or of religion is to abdicate my own personal responsibility for my actions…
to follow god or the bible or the koran or any religion is to give that authority
the right of judgment over me…now, I am not going to even accept the
authority of biology to determine my actions… be it the programming I
have within me… be it mental or be it DNA…I am more then my programming…

to become fully human… one must rise above DNA or the genetic programming
we have… we must become more then our base lower level of behavior
that is let loose by IQ45… we are more then that… much more…

following authority is to follow the previously written script by others…

I will not do that…I would rather fail on my own terms then
succeed on other’s/authority terms…

that is why I am not a fan of programming or genetic DNA or
following authority… my success or failure lies with me…
not the authority…………

I view success far differently then other people…
I have never pursued money… I haven’t pursued titles or fame
or even love… love just sort of found me…….

my success and failure comes from my search for understanding
of the world and of understanding myself… which for Kierkegaard
and Nietzsche and Socrates was the same thing.

I record my findings and I post them here…

and that for me is success… I ask for nothing more…

just let me live long enough to understand who I am and
to understand the problem of existence…

Kropotkin

All I can say is, that I totally accept and agree with most of Your opinions.

K: ok, but why? it is not about who, what, when, where or how, but why?
why do you accept anything I say? I could be completely batshit crazy…
but if you know why you accept my opinions, then it doesn’t matter if I am
batshit crazy…

Kropotkin

Because it sounds like Your ok with them. Apart from Your understandable dissatisfaction with current political affairs, I see you as a pretty functional and satisfied human being. If I didn’t approve you’re ideas., You could accuse me of having unrealistic assessments of You based on misrepresentations.

In particular, it is the problem with authority that concerns you above, and it is particularly to that I am responding to. That rejection of authority, gives rise to going your way as an independent, and I agree with that in today’s political climate.

There is problems with being an independent , as well, only today, someone high up in Trump’s organization, which I believe was a family member, said, that if an election was held today, he would vote independent.
Others say Trump may as well run on his own independent party next time around, if there was a next time, since his own party is so divided about him.

I’m bringing in Trump to square away with your independent stance, on account for your opinion against authority, and that you are warranted to such, in today’s climate.

This is mostly why I said I approve of what I thought of Your position as fitting.

As far as the why under the more general why of the great changes taking place , umderneath personal opinions, that question is not yet readily available, and and they are unfolding under our eyes, as a day to day event, in one of the most important times we ever lived in.

Other then that, I can have no other answers as to the why of having the opinions.you are having. That is for You to examine
as long you don’t start to try to figure out why do I have the opinions about why I am having the opinions about your opinions. That would involve us in an endless chain of why’s.

Besides most of my opinions of Your views are based on an appreciation of common sense and a gut level feeling on where You’re at , politically, in the broadest possible meaning.