Français Français Français        Smaller page          more readable page  

General Epistemology        Chapter V-6       

 

V-6 The Nature and cause of the Transcendence

 

As promised, here is a simple answer to the crucial question of the Transcendence, and its nature. This answer will probably surprise the religious, but it should especially interest them.

 

Attention, because of many accidents, all dogmas are forbidden in the theology laboratory. Anti-dualism protection blouses are mandatory, more the glasses with integrated indicator of type of logic (for sale in chapter I-7).

 

Throughout the previous chapters, we found natural or logical explanations to all the actions attributed to God: creation of the universe, creation of consciousness, free will, assigning a meaning and a purpose to this consciousness, foundations of morality, etc. without requiring any intent, or any pre-existing entity of any kind whatsoever.

Many scientists then invoke the principle of economy of hypothesis (note 45), to state that God would not exist. But the principle of economy of hypothesis is just an heuristic principle (note 2), it does not determine reality!

This cannot convince anyway the believer of any religion: indeed, we could not rule out whether He acts without leaving visible traces, for a whole bunch of very likely reasons: not to disturb our growth, testing us, etc. So we actually cannot assert positively that He would not exist.

Either way, scientists do not like this argument. They consider that, each time science explains naturally one of the activities attributed to God, then faith takes refuge in the unverifiable... But scientists are kinda in the same situation with a problem such as life on Mars: whenever we show its absence of one place, there are other places, further, deeper, that is, to say, also in the unprovable. And if Mars is really sterile, it will take centuries to be sure!

 

The explanation that I propose is more subtle, but also much more interesting.

 

To begin with, in order not to favour certain religions to the detriment of others, we shall no more talk of «God», but of the Transcendence, a much more general concept, but that all religions and spiritual currents can accept. Indeed, the spiritual goals necessarily transcend any material need or personal interest, and this is really what all forms of spirituality are dealing with.

 

We saw as soon as chapter III-3, that the logical self-generation process of the physical universe could have started with the arbitrary resolution of a logical paradox (which is the only thing allowing for such a process to reify without cause). Then we saw in chapter IV-6 that this paradox resolution could also feature a logical loop including the whole history of the universe. If this is the case, then the existence of an universe (including ours) is conditioned by certain criteria, or even by a certain result. In the same chapter, we saw such a creating logical loop at work (the appearance of the flight of birds), when the evolution of life leads to forced results, without yet anything visible to guide this evolution: no angels, no time machines... yet the tree of evolution has just the right form, even if nothing guided it! Finally we saw in the previous chapters how consciousness starts during pregnancy, how it establishes free will with a «magical moment», and finally how it sets its own goals, its own reality.

 

The idea is that all these special events, with no apparent logical cause, still have a common origin, or more accurately that they satisfy a common need. We have an example with the case of flight, which is so necessary that it appeared several times in the evolution, despite the extreme difficulty of simultaneously creating all of the necessary organs, and the Darwinian selection which would have mercilessly eliminated all the intermediate beings equipped with cumbersome non-functional appendages.

Then we can very well consider that this common need is the Transcendence, this very one that all the religions invoke, which mere existence would have logically provoked or guided all these events, in the manner described in this book. Of course this Transcendence is totally unrelated with the bearded God of the Sulpician art, it is even not a character, but a kind of common necessity for all the universes, see a simple logical cause. A kind of project, an ideal vision of beauty, peace and harmony, to which tends all life, all creation, and which would finally guide all the acts of creation, from the most physical (resolution of the founding paradoxes of physical universes, logical feedback of the evolution of life) to the most spiritual («magical moments» of free-will, which allow beings to evolve).

Such an objective is transcendent, as it can be reduced to nothing physical, nothing genetic, nothing biological. Maybe it even existed before all these things. It is also transcendent in the sense described in chapter I-9, as it cannot be described in an Aristotelian way. On the contrary, in order to understand it, we need the non-duality (chapter I-3) between several seemingly contradictory views. The various religions and spiritual concepts existing today provide such views in sufficient quantity for getting a sufficiently clear idea.

We cannot know if this transcendence existed «before» our universe, regardless of it (whatever the cause). The transcendent purposes can very well be the creation of consciousness, meaning that they appeared only recently in our universe. But even in this case, a logical feedback (chapter IV-6) validated the events which occurred before, during the creation of the universe, or during its infancy. This is possible without «time travel», if the final state validates the whole logical loop on which depends the existence of the universe. (And this is one of the possible explanations of anthropism, as seen in chapter IV-6)

However, we cannot either exclude a Transcendence which would exist in an absolute way, independently of any universe. In facts, we currently have no way of knowing in which case we are. The very fact that our universe would need It to exist would rather show that we would be in the case of an absolute Transcendence, independent of the universes.

 

But in one case as in the other, the Transcendence would be timeless, and so It would never change. This may look abstract, but it however has important practical consequences. First, It cannot either act or pursue a plan, in the meaning where human consciousness understands these words. This would also explain that we cannot interact with It, on the contrary for instance of extraterrestrials and angels who would manage our world. At last, we would not be able to receive practical information from It, and not seek Its help, regardless of the cruelties of the world.

This explains very simply why It does not intervene against the evil, without the need for any twisted theology or any sadomasochist «need» for evil or suffering. (that she never produced Itself).

Its influence would then be more abstract, such as promoting the events in a certain way, and the only way to receive Its help (providence) would be to place oneself into Its purpose. Oh, but we learn this in the catechism for the kids, hehehe

 

(It should be noted while we are on it, that this transcendent purpose is nor a mandatory way or thinking, neither an imposed model to which all human beings would have to submit. It is in the reverse, to eliminate any imposed thought or mandatory model, and develop certain qualities (non-duality, non-conflict, elimination of the ego and neurosis, beauty, etc.) allowing a great freedom of varied and original expression. We shall even see in chapter VI-2 on morals that, if some basic rules are mandatory (such as to not harm others), other secondary rules can be set differently depending on the species).

 

This vision of an abstract Transcendence will certainly please the religions with abstract views: Buddhist Dharmadatu, Tao, force of the Jedis. But the theistic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Brahmanism, Celtic or Nordic renewal, animism), are also rightfully admitted here: It is not a spiritual fault to represent the forces of the universe as characters that we love, who love us, who are on our side. It is even a very practical and very effective way of communion with them. And the confirmation comes from the Buddhist Tantras (Vajrayana), which basis is to use the Yidam (personal deity) as a meditation model. So that nothing prevents a Christian to do the same with the God of the Church, or with any Angel or Saint that he wishes. The result can as well lead to high achievements, as demonstrated by Saint Teresa of Avila, after many others.

Just that, according to this view, the probability of encountering in person the bearded God of the Sistine Chapel is strictly equal to the one of meeting Master Yoda.

But the probability of being inspirited by them is also equal, so...

 

This way of seeing things does not change anything essential in any religion, as long as each of these religions admits that it is only one way among others, non-dual, to present things. We still need, though, to do some cleaning of all the dogmas, and practice ecumenism at 100%, but this is unavoidable anyway. The dustbin of History also have a «religions» box, for waste sorting.

Nobody is obliged, but we must always bear the consequences of our choices

If we were unable to obtain any evidence of the existence of the bearded God, however it is completely impossible to deny that the vision of a harmonious world, of beauty and wisdom, is a perfectly appropriate choice, and perfectly within our reach, be it at the level of the orientation of our societies, or at an individual level. The only tools required are our decision, and psychoeducation to be able to implement it, as discussed in chapter V-12.

 

I am not a prophet, and I do not know when mankind will decide to do so.

However we can write without risk that as long as mankind renounces to this project, that is to ITS project, then it will be unfortunate, oppressed, if it does not simply disappear by some catastrophe it will have provoked from its only masochism (chapter VI-15). And those who remain into inaction have no right to complain, since, while doing so, they offer the power to the destructive minority. So whatever happens shall be only their choice, their responsibility. Only those who have engaged in a process of psychoeducation have the right to complain, to say they are victims rather than perpetrators.

 

But things could be even tougher, if this Transcendence acts in an impersonal way, as part of a logical feedback. Indeed, in this situation, there is no immediate or local cause which determines the choices, the switches of the evolution. No angels, no aliens, no temporal police. Simply, we are in an universe where the switches are in the right position. Only the universe with the switches in the right position exists, the universe with the switch in the wrong position does not exist. There is therefore no choice, other than to place oneself on the good track, or to be cast away as an old bandage with AIDS.

As seen in chapter IV-6, everything happens as if the evolution of birds had been guided, although there is no trace of such actions. Only exists the tree of evolution with all its branches in the right position, as if made purposely, but without any trace of action or will. The universe with birds exists, the universe without birds does not exist. And the bizarre intermediate beings, such as the four-winged birds, have been eliminated, as were all the dead branches leading nowhere, of which only scattered bones remain today, crushed by millions of years under the merciless weight of rocks.

 

This is just mechanical, logical actions, and as such totally insensitive and relentless. But if the evolution of the Earth is led by angels or by extraterrestrials, the situation is not necessarily more comfortable (see chapter VI-17 for more discussions on an extraterrestrial government or control of Earth). Indeed, our today world ruled by a small number of unknown persons organizing climate suicide or financial sadomasochism, while the majority is embroiled in the Stockholm syndrome (note 84), is the exact equivalent of a hostage taking by terrorists determined to kill. And we know that in such a situation, compassion or sensitivity are of no help, the only solution is the cold and rational action which will minimize the number of victims. And «rational action» often starts with «sorting»: only those who have decided to be part of the solution can hope for care, while those who chose to be part of the problem will just taste their own cuisine.

 

At last, if we are in this situation of logical feedback, then the transcendent project is forced to be realized in our universe. But this does not mean that it will be realized on Earth! We must carefully remember that, even in a logical feedback, each step results only of the actual results (chapter IV-6), in this case of our choices. Without choice, without individual action, there is no advance, and this branch of the tree of evolution remains a dead end, while others advance. And if one chooses to be in the failures, then one choose to be in the culled out. And in these times of climatic, nuclear, biological calls to suicide, it is more likely to happen before the next elections, as in ten million years. Not forgetting that, if Earth becomes a danger to other planets, then we may also receive more conventional «incentives»... (chapter VII-17)

The divine paradox

To «Believe» in this transcendence, in this project of the universe, is not imposed, and nobody will punish us if we do not enter the current. However, if we «do not believe», we remain isolated, alone in the universe, tied by our neurotic desires, with our only technologies to try to make the physical world less uncomfortable and futilely try to escape death.

While entering this general current gives us access, not only to the purpose, but also to all the spiritual means to access it... and even more, since the physical reality itself can sometimes give way to «impossible» events: «luck», repetitive dreams (chapter V-8), «coincidences», instants of Superconsciousness, NDE, etc.

 

The only known non-spiritual justification of religious faith is Pascal's wager (note 77). However, it is only a way to determine an optimal conduct from incomplete information, but not at all a scientific way to prove the existence of God.

 

But the attitude that I propose is going much further: it is not about determining a conduct from incomplete information, but about choosing to place ourselves in a reality where the transcendence exists, and allows us to interact with it. Better, we do not do this with «joining» something outside of us, such as a political party or a religion. We recognize that transcendence is part of our essential nature, that it is none other than our true personality, our real desires (the essential purposes of our consciousness, chapter V-5), that we are neither different nor separated of it. (Which means of course that we purify our personality of any auto-delusions, otherwise we wade in high rubbish, such as taking our neurosis or our sexual fantasies as divine injunctions...)

Doing so, we gain access to considerable resources, since each «magical moment» will be somehow «loaded» if favour of the essential purpose, that is in our favour. While refusing to do this, confines us in a reality, certainly less «expensive», but lesser and of poor quality, where this Transcendence does not exist, leaving us alone and without means to protect us from evil and death. And how do we protect from evil, if we do not even know to recognize it? To refuse the purpose of life connects us to suffering, manipulators, dictators.

 

No more than Pascal's wager, is this a «proof» of the existence of the Transcendence. However it is something much stronger than a scientific demonstration, and which has no equivalent in physics: we CHOOSE in which reality we are. Thus, we have nothing to prove, but only to choose!

 

This idea is fundamentally different from the «belief» which so much irritates the scientists. For a scientist, «to believe» is to deceive or to delude oneself, which has obviously no effect on reality. For a traditional religious person, «to believe», or «to have faith» is to have confidence... but still without evidence, which is at best only a skilful Pascal's wager. The vision that I propose is much stronger: if we choose to be in the good reality, then we determine this reality, or more specifically we connects to a different and much more interesting reality. Such an approach will thus give a value of absolute truth to the loving spiritual core of the religions (while not favouring any, because this truth is non-dual with all)

 

This concept of a double reality may seem strange, and even suspicious, in the eyes of any rational person. It is however strictly equivalent to the intricated quantum states which reificate in a single result. For this reason we can say that these two realities are intricated, and each one gets the result he is working for, the reality he tunes with.

This is only a simple consequence of the theory of the logical self-generation. We saw in chapter III-5, that a consciousness connected to a physical universe A by means of sensory organs, perceive this universe A as being «the reality», while he has no way to check the reality of other universes B, C, etc. This consciousness then perceives «only one reality», as this happens in the physics lab. However if we change this relationship, for example this consciousness dies in A, and comes in a paradise B, then this consciousness now perceives B as «the reality» and has no way to verify the reality of A! Again, he sees only «a single reality». This applies to perfectly separate universes. But in the case of the Transcendence, although all the consciousness are into A, some connect to Transcendence, while others do not. This Transcendence is not enough to appear as a full universe B, but It contains important determinants for the consciousness connected to It. Thus, these consciousness actually perceive a different reality, within the meaning of chapter III-5, while still obviously perceiving the same physical reality of the universe A, the same facts. And an unconnected person will see the «strange» behaviour of the connected person, and think that this connected person is «mad». Or the unconnected person will see «strange» events, and think that the connected person is very «lucky».

 

If it is still hard to swallow for the physicists, they think about the famous experiment in quantum mechanics where the position of the detector influence the quantum reality we are going to observe. So there will be two different realities according to the choice of the experimenter (although we cannot see them at the same time, even if two scientists have each a detector)

Note in passing, this notion of multiple reality is totally unrelated with a common mind control method in cults and in New Age, where false masters evade any moral challenge by saying that «we each have our own truth». (This trick is also used to prevent objective discussion on beliefs such as Atlantis, Roswell, etc.). Indeed the general laws of the operation of consciousness, and especially its ethical imperatives, are the same for everybody, and engage us all in the same way. And the crooks will probably not like «their truth» when death will make them taste it.

 

So we have the choice to join a stream which leads to wonderful versions of ourselves, living in paradise worlds, or to stand motionless in this limited physical world and its retarded capitalism, forced to fight forever in a competition without purpose, in which only death wins.

Maybe even that these visions of paradise lead to things even more fantastic, and still inconceivable to us.

 

On this path, our choice of religion is only a matter of personal preference. We are even not obliged to practice one. However, to obtain enough understanding of transcendence requests to study the metaphysical views of at least one monotheist (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism), one polytheistic or animist (Hinduism, Indian natives, Voodoo, Antic, Celtic revival...), and one with abstract Transcendence (Buddhism, Taoism, Celestine prophecy, Jedi... If it works with fiction as these last two, then it also necessarily works with all the others) more obviously the non-duality (chapter I-3) between the three, otherwise the exercise is totally useless, and even dangerous. (We shall especially pay attention to avoid syncretism, which is not a non-duality, and which can create problems of misunderstanding or sects). If we want to master our psychology (psychoeducation), meditation is essential. If we want to obtain spiritual achievements, we needs yoga and work on energy (Tantra). And in every cases, we need to love others, to respect of others, and non-violence. If not, our spirituality is like a car without a road: as luxury as it can be, it is just good at storing the tools for the garden.

Personally, I would insist on beauty, which seems not enough represented, while the enjoyment of beauty seems to be just as capable as sexual enjoyment to create powerful incentives to spiritual enlightenment (chapter V-10), with less hazard. This is the reason why I create Elven stories, and I think that a «elven» state is a plausible future for mankind, the next step on our evolution, see chapter VI-16.

But even ostracised religions like the neo-paganism bring a celebration of the raw sensations of life, in an appreciated counterpoint to a Christian search for purity.

 

An argument against the views presented in this chapter would be that it would be only «positive visualization», or even self-delusion. This argument is funny, because exactly the same argument can be applied to the atheistic materialism: If our choices create reality, then they do it exactly the same way with materialism. And all the experiments made by fanatic materialists show the same materialistic delusion, that they call a «scientific demonstration» of materialism, but which only maintain these people into their belief! In the extreme, we get a «Muggle science» (necessarily scientistist), which «does not see» what everybody else see, which maintains itself into the feeling of being the only true with its ridiculous fake «rational explanations», which censors any «heretical» publication, and gargles with expressions like «serious», «rational», «objective», «debunking pseudosciences», etc. all things that precisely they are no longer. As to the true science, the one which does not filter reality, it may have to hide again, like in the time of the religious persecutions, until it can help society without having to bother with media denigration.

In more, materialism and Atheism are a really bad trip, with competition, conflict, old age, disease, and nothing after death. What I said is that, in my theory, unlike an illusion or a belief, our choice to place ourselves into the flow of the Transcendence, and acting accordingly, can actually influence the reality we are in. For the spiritual reality, it is quite obvious, since this choice will make us for instance enter in communion with people we would otherwise ignore (this is not even magic!). But even the physical reality can be modified, even if it is less visible. People who have done the right choice can see that, even if they do not become rich or able to levitate, however things get arranged to optimize their spiritual trajectory: moments of Superconsciousness, dreams guiding them, etc.

 

And how do we connects to this Transcendence? I said by a choice. However it seem that in practice this is not enough. Indeed the choice (intellectual decision) must be accompanied by a feeling (a desire to know the truth, or to know the good), which can be called an aspiration. What is amazing is that this aspiration does not need to be strong, stable or accurate, or even not a conscious desire. Clearly, we do not need to be saints or a superman, anyone can do it. It even seems that we do not need to know what the Transcendence looks like, it is enough to want to know. So, I had my first moment of superconsciousness at thirteen, in a time where my feelings were still very confused and contradictory, way from any formal commitment. However I got my first usable spiritual information only a little later, at sixteen.

It is really incredible that so little is enough for switching from one reality to another... However, we shall see in chapter VII-3 on UFOs that we can do much better.

 

An important concept of Buddhism is the dedication: whenever we completes a positive action, we meditate that we dedicate it to our accumulation of merit for reaching our liberation. Similar concepts are present in other religions, like the Christian thanksgiving. We can then consider that this notion of dedication is a practical way to connect with the Transcendence, and meditate in this way, without having to change of religion.

We note that we can also dedicate our trouble or suffering, to the elimination of our negative karma (or sin, etc.). Not only this is very useful and efficient, because the fuel (suffering) is abundant, but this also makes that it is impossible to disconnect somebody by force. And no use to try anyway: the perpetrator will never see the result... being himself disconnected, hi hi hi!

The ultimate proof.

 

Sorry there are none.

 

Or rather yes:

 

When hearing about happiness, freedom, altruism and spiritual evolution, you feel enthusiasm.

 

This is the only evidence.

 

Sorry, it is too simple perhaps. If I presented it with a billions dollars machine, allowing to make large bombs, maybe some «authorities» would consider me seriously.

 

But I would have no use of such a recognition. What I am interested in, is to reach out people like everybody, farmers, workers, parents, children, the poor, Africans, Arabs, Asians...

 

Indeed, the basis of happiness are very simple, and there is no need for university studies to understand them.

 

From an epistemological point of view, one could argue that an evidence in the heart of our conscience, that we cannot share, would not be a scientific evidence. I shall say that it is, because everybody can reproduce it, even a savage, even a mentally disabled. Even Popper can do this test, because he has the same consciousness than everybody. And it is extremely simple. The only difficulty is to drop the ideologies, neurosis, prejudices, financial interests, etc. which hide the result to us. But for some, this seems to be the most difficult thing in the world, hi hi hi

 

And I think it is very well if things are that way. Because everyone can advance, and demonstrate his sincerity and human value, by doing the right choice, and show it concretely by the control of his ideas, his emotions, and with a positive behaviour. The only obstacles to this are the ones somebody puts to himself.

Or nearby: the manipulation power of the media and the sadomasochistic submission to «social standard» make that many people spend their lives sincerely pursuing illusions. Freedom of thought and free will are still so fragile things, that they need to be defended. This book is therefore a weapon in this fight to protect this majority against the ideologues and the life time thieves.

However it is up to you - Yes you personally who are reading me - to use this weapon. In fact, myself, and the others who understood, cannot do anything in your place: we cannot force someone to be free, because this action would go right against its very purpose. Therefore it is up to you, and to you alone, to learn to distinguish between your real deep desires and psychological impulses.

Did science killed God?

We often hear expressions such as «creating God» or «killing God».

The problem is that these actions are impossible. Whether God exists or not, we cannot create Him or kill Him.

The people who use these expressions actually play on a serious semantic confusion (note 17): these people are speaking of the concept of God, which was actually created in history, and which can also be abandoned. But this has obviously definitively no effect on the existence or non-existence of God Himself. Such semantic mash up is common into egghead jargon, where it has little impact. But when the media throw this stuff to the general public, terrible confusion ensues. For evidence, the quantity of novels, or comics, which depict visually the senility and death of God: all the immoral and exploiter are visibly thrilled by such an evocation, happy to see any limits removed to their depravity.

 

In facts, the concept of God really appeared gradually from the prehistoric «nature spirits» to modern religions. This path is one of a progressive abstraction, from the animal totems to the great cosmological or moral principles.

More recently, science has shown the falsity of many magical or religious explanations of the world, forcing the religions to take refuge in a last square of moral and human principles, where classical science cannot reach them. This gradual demonstration of the falsity of the religious explanations of the world (geocentrism, creation, arbitrary dogmas, possessions, etc.) led to the idea that science would end to fully disprove all the religions, eliminating them completely.

Sure?

If conventional science has conquered the whole realm of physical phenomenon, it remains, by lack of appropriate epistemological tools, unable of apprehending the spiritual realm: the morals and the meaning of life. Hence the existence of this last square, which on the other hand is unassailable: If science ventures here, God will kill science. (Useless to play the smartest: I too love puns, hahaha).

However the General Epistemology that I propose precisely allows science to venture into this last square. Not as a conquistador, but as an humble observer.

And what we found in these chapters does not destroy religions; right on the contrary it validates their spiritual heart, with offering a clear and easy to understand meaning of life and morality, beyond any discussion or quibble.

Right, it did not validated creationism and geocentrism, and this is a fact that the religions necessarily have to account with, under penalty of being phased out from the world. But we have validated the idea that our life has a meaning and a value, and this is an idea that science, media and politicians have to account with... If they want to one day be in phase with the world.

And snake oil philosophers will not be able to «kill» this idea.

 

In fact religions have everything to gain to refocus on their spiritual core and on morals, while abandoning all the unnecessary dogma which tarnished their image in the eyes of the general public.

Practical conclusions on religions

A practical conclusion with immediate effect is that we must respect all the religions, as long as they bring hope, love and peace. All the religions must also respect each other, in good ecumenism. All actually bring their share of understanding the Transcendence. We could reason in the reverse way, and say that no religion is indispensable, and that they will all end up to disappear some day. This would forget that their views are all necessary, and that therefore these views should in any case be preserved indefinitely, as means for understanding the Transcendence (chapter I-9).

This is what was done in Buddhism, the religion that Einstein recommended because it is the best approach to a spiritual science. Indeed, Buddhist studies present several thinking schools as a way to gradually understand Emptiness, even if several of these schools no more have any followers today.

Exciting conclusions about the direction to give to our lives

But the main conclusion is that all this offers to us a fantastic freedom to create a huge and wonderful world, a much stronger freedom than anything material or technological can ever offer. And the recipe is very simple: we just have to agree to place ourselves on the good side of the paradox, and enter the current. Then reality will serve us, as it serves the purposes of the Transcendence, which are also the deepest purposes of our consciousness. And our consciousness, it is us.

This is how each individual is intrinsically connected to the divine... If he wants to.

 

Because nobody is obliged.

What could happen if we do not do it.

Nobody is obliged to accept these goals, or to place oneself on the right side. I do not know what will that happen of those who deliberately refuse, maybe they will stay like this for millions of years, until they realize. After all, Earth is nourishing the promise of intelligence since billions of years, so that eventual cosmic reapers will not mind some more million years.

 

On the other hand, I would seriously caution those who may attempt to oppose the purposes of life. Such an attitude is extremely dangerous for us, but especially for them.

I'm talking about real dangers, as, if informed individuals are free to advance on this path and reach the goal, on the other hand the vast majority of the people remains submitted to television or to materialistic prejudices. Thus, even if in their hearts the majority wants the good, in practice they are deprived of understanding, and they even not understand why they find themselves unemployed while there is full prosperity. But this ignorance also makes them dead weights at the service of the nothing. In doing so, they pose a significant risk to the overall process, and they might block the evolution of mankind itself. Hence the vital need to radically eliminate all the anti-spiritual ideologies advocating materialism, self-centredness, ugliness, hatred, which must all be denounced and fought under whatever name they are hiding, as well as all those who spread them.

Especially, the constant vilification of parapsychology in the name of science (peremptory pseudo-psychological and humiliating pseudo-scientific «explanations» thrown everywhere) constitutes a form of harassment, which steals energy from people. The denigration of religion in the name of secularism (hypocritical requirement of practising religion only «in private», which is equivalent to forbid it) is a form of normative deliria as dangerous as the fundamentalism it claims to fight. Finally, the massive support of the media to so-called «cultural movements» deliberately turned toward ugliness («contemporary» art, rap, punk, gangsta, violent video games, horror...) opens the door to the immoral values which go with them. We shall talk of this with more details in the sixth part.

 

Then we start to dream of a world Government (chapter VI-16) who would understand these things, and explains them on the television and in school textbooks. People will be free to follow or not, but at least society would no longer be the main obstacle. The problem, however, is how to choose the wise persons to make such a Government?

 

What may happen in practice, if we continue in this gooeyish stupor, is that «random» events come to cause a natural selection. I obviously do not wish this, preferring to explain things as I do here, so that everyone can understand and can move forward without suffering. But it is impossible for me to think or to decide in the place of others! So, if people decide to place themselves in a natural selection process, I don't have the power to stop them. My only power is to sound the alarm.

 

Such events are nor «natural disasters», neither the «wrath of God», but the logical consequences of things that we did ourselves! So that nobody must complain, then. And it has already started (nuclear «accidents», weather excess, famines, tropical diseases arriving in Europe) and others are in preparation (artificial virus epidemics, global warming, the cost of which can go up to billions deads if we continue the sadomasochist practices). There is no justice in these things, and they will strike blindly, the innocent or the guilty, the active and the sleepy, the religious or the atheist, until a more responsible humanity emerges, or until it joins the other failures of evolution into the nothing. The outcome does not depend on a handful of activists or scientists, or even not on the small sect of the climate deniers, but on the choice that the majority will do, to move their bum, or to stay before the TV chewing popcorns while watching the death coming. I do not know what is going to happen, and I do not make bets: Earth can still become a paradise, if we want to, or it can become a terrible purgatory for those who continue to abdicate their will.

 

As to those who deliberately oppose, I prefer to warn them that, since the victory of the good is anyway ensured, then the logical feedback will necessarily bring something to eliminate them. I do not know what, and I prefer to never know, as it could be dire. But I need to say that I feel no pity for them. And anyway there are billions innocents to take care before.

 

And those who made the right choice? Even if they die of old age or of persecution before seeing it implemented, they can be assured of one thing: in the spiritual worlds, they will not miss kind people to welcome them, and beneficial activities for their talents. All the smart people and all the nice people will gather there anyway, hihihi!

 

 

 

 

 

 

General Epistemology        Chapter V-6       

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ideas, texts, drawings and realization: Richard Trigaux.

 

 

 

As every independant author I need your support to be able to continue to work on this site and allow for a freedom of expression to exist on the net:

 

 

 

Legal notice and copyright Unless otherwise noted (© sign in the navigation bar) or legal exception (pastiches, examples, quotes...), all the texts, graphics, characters, names, animations, sounds, melodies, programming, cursors, symbols of this site are copyright of their author and right owner, Richard Trigaux. Thanks not to mirror this site, unless it disappears. Thanks not to copy the content of this site beyond private use, quotes, samples, building a link. Benevolent links welcome. No commercial use. If you desire to make a serious commercial use, please contact me. Any use, modification, overtaking of elements of this site or the presented worlds in a way deprecating my work, my philosophy or generaly recognized moral rules, may result into law suit.