The-objective-truth unacknowledged

Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The comment box below invites readers to write.

"Civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for individual happiness with civic integrity more than for the city, state, nation, or society.

Consider writing a personal paraphrase of the preamble, which offers fellow citizens mutual equality:  For discussion, I convert the preamble’s predicate phrases to nouns and paraphrase it for my proposal as follows: “We willing citizens of the United States collaborate for civic, civil, and legal self-discipline to provide integrity, justice, goodwill, defense, prosperity, liberty, for ourselves and for the nation’s grandchildren and beyond and by this amendable constitution authorize and limit the U.S.A’s service to the people in their states.”

I want to collaborate with the other citizens on this paraphrase and theirs. I would preserve the original, 1787, text, unless it is amended by the people.

It seems no one has challenged whether or not the preamble is a legal statement. The fact that it changed this independent country from a confederation of states to a union of states deliberately managed by disciplined fellow citizens convinces me the preamble is legal. Equity in opportunity and outcome is shared by the people who collaborate for human justice.

Every citizen has equal opportunity to either trust-in and collaborate-on the goals stated in the preamble or be dissident to the agreement. I think 2/3 of citizens try somewhat to use the preamble but many do not articulate commitment to the goals. However, it seems less than 2/3 understand that “posterity” implies grandchildren. “Freedom of religion,” which fellow citizens have no means to discipline, oppresses freedom to develop integrity.

Selected theme from this week

One forum seemed to object to my reference to faith in the-objective-truth. The hyphens are intended to prevent separation of any of the three words, especially the article. Scholars who responded to it erroneously used the phrase “objective truth.” Like so many other modifiers, “objective” is the opinion of the writer and therefore is no better than ultimate, absolute, and “truth” itself, sometime refered to as “the naked truth.”

The edge search engine did not yield results with or without quotation marks. Adding “Phil Beaver” did not help, but adding “a civic people” found two citations with my use of the phrase.

Google Chrome found “The Objective Truth in Philosophy,” by Austin Cline, updated February 7, 2019; https://www.thoughtco.com/objective-truth-250549. But right away, there’s “who believes in objective truth?” The article “the” lost its role.

Adding “Phil Beaver” in Google Chrome, the first eight URLs cite my writing. Using “a civic people” instead gets more of my writing.

Columns

Yourself is a circular truth-standard (Christopher Simon) (https://www.theprogressreview.co/meditations-august-1-2018/)

Proverbs 10:9 typically leaves the reader in mystery---that is with mysterious advice. “He who walks purely walks securely, but he who walks in crooked ways will be found out.” (CJB)

This idea, perhaps 3,000 years old or older, leaves it to the reader to choose his or her standard for purity. If Solomon wrote Proverbs, we’re reading the mystery of a man who was faithful to no woman. In I Kings 11:3, “He had 700 wives, all princesses, and 300 concubines; and his wives turned his heart away.”

In 1941, Albert Einstein suggested that we don’t lie so as to lessen misery and loss, and the standard against which humans judge fidelity is the-objective-truth. The-objective-truth can only be discovered rather than constructed on reason or other human endeavor and is the standard of truth.

The standard on which to discipline “being true to yourself” is the-objective-truth.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/What-is-wrong-with-relationships-in-todays-society?

The newborn human has the challenge of transitioning from total ignorance to informed intentions to live a complete human life. By complete I mean whole and aware. Since the body completes the wisdom parts of the brain before a quarter century has passed, achieving psychological maturity takes a half to three-quarters century. Many people die too young.  Humankind, after perhaps 10 trillion person-years, is so uninformed no one knows how to encourage and coach the individual to accelerate the journey to human being.

The human person has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (IPEA) to develop either integrity or infidelity. Most people allow infidelity to become a habit. And there is no standard for fidelity.

Integrity is the practice of discovering the-objective-truth, understanding how to benefit, and behaving accordingly. The-objective-truth is the standard by which the truth is judged. When discovery has not occurred, humankind, in fidelity, admits, “We do not know.”  Infidelity to the-objective-truth begs woe.

These concepts have not been discovered or at least promoted, because most individuals are not aware of statutory justice. Most humans want mutual, comprehensive safety and security, which can only come from people who develop integrity.

Cultures develop legal systems that rely on the individual’s reluctance to accept IPEA and develop integrity. Most people want to consign their IPEA to another entity—usually an ideology or a government, neither of which accepts the individual’s IPEA. The ideology or government works for its continuity rather than for the individual’s integrity. The people in charge of the ideology or government feel no obligation to accept a person’s IPEA.

This way of living is not inevitable. There can be an achievable better future in just a few years. The requirements are for most individuals to commit to equity under statutory justice (arguably, Pericles’s idea from 2,500 years ago) and to pursue integrity, in other words fidelity to the-objective-truth. It is not surprising that the very phrase “the-objective-truth” is resisted if not rejected by existing human powers.

In the USA, fellow citizens are free to adopt the civic, civil, and legal agreement to pursue integrity that is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. preamble offers willing citizens individual happiness with civic integrity.

I write to learn and would appreciate comments.

https://www.quora.com/Is-Freemasonry-just-a-harmless-social-networking-society?

If I understand “social networking society” I could not say that Freemasonry is harmless: Indoctrination and tyranny seem possible.

My meagre understanding informs me that there is a political control element wherein the higher a member rises in the organization the more conformity to the rules and individual loyalty he must demonstrate.

However, by experience, I think the man who maintains individual authenticity is enriched by association with Freemasons. In other words, the man who uses the good in the doctrine and declines the bad can better himself, primarily through self-discipline.

I have this impression from my father, Fred Taylor Beaver, Jr., who was a 32^nd degree Mason and also the best Sunday school teacher I ever had (Southern Baptist). I never heard a racist word from Dad, yet he was equitably suspicious of wayward people whether white or black. Dad had a GED but was widely read. He was a master machinist and union member. He walked picket lines when there was violence. Yet if he disagreed with the union’s cause, he quit his job and moved his family of four to another state rather than be a scab.

Yet, he was conflicted. For example, he painted in big blue letters, in our basement, “God is the boss in this house.” I think he sought relief from the constant bickering by his mom. She had been widowed when Dad was twelve. Grandad, they say, was an excellent husband and craftsman; except he had no life insurance when he was diagnosed with cancer and died. He left Grandmother with three children. She became a seamstress in a sweat shop. As the oldest child, Dad took responsibility for Grandmother. She constantly assumed lordship of Mom’s home. Dad refused to take sides. I never heard him appeal to either woman to compromise. Dad seems a hero in that he sought higher power in a dilemma he perceived he could not solve. Grandmother’s death did not resolve bitter consequences.

If Freemasonry attempts to control its members, which I think it does, Dad may have been an instance when a man preferred his individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (IPEA) to develop civic integrity rather than attempt to consign human authenticity, knowing his status was so low he could never perfect his person.

Freemasonry, like most human associations, may be harmless if the individual member does not take it too seriously. Recall, I have never attempted to be a Mason, so am only a witness to an experience.

Phil Beaver does not “know.” He trusts in and is committed to the-objective-truth which can only be discovered. Conventional wisdom has truth founded on reason, but it obviously does not work.

Phil is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com, and consider essays from the latest and going back as far as you like.