Resisting the press’s freedom to censor humble-integrity

 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 interpretation of its proposal as follows:  This good citizen practices the U.S. disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, "in order to” develop responsible human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity.”  I want to improve my interpretation by listening to other citizens and their interpretations yet would preserve the original, 1787, text, unless it is amended by the people.

It seems the Supreme Court occasionally refers to it, and 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

Resisting the press’s freedom to censor humble-integrity

Everybody knows that the press claims to be fair and balanced, but every media I ever imagined a vehicle for connecting with fellow-citizens proved a censor of the good. By “the good” I mean communications to encourage male and female to comport with Genesis 1’s charge: literally, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it,” which I interpret “to ourselves and our Posterity”:  Constrain chaos during a complete lifetime.

I recently tried The Epoch Times, with the letter below. I address the tyranny of “freedom of religion” to suppress humble-integrity. We’ll see how it works out.

Columns

Ken Hazel, “The Silenced Majority” and Allen Stark “Echoes: Understanding the Word Dominion” (The Epoch Times, Reader’s Views, December 9-15, 2020, Page A18)

Proposal for the season of goodwill to all

Together, Ken Hasel and Allen Stark (The Epoch Times, Reader’s Views, December 9-15, 2020, Page A18), offer pivotal dialogue regarding the 2020 possible abyss in 229 years’ Congressional tyranny. Congress, so far, has not accepted the-humble-integrity that was proffered by the framers of the 1787 U.S. Constitution to order domestic responsible-human-independence (RHI). RHI was established to the world in the founders’ 1776 Declaration of Independence from England. The 1776 “the good People” and the 1787 entity “We the People of the United States” expected their posterity to continue developing separation of life and death; church and state; physics and metaphysics; ineluctable evidence and human reason. Some people still want church to rule state in the English syle in 2020.

First, Hazel suggests a U.S. silent majority, “law-abiding conservatives”, react by boycotting biased forums, without suggesting what conservatives want. The evidence, not only in public, but in the 1791 Bill of Rights, is that conservatives want to suppress the 1787 Constitution’s separation of church and state. They want colonial-factional-American Protestantism in traditional dominance, mimicking England’s constitutional church-Parliament-partnership. As usual, Hazel assumes political correctness in stonewalling members of We the People of the United States who prefer to conserve the 1776 and 1787 U.S. humble-integrity.

It’s not surprising that humble-integrity, as self-interest, is not encouraged and that few citizens perceive that RHI is the U.S. intention. RHI emerged from mistaken focus on liberty, license granted by legislators and judges, rather than freedom, a human responsibility. Neither the-God nor a government will usurp the human being’s opportunity to develop, perhaps perfect, their unique person. When Congress suppressed the preamble to the U.S. Constitution as “secular” they stymied development of the 1776 and 1787 intentions. In addition the Constitution’s amend-ability and prevention of religious tests, the preamble proposes public discipline. Every citizen should own a personal interpretation of the preamble, for self-interest.

I share my interpretation, hoping someone’s heartfelt opinion offers a view I need to consider. My interpretation, today is: This fellow-citizen practices and promotes the 5 U.S. public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength (also against attack), and prosperity, “in order to”, encourage responsible-human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity”.

Notice that the preamble excludes religion from the disciplines. Also, neither process nor standard for the discipline is offered, leaving the continuum of living fellow-citizens free to avoid past errors. Neither tradition nor un-amended law limits the living “ourselves and our posterity”. In summary, the U.S. has physical independence from England. But fellow-citizens have yet to accept freedom from the English mimic: partnership of church and state.

Second, Stark collapses a literature reference that can free “politically correct” antinomians from the tendency to class the un-elect as haters. Antinomians believe they are exempt from civic law by the Grace of their God. Further, antinomians believe they receive this Grace, because God chose them to believe Jesus. I think St. John erred to accuse un-believers, like me, of comprehensive hate: see John 15:18-23. No ideology I would follow tolerates accusation of hate by one civic citizen toward another. Part of constraining chaos on earth is not to hate fellow human beings.

Stark’s quotation of interest is from Genesis 1:26-28, a worthy study indeed. Perhaps 4 thousand years ago, a political-philosopher suggested that their-God charged male&female (in the God’s image) with responsibility for the earth. Before reference to dominion over living things there’s “subdue”: “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it.” At age 77, I feel fortunate to have 1) discovered an excellent woman, unique for my person, 2) accepted the trust-in and commitment-to vow to monogamy for life including our offspring, and 3) collaborated to constrain chaos during our lives.

In crisis, after all I can do, for example, get a loved one to the hospital, my knees buckle to pray for recovery. But with principles like the above available in the literature, there is no way I am going to pray for civic fellow citizens to reform and follow the-God, about which I cannot speak: I am humble to the-God that inspires them to civic behavior. What I consider worth conserving is open-minded interpretation of past suggestions, accounting for humankind’s recent discoveries, such as evolution, so that living fellow-citizens have a better chance of not traditionalizing practices that invite pain and loss.

If journalism had discovered its purpose, humankind would today enjoy a catalogue of lessons in humble-integrity and consequential discovery, both in physics and in psychology. The journal could be called “conserving human ethics”. Nevertheless, as always, the individual may develop the humble-integrity needed to constrain chaos during life.

A remedy for Congressional and Supreme Court tyranny is for We the People of the United States to amend the First Amendment so as to promote humble-integrity, a citizen’s duty, rather than religion, international, competitive business. Restore the 1782 USA motto, e pluribus unum. Emphasize that the motto prudently applies to all Gods as long as the-God has not been discovered.

Will The Epoch Times letter writers conduct an open-minded fellow citizens’ forum to promote responsible-human-independence in life including both people who expect an afterdeath to everlasting soul and non-believers?

 

Quora

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-that-we-cannot-only-demand-our-own-freedom-without-respecting-other-people-as-much-as-ourselves-and-without-recognizing-that-they-have-the-same-freedom-and-rights? By Vambie Grace Viernes

I interpret your question as:  Why can’t we appreciate fellow-citizens who self-discipline to constrain chaos in their lives? But in your own words, your question surpasses “the Golden Rule”, by accepting the other person’s responsible-human-independence rather than imagining to impose your pursuit of happiness on them.  

I don’t know the answer.

I think there’s evidence in Genesis 1:26-28, as literature, that most humans regret personal negligence toward necessity; that is, they remorse over complacency and arrogance. The discipline to attend to self-interest is not coached and encouraged in typical human cultures, so most people tolerate natural unhappiness more than develop sincere confidence.

Quoting from the Bible, CJB: “Let us make humankind in our image . . . male and female he created them [and] said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it.” An interpretation of these selected words includes the following: 1) male and female have the image of their makers (or the-God is androgynous yet male); and 2) male and female are responsible for the earth and the-God takes care of the other.

I write almost daily perhaps 4 practices for an achievable better future under a culture of acceptance and appreciation. First, the appreciative person may accept that they are a human being and choose to prevent behaving as an opposite: animal or plant. Second, they may accept that the human being is psychologically intended to be like humankind’s originator. And therefore, acquire the comprehension and intention to live a complete human life, perfecting their unique person before afterdeath begins. Third, they may accept that necessity demands the human being to neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or from any person or association, including self and family. Intolerance begins with informing the offender and may end with defense under attack. Fourth, they must accept that some people choose to behave as animals or plants and therefore invite constraint. This civic responsibility returns the discussion to Genesis 1: male and female are charged to constrain chaos on earth.

The first acceptance of these principles is to constrain chaos in personal living---to self-discipline in self-interest. The person who does so will appreciate self and fellow-citizens who also behave to constrain chaos. In such a culture, “love” could either apply its many meanings or its usage decline for specific words such as “appreciation” and “empathy”. The first object of personal appreciation could be the disciplined-self.

With self-appreciation, not hurting the one you love, briefly reviewed online, could aid Genesis-1-commitment to civic development: https://www.psychologytoday. com/us/blog/in-the-name-love/201010/you-always-hurt-the-one-you-love. I read this article with respect to loving my person, which I think is essential to serene confidence respecting Genesis 1.

I think there’s only one essential freedom: the opportunity to develop responsible-human-independence. That is, to choose to be a human being; to accept the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop humble-integrity to self rather than submit to someone else’s intentions for your person; to accept that some persons develop HIPEA for crime or tyranny and must be constrained or held responsible, respectively; and to accept the opportunity to appreciate fellow-citizens who develop civic discipline.

I think bargaining for favor from the-God of Genesis 1 distracts too many people from accepting the demand to constrain chaos during their lives.

If there are no objections. I am going to add “Vambie Grace Viernes12/26/2020” to my appreciations page. I have never before thought I had read a thought that solves the Golden Rule’s egocentricity.

FB add on:  Setting aside the Golden Rule's egocentricity.

https://www.quora.com/Isnt-specialization-in-society-designed-so-that-we-each-dont-have-to-research-test-define-and-fix-everything-ourselves-Doesnt-this-eliminate-the-need-for-self-reliance-for-literally-everything-Isnt-that-progress-and? by Chris Guerrieri 

You are correct in that fellow-citizens connect to supply needed goods and services in a free market, including civic ideas. And, quoting the 1776 Declaration of Independence, “the good People” of the United States spend 2 to 3 decades preparing to participate in civic living for 3 to 4 decades, then civically retire, continuing to develop the good. However, determining preferences is a matter of self-reliance, or better, responsible-human-independence (RHI). For example, when a group decides to do harm to express themselves, RHI motivates and empowers objection, departure, and informing first responders. At stake in 2020 is restoration of U.S. civic integrity.

The ineluctably qualified citizen behaves so as to develop statutory justice rather than tolerate human misery and loss. Citizenship is a life-long self-interest that starts with being informed. Therefore, every U.S. citizens could and should own a personal interpretation of the preamble to the U.S. Constitution.

Human beings tend to want to take responsibility for everything in life, so they develop judgment and preferences in order to earn the goods and services they need or want rather than what someone else would impose on them, for example, by pressure-sales.

Some sales people want to impose concern for afterdeath, that vast time after body, mind, and person stop functioning. The mystery of “soul” is introduced to encourage people to take responsibility for their afterdeath. It’s a hard sell, because it’s metaphysical. Some people take interest in soul because they want to, and no one has the prerogative to object. I don’t object. However, those who take charge of their soul have not the prerogative to impose on others. It is a private choice, not a civic, civil, or legal issue.

What’s a stake in this discussion is being a human being. The human has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop humble-integrity to the good. HIPEA is inalienable, that is, “incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred”, according to Merriam-Webster online. Some people overlook that HIPEA cannot avoided, submitted to a priest, or turned over to the-God. After all, it seems the-God assigned responsibility for peace to male&female “in his image” (Genesis 1:26-28).

The founders, in the 1776 Declaration (for independence from England), recognized the necessity to separate responsibilities: civics and spirituality; state and church; death and life; the-God and the military; peace and war. They spoke of “Nature and Nature’s God” and “the Supreme Judge of the world” and in 1778 accepted military providence from France. They did not address England’s constitutional Trinity, which was precious to most loyal British-colonists, whether Protestant (1689) or Catholic (1215). Thus, the founders separated church from state and won independence.

Failing as free and independent states, delegates of 12 states, the framers, negotiated the 1787 Constitution to establish domestic order. They wrote nothing that lessened the integrity expressed by the founders, addressing civic, civil, and legal issues and leaving to privacy metaphysics such as soul. The purpose, a people’s proposition, was proffered in the preamble only 5 days before the signers made the a global nation possible on September 17, 1787.

The founders, the framers, and the signers proposed a United States that comports to Genesis 1: fellow-citizens accepting responsibility to constrain chaos in the USA, leaving metaphysics to the-God. However, the First Congress, perhaps to make themselves feel divine on par with the Church of England’s constitutional partnership with Parliament, re-established a factional-American Protestant tradition, codified by the 1791 First Amendment’s religion clauses.

This Congressional tyranny against the-God, the Supreme Judge of the world, France’s providence, the good People, and the entity We the People of the United States must be corrected by living “ourselves and our Posterity” such as fellow-citizens of 2020-21. Two reforms are needed. First, the First Amendment must be amended so as to promote humble-integrity, a citizen’s duty, rather than support religion, an international, sometimes alien, business competition. Second, the 1782 motto “e pluribus unum” must be restored and the 1956 imposition by the Knights of Columbus, “In God We Trust,” retired to private hope and comfort. Metaphysics is for people who take interest, but cannot be imposed on others.

The human being is naturally independent and chooses civic integrity in self-interest.

 

https://www.quora.com/What-rules-do-you-apply-to-your-own-thoughts-to-define-their-worth? by Graham C Lindsay

Of course, I am developing and do not know the-objective-truth, let alone the-ineluctable-truth.

I think I follow acceptance and appreciation more than rules.

First, I choose to be a human being and therefore accept some constraints: I get tired, cannot do more than one activity at a time, need to exercise physically and psychologically, consider what I can achieve more than what I’d like to achieve each day, prefer spontaneity to regimen, appreciate other human beings as they are where they are and try to avoid persons who behave as opposites (animals or plants), try to express clarity and kindness, never lie, appreciate necessity and that I am excited to live; I face death. Let me know if you think I left something out.

Second, I accept responsibility to read&write, speak&listen&listen&speak (and in reverse order), comprehend&connect, in order to behave for the civic good and not try to change it. Therefore, I neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or from any person or association, including myself and my family. Normally, intolerance means verbally opposing offensive behavior and nothing more. If necessary, I call first responders rather than get physical, except in direct defense.

Third, I trust-in and commit to physics and its progeny, such as mathematics, chemistry, biology, psychology, imagination, and fiction (reasonable human constructs about physics’ unknowns or mere speculation). Serendipity influences me to reserve sufficient humility toward metaphysics. For example, just as I re-considered Genesis 1:26-28, there seems a flood of possibly applicable Quora-questions.

Fourth, for over 4 decades I have studied in a self-directed path to answer two personal curiosities. With so many wonderful people in the world, why is there so much conflict, pain, and loss? And with such a promising cultural proposal (responsible-human-independence), why has the United States regressed, divergently during my lifetime?

Fifth, I have wanted to write a book for at least 3 decades. Friends have lost hope to read it (or for me). Thank goodness I haven’t thought I knew enough to write! Lost time would have prevented the explosion of enlightenment I have experienced by listening to fellow-citizens’ including family concerns and trying to address them clearly, attractively, and sincerely (quoting Steve Haffner).

Sixth, owning erroneous word-definitions (by perceived context at the time), if someone’s question prompts my interest, I look up key words. Often, that duty informs me. Likewise, if I suspect a colloquialism, like “the sun’ll come out tomorrow” I study to understand that the earth’s rotation on its axis hides the sun during each evening and begins to unhide it after midnight. Similarly, if I want to know whether the Bible uses the word “hate” or not, I search for passages and ponder possible excuses. For example, some believers excuse Luke 14:26 as the physician’s perception of Jesus’ love for the-elect---those chosen by God to believe Jesus. Jesus did not write. I oppose hate and its advocates.

Seventh, I appreciate that prior opinion may help form my opinion, see no reason to cite previous thought with which I contend, and resist censorship in all forms.

Eighth, I accept that reading pivotal documents is worthwhile, whereas commentary is often misleading. For example, in my view, the framers, in the 1787 U.S. Constitution, enhanced the humble-integrity expressed by the founders in the 1776 Declaration of Independence, and only the signers proffered the 5-day old, pivotal, people’s proposition in the preamble on September 17, 1787. Writers who conflate signers and framers into founders either are unaware or intentionally mislead, probably because they fear the entity We the People of the United States.

Ninth, I accept failure to humble-integrity and do not intend to let it destroy my person: death is coming.

Again, if you noticed something I missed, please share it.

FB add on: Accepting and appreciating experiences and observations in life.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Is-it-immoral-to-discourage-bad-behavior-by-using-shaming-language? by unknown

I don’t think so.

However, the shame must be real, not imaginary. That is, the offender knew better than to intentionally behave as they did.

A personal guide comes from this demand:  An ineluctably good citizen neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person or association, including self and family.

If some behaves so as to cause actual harm, the first obligation is to inform them. If the-ineluctably-facts prove they knew better, there’s nothing wrong with shame language.

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-peoples-morals-become-really-bad? by Mohammad Hamdan

Of course, I do not know.

However, I recently re-read Genesis 1:26-28, a perhaps 4-thousand year-old suggestion by apparently a Mesopotamian political philosopher (thinking with what I perceive humankind has learned and codified as of the year 2020. For example, good citizens don’t lie so as to lessen human misery and loss, Einstein’s suggestion). The philosopher expressed that his God charged male&female, in image of the creator or the-God, to constrain chaos on earth. This marked transition from paganism or beliefs in many gods to the mystery of monotheism.

Abram left Mesopotamia to establish a new nation, I understand because his God did not demand human sacrifice, a doctrine that was constructed by religious priests in Ur. Abram envisioned animal sacrifice. You might say Abram was motivated by necessity to save lives. Opposition to human sacrifice is typical of issues that inspire human beings to separate from their nation and form a new one, with reform they believe/not represents the-God. It is in the nature of human beings to take responsibility for their lifetimes, according to the humble-integrity they perceive. Therefore, cultures tend to form to lessen chaos on earth, conforming to the above suggestion from Genesis 1. However, by infidelity to male&female, Abraham created a divided future, in Ismael and Isaac.

As a group of people take the risks of separating from a culture, provided they are correct in their objections, they leave behind a culture with a critical feature that generates chaos. One such feature is the subjugation of females. According to the above interpretation of Genesis 1, the image of the-God is male&female. Therefore, to flourish on earth, male&female must appreciate its androgynous image of the-God.

About 25 hundred years ago, Homer described an elite society wherein it took about a thousand good women to be as cherished as one Greek soldier. Entire nations warred over the competition by two men over one woman. The armies judged defeat depended on the moods of Gods. Recognition, much less appreciation, of the Genesis 1 suggestion had not happened.

Meanwhile, in the Middle East, Israel, observing the civic success of kings in Egypt demanded kings to help them survive. Their appeal may be viewed as a move toward accepting the division of responsibilities suggested by Genesis 1: the-God assigns to male&female responsible-human-independence. The anecdotal prosperity in Egypt misled Israel to think a king is sufficient for civic order. However, the tribes of Israel disbursed under different kings, and returning to the-God, hoped for a messiah to unite them against other nations.

The historical Jesus may have suggested that the human being, while facing death, has the ability, in the-God’s psychological likeness, to perfect their unique person during life (Ralph Waldo Emerson’s suggestion). Such ideas were so encouraging some listeners thought Jesus was the messiah, and rather for only Israel was for all human beings. Genesis 1 would seem to affirm that each human being may develop into a god facing death, provided they constrain chaos during their lifetime.

The language of the Holy Bible doesn’t make it clear that Jesus message (which he did not write and came to us only from typically biased reporters) is not complimentary to Arabs and Africans, and therefore, these groups of human beings develop more favorable interpretations: maybe in the Quran, the Ethiopian Tewahedo Bible, and African-American Christianity, none of which I read (nor at age 77 am likely to read).

There are many canonizations of the Bible, and perhaps as many interpretations of those canon as there are priests who promote them. After 5 decades under wonderful providers Mom and Dad’s Southern Baptist two sects of Christianity, I can attest to 4 decades of earnest study (obviously not terminated in my 8^th decade) to conclude that I prefer to trust-in and commit-to the-ineluctable-truth, unknown as it may be to human beings at any moment. Yet I have no objections to Mom and Dad’s spiritual hopes for them: they were civic citizens. However, I object to behavior that represents the opposite of human being: animal or plant. For example, both Mom and Dad smoked cigarettes, and I adopted the practice during my teens, mimicking Mom’s secrecy. In 1972, I quit, because I thought they were ruining my life and killing me sooner.

I am no authority on history, anthropology, political science, or religion. Yet as the husband in a monogamy for life, now in its 53rd year of courtship and 51^st year of marriage with 3 children, I feel I am qualified to develop the humble-integrity for responsible-human-independence. That includes a deep appreciation for the-God (necessity for all I know), an automatic buckling of my knees to pray when a loved one’s life is in jeopardy, and an acceptance of responsibility to constrain chaos during life, trusting my afterdeath to my before-conception.

I think the ambition to bargain with the-God for civic power drives persons to choose the opposite of human being: animal or plant.

If there are no objections, I will add Mohammad Hamdan and 12/24/2020 to my appreciations page. There is no possibility I could have written this without your heartfelt, creative question. Your question seems appropriate for the 2020 season of goodwill to every human being.

FB add on: Trusting afterdeath to before-conception and constraining chaos during life.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-dilemma-of-a-pacifist-today? by Alvin Funk 

After citing opposition to violence, Merriam-Webster online says pacifist means “an attitude or policy of nonresistance.” Pacifists ignore responsibility and lose to chaos.

Four thousand years ago, a perhaps Mesopotamian philosopher suggested, taking into consideration what we can observe and have experienced by 2020, that necessity holds male&female (almost like the-God) responsible to constrain chaos on earth. Some might view Genesis 1:26-28 as instruction that male&female must appreciate its androgynous self in order to succeed in life.

Rather than accept the power to develop peace on earth, most cultures construct a God and doctrine that theirs is the-God the philosopher referred to. Some attack other cultures if they perceive advantage. Some accept that military strength enables either the offending culture or the defenders to prevail in violence. The military winner, whether owing a doctrinal-God or not, either licenses some liberty to some losers or enslaves them all: life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness go to the military victor.

The person who observes violence for political power and choses to let military strength prevail suffers the license the winner offers. The person who accepts the responsibility to constrain chaos in their life is probably on the side with military power, and the pacifist probably lost some of the freedom they had. The elites among the victors are judges, legislators, and when legislators partner with churches, the clergy. It is self-evident that the-God does not usurp the individual’s opportunity to constrain chaos in life.

The U.S., according to the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, offers 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” establish responsible-human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity”. There’s no doctrinal-God involved. The pacifist as well as citizens with insufficient humility to the-God of Genesis 1:26-28 risk losing the U.S. proposition.

In 2020, the entity We the People of the United States seems pacifist toward judges, Congress, and the Church. Rather than violence, we have the power to hold tyrants accountable by 1) voting in personal self-interest and humble-integrity and 2) amending the First Amendment in order to a) replace “freedom of religion” with encouragement to humble-integrity and b) encourage the press to journal U.S. progress toward fulfilling the U.S. Constitution. It’s an interesting consideration for this, the season of goodwill to fellow-citizens.

If this post interested you, please visit the Quora Spaces, “Preamblers” and “Appreciators” and consider starting a conversation.

Updated on 12/24/2020

FB add on:  Pacifists invite chaos, loss, and misery.

https://www.quora.com/Is-finding-the-right-question-just-as-important-as-finding-the-right-answer? by Rocco Valentino 

I think so. In fact, the right question may be more important.

For example, necessity imposes on the human being the responsibility to constrain chaos in their life. Therefore, the civilization that encourages and coaches its youth to develop the discipline to neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or from any person or association, including self and family, may have a better future than cultures that encourage pursuit of unknown-power above necessity.

This does not preclude person seeking unknown-power against the unknown. For example, if a person has provided all the necessities when a loved-one’s life is threatened, a drop to the knees for prayer seems prudent and kind. Just now, over and above my daily work, I’m in a prayerful mood for 1) relief from illegalities in the November 3, 2020 election and to constrain the people who perpetrated the crimes and 2) reform to the humble-integrity expressed in the combination of the 1776 Declaration of Independence from England and the 1787 Constitution to order the USA to be held accountable by the entity We the People of the United States (rather than foreign influence).

Lastly, my experience: For 4 decades I have wanted to write a book about my two questions: What does it mean to be a human being, and what if you were born in the U.S.? For the first 2 decades, I mostly read and wrote to share my opinion. For the last 2 decades I read & wrote & responded and spoke & listened & iterated. I’m glad I never wrote a book. (The time to do so may be near.)

Students of the-ineluctable-truth are prudent to reserve doubt that they have heard the most essential question. For example, Leibniz’ “Why is there something rather than nothing” may start with a fallacy: “Why” may be impertinent/overconfident.

FB add on: Pondering questions may be more effective than constructing answers, and if you can converse--listen and speak then iterate--good.

Reaction to an empty quote

Believe deep down in your heart that you're destined to do great things.

-- Joe Paterno

 

Accept that you are a human being and therefore possess the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop the humble-integrity needed to perfect your unique person rather than tolerate infidelity to self.

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.

Promoting Genesis 1:26-28 for chaos constraint

 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 interpretation of its proposal as follows:  This good citizen practices the U.S. disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, "in order to” develop responsible human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity.”  I want to improve my interpretation by listening to other citizens and their interpretations yet would preserve the original, 1787, text, unless it is amended by the people.

It seems the Supreme Court occasionally refers to it, and 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

Promoting Genesis 1:26-28 for chaos constraint

Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, in the likeness of ourselves; and let them rule over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air, the animals, and over all the earth, and over every crawling creature that crawls on the earth. So God created humankind in his own image;
in the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. God blessed them: God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air and every living creature that crawls on the earth.”

Considering what humankind has discovered since 4 thousand years ago, the above principles suggest the-God is male and female and charges humankind to constrain chaos on earth.

We have observed and experienced that male and female not appreciating each other, communicating, collaborating, and connecting for safety and security to each other and to their progeny increases chaos. We observe that civically conflicting and warring over the characterization of the-God increases chaos unto divergence.

Both the 1776 Declaration of Independence and the 1787 Constitution propose a nation with humility to both “the Supreme Judge of the world” and the-God that privately motives the human being to develop responsible-human-independence rather than to tolerate the liberty another entity licenses.

The time for We the People of the United States to adopt the Genesis 1, 1776, and 1787 collective charge to constrain chaos in our lives has arrived.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/Is-this-a-definition-of-science-and-rationality-Science-and-rationality-is-the-capacity-to-come-to-a-conclusion-that-violates-your-biases-and-prejudices-and-accept-it-because-you-believe-in-the-process? by Michael Wayne Box 

 

Physics and its progeny such as psychology follow the same laws and do not respond to reason or human constructs. Human error can change the course of human events, but the consequences conform to physics. For example, Abraham Lincoln failed to make it clear that the February 1860 secession from the USA had military disfavor approximating the state count: 7 CSA to 27 USA.

Albert Einstein’s second greatest blunder was speaking at “science and religion” conferences in their language. Thereby, he produced the nonsense “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” My study of his political science suggest he thinking was: Research without integrity is ruinous; integrity without research is useless.

The “scientific process” is a research-method, and the product is the-objective-truth as perceived by extant methods. Researchers reserve appreciation for future instruments of perception that may modify the-objective-truth, intending to more closely approach the-ineluctable-truth.

For their reasons, certain agents in the world have attached the word “science” to statistical studies of subjective reasoning rather than ineluctable evidence, called the products of subjective-research “science”, and overlooked Einstein’s emphasis on integrity. The “new sciences” seem like old metaphysics.

 

https://www.quora.com/Gender-equality-is-critical-to-the-development-and-peace-of-every-nation-Kofi-Annan-Do-you-agree-Why-Why-not? 

by Sied Talebinejad  No. Male and female must constrain chaos in life. First, every human being is unique, and therefore no two can be equal. Second, male-and-female mutual-appreciation is essential to constraint chaos on earth. Mature female must be appreciated for not exposing about 13 ova per year to indignity and abuse. Male must be appreciated for supporting female and viable-ova for life. Tolerating infidelity to self-interest invites chaos. To say that gender-equality is a nation’s responsibility contradicts promoting and encouraging the responsible-human-independence that is necessary for a person to choose humble-integrity rather than submit to a false premise.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-your-thoughts-about-to-do-good-is-to-be-pure-to-do-evil-is-to-become-impure? by Casper John 

It’s an erroneous church-teaching. Moreover, church itself is a chaos-creator that needs reform rather than annihilation.

Necessity motivates and inspires the human being to constrain chaos in their life despite any hopes for their afterdeath. On the other hand, carnal satisfactions---eating, sleeping, connecting, can motivate infidelity to self-interest. Only self-discipline has the power to keep the human being on a path to perfect their unique person.

Church promotes dependency on a higher power---a doctrinal God or government---to provide disciplines only the person can provide. Because cultures impose this concept on their youth, instead of coaching and encouraging them to “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it” (Genesis 1:28, a 4 thousand year-old suggestion), cultures continue to pursue divergent carnal satisfactions rather than to constrain chaos.

A person must articulate the choice to be a human being rather than one of the opposites---animal or plant. The human being must accept their individual power, their individual energy, and their individual authority (HIPEA). The human being uses HIPEA to develop humble-integrity in self-interest rather than tolerate infidelity to self by self. Fellow humans who use HIPEA for crime or tyranny can reform. I think only persons who choose not to be a human being can intend evil.

The moment a person accepts the above principles or better, they may begin the perfection of their unique person as they are and where they are, chaotic as the present characterization may be. I don’t know the-ineluctable-truth: perhaps even developing beasts can reverse their choice not to be human.

These principles seem unattainable, only because they have never been articulated and promoted by any culture, at least that I know of.

However, one such culture has been proposed. With my attitude or better, the 1776 colonial Declaration of Independence from England and the 1787 U.S. Constitution for domestic order, express a path to human compliance with Genesis 1’s suggestion to constrain chaos. First, it expresses separation of church from state. In 1776 “the good People” appeal to “the Supreme Judge of the world” rather than civically lessen the American-Protestant Trinity the loyal-colonial British-subjects privately worshipped. And they relied on France’s military providence when it seemed the Continental Army would fall to chaos. Second, in 1787, We the People of the United States appreciated that Posterity would resolve statutory injustices “ourselves” were powerless to remedy: the Constitution can be amended. Also, the preamble proposes 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” promote responsible-human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity.” But it offers no discipline standards or processes, leaving Posterity in freedom-from errors of the past.

Alas, in 1791, Congress imposed on We the People of the United States “freedom of religion,” a tyranny ourselves of 2020-21 can reverse in order to restore the Genesis 1, 1776, and 1787 U.S. humble-integrity needed to constrain chaos in this country.

FB add on: With humble-integrity, a human being can recover from chaos during their life on earth.

https://www.quora.com/Does-the-study-of-epistemology-add-any-practical-benefit-outside-of-intellectual-stimulation? by David Gomez 

Mr. Gomez, “epistemology” is controversial. But it’s essential to humble-integrity.

My first interest in considering your question is Merriam-Webster online; its definition is: “the study or a theory of the nature and grounds of knowledge especially with reference to its limits and validity”. I glanced back at the Google definition: “the theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope. Epistemology is the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion”. Hmmm.

It seems “justified belief” is a proprietary phrase, for example, the author uses it in https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/. From there, we click on https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justification-public/, and discover an advocate: John Rawls. His social theory, in my view, is that if someone is not behaving as a human being, the public is required to provide care in a veil of ignorance. In other words, it matters not if the person has elected to be an opposite of human being. There are two phylum of opposites: animal and plant. For examples, beasts and poisons. Among human beings, dissidents such as dependents and criminals can reform. I do not support veils of ignorance.

Rawls’ knowledge-ignorance may extend to a political philosopher whose primitive idea was expressed perhaps 4 thousand years ago and reported in Genesis 1:26-28. “Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, in the likeness of ourselves . . . male and female he created them . . . God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air and every living creature that crawls on the earth.”

Today, December 19, 2020, the Genesis message can be viewed as the observation that male and female must constrain chaos in life. In 2020-21, we observe that male and female, or humankind in the-God-likeness, are grouped by Genesis appreciation as follows: the ignorant, the willful, and the compliant. My demography speculation is 23:69:8.

The compliant female knows she may generate perhaps 400 viable ova during her fertile years and will protect each one from chaos. The compliant male knows every woman has the potential to originate 400 human beings, and he would not threaten her or hers with chaos. Spouses know it takes a quarter-century for a human being to acquire the comprehension and intention to live a complete human life; by “complete” I mean develop psychological maturity rather than invite chaos and young-death.

In general, Genesis-compliant human beings constrain chaos in their lives, and thereby aid a culture that develops humble-integrity rather than tolerates infidelity to self.

To demand interpretation of the above principles as dictate from the-God is arbitrary---religious. It seems more likely that constraining chaos in life is essential to survival. To label necessity as “justified belief” or higher opinion is an attempt to accept either ignorance or willfulness, neither of which is acceptable to human beings. And I doubt the-God, whatever-it-is, appreciates personal Gods.

I do not know the-ineluctable-truth. Therefore, I work to know previous thoughts that could benefit my life. When I discover a thought which deserves humble consideration, I ponder it with attention to recent discoveries, in order to gain comprehension and intention to either use it or not. Pondering Genesis 1, and admitting considerable losses and pain prior to 2020, I am convinced that everything I can do to constrain chaos in life is good.

Just now, I need to improve patience.

FB add on: To base knowledge and justice on “a veil of ignorance” lessens responsible-human-independence and promotes not being human.

https://www.quora.com/Does-anybody-actually-deserve-to-have-any-inalienable-rights-Why-or-why-not? by Mike Norris 

Mr.Norris, I think so. And I think your question is profound.

Deserve, inalienable, and rights are in question. I want to revise “rights” to “independence” to support my response, in order to appreciate obligation more than privilege. Forget “rights”, which no entity on earth can warrant: right to life? In the 2020 U.S., BLM can deny life in the dark of night with support of a Democrat mayor.

Merriam-Webster online (MW) says “inalienable” means “incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred”. “Alienate” means “to cause to be withdrawn or diverted”. The shock here, is that according to MW, “inalienable” can imply that a human being cannot withdraw, divert, surrender, or transfer their independence!

Humankind has evolved for some 3 million years, language perhaps 0.15 million years, spirituality perhaps 0.04 million years, and monotheism perhaps 0.004 million years. About 4 thousand years ago, a political philosopher expressed, adding human observations since then, that the-God assigned to male and female the obligation to constrain chaos on earth, the-God being whatever empowers male and female to develop humble-integrity in self-interest rather than tolerate infidelity. See Genesis 1:27-28 for the primitive expression of responsible-human-independence.

The political philosopher’s expression suggests that male and female should appreciate each other, collaborate, and connect so as to coach and encourage their young to prepare for a future the spouses cannot imagine. The people who accept the obligation need not contest the source of the responsibility, since it is evident from necessity, often essential to survival. Political philosophers today benefit from exponentially more experience and observations. For example, Albert Einstein said, that good people don’t lie so as to lessen human misery and loss to illustrate that the laws of physics and of integrity come from the same source.

There remains the question “does anybody deserve . . .”? I think the person who accepts that they are a human being rather than one of the opposites—animal or plant; commits to monogamy for life with family; and accepts individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to develop humble-integrity, in order to practice responsible-human-independence is deserving.

Also, I think people who use HIPEA to develop dependency, deceit, crime, tyranny, evil, war, and such invite woe, and woe has a way of finding them.

FB add on: By choosing to be a human being and developing the attendant power, energy, and authority, a person may either develop humble-integrity or tolerate infidelity to self, and thereby either pursue responsible-human-independence or invite woe.

https://www.quora.com/Within-the-political-domain-how-do-freedom-and-liberty-differ? by Robert Akridge 

Mr. Akridge, you pose a profound question.

In the past, I expressed the proffered U.S. political proposition as freedom-from oppression so that the individual has the liberty-to develop humble-integrity. Some scholars suggest that freedom is innate to humankind and tyranny (typically expansive government) grants liberty; see https://www.docsoffreedom. org/student/readings/equal-and-inalienable-rights. Quoting, “[England] approached the task of guaranteeing liberty by limiting government.” They did so in arrogance toward necessity. Humankind cannot limit it’s own opportunity to develop responsible-human-independence (RHI, the only acronym I’ll use).

Recently, I discovered a political philosopher’s suggestion at least 4 thousand years old. As of December 2020, humankind discovered exponentially more, especially evolution, and might comprehend the ancient idea: whatever motivates the human being to pursue RHI does not usurp the responsibility to constrain chaos on earth. Necessity requires the prudent individual to constrain chaos in their lives. Plato’s Socrates might suggest human beings pursue the good without trying to bargain with the-God.

The ancient philosopher’s reported message is: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” Genesis 1:27-28, CJB, emphasis mine. Show me the scholarship that explains the observable contradictions yet valuable advice in those verses.

After between 6 and perhaps 36 millennia of mystery as to what controls the unfolding of human development, monotheism had emerged. During the recent 4 millennia, theistic nations did not ponder their national Gods as evidence of the-God, shared by humankind as the motive to be good. Nor did male&female imagine they could appreciate their complimentary-human-powers and their progeny and therefore constrain chaos. Accepting neither necessity nor mutual appreciation, humankind divided on schemes to develop both the most powerful national God and well-ordered tyranny to reign supreme on earth. In other words, to construct a chosen nation. The chosen nation had the strongest military power. I know of no nation founded on the principle that fellow-citizens are to individually constrain chaos in humble-integrity to the-God, as suggested n Genesis 1. Consequently, military power, intended to protect fellow-citizens from aggressive nations, constitutes the power to license liberty, in other words, constrain freedom. Fellow citizens need not maintain this domestic tyranny.

If a nation embarked on the quest for RHI, they would accept that not every nation will co-operate; some will insist on supremacy. Other nations might view a culture that seeks peace on earth as vulnerable. Therefore, the RHI-nation would maintain superior economic and military power so as to discourage foreign aggression; in other words, to prevent the practice of defense, with the attendant loss of RHI-youth. Further, not every citizen would choose RHI, so the RHI-nation would develop statutory justice to constrain domestic aggression. Having experienced psychological, cultural, and technological evolutions neither their grandparents nor their parents expected, adults would not try to constrain their children and grandchildren from preparing for the unimaginable future they face. They would encourage and coach their youth to accept the powers and responsibilities of being a human being rather than one of the opposites: animal or plant. Conservatism would reform from preservation of discovered tyranny to posterity’s opportunity to constrain chaos during their psychological maturity.

Whether from the-God or from necessity, the human being has the freedom to develop RHI and use it to constrain chaos in their lives. Success requires discipline in self-interest. So far, no nation has developed these principles, although one was proposed, I think intentionally. However, when the proposal was proffered, free U.S. inhabitants were too dependent upon a church-state partnership to accept RHI. U.S. tyranny-toleration persists today.

Another nation, Israel, seems to accept the necessity of military power in order to protect fellow-citizens’ opportunity to pursue the-God each one privately desires. Thus, while an individual citizen of Israel may seem spiritually erroneous to the majority, there is no institutional tyranny against them and the military protects them from foreign aggression and threat. I don’t know enough to expand on this indication.

Together, the United States 1776 Declaration of Independence from England and the 1787 Constitution for domestic order propose RHI to the continuum “ourselves and our Posterity”. The Declaration represents “the good People” and appeals to “the Supreme Judge of the world” without questioning England’s Trinity. In both 1776 and 1787, their Trinity was Protestant (1689), after Lords, Bishops, and King John had partnered with Roman Catholicism (1215)---either way, at the unending expense of commoners.

The U.S. Declaration expresses humble-integrity to civic state (the march to chaos-constraint) as well as private religion, consistent with Genesis 1. The Constitution provides for amendment by Posterity (to constrain chaos) and does not lessen the humble integrity expressed by the Declaration. Its preamble offers 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” encourage RHI “to ourselves and our Posterity”. It specifies neither process nor standards by which Posterity will develop statutory justice, recognizing that “ourselves” do not know the future. I perceive a culture of freedom, provide the entity We the People of the United States will accept responsible-human-independence as primitively suggested in Genesis 1.

I plan to post reference to your question, Mr. Aldrich, and this response at the Quora Space “Preamblers”. Readers, please contribute to the discussion there, too.

FB add on: Military power, intended to protect fellow-citizens from aggressive nations, constitutes the power to license liberty; in other words, constrain freedom. U.S. fellow-citizens, "ourselves and our Posterity" of 2020-21 can accept responsible-human-independence and end Congress’s domestic tyranny by amending the First Amendment in order to promote humble-integrity.

To Gary Smith:

Mr. Smith, I appreciate your emphasis on an oppressive hope. Government tyranny, no matter how limited, cannot provide freedom from want and care.

The four tyrannies came from F.D. Roosevelt’s 1941 book, Four Freedoms. They were: freedom of speech, of worship, from want, and from fear. No entity on earth can provide these freedoms. However, each human being has the opportunity to constrain both civic and private chaos in their life.

For example, each citizen can coach and encourage their children to accept being a human being rather than tolerating one of the two opposites: 1) animal of one type or another or 2) plant. Considering this choice is a matter of personal necessity, not someone else’s political/religious ambition.

https://www.quora.com/G-K-Chesterton-said-Fallacies-do-not-cease-to-be-fallacies-because-they-become-fashions-Which-fallacy-do-you-think-has-become-popular? by Graham C Lindsay 

The fallacy: U.S. Congress was correct to impose “freedom of religion”—on the continuum, “ourselves and our Posterity”, still tolerating the tyranny in 2020.

The humble-integrity (regarding human responsibility assigned by the-God in Genesis 1:27-28) that is expressed by “the founding fathers” in the 1776 colonies’ Declaration of Independence from England was upheld by the framers of the 1787 Constitution for U.S. domestic order. That 1776 and 1787 don’t agree is a fallacy: Both documents are humble toward the civil “Supreme Judge of the world”, and neither rebukes privacy regarding the English Trinity---Catholic in 1215 then Protestant in 1689.

As a consequence of fallacy, some framers rejected the 1787 Constitution; only 39 of 55 became signers. At least 2 of the 9 states required to ratify the Constitution did so only on the promise that the First Congress would amend the draft, especially to mimic the 1689 English Bill of Rights. It requires a Protestant monarchy. The U.S. began operations with only 11 states.

Having won physical independence from England, the First Congress created a Protestant-Congress-partnership tradition to compete with the constitutional Protestant-Parliament-partnership, re-establishing psychological dependence on England. Defying the-God of Genesis 1:27-28; 1776s “the good People” and “the Supreme Judge of the world”; France’s military providence in 1781; and 1787s “We the People of the United States” and “ourselves and our Posterity”, Congress imposed an unconstitutional church alliance that has delivered the civil chaos now being imposed by the Democrat Party. The Republican Party had its chances to separate church and state and could yet reform.

We the People of the United States look to their God for relief, but in Genesis 1:27-28, they are informed that man&woman have responsible-human-independence to constrain chaos in their lives, regardless of hopes for their afterdeaths.

If America is lost to socialism, then communism, after these 229 years under “freedom of religion,” perhaps the lesson will inspire global reform to develop humble-integrity, at last.

On the other hand, it seems time for 2020s “ourselves and our Posterity” to defend the world’s last hope for responsible-human-independence: the U.S. humble-integrity, articulated.

By the way, it’s possible that Chesterton (d. 1936, UK) read Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” and recalled, “. . . a long habit of not thinking a thing WRONG, gives it a superficial appearance of being RIGHT.” I prefer Paine.

Thank you, Mr. Lindsay, for the question.

I write to encourage and learn and hope someone comments.

FB add on: It seems time for 2020s “ourselves and our Posterity” to defend the world’s last hope for responsible-human-independence: the U.S. humble-integrity, articulated in 1776 and 1787.

https://www.quora.com/What-barriers-are-there-to-making-ethical-decisions? by Ammiel Jordan 

Four thousand years ago, a political philosopher suggested, in Genesis 1:27-28, that the-God assigned to man&woman the responsible-human-integrity to constrain chaos on earth. Primitive minds already had the habit of arguing and warring over who is the-God’s people. Churches and governments partner to bemuse people from the discipline to constrain chaos in their lives regardless of hopes for their deaths.

I know of only one proffered government that proposes public discipline in order to develop responsible-human-integrity. The 1787 U.S. Constitution proposes humble-integrity, in civics “to the Supreme Judge of the world” and to spirituality, whatever the fellow-citizen nurtures for private hope and comfort in the face of human death.

The First U.S. Congress, during 1789-1791 usurped the-god, the Supreme Judge of the world, 1776s “the good People”, and 1787s We the People of the United States, especially in the First Amendment’s religion clauses. No entity gave Congress authority to impose “freedom of religion” rather than encourage the 1776 and 1787 U.S. humble-integrity.

“Ourselves and our Posterity” of 2020 have the privilege of holding Congress accountable to so amend the First Amendment. Church, a private, often international-alien association, has no place in U.S. civic, civil, legal, and public security and constraint of chaos during life.

FB add on: For humankind, ethics is the journal of discovered humble-integrity. The most egregious impediment I know of is religion, a private pursuit that unjustly causes civic chaos.

https://www.quora.com/Are-human-beings-at-their-best-givers-of-gifts? by Michael Maher 

I don’t think so.

At their best, human beings constrain chaos, both personally and civically (not civilly---that job’s for the 1776 Declaration’s “Supreme Judge of the world”).

I perceive two potential problems. First, the giver thinks they have a gift. Second, when they approach the potential receiver, they assert that the other needs the gift. The consequence is 2 avenues for creating chaos. Chaos has a way of escalating.

When someone proposes to “save my soul” I sometimes withhold the question “What gives you the authority to assert it is lost?” Same with telling me I’m going to Hell or equal.

I write to learn, so please comment.

https://www.quora.com/What-does-it-mean-to-treat-everyone-equally? By Ashwin Krishna 

Neither initiate harm to or from any person or association, including your person.

 

https://www.quora.com/Can-the-acceptance-of-lifes-unfairness-set-you-free? by Vincent Pisano 

I don’t think so.

For 4 thousand years now, humankind has had the suggestion that the-God, whatever-it-is, assigns to the human being the responsibility to constrain chaos in life, regardless of hopes for afterdeath, that vast time after body, mind, and person no longer has the chance to develop humble-integrity.

Both churches and governments and their partnerships influence people to tolerate dependency rather than develop the responsible-human-independence required to constrain chaos in their lives.

The proffered U.S. proposed the people to separate church from state. However, the First Congress repressed the 1776 Declaration of Independence and the 1787 U.S. Constitution, labeling its preamble “secular” and in 1789-91 re-establishing the traditional colonial-American-Protestant-Congress partnership to compete with the constitutional Church-of-England-Parliament partnership, usurping the-God, the Supreme Judge of the world, and “ourselves and our Posterity”. The Congressional tyranny has gone un-assailed ever since.

We the People of the United States of 2020 have the privilege of holding Congress responsible to amend the First Amendment so as to promote U.S. humble-integrity rather than support the chaos of international religious institutions. The 2020 “ourselves and our Posterity” can no longer brook the divergent chaos we experience from Congress and the US Supreme Court.

FB add on: Time to end 229 years of Congressional tyranny nourished by the U.S. Supreme Court; "ourselves and our Posterity" could, should, can, re-establish U.S. humble-integrity and end the divergent chaos.

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-necessary-to-transform-personal-vision-into-shared-vision-Why-and-why-not-Justify-your-answer-with-logical-arguments? by Syed Waqas Raza

Accepting responsible-human-independence should be promoted.

It is necessary to encourage every human being to constrain chaos during their lifetime.

Sharing the chaos-constraint-vision is necessary, in order to encourage fellow-citizens to 1) accept the responsibility to develop their unique psychological maturity, unknown as it may be, until death, and 2) to support the statutory justice that may constrain those individuals who choose to nurture/tolerate an opposite of human being.

Human beings cannot limit the opposites a person may nurture, but opposites I found online include: animal, beast, beastie, brute, critter, immortal, devil, evil, robot, zompire, mortal soul, inanimate, immortal soul, idea, god, dracula, concept, chamber, cat, apparition, abstract, zed, woman, thunder god, team, group, community, person, civilian, dog, and adjectives apelike, anthropoid, nonhuman, bloodless, anthropoidal, inhuman, dehumanised, dehumanized, unhuman.

Relative to the society of human beings, I would add traitor, tyrant and synonyms of both. On the other hand, people who think erroneously, like, crime pays, may reform.

I write to learn and would appreciate comments.

FB add on: A person’s first step toward constraining chaos during life may be to choose to develop a human being rather than nurture/tolerate an opposite.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Which-is-more-important-reliability-or-validity-1?  By Catherine Doucer

It depends upon whether the speaker has chosen to be a human being or one of its opposites. A person who so chose is both validly and reliably a beast. A traitor is validly and reliably a traitor. A communist is validly and reliably a communist.

 

 https://www.quora.com/Is-there-truly-a-common-ground-that-everyone-everywhere-could-be-harmonious-in? by Melonie Tuttle

I think so.

Each person can decide to constrain chaos in their lives. The consequence would be humble-integrity to self. Human connections would benefit from fidelity instead of infidelity. Consistent choices to exclude infidelity would accumulate to a perfect, unique lifetime for each person who accepts the self-interest.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-are-your-top-5-classic-works-of-philosophy? By Niklas Anzinger 

Thinking first of how much time/effort I spent on a literature, there’s The Bible (KJV, NIV, then CJB); Emerson; Faulkner; Einstein; and Plato.

Respecting discovery of the person, Phil Beaver: Machiavelli in irony; Overstreet’s mature mind; Chekhov on appreciating spouse; Gibran on children; and Cecil J. Scnheer on philosophy.

Respecting citizenship: the key documents from 1774 through 1791; Paine; Twain; O’Connor; J.B. Preistley; Polanyi’s personal knowledge.

Some key humilities acquired from each author, respectively:

Don’t expect church or state to usurp individual, responsible-human-independence, in order to constrain chaos in life. (Bible)

Your self-reliant human being can perfect your unique person. (Emerson)

Justice is thicker than blood. (Faulkner)

Physics and integrity conform to the same laws. (Einstein)

“Good” is adequate and needs no substitute, such as “God” or “virtue”. (Plato)

The clergy-politician-partnership picks the people’s pockets with antinomianism and only a dreamer would suggest reform. (Machiavelli)

It takes a complete human lifetime to develop psychological maturity. (Overstreet)

A wounded spouse can destroy the faithful, innocent other. (Chekov)

Try to be like your children’s future adults rather than constrain them to your vision. (Gibran)

Reason cannot defeat research on the-ineluctable-evidence. (Schneer)

The U.S. developed and expressed humble-integrity toward both church and Congress, then fatally partnered them, and must reform.

A fellow-citizen can redress a neighbor for folly without being offensive. (Paine)

Fellow-citizens have the empathy required to sacrifice religion for the other’s life. (Twain)

Worthy writing violently pursues the-ineluctable-truth. (O’Connor)

The 4,000 year old suggestion that man&woman must appreciate each other was abused by both Homer and 500 years of Western thought. (Priestley)

An individual’s God can bemuse them from humility. (Polyani)

Thank you, Mr. Anzinger, for the incentive to review. I am shocked with how many writers I passed over, now realizing they were bemused by their opinion about ancient thought. For example, Albert Einstein is not considered a political philosopher, but he was among the ancients in quality. Of course, I do not know the-objective-truth.

 

 

 

https://www.quora.com/Is-there-really-such-things-as-implicit-bias-Is-the-mental-process-of-forming-our-attitudes-and-beliefs-towards-a-group-of-people-done-fully-consciously-willfully-and-voluntarily? by Kiril Degtarev 

I don’t think so---beyond the widespread neglect of articulating the choice to be a human being rather than one of the antonyms, like beast or critter; in my opinion, priest or minister is as antonymous to “human being” as Mormon saint.

Over 4 thousand years ago, someone suggested that man&woman are charged to constrain chaos on earth. People then struggled for carnal needs---eating, resting, warmth, and banal satisfaction more than psychological needs. Men did not take heed to appreciate women.

And the equally-primitive scribe reported the earth-management message as a mystery from his God. Most people since then have conflicted and warred over the God, intentionally or not, neglecting fidelity to responsible human independence for survival of the human race.

The infidelity to self-interest was acute when Israel demanded kings, and thereby disbursed their race of people. It became worse when England’s constitutional church-state-partnership accepted Catholicism in 1215s Magna Carta then, after Martin Luther, “reformed” to English-Protestantism in 1689s Bill of Rights. America, relieved of English disputes, under religious “e pluribus unum”, shockingly re-establish colonial-English-American tradition with a Protestant-Congress partnership, in 1791s Bill of Rights. In 2020, it seems there are as many Christianity-s as there are believers—-religious chaos. It seems self-evident that not just Christianity, but religion itself increases chaos on earth. It also seems self-evident that neither the God nor a government will usurp the human being’s responsibility to constrain chaos in his or her life.

This is 2020, and 1776s “the good People” as well as 1787s “We the People of the United States” have posterity who can choose to accept, at last, responsibility for peace on earth, leaving anyone’s concerns about afterdeath to their mysterious hopes and comforts—-whether religion is involved or not.

The individual who would accuse me of being brutish is taking offense at my appreciation of fellow-persons with objection to religion’s role in creating chaos; religion could serve believers’ mysteries and still support peace on earth. The human carnage caused by religion is staggering and exponentially increasing!

It brings me warmth to express this appeal to human beings who are also religious believers to take advantage of this season of good will to start a much needed reform. The 2020 “ourselves and our Posterity” can take the decision, at last, to establish psychological independence from England by requiring Congress to undo its 1791-2020 chaos: amending the First Amendment so as to promote U.S. humble-integrity---rather than continue to support the international chaos that religion imposes on the earth in defiance of whatever entity suggested Genesis 1:27-28.

FB add on:

In this 2020 season of goodwill, we human beings can bring peace on earth by heeding the charge expressed in Genesis 1:27-28 rather than tolerating brutes and tyrants who speculate and war over the entity that may have inspired the 4-thousand year-old suggestion. It is in our self-interest to stop expecing the God or government to usurp responsible human independence.

We can express humble-integrity and appreciation to the msyterious God by controlling chaos both in our individual lives and our human connections.

 

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Is-there-any-hope-for-lessening-the-amount-of-moralization-in-society? by Rahul Kushwaha

I think so. In 2 steps, Merriam-Webster online tells the meaning: “to explain or interpret principles of right and wrong in behavior.” We can view what the ancients discovered, adding the experiences and observations humankind has accumulated lately, then act in our own self-interest to separate church from state.

More than 40 hundred years ago (HYA), a philosopher suggested, in 2021 awareness, that necessity requires man& woman (the androgynous pair) to constrain chaos on earth. That is, appreciate each other and mutually develop responsible human independence. However, their awareness, comprehension, and grammar was so primitive they could not discern self-interest from carnal appetite. Often, it was merely the appetite to survive, provided death was not preferred.

About 24 HYA, Greek philosophers, commenting on prior opinion, rendered suggestions for lessening chaos. For example, is “the God” a sufficient substitute for “the good”? Ineluctably good citizens (IGC) neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or from any person or association; in other words, peace is a human responsibility. IGC behave for human-equity under statutory justice. Meanwhile, written law must be honored, even if unjustly enforced.

About 20 HYA, scribes suggested, again in 2021 awareness, that human beings can perfect their unique person. Other scribes suggested that only the elect were eligible and that the un-elect hate both the elect and the electors. Introduction of hate between fellow-citizens creates rather than constrains chaos. Therefore, the book that contains those suggestions, no matter who authored it, is suspect.

In 1215, a developing military power, England, under King John 1, partnered with the Catholic Church under the Bishops at Canterbury, in the Magna Carta. Martin Luther protested in 1517, and England’s 1689 Bill of Rights requires a Protestant monarchy.

In 1763, the constitutional Parliament-church-partnership began taxing loyal American subjects to benefit their fellow subjects and families on the island, Great Britain. The colonists had been complaining about both Catholic encroachment from Nova Scotia and England’s African-slave trade imposing slave-management responsibility on the colonies. Taxation tipped the human-responsibility from dependency to independence. In 1774, the colonists stated their complaints. In 1776, in humble-integrity, representatives, dubbed “the founding fathers,” declared independence, appealing “to the Supreme Judge of the world,” the earth’s war power. With military providence from France, the French and the colonists accepted Cornwallis’s surrender in 1781. In 1784, 13 former British-colonies ratified their global status as free and independent states. The human being needs freedom and independence to develop humble-integrity.

In 1787, delegates from 12 willing states in Philadelphia created domestic order with a union of states under 3 branches rather than with the confederation under Congress. The republic would be held accountable by willing citizens called “We the People of the United States”. Ratification by 9 states would create the USA, leaving dissident states still free and independent. Nothing in the framers’ 1787 document lessens the humble-integrity the founders expressed in the 1776 Declaration. Among some framers’ dissatisfactions was that the 1787 Constitution broke the tradition of Congress-Protestant-partnership. Only 39 of 55 framers signed the document. Some states required commitment to amend the 1787 Constitution with an English-like Bill of Rights in order to ratify. With that provision, the USA began operations in 1789 under eleven states, and in 1791, with 14 states, Congress, with the U.S. Bill of Rights, re-established some British-traditions, including Congress-Protestant-partnership. Neither the necessity to constrain chaos, the 1776 founders, the 1787 signers, nor We the People of the United States authorize Congress to usurp the human being’s freedom and independence from religion.

In 1860, the Confederate States of America (CSA), believed Bible interpretation that African-slavery was God’s punishment for black-heritage of sin. Rather than abolitionists, only God could decide the duration of black-punishment. The CSA resumed aggression (Bleeding Kansas, 1854) holding abolitionists evil Bible-interpreters, declared secession from the USA, and opened-fire at Fort Sumter. CSA had a 7 states: 27 states military disadvantage. Only religious zeal can motivate such folly! The consequence, in proportion to the 2020 population is 8 million Americans killed in a white-Christian war against white-Christians.

Many scholars write about the U.S. development of civic humble-integrity as freedom and liberty, interchangeably, often in the same essay. In doing so, they overlook that the U.S., in the 1787 Constitution, codified its separation from England in psychology as a progeny of physics. The 80% of inhabitants who were free to develop civic humble-integrity were too dependent on church to take responsibility to constrain chaos in the United States. The 12 generations of “ourselves and our Posterity” since then have left to us, “to ourselves and our Posterity”, the privilege of separating state from church, at last.

Neither the God nor a government will usurp our opportunity to amend the First Amendment so as to encourage responsible human independence rather than dependency on religious liberty or freedom of religion.

Fellow-citizens who know this is correct yet hesitate have lost the opportunity, and someone else intends to destroy the entity We the People of the United States altogether.

I hope most of us will act to restore ’76 and ‘87 U.S. humble-integrity in 2020 and get it done in 2021.

FB add on: Hope lies in separation of church and state so that the human being can focus on constraining chaos in life rather than depending on the mysterious  afterdeath. The 1776 and 1787 U.S. proposition is responsible human independence rather than freedom (a human trait) and liberty (licensed by the victor in war). We are the 12th of the latest generations to receive the privilege of establishing psychological independence from England's constitutional church-state-partnership. Our chance is disappearing as I write.

Appreciators, Quora Space

12/13/2020.

To people who recently joined this discussion space, thank you. Please invite people you perceive would like to join.

Today, I realized I should clarify my intentions for this space. It is for people to freely develop human appreciation, as they see it, rather than tolerate infidelity to self/humankind. That is to say, it is not intended for me. Presently, I am the only administrator, and I hope there will be others. I hope each Appreciators-member will treat the space as theirs, to communicate and connect for responsible human independence as they perceive it.

I discovered that I learn by listening.

I chose Quora Space, because I have acquired tentative trust that its management intends to create human dialogue for a better future. I did so after a 2 decades, withdrawn for 3 years now, participation in “letters to the editor” then online comments for my local newspaper. At last, I accepted that it’s freedom of the press, not the letter writer. Therefore, I created blogs, so that I could express myself without restriction beyond sincerity and decency.

I chose not to generate revenue, because of the importance of my 2 concerns: what it means to be a human being and what it means to be a US citizen. My opinions in response to my own 2 questions are no longer first priority to me, because I discovered immense creativity in the questions I face on http://quora.com (and less frequently on other venues). People who are interested can sample my weekly responses at Voluntary Civic People of Baton Rouge.

In summary, I hope Appreciators will experience the joy of immediately ignoring questions/concerns that do not attract their interest, in order to clearly, attractively, and sincerely respond to every questioner whose concern seems worthy. I have been doing this in open forums for the recent 7 of the 20 years until I stopped press-participation. I cannot imagine what will happen among Appreciators-members (and the companion group, Preamblers). Both spaces are for the volunteers who join, and it is my intention for the space to serve “ourselves and our Posterity”.

Appreciators, Preamblers Quora Spaces

Interest seems low for now.

Law professors

I feel censored by lawliberty.org but will try again when I have more time. Just now, perhaps until January 21, my interest in them is not high.

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.