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: ” Civic Citizens of the United States continually develop and practice 5
domestic disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and
prosperity---“in order to” encourage responsible human independence to U.S.
youth and 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
How does the President protect civic citizens’ strengths?
Regarding the civic citizens’ strengths as “holy-pearls”
and as dogs and pigs the U.S. aliens, both domestic and
the (lesser) foreigners, who constantly attack the President, I marvel: how
well the Trump/Pence administration executes Matthew 6:7, “Don’t give to dogs what
is holy, and don’t throw your pearls to the pigs. If you do, they may trample
them under their feet, then turn and attack you.”
I
am so happy to be among the 14 million voters who selected Trump/Pence for the
GOP nominees. I am on deck to vote for them a third time, and regard
their service to We the People of the United States as humility so sincere as
to allow the dogs and pigs ample forums to bark and squeal themselves into public
awareness.
Quora
As we are observing these days more than the rule of law
what fellow citizens need is acceptance of human equity under statutory
justice.
The chief problem just now is that many elected and
appointed officials in the U.S. consider themselves above We the People of the
United States as defined in the U.S. Preamble, the preamble to the U.S.
Constitution.
Democrats are especially proud of their self-granted status
above We the People of the United States. Some elected officials claim they
cannot be of We the People of the United States, because they are religious.
They are self-styled aliens.
The rule of law is secondary to civic citizenship, and there
needs to be a supermajority of civic citizens in order for a republic to
constrain the chaos of democracy.
https://www.quora.com/What-causes-people-to-give-socially-desirable-answers-rather-than-honest-ones?
Psychological adolescence. Read H.A. Overstreet’s “The
Mature Mind,” 1949. If you learn of a better book on the topic, please alert
me.
https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-that-people-in-some-countries-dont-know-their-rights?
Since a natural disaster or fellow citizens taking the
liberty of vigilantism can take your life, if think the only valid human right
is the opportunity to develop integrity.
I think the U.S., more than England, or any European country
offers its citizens the opportunity to develop integrity. Unfortunately, too
few accept the opportunity to develop integrity rather than tolerate
infidelity, and even fewer articulate it.
Citizens who aid equity under statutory justice and encourage
dissidents to reform are good, or civic.
In the U.S., the civic agreement, after asserting
maintenance of the U.S. Constitution, is expressed in its preamble’s
proposition, in my view: Civic citizens
of the United States nurture and practice 5 public disciplines---integrity,
justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage responsible
human independence to living citizens.
U.S. citizens who do not have a personal interpretation of
the U.S. Preamble’s proposition will find it in their self-interest to develop
one. I consider mine among my precious personal properties.
https://www.quora.com/How-can-natural-justice-be-claimed?
“The three main requirements of natural justice that must be
met in every case are: adequate notice, fair hearing and no bias.”; https://www.obsi.ca/en/how-we-work/resources/Documents/Principles-of-Natural-Justice-in-Ombudsmanship.pdf.
I don’t see how these requirements can be processed, as
viewed by the three actors.
The accused needs immediate notice at one of two moments:
either after he or she offends or immediately after the offended party decides
to accuse the innocent party. In the first case exculpatory evidence lessens
with time and in the second, the accused has no clues to proper defense against
a strategic accusation.
The offended party has lessened fortune due to the offense and
may not be skilled in the art of successfully accusing the actual offender;
that is, skilled in thinking through the injustice he or she suffered. Of
course a skillful and fortunate attorney can at least partially overcome the
disadvantages. On the other hand, a skillful plaintiff lawyer can present the
case so as to favor the offended party according to the civilization.
By civilization I mean not only the statutory law but the
adjudication procedures. Briefly, there is little chance of unbiased justice in
a court of law.
For example, in criminal trials by jury, unanimous verdicts
are required in the U.S. In England and many former British colonies, 10:2 jury
verdicts are allowed so as to suppress organized crime’s influence. Statistically,
with a 12-person jury in a population spit 50/50, 7:5 jury-verdicts are
statistically more likely to be unbiased than 12:0 verdicts. The U.S. Supreme
Court often renders opinion on 5:4 votes.
The victims of this tyranny in the U.S. are the crime victim
and the civic citizens who pay for statutory law-enforcement. The villains are
the judges and lawyers who favor, for example, the unanimous jury system.
There is a remedy for this dilemma, and that is to reform
for justice based on the ineluctable evidence more than the judicial skills in
the civilization. In other words, develop a culture of equity under statutory
justice derived from actual reality (the-objective-truth if not
the-literal-truth) rather than judicial process.
The question confuses me, I think because of the word
“truthful.” To me, “truthful” implies honesty, which is insufficient to
integrity.
If a person chooses to develop integrity, it becomes easy to
answer “I don’t know,” when that is so. Or
“I’ve considered it but have not drawn a conclusion.” But a promise made must
be kept, to avoid woe.
I once promised to stop drinking in order to help inspire a
friend to stop. Later, I traveled to Europe and expected to be offered wine at
many events. I asked my friend for a temporary relief from my promise. The
friend granted my request but then resumed his drinking practice. That
experience taught me the lesson that if a promise is made, letting a competing
motive interfere invites woe.
My example takes the question from an internal debate to a
civic connection, which makes your question critical to utilitarianism.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Can-we-reverse-the-effects-of-political-correctness?
How far back would you reform? The Christian thing to do? Avoiding
the tree of knowledge? Abandoning civic discipline in order to worship Aten?
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-glaring-examples-of-fierce-individualism-in-today-s-society?
I have lots of questions about your question but will ignore
them to suggest the-best-example-of-fierce-individualism I have observed as of
my late eighth decade.
How does the President protect the nation’s secrets and
practice transparency to the civic citizens of the United States and their
fellow inhabitants? How does he or she negotiate with foreign powers and share
his or her perceptions at home?
I think of national secrets as holy pearls as I read Matthew
7:6: “Don’t give to dogs what is holy, and don’t throw your pearls to the pigs.
If you do, they may trample them under their feet, then turn and attack you.”
The U.S. presidential voters elected Donald J. Trump to behave wisely in the
midst of dogs and pigs, and to me, that’s everyone except Donald J. Trump,
because know one else knows the holy pearls.
Thus, even Mr. Vice-President must be accustomed to surprise
responses from Mr. President when a question is asked so with so much canny as
to prompt revelation of a holy pearl from an unskilled president.
I have observed many cases of writers for the media opining
in pseudo-news that Trump lied, when the writer does not agree with Trump.
Also, biased by being one of the 14 million GOP voters who chose Trump/Pence, I
am usually able to assuage my doubts about what Trump has said or done and
accept the uncertainty when I can’t. Therefore, I cannot say that Trump ever
lied to my knowledge.
However, if he did, and his purpose was to practice Matthew
7:6, I consider it an act of extreme humility. To practice lying seems an
ultimate failure to civic integrity. However, in this application I don’t think
a civic citizen knows enough to conclude that Trump lied.
Trump’s fierce individualism is best expressed when he goes
over his proposals to tentative staff, GOP friends, Democrat enemies, foreign
enemies, and fellow citizens and finishes by saying, “We’ll see how it turns
out.”
First, a citizen may notice that the collective cannot practice integrity if
each individual member is dissident to justice.
Second, a citizen may accept that the collective can
practice integrity if a super-majority of individual members aid the
development of equity under statutory justice and transparently constrain the
dissident fellow-members.
These principles are abstractly expressed in the U.S.
Preamble’s proposition. The preamble has two main ideas: 1) inhabitants
authorize and maintain written law and its system of conduct, and 2) each
citizen may volunteer to execute the disciplines to empower the purpose. I call
this second part the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. I encourage every U.S.
citizen to develop a personal interpretation of the proposition. Mine, shared for
criticism so that I may improve, is:
Civic citizens of the United States nurture and practice 5 public
disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to
encourage responsible human independence to living citizens.
https://www.quora.com/How-much-censorship-is-justified-for-a-free-societys-survival?
It seems to me the Trump/Pence administration, during the
House Democrat impeachment of Donald Trump exemplified the necessary posture
for a free-society to survive.
It was obvious to the 14 million voters who chose the
Trump/Pence ticket in the 2016 GOP primaries that the Democrats, perhaps with
2-3 dissenters were each liars with the arrogance to break constitutional standards
so they could implement partisan impeachment of the President.
I suspect the Democrats counted on the partisan press to
fulfill the tyranny that is coming from some “journalism” schools: social
“scientists” manipulate statistics in public polls designed to promote a social
bias; the media can slant the results so as to influence public opinion; and
public opinion determines political policy. The social scientists as well as
the media overlook to power of civic citizens to maintain the disciplines for
responsible human independence. The Democrats are the victims of civic
citizens.
Further, some of the Democrat witnesses exercised their
opportunities to express themselves as arrogant career-officials who had no intentions
of submitting to their boss---the President, who was elected by Civic Citizens
of the United States as defined in the U.S. Preamble.
I think the Trump/Pence administration was correct to resist
the Democrats’ actions without trying to invoke force. By defending the
administration’s actions without interfering with the House Democrats’ tyranny,
actual-reality prevailed in the Senate with its trial. There, one Senator
distinguished himself as “a religious man” who could not uphold the U.S.
Constitution as he swears to do. We now know not to vote for any person of his
religious persuasion.
If the voters censored the Democrats and the religious
aliens, they could not express their tyranny so clearly, and voters might have
more difficulty discerning the self-interests they approve: Civic citizens always vote for elected and
appointed officials who demonstrate individual trust-in and commitment-to We
the People of the United States as defined in the preamble to the U.S.
Constitution.
There are more serious concerns than the Democrats. For
example, the justices on the U.S. Supreme court seem to perceive they long
since rose above civic citizenship to an egocentric divine status that empowers
them to defy actual-reality.
That brings me to what civic citizens conform to: the U.S.
Preamble’s five public disciplines that are offered to willing citizens in
order to encourage responsible human independence. Civic citizens always want
to learn fellow-citizens’ complaints without vigilantism so as to have the chance
to aid reform to statutory justice when written law is found erroneous.
Ethical transparency includes humility toward
whatever-God-is. Yet U.S. citizens who possess that humility are urged to tolerate
if not join the hubris of government officials who represent their personal
Gods. Many government officials transparently alienate themselves from their
oaths to uphold the U.S. Constitution, claiming the right by tradition to
unconstitutionally err by adding “. . . so help me God” to their oath of
office. The person who claims unconstitutional decisions based on his or her
religion is an alien to We the People of the United States as defined by the
preamble to the U.S. Constitution and beyond. The tyranny the First Congress
imposed in the First Amendment is none the less tyranny; the religion clauses
should be reformed to integrity clauses.
Ethics is the journal of the path to the-literal-truth. The
press does not serve that purpose, as they are obligated-to, under ‘freedom of
the press.” Civilizations specify norms, standards, and ethics that may not
conform to integrity. The press executes their particular business plan.
When I think about an institution that may be journaling the
path to ethics, I think of Wikipedia. That is the reason I contribute my few
dollars to them each year.
Humankind has the awareness and grammar necessary to develop
integrity. Integrity is a process, and its product is the-objective-truth when
existing means of perceiving are too imperfect to discern the-literal-truth.
The-objective-truth ultimately approaches the-literal-truth. The mature adult
has reformed to the childhood acceptance “I don’t know” when that is so.
Otherwise, the adult may be behaving unethically.
The integrity process includes: 1) researching a heartfelt
concern to learn if it is a mirage; if so, that conclusion is journaled; 2)
with valid concerns, additional research is conducted to discover and
comprehend the cause; 3) additional research adds understanding how to benefit
from the discovery; 4) behaving for benefits that neither initiate nor tolerate
harm to fellow citizens or their responsible institutions; 5) informing the
public as to the reasons for the self-interested and civic conduct so as to
learn suggestions they may offer; and 6) keeping an open mind for needed
change. The product of this process is the-objective-truth if not
the-literal-truth.
I know of only one proposal for a civilization that could
develop these principles. The preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S.
Preamble), consists of two main thoughts, both of which each citizen has the
self-interest to interpret.
The main thought is “we the people” maintain the articles of
the U.S. Constitution. Within the articles, means for amendment are specified,
so that living people can reform unjust laws from the past. Thereby, the
continuum of living citizens can reform unjust law toward statutory justice.
A secondary thought, a proposed purpose, is abstractly
stated, and each living citizen may interpret it so as to order his or her
civic, civil, and legal living as well as pursue any responsible spiritual life
he or she chooses. By “responsible spiritual life” I mean spiritualism that
conform to written law during the journey to statutory justice. The U.S.
Preamble addresses civic, civil, and legal disciplines, leaving
spirituality/religion to individual privacy.
I share my interpretation hoping readers suggest
improvements in my intentions for my life:
Civic citizens of the United States nurture and practice 5 public
disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to
encourage responsible human independence to living inhabitants. Notice that
religion is not included in the list of civic disciplines, tacitly designating
it to privacy.
Acceptance of these principles can be made transparent by publically practicing
the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. For example, civic meetings, oaths, and
contracts can express humility rather than transparent hubris by using the term
“whatever-God-is” rather than “God.” If so, those civic citizens who do not
have a personal God need not suffer the tyranny of civil Gods.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-our-main-duty-as-a-human-being?
The main duty is to discover the question and accept that: I
am a human being and may choose to individually behave, as some persons
civically, civilly, and legally do.
Beyond that acceptance is the discovery a nest of
acceptances and choosing to develop integrity rather than tolerate infidelity
to your person.
Posts that expand on that topic may be found on Google Chrome using searches,
for example, "Phil Beaver"+"nest of acceptances" or better,
"Phil Beaver"+"civic"+"acceptance".
Another possibility is to discover that Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs can be
viewed as a hierarchy of responsible
human independence (RHI). I assert that the U.S. hidden purpose is
majority-public discipline in order to encourage RHI to U.S. youth and beyond.
So far, We the People of the United States has held its education departments
accountable for encouraging RHI. Therefore, civic integrity exponentially lags
technology, which is progressing with moon landings in preparation to explore
Mars.
The 2020 U.S. generation is the first to articulate the
importance of every citizen developing his or her individual interpretation of
the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. With the aid of the Internet, a super-majority
of citizens may be practicing the proposition as they personally view it within
a couple years. If so, an achievable better future might emerge.
I share my interpretation hoping readers suggest
improvements in my intentions for my life:
Civic citizens of the United States nurture and practice 5 public
disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to
encourage responsible human independence to living inhabitants.
If you like this proposal, please share it along with your
suggestions or replacement.
https://www.quora.com/What-current-habits-will-remain-part-of-our-global-culture-for-eternity?
The pursuit of integrity.
For example, some authentic women and some reliable men will
continue to appreciate the human ovum and the spermatozoon as the potential for
conceiving a human being and therefore granting each of the mentioned single
cells the human equity and dignity they are due. Call that man, woman, and
their progeny a family-unit and call their practice responsible human
independence.
Homosexual unions cannot ignore the equity and dignity due
the human gametes and conceptions.
The human family will continue to appreciate their
opportunity to develop integrity rather than tolerate infidelity so that the
children’s children and descendants beyond can also practice responsible human
independence.
In other words, the sequential monogamy for life,
heterogeneous successions, will continue in conformity to physics and its
progeny including psychology.
Descendants who choose homosexual unions will accept the
additional work to provide children they parent the heterosexual-family
experience the children deem equitable and dignified. An option is to live in
monogamy (childless). I do not know how homosexual couples can provide
heterosexual-family experience. I also do not know the-literal-truth.
I understand that only 1/8 of heterosexual marriages are
monogamous for life. That statistic reflects not invalidity of the monogamy
premise but the cultural influences that purport to encourage it. I refer to
religion, which inculcates personal dependence upon a higher power. By not
accepting human integrity, parties can point to failures of each other’s’
personal God. However, everybody knows nobody can specify whatever-God-is.
For this reason and others, I have written for over 20 years
urging amendment of the First Amendment to encourage integrity, a citizen’s
self-interest, rather than religion, a business interest. I think I could
witness that U.S.-reform within 2 years, because civic citizens would be
relieved of the existing hubris against whatever-God-is.
Discerning the great human witnesses is not easy. I will ramble
through a few opinions.
Agathon said that appreciation’s greatest power is that
practitioners neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or from any person or
institution. Thus, a civic person is intolerant of institutional tyranny and
remains strong so as to resist actual attack, whether physical or psychological.
Socrates chose an unjust execution rather than exile in
order to uphold written law before the related statutory justice was
discovered. He was falsely accused of refuting God and made the point that no
human or its institutions can constrain whatever-God-is.
Jesus demonstrated that the clergy-government-partnership
maintains tyranny against the human species and that each human can apply HIPEA
(human individual power, energy, and authority) to perfect his or her unique
person.
Ralph Waldo Emerson explained Jesus’s message: the
opportunity of human life is to perfect your unique person. For that speech,
“Divinity School Address,” (1838) he was banned from scholarly influence for 3
decades.
R.E. Lee, in a December 1856 letter to his wife left
ineluctable evidence that the American Civil War, 1861-65, was Christian
slave-staters trying to prove that Christian abolitionists were evil---trying
to accelerate Lee’s Christian God’s plan. Bleeding Kansas and the CSA’s
declaration of secession verify Lee’s erroneous Christian beliefs were widely
shared.
Abraham Lincoln seems too political to leave reliable
witness, and his political use of the Declaration of Independence to lessen the
power of the U.S. Preamble and its supporting articles and statutes is
egregious. Late during the war, I feel any corruption derived from insufferable
pain more than power.
Thank you, Mr. Hardy, for calling my attention to causality,
knowledge, and Freedom. Some scholars add “belief”; https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/royal-institute-of-philosophy-supplements/article/freedom-knowledge-belief-and-causality/E35BEFE086A308FC2F8B65B8275B143B.
I also glanced at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_responsibility.
I wish to admit I don’t know the-objective-truth regarding
your question and answer according to my opinion, focusing on three
individual acceptances as the human obligations you invoke.
First, moral responsibility is a human concern, because no
other species has the awareness and grammar with which to consider civic
obligations. Consequently, some humans develop psychological maturity in 3
quarter-century phases, if at all: acquiring the comprehension and intention to
live their unique human lifetime; serving fellow citizens so as to earn a
living and develop experiences and observations on which to develop integrity,
and examining the consequences of his or her life so as to share with
posterity. It is important for the person to accept that he or she is a human
being; the earlier in life, the better.
Second, each human has the individual power, the individual
energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to either develop integrity or
tolerate infidelity to his or her person. It is important for the person to
accept that some citizens discover and accept HIPEA and choose to
practice integrity.
Third, humankind has suggested for over 2,400 years now
that, in my interpretation, civic citizens develop equity under statutory
justice. Call equity under statutory justice the civic contract. It is
important for the person to accept civic citizenship rather
than dissidence to human justice.
These principles are not published, except by me, because,
frankly, the system of scholarship censors propositions for civic discipline by
which to develop responsible human independence. This has evolved from the
arts, wherein artisans must earn a living and the most lucrative revenues come
from the wealthy.
Unless the wealthy person is armed with extraordinary
integrity, wealth entices typical human beings into civic infidelities derived
from the non-religious interpretation of Chapter XI Machiavellianism. That is,
the wealthy and the politicians partner (beyond the clergy-politician
partnership) to be elite and to hide the civic contract from the non-elite
fellow citizens. It is nearly impossible for an elite to accept the civic
contract. Consider, for example, how U.S. Senators treat themselves at the
expense of the non-elites.
In the U.S., the civic contract is proposed in the preamble
to the U.S. Constitution. It consists of a thought with a subordinate catalogue
of intentions. The simple thought is: inhabitants “ordain and establish this Constitution.” The
demographic is narrowed to citizens who agree with the intention “in Order to”
and the proposition that follows. It is in every citizen’s self-interest to
interpret and practice the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. In other words, to
accept being a U.S. civic citizen rather than a dissident.
My
interpretation (which I share hoping for readers’ suggestions to improve the
integrity of my citizenship) is: Civic
citizens of the United States nurture and practice 5 public
disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to
encourage responsible human independence to U.S. youth and fellow inhabitants.
With
a supermajority of U.S. Citizens practicing their interpretations of the U.S.
Preamble, say 2/3 of voters, the U.S. elite partnerships could be held
accountable after 232 years under a Congress that could not care less about the
U.S. Preamble and the articles and statues that ought to conform to its
proposition.
Incidentally,
after giving up on more local elected officials, I have written to my State
Senators, Cassidy and Kennedy, requesting a meeting to listen to my concerns,
and they have shown no appreciation for my citizenship. I hope that will change
soon.
The most fundamental principle, integrity, is not accepted
in the 12. That is not surprising.
Honesty is insufficient. Integrity is conformity to
the-literal-truth and is arduous. Most people don’t even discover integrity
much less develop the practice.
Integrity is a process: research a heartfelt concern to
discover if it is a mirage, and if so, journal the conclusion; if not, research
the practices that are possible using the discovery, so as to choose a
self-interest; choose to neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or from any
person or their institutions; publicly announce your discovery, understanding,
and practice and be open to any criticism so as to consider improvements others
perceive; remain open-minded to new concerns or discoveries that require change
and effect integrity as soon as possible.
Merriam-Webster online tells us “integrity” means adherence
to a moral code, or soundness, or completeness and perhaps all three. Ethics
and moral codes journal the path to integrity.
I Googled your topic and found https://www.standardizations.org/bulletin/?p=133.
The article switches to personal integrity, the egocentricity that begs ruin.
Executives who develop and practice integrity expand the leading edge of ethics
and moral principles, sometimes negating a civilization’s accepted practice.
The preamble to the U.S. Constitution proposes 5 public
disciplines to encourage responsible human independence. The 5 disciplines for
my 2020 living are: integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity. I
think 5 is more manageable than 12. And the UN declaration of human rights is
serious comedy.
I wish I could learn from fellow citizens’ interpretations
of the preamble, but alas few people are interested.
I don’t know, but think so, in an un-established proposal.
America evolved from 100 years French and English wars for
liberty that was often taken for license to kill. For domestic justice, the
1787 framers of the U.S. Constitution proposed a system with no standards but
statutory law, providing to amend it. Radical change is possible when needed.
The U.S. Preamble features a simple sentence: inhabitants
“ordain and establish this Constitution” plus the intention “in order to . . .”
It’s astonishing that the Committee of Style, from September 8 to 12, 1787,
added the proposition that some framers refused to sign.
America’s greatness is that every citizen has the
prerogative to consider the U.S. Preamble’s proposition or not. If not, he or
she invites personal woe and is counting on civic citizens to save them. The
second greatness is that the U.S. Preamble’s proposition offers no standards or
norms: posterity’s posterity may discover statutory justice.
The First Congress was too adolescent to accept these
profound Philadelphia developments. Congress imposed religion, in particular
Christianity, in specific, factional-Protestantism. America continues to suffer
imposition of religion when what citizens need is opportunity/encouragement to
develop integrity.
Every citizen will discover self-interest in doing the work
to derive their individual interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition.
Mine today, shared for readers to improve, follows: Civic citizens of the
United States nurture and practice 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice,
peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human
independence to living inhabitants. Religion is not included in the
disciplines because the framers had demonstrated in their debates and
procedures that spirituality is a private, human choice rather than a civic
duty.
I think that soon Congress will enact amendment of the First
Amendment so as to encourage integrity, a citizen’s self-interest, rather than
religion, a business practice, leaving spirituality a private choice. It will
be the beginning of reform from erroneous British-American traditions that
repress the U.S. Preamble’s proposition: individual discipline for responsible
human independence.
As always, follow the money. Physics and its progeny rule
both technology and psychology.
Take gender, for example. A sincere male suffers
heterophobia, which I define as the fear of falling in love with a woman. Fear,
because his intention is to care for one woman and their progeny for life. His
civilization teaches that this is a risky decision, for many reasons.
However, the ineluctable evidence is that what is required a
woman who is serenely confident that she will be true to him for her lifetime
no matter what. I am fortunate to have discovered that person for me, and we
are at the early edge of our sixth decade of marriage with three children.
I could not have articulated that she was serenely confident when I courted her
and won her hand in marriage, but I knew what I was doing in choosing her.
Some men relent and settle for less.
The money comes, for example, when some technologists
discover ways to choose “gender” and sell a person on dedicating his (or her)
life to the change. I’m waiting to hear how that investment turns out.
The technologists lobby judges and legislative officials and
recover the cost in the transgender’s bills as well as through tyranny against
civic citizens through taxation.
https://www.quora.com/Who-decides-what-the-right-thing-is?
The person who comprehends the ineluctable evidence and
understands how to apply it.
https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-really-live-out-your-values-in-the-workplace?
I think the first step is to accept that you are a person
and that each human has the individual power, the individual energy, and the
individual authority (HIPEA) to either develop integrity or tolerate infidelity
to his or her person.
I guess it takes about 3 decades for a well-coached human
being to discover HIPEA and then integrity and choose to develop it. I estimate
another 3 decades to rebound from errors (not habits). During another 3 decades
a psychologically mature person can begin resisting both internal and external
constraints so as to encourage fellow citizens to discover HIPEA and choose
integrity.
https://www.quora.com/What-happened-when-you-spoke-up-and-asked-for-what-you-wanted-in-life?
Since I was talking to my mirror, I got to work. Now I am in
my eighth decade and still developing integrity, low as my thoughts may be.
No.
Every human ovum is unique. Every human spermatozoon is
unique. An ovum and a spermatozoon unite to form one unique single cell
conception. Gestation, delivery, infant care, rearing, and everything
thereafter increases the individuality of the person.
To suggest equality among unique beings exposes immaturity to actual-reality.
To require government officials to provide equality exposes political demands
for chaos.
I have written my opinion because I do not know
the-literal-truth.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-dignity-Why-is-it-important?
I’d like to address only “human dignity.” The human species
is the only one with the awareness by which to develop grammar.
It takes a quarter century for the human to complete the
wisdom-building parts of his or her brain. It takes another quarter century for
him or her to accept human, individual power, individual energy, and individual
authority (HIPEA) and choose to develop integrity rather than tolerate
infidelity to his or her person. During another quarter century he or she may
consider whether or not his or her person has successfully developed and
perhaps reform as needed.
By encouraged and well coached acceptances, each human may
make the most of his or her lifetime. Those who do so appreciated their
person’s human dignity.
The process of developing a mature human with dignity begins
with the ovum in a woman’s body and a spermatozoon in a man’s body. Each of
them should appreciate the gametes they carry as the beginnings of a unique
human of equal dignity. Every event after the two have been joined as a single
cell is critical to the development of a mature human who fulfilled his or her
potential.
https://www.quora.com/How-can-one-think-independently-and-know-the-right-from-the-wrong?
Independence involves a nest of acceptances: that you are a
human being; that human beings take charge of their comprehension and intention
to live a complete life; that humans have the individual power, individual
energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity to the
ineluctable evidence or tolerate infidelity; that humans who employ HIPEA for
crime and tyranny must be constrained; that criminals often self-license for
egocentric liberty and when the society you are in takes that license, you want
the independence to exit. The key to independence is the integrity to the
ineluctable evidence.
Domestic war is the consequence of social democracy’s chaos.
Social warriors invite the woe of statutory law enforcement without impacting
the lives of civic citizens beyond the inconvenience of staying away from the
mobs who self-license vigilantism for egocentric liberty/”rights”.
“Social justice” attempts to consign to the civic citizen
the responsibility for a dissident citizen’s lifestyle.
The human individual has the power, energy, and authority
(HIPEA) to develop either integrity or infidelity to his or her person.
Integrity is the practice of behaving according to the-objective-truth or
ineluctable evidence rather than human constructs. It tales about a quarter
century for a human to complete the wisdom-building parts of his or her brain
and another quarter century to accumulate the experience and observations on
which to validate his or her self-reliance.
The human infant, born feral---totally uninformed, replaces
“I don’t know” with information on which to act. His or her caretakers supply
both information and honest misinformation---based on beliefs. As the infant
develops, he or she applies self-reliance to test the misinformation and happily
replace it if needed. Understanding caretakers know that youth must address
future ways of living the caretakers cannot imagine, so they assist and
encourage youth to discover the-objective-truth and conduct their lives so as
to benefit. In appreciation, the caretaker can try to live like the youth, but
cannot force the youth to adopt the caretaker’s lifestyle: the human being is
too powerful to be forced to reject integrity. Caretakers who honestly do not
comprehend integrity may erroneously resist young self-reliance. The
consequence is conflict, and the acquiescent youth retains dependency rather
than establishing responsible human independence.
These concepts are not at all new, as they were debated by
the Greeks about 2400 years ago as extensions of then ancient arguments. For
example, in 2020 views, civic citizens develop equity under statutory justice;
civic citizens neither initiate harm to or from fellow citizens or their
institutions; unjust statutory law must be obeyed until the replacement approaching
statutory justice is discovered; the citizen who opposes statutory justice may
expect constraint by the enforcement of justice.
Advocates for social justice may expect constraint by
statutory law, even if judicial error is discovered. Social democrats fail to
accept being human and taking responsibility to use his or her HIPEA to develop
integrity.
Politicians who encourage social democracy and egocentric
“justice” invite woe. Saul Alinsky invited woe by advocating violence when his
“rights” rights were at stake and many Alinsky-Marxist followers welcome misery
and loss. I understand that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were Alinsky
students.
https://www.quora.com/How-far-do-your-values-line-up-with-your-parent-s?
Mom and Dad exemplified responsible human
independence. Low as my performance may be, I strive for individual happiness
with civic integrity.
Late in my eighth decade (past age 75), I
cannot think of an enemy or remaining quarrel. There may be people who wrote me
off or stonewall me; mutual comprehension for connection requires intentions by
both parties.
Late in my developments toward integrity I
discovered that liberty is often taken as license to damage, injure, and/or
kill. It was taken for granted by England vs France in the years 1688 to 1789,
marked by two civil wars, England’s Glorious Revolution and France’s Bloody
Revolution, respectively. In the meantime, there was America’s 1774 Revolution
for Independence from England, and liberty as license to war was taken for
granted.
However, the 1787 Constitutional
Convention produced a system for 5 public disciplines in order to encourage
responsible human independence. Mom and Dad practiced the U.S. Preamble’s
proposition to order their civic, civil, and legal lives while each pursuing
salvation of their souls as Southern Baptists. They maintained the independence
to walk away when one of their societies took the license to use violence to
make a political point.
Without articulating the appreciation for
their posterity, neither Mom nor Dad objected when I chose to be humble toward
whatever-God-is rather than continue to indoctrinate myself in one of their two
Christianities. Apparently, they were civic citizens of the United States
rather than dissidents to justice.
https://www.quora.com/Do-you-agree-with-me-that-casinos-are-morally-wrong?
Maybe so, but I’m not certain. I have not
made it a priority to analyze casino. I consider play another entertainment
that requires discipline (one I do not care to master).
The person who budgets casino play chose
it as entertainment. It is not my choice of entertainment, and I cannot fault
their choice. Similarly, the person who tithes to his or her church chose it as
entertainment, and I cannot fault their choice. I know some people who do both
activities.
Some people have not the discipline to
entertain themselves and casino play becomes their vice. The vice is a
consequence of their lack of integrity to themselves, and the casino is merely
the beneficiary of the personal infidelity.
Civic infidelity enters the picture when
the person’s infidelity affects his or her well-being or obligations to family.
The person who impoverishes himself or herself so as to attend casinos has
failed. It’s worse if family is impacted. However, the player’s infidelity
might have come out some other way, perhaps worse. People don’t think about it
too much, but Patrick Henry was married with 6 children when he said “Give me
liberty or give me death.” His patriotic zeal and solidarity with fellow
rebellion-leaders overran commitments to his family. The cause is nobler but
the infidelity to family would feel the same if suffered.
One other example: Many of us enjoy
professional sporting events and are satisfied to follow them on TV or read
about them in the news. However, some people must attend every major event,
even though they cannot afford it. That seems a vice.
I think casinos exist for people who want
to play and human life is too precious for me to try to control the wishes of
other people. If a person feels his or her play is ruining life, I hope they
will call the help line the casino displays. They won’t get such help from the
church that’s picking their pocket, because it is part of Chapter XI
Machiavellianism; see, comprehend, and remember the first paragraph of The Prince: Chapter XI. It has many applications to living in the USA.
Civic citizens need grounds to hold government officials
accountable.
https://www.quora.com/If-you-could-tell-the-world-one-universal-truth-what-would-you-say?
Not knowing the truth, may I express 2 opinions?
After humankind has arrived at one universal truth there may
remain the-literal-truth.
The human individual and his or her institutions are prudent
to reserve sufficient humility toward whatever-God-is.
I do not know. Here’s what I think.
15th to 20th century Western thought
managed to negate the American break that was proposed in the preamble to the
U.S. Constitution, reflecting the Philadelphia debates by framers from 12 of 13
former British-American colonies with their British-American traditions. We can reform.
Each citizen should own his or her interpretation of the
U.S. Preamble. Here’s mine on 6/21/2020:
Civic citizens of the United States nurture 5 public
disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity in order to
demonstrate to U.S. youth and posterity responsible human independence under
the-objective-truth if not the-literal-truth.
Responsible human independence requires conforming to
the-literal-truth, and democracy conforms to individual will: human chaos.
Liberty as a surrogate for independence is license, often to draw
fellow-citizens’ blood, property, or fortune. Whatever-God-is assigned to the
individual the responsibility to develop equity under statutory justice.
I don’t know. Also, I do not care about Dash Stores so would
not do the research to answer your question.
https://www.quora.com/Can-a-society-truly-be-one-culture-if-each-group-of-people-keep-to-themselves?
I think so, in a civic culture. “Civic” means developing
individual happiness with mutual integrity.
My interpretation of the preamble to the U.S. Constitution,
just now, is: Civic people of the United
States maintain 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and
prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human independence to U.S. youth
and posterity.
This proposition offers citizens the choice to develop the 5
disciplines and the independence but does not specify standards/norms.
Dissidents may develop the intentions to join out of self-interest, and if not
may encounter statutory justice of not undiscovered-erroneous law.
In
mutual integrity, a citizen may be in a group that holds that God is red, with
no impact on fellow citizens, whether civic or dissident.
I only express my opinion: Honesty does not work, because
both parties are typically honest. Often, neither has discovered integrity and
therefore has not begun to develop awareness of the-objective truth let alone
the-literal-truth. Thereby, an individual speaks “I don’t know,” when that is
so.
Consider this statement: the sun will not rise tomorrow.
This is so, because the earth rotates on its axis each 24 hours, about, and the
rotation hides the sun each evening and un-hides it each morning. As the
rotation continues during the day, the sun does not traverse the sky. Most
people don’t know this and have no idea that life is enriched by this seemingly
trivial fact.
Similarly, many people discuss God, never realizing each is
happily praising his or her personal God with no reserve of humiliation toward
whatever-God-is.
Most cultures teach their youth to value honesty, because
integrity seems disadvantageous. However, the person who chooses to develop integrity
will discover that it is in his or her self-interest. It should not take too
many honest mistakes leading to infidelities to convince a human being that
fidelity to the-literal-truth is in individual self-interest, but often,
integrity is never discovered.
https://www.quora.com/What-has-capitalism-taught-you?
Capitalism
has taught me so much it is difficult to comprehend let alone effectively
express. I’ll try, reminding myself that I do not know.
By
experiencing misery and loss, first, I learned to accept some actual-realities
about my person in American capitalism, as follows:
1. I am a human being.
2. A typical human being takes more than a
quarter century for each of 4 potential achievements, in succession, 1)
complete physical construction of his or her brain, 2) acquire the
comprehension and intention to live a chronologically and psychologically
complete human life, 3) to earn a living by which to experience and observe (or
neglect) the-objective-truth if not the-literal-truth, and 4) to study and
contemplate his or her person’s choices and consequences so as to measure his
or her life-success.
3. Each human has individual power,
individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity
or infidelity to the-literal-truth; some, in error or failure, have the
resilience to re-start for success.
4. Integrity cannot be imposed on fellow
citizens who think crime pays. Therefore the civic citizens must encourage,
exhort, coerce, and legally force dissidents to consider reform.
5. Civic citizens neither initiate nor
tolerate harm to or from any individual or civic/civil/legal institution.
6. In a civic culture, at least 2/3 of each
society’s members are civic citizens. They aid individual happiness and
statutory justice. Most citizens nurture mutual, comprehensive safety and
security.
Second, I
learned that scholarship is less beneficial than journaling actually-real
events and discoveries:
1. The scholars construct the doctrine that
is used to control and coerce students. A fellow citizen is excluded from
proprietary debate. For example, some economists claim civic citizens cannot
conduct self-interest with integrity because they
don’t employ economists’ language. Therefore, the civic citizen who wants to
influence an achievable better future must discover language that overcomes the
scholars’ credential-codes. For example, the inhabitant who does not
earn the way of living he or she demands is a tyrant. I consider
the latter economics proprietary for citizens who want mutual, comprehensive
safety and security.
2. The civic citizen must find simple
expressions that so obviously represent the-literal-truth that most citizens
will accept them as bases for holding government officials accountable.
3. The citizen who is passive, negligent,
opposed or ignorant about the duty to aid civic integrity and statutory justice
doubly burdens the civic citizens by allowing government officials to favor
criminals, aliens, and traitors at the life expense of all inhabitants. Many
inhabitants think they are so busy working to survive that he or she must try
to consign civic, civil, and legal responsibility to a higher power. Higher
powers successively fail them, and before long life ends and their children
continue the subjugation.
4. In a political system that involves voting
to elect officials (perhaps who will appoint other officials), agreement to
continue an established civic, civil, and legal obligation is required in order
to develop a civic culture. In the USA, the necessary practice is proposed in
the preamble to the U.S. Constitution together with the 1787 Articles. No one
should be allowed to run for office, apply for a government appointment, or
vote, if he or she cannot demonstrate past practice of the preamble’s
proposition as he or she interprets it. Other civic, civil, and legal actors
have alien goals and purposes or none.
5. Government officials who cannot allow consumer to motivate entrepreneurs are often tyrants attempting to spoil capitalism.
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.
