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.