Tag Archives: intelligence

Middle Ground

Denying God is a choice for some folks. This choice has many different factors, most of which are not evil. The roots of disbelief are varied and don’t have as much to do with Satan as they do with our psychology.

I’ll stay as far from the atheist vs theist movement as much as possible. These two groups, in my eyes, are the charismatic extremes of the normal everyday believer or non believer. While one labors to live today within an Old Testament reality the other spends an inordinate amount of time talking about the crusades. Neither of these two will help anyone.

I have learned that the middle road scenery is a more realistic journey. I have to stay focused on the path because life seems to push us to extremes. I’m not afraid of God or biology, and for me, it’s what we’re all made of.

At it’s purest form God seems to be the “thing” we question or celebrate every time something good or bad happens to us. After a series of unfortunate events we may question “Why me!” Maybe we hit a string of luck and feel fortunate that somehow it was our turn. Either way, luck, good or bad, assumes an external control.

The strange thing is that whether you believe or don’t, there’s a nagging “something” within the human condition that questions our place in the world. A believer who questions their faith during times of trial, or the non believer who rationalizes events in their life, both rely on something invisible to the average human condition of understanding. Both experience events beyond their understanding and question “why”.

I’m not making a case for or against believing or non belief. I’m simply pointing to the fact that we share this space of unknown consequence. We experience things beyond or control or understanding and attempt to fill it with faith or facts. When both of these fail it seems it’s just us. Somehow we are the unfortunate or fortunate ones.

This space is where the disagreement comes and folks have preyed (no pun intended) on probably forever in human history. It’s almost like I wish we could define for folks what it was like “pre-religious”. Like we do for pre-industrialization. From the accounts we have, it was a violent existence. I’m not saying religion saved the world , it seems it capitalized on humans ability to organize for collective survival. However, we are certainly better off as humans for exploring our spiritual side, it’s when it became a vocation we strayed.

Origins are the key. It’s from these points we can move foreword with coherence. We won’t change institutional religion in government, they’re mutually exclusive at this point, we’d have to eliminate both and that’s not gonna happen. We can enlighten folks on the history of our humanity so that they may exercise their spirituality more responsibly.

So whoever or whatever we fill that void with, we have to leave room for respect and honesty. When I say honesty I don’t mean facts, I mean feelings. I am in the middle between facts and feelings, not to be objective, although that helps, but I think the middle is the space where balance rules.

Hitting folks over the head with a Bible or Quran just makes folks numb. Just like throwing our a barrage of scientific facts to counter someone’s spiritual sensibilities shuts down dialog. Someone had to stand in the gap of reason.

Religion is not spirituality and science is not intelligence. It makes no sense that God would subjugate his creation, just as it makes no sense science would reject possibility. Between the two most of us live, and within the two we survive our own intellectual and spiritual ignorance. And this is life.

Artificial Existence

Artificial ignorance, is artificial intelligence an oxymoron? This creation based reality that is being advanced by the progressive movement hasn’t changed in 100 years, and we still have to listen to the ignorance.

This rote life form can be admired and armed to the point everyone is “blown away”! What makes it interesting is that in its simplest term, these forms can be shut down in seconds, it takes years to shut a human down. This basic fact has to be ignored to perpetuate the artificial truth that you can create real life outside the womb, unless you redefine life.

A latent effect for the average person is we begin to quantify life. The same folks who progressively portray themselves as humanist are the ones who developed this concept to establish the paradigm shift. Now the conversation is open to dividing up a populace. We can quantify woman, children, or babies. We can Label illegals, criminals, or addicts. We can bolster the belief in class and entrench masses in associative values. We could even quantify the fetus and each trimester and assign levels of humanness, ignoring the fact this is the origin of ignorance.

Now we come up with a right to life or woman’s choice slogans that serve to falsely elevate the gender gap. They throw in divisive terms like patriarch or matriarchal as if there’s a division. This is how they quantify the process of procreation. Divide the male and female ability to procreate. Then add artificial genders to confuse the possibilities. Then it becomes archaic to consider a man and a woman and the power of creation. Now it’s far fetched to think a man and a woman can create a family that can change the world. This is the America they want to eliminate. This is a hidden pillar of socialism that is masked by the scrim of deceit.

This is possible more and more because much of what was fantasy 100 years ago, is a reality today. The roots of ignorance run deep. These ideas and supporting terms were written and discussed years ago, there were many academics with political intuition who saw this and outlined the foundation of today’s progressive movement.

Keep I’m mind I’m speaking about one aspect of the progressive movement. Also keep in mind that most of the folks following this movement don’t understand the value of the compartmentalized nature of the ideology that influence their beliefs. For most it’s as simple as having a choice is better than not having a choice, being free within a society or culture is a right. We can even take our ability to create artificial existences and extend that to the natural order. All we had to do is attack every part of the process by creating a dichotomy within conception, gestation, and maturation. Then quantify the individual processes and soon the arrogance of the artificial intelligence fallacy has fled believing they can exercise that power over the natural order, which is demonized.

But why go to these lengths? Why divide the world against itself to unify it against itself. Chaos. Within this chaos created by ignorance leaders will arise who can gain control of the process and guide the fractionalized pieces together towards a unified ignorance till it looks like an early Picasso.

Listen to what’s being said nationally. Socialism can be a better system if we add “democratic” as a prefix. This was apparent in our last election when an elitist dressed as a common man espousing socialist ideals of shared wealth, except his. The “old man”, with his tweed jackets and grey hair, was a product of a generation heavily influenced by characters, not reality. Living proof that egocentrism isn’t confined to early childhood when you’re wealthy or privileged.

There are many other aspects of this movement and it’s ignorance that the same rubric is used to keep folks following this ignorance. I won’t waste time since the rubric is obvious. In it’s simplest form it’s the kid who is different justifying his difference by starting an argument between his two buddies to gain control of how each of them view the other. All the while remaining invisibly in control of the whole discord; until the other two boys grow up of course, then they hopefully whip his ass.

The truth is we’re about as free as you can be if you chose to live as part of a society, culture, or family. We have to sacrifice part of our freedom to be a part of any group. Even living life within one of the artificial existences requires you to give up part of who you are. Maybe that’s where the term “keep it real” came from, some sort of cry for freedom from artificial arrogance.