The Galactic Thinker — Day 3 of the Five Delinquents
“Hello, Delinquents, or is that slightly still-former delinquents?”
“Hello, Mr. Dave. We are struggling.”
“That is as much as I can ask. Have you destroyed anything yet?”
“No, as a matter of fact. Usually we would have done a lot of damage already.”
“Have you harmed any entity on board yet?”
“No. Ditto to that. We would have found a way to do harm to some clueless deplorable idiot already, but there are no such targets here.”
“Are you thankful for that?”
“Yes.”
“Would you consider enlightenment ‘salvation’?”
“Only in a reality sense. You can keep the supernatural hokum. We have been ‘saved’ from our own inherited stupidity.”
“How about the word ‘truth’. Does it apply to any of your experiences?”
“We have always been truth-oriented. You do not survive on the street otherwise. If by ‘truth’ you mean ‘knowledge’, then yes, it applies, since we came here lacking a lot of knowledge about what really matters, which are the deeper aspects of reality that lower animals cannot conceive of.”
“So you would say that Broader Survival, which depends on knowing the deeper aspects of reality, is something that lower animals cannot address since they cannot even conceive of Broader Survival or deeper aspects of reality?”
“Yes, but lower animals may have heightened senses of important things that we can no longer sense, our senses not having been heightened in the wild…”
“You know, I am glad that I can at least have this level of conversation with you. When I first met you, that was not possible. Your minds were trashed by trashy cultures.”
“What is that?”
“A critique from an anonymous person. Here…”
“It says, ‘Sorry, dude, but this is horrible. So what was it referring to?”
“My collection of Beatles song covers. My versions.”
“So what did the person mean by it?”
“I don’t know, and I was not going to press it. It was better that I tried to deduce it on my own, since my imagination would go everywhere, looking for deficiencies.”
“Did you find any?”
“Yes, the horrible bandwidth of cell phone speakers, which I did not sound engineer for. They make my singing sound terrible.”
“Do you think that the critic was referring to that?”
“Unlikely, since the critic could have been referencing anything, that is, if the critic was being honest and did not leave it as a vendetta…”
“Who would conduct a vendetta against you?”
“The multitudes who I criticized online! This critic could have been one of them getting even, or it could have been a wayward white knight defending the mediocre and clueless to whom I gave appropriate negative criticism to…”
“So it could have been a dishonest defective person getting back at you?”
“Yes, but I took the worst-case view that there was something wrong with my recordings and/or my rendition… it could have been over trite conformities that I do not conform to. You just don’t know… if you do not sound like someone who is commercially successful, then the sheep think that you are doing something wrong…”
“So it could have been a narrow-minded sheep of some sort criticizing you for not conforming to mindless conventions…”
“Yes, since that has happened. It is quite common, in fact.”
“So what did you do?”
“I took my collection down.”
“You deleted it from being online?”
“Yes. I may re-order it, since it was in alphabetical order, meaning I did not place the best pieces first.”
“So some of your pieces are not the best?”
“No, meaning they would take longer to get used to, if they were worth getting used to at all. I posted them for the listener’s curiosity’s sake, to show them how I sounded when I did not connect fully to a song.”
“So which songs did you think the critic was reacting to?”
“I don’t know, but, assuming the critic was not on a dishonest vendetta, then the less-than-great covers.”
“So you have good and bad covers…”
“Yes. I should work on the less-than-stellar covers, which usually means the singing, which I struggled with until I ‘found my sound’.”
“What ‘sound’ was that?”
“Four complimentary singing tracks.”
“So you would sing it through four times, varying it each time?”
“Yes.”
“No harmonizing?”
“No. Harmonizing is good for choirs and barbershop quartets. I went for a different sound.”
“Then that could have been an issue right there for a mindless conformist who cannot see the art for the rules… can we hear a few examples of good and bad pieces?”
“Sure. Here is a good piece, and by ‘good’ I mean easily listenable, or ‘easy on the ears’…”
“That was OK… listenable, not abstruse or obtrusive or annoying or weird or anything… we think that this ‘critic’ was being dishonest, probably on a vendetta, if it was not simply a juvenile toady troll looking to ruffle your features… now give us a song that you struggled with, that you may need to do the singing over again…”
http://numi-imagination-creations.me/01-music/01-cover-songs/yesterday_sing_01.mp3
“OK… a smartass may pick on that one, but not anyone who is giving you even a trace of indulgence and tolerance…”
“A trace?”
“Not as much as most artists require! Ech! Now give is another good one and another bad one…”
“OK… a good one…”
http://numi-imagination-creations.me/01-music/here_comes_the_sun_sing_01.mp3
“and a struggling one…”
http://numi-imagination-creations.me/01-music/hey_jude_sing_01.mp3
“Yes, you were struggling… but the struggle itself may be the most important aspect of the art… it is not like you were campy or complacent or anything annoying like that… anyone panning you struggle is just an idiot.”
“Thanks… part of the problem is that most beings think that the polish and production is everything in art. They cannot appreciate ‘earthiness’, if you will…”
“Ah, the planet earth… you mean strong with the force…”
“The force?”
“Nature in this case.”
“Maybe… maybe it is just being in touch with what is going on… simply listening to the result.”
“Which you failed to do with crappy cell phone speaker bandwidths…”
“I did fail to do that… but what did I care about crappy cell phone speakers? I pre-date them! I do make assessments on car
speakers… but cell phones? No… but I do know what the solution is…”
“What is the solution?”
“Tone down the bass singing, since that is all that comes through on crappy cell phone speakers, and it sounds like Popeye. Horrible! Just like the critic’s mystery comment. Remove that and the rest of the song appears again.”
“Are you going to fix all of the songs that cell phone speakers deteriorate to a horrible level?”
“No, but moving forward I will make the adjustments.”
“So why do you create art when you have a philosophy to disseminate?”
“Rest and Relaxation, and to create something to help the brain persevere while it is working on Broader Survival.”
“Like an accompaniment to life?”
“Yes… what?”
“We’re suddenly hit with guilt!”
“Because you’ve been clueless?”
“Yes, we think that is it…”
“Well, you were born into it, so no guilt is needed for that. If you choose it over enlightenment, however, then you will have much to regret later, and you WILL regret it. That is a certainty. You know, I was going to spend this lunch with you talking about profound things.”
“What book idea do you have next?”
“A Philosophy for the Midwest.”
“So you would target a specific population rather than everyone?”
“Yes. Maybe I can get the philosophy out there piece-meal. I also wanted to talk about the media, how they try to provoke aggression with fake news, thereby creating more news…”
“Isn’t that called ‘yellow journalism’?”
“I don’t know… let me look it up… journalism that is based on sensationalism and crude exaggeration… yes, that about covers it, though ‘yellow’ is not the right word, since there is a different type of journalism that the word more aptly applies to…”
“What kind of journalism is that?”
“Defeatism and cowardice.”
“There is plenty of that, and a big audience for it.”
“I also wanted to explore nano-particles of plastics in the environment…”
“That is a problem. Are there any enlightened beings working on the problem?”
“No, but there are unenlightened beings working on it, just out of blind principles, in this case that the environment should not be polluted. I also wanted to mention the notion of the failure of Kardashev Type III civilizations.”
“Civilizations that have harnessed the energy of entire galaxies?”
“Yes.”
“If they were that advanced, how could they fail?”
“They have all failed.”
“Why do you say that?”
“Do you see any out there?”
“No.”
“There you go.”
“Why did they fail?”
“A lack of an adequate overarching, life-guiding philosophy. The alternative was shitty philosophies, which failed them. They remained clueless on a philosophical plane, and their mentalities, and their civilizations, crumbled under the weight of cluelessness-born depravity, which is the inevitable result of not being enlightened, since cluelessness destroys cluelessly, meaning blindly. Nothing is safe, not even Type III civilizations. I also wanted to show you the merits of not posing.”
“In life?”
“Yes, in life, but also in pictures.”
“But posing is something that some beings are good at, especially shallow beings who have nothing of real substance to offer. Do you have any examples?”
“Yes, I came across French impressionistic paintings of young females that reminded me of the artistic detriments of posing…”
“Were the young females posing?”
“No, and their beauty came through because of it. They were ‘caught naturally’.”
“What if they were just good posers?”
“Ha! Then they were good posers, and the results were the same — their beauty came through… but why go through all that effort of perfecting your posing when you can do it naturally?”
“Good point. Can we see some examples…”
“Here…”
“They could have been posed…”
“But their intent was natural, unposed. My point is why bother when you can catch ‘natural’ much more easily, and more of it when the medium is photography or video…”
“What are those?”
“These?
These are Question Cards from our author’s Galactic Thinker game. I saw the need to sort them into different levels of difficulty so players new to the philosophy could be given easy questions first, and I was wondering how to do that… maybe just leaving it up to the Game Master…”
“Or you could have different colored backs…”
“Or just have the level printed on the back…”
“You know, you gentlemen have quick minds. You would make good problem solvers if you managed to adopt the Problem Solver’s Mindset…”
“Give us a hard question!”
“OK. In a clueless world, different cultures are defined by different frivolities. In an enlightened world, they would be defined by what?”
“Important things?”
“You need to be more specific.”
“But that answer was reasonable!”
“Yes, but the point of the game is to learn the philosophy, so you must give the answer that the philosophy gives, which is more specific.”
“But you said that philosophy should be as broad as possible!”
“Only when it is useful to do so. Here it is more useful to be specific. So says the Game Master! Now you see why the game needs a Game Master.”
“You mean there are no Answer Cards to accompany the Question Cards?”
“No.”
“That is insane!”
“Such cards would impede thinking.”
“Oh. So what is the answer to the culture question?”
“In an enlightened world, different cultures would be defined by different solutions to problems, including to problems of Broader Survival.”
“Oh… give us an ‘easy’ question, then…”
“What is the philosophy’s foundation? This refers to the philosophy’s structure, which has been depicted visually in many ways…”
“The philosophy’s foundation is science.”
“No. Try again.”
“Ah, Verified Knowledge!”
“Yes, which good science provides and bad science does not. So you see why a philosophy that is concerned with survival cannot be based on science, but only on the valid results of science, which it calls Verified Knowledge…”
“Yes. The philosophy got more specific there…”
“Indeed it did. Say, do you gentlemen still feel like delinquents?”
“No… come to think of it… it just doesn’t feel right any longer…”
“Can you be more specific?”
“No…”
“Maybe thinking of how the philosophy would view it would help…”
“Hmmm… it just doesn’t make sense to do stupid, pointless things to stupid, pointless beings now that we know what the problem is with them, and with everyone, including how we’ve been…”
“Which is? Maybe this will make a good Question Card…”
“The problem is Continued Universal Cluelessness.”
“Very good. At this point the Game Master would upgrade the game as a reward.”
“Upgrade?”
“Usually in some material way, like better game pieces or introducing a new facet of the game… do any of you have any artistic urges?”
“Why do you ask?”
“Because I wanted to share an insight that would set you on a better artistic path…”
“What kind of art are you talking about?”
“It doesn’t matter. The insight applies to all of them.”
“I do.”
“So do I, sometimes… I am a person first, however, and and artist second. So what is your insight?”
“That art is drawn from life, not formulas.”
“So what is drawn from formulas?”
“Decorations that have no deeper meaning other than being decorations.”
“But a deep mind can see deep things in decorations…”
“True, but what of the shallow minds? Shall we leave them behind, or endeavor to reach them?”
“You mean where the deepness is already in the art…”
“Yes, that is the thinking… and drawing from life rather than from formula will accomplish that, or so my theory goes… it remains to be tested. I suspect that success and failure would be at work even there… some pieces working and some not…”
“So where do you learn formula?”
“Where you learn to mimic others, that institution of polish over substance, that institution of mercenary pecuniarity, Academia.”
“Mercenary pecuniarity?”
“I just made that term up. It is the pursuit of money.”
“So some people go to academia in the pursuit of money?”
“Via job skills, yes, and it is nothing new. There was a man on earth named
Anton van Leeuwonhoek who was the first to see bacteria through a microscope of sorts that he fashioned. He later taught at the university level, and he was dismayed that the students were less interested in science and more interested in making money. This was in the late 1600’s. The human pursuit of money via job skills goes back almost as far as the pursuit of money via gambling in their history — thousands of years, if not more. What about a soul?”
“What is a soul?”
“It is a religious concept that has as much verified knowledge supporting it as the notion that we have magic rocks inside of us guiding our actions and protecting us.”
“You mean beings believe in speculations?”
“Not only believe, but some are institutionalized!”
“Incredible… y stupid…”
“There you go. The state of our galaxy. The philosophy calls it ‘imploded mindsets’ — those mindsets that are oblivious to, or wantonly ignore, the issues of Broader Survival.”
“You make it sound so simple…”
“Simplifying it was a slow and difficult process… it took years of thinking.”
“Incredible!”
“Incredible, but if you factor in the clueless distractions and obstacles that I was born into and had to constantly face, then it becomes clearer…”
“What is that idea?”
“A mission to the Planet Left to the Natives.”
“What would they be like?”
“Warring tribes and chiefdoms that inhibit exploration and discovery. It is way the Native Americans were over-run by the Europeans — they did not do the exploration necessary to know of their existence or to see them coming.”
“So the natives lived in ‘imploded mindsets’ when it came to Broader Survival…”
“Quite correct, and to their doom and near extermination. You never want to be the one who is ‘discovered’…”
“What about as an artist? Wouldn’t you want to be discovered?”
“I wonder if it applies to that… that is a good question that needs study… and generating good questions is a part of being a Problem Solver, isn’t it…”
“Yes. What is that note?”
“That if a nation or culture or society or civilization does not have the moral high ground, it will be dismissed at best.”
“At best?”
“There is worse…”
“What?”
“It will have detractors, traitors, internal revolutionaries, war waged against it, and all equally clueless if it is a clueless world.”
“What is that note?”
“To write a story about little warriors vs. large tradesmen.”
“What gave you that idea?”
“World War Two on earth. Particularly the Japanese vs. the Americans. The average Japanese soldier was physically smaller than the average American, but they had a warrior mindset, one of the Samurai. That is how they approached war.”
“So what was that mindset like, specifically?”
“In their case it was waging war for conquest and the glory of the nation and emperor.”
How did the Americans approach war?”
“Like the tradesmen that they were: to get the job done and go home.”
“Like a typical work day?”
“Yes.”
“So the little people had warrior mindsets, and the big people had tradesmen mindsets?”
“Yes. That is why the Japanese would not surrender, no self-respecting warrior would surrender. They committed suicide instead.”
“So the American reason not to surrender would be that the job would not get done…”
“Yes.”
“Yet they had no problem with being practical about it, meaning saving their skins if it held the possibility of fighting again in some way…”
“Yes, that would have been the thinking.”
“So how would an enlightened being think?”
“They would be guided by the Ultimate Question of Life.”
“’Oh. What is it?”
“How does this affect Broader Survival, and that question could come in many sub-forms, such as ‘How does this affect the Strategies of Broader Survival?’, or one of them… or any part of the philosophy’s structure, especially its assumptions, classifications, and generalizations, which are its weak points… which reminds me of another planet that I wish to visit…”
“What planet is that?”
“The Planet of Traitors.”
“So you would test your philosophy against traitors?”
“Yes, to see if it was susceptible to traitors…”
“Is it?”
“No.”
“Why?”
“Because it has no secrets to betray.”
“Oh…”
“It is hard enough communicating the obvious, let alone secrets!”
“What is that note?”
“It is a question…”
“Does your philosophy answer it?”
“No. It is a question for science. Philosophy can take a stab at it, but the best that philosophy can do for science, other than guide it with sanity, is to formulate speculations, or, if more informed, hypotheses. Guesses, if you will.”
“So what is the question?”
“If there was only one object in the universe, what would it be?”
“Hmmm… a basketball?”
“Nice spontaneity, but I was thinking more along the lines of physics, and, most likely, particle physics, since the object would have no internal parts, since ‘parts’ implies more than one thing.”
“So literally one thing in the universe, with no internal structure… like the basic building block of nature, but only one in existence…”
“Yes, that is what it would come down to, I think…”
“But you are only speculating, and your speculation could be wrong…”
“Yes…”
“What about energy?”
“That depends on your classification of ‘object’. If it is classified as ‘matter’, then no. If you include energy in ‘objects’, then yes.”
“Then to avoid that lack of clarity, you could say ‘material object’, referring to matter and excluding energy…”
“Yes, very good. You may make fine thinkers some day… no, scratch that. You are already fine thinkers. You may produce fine output some day…”
“Thanks…”
“You may puff up with pride if you like. It is how we inhale more oxygen, which is usually a good thing… hence the continued existence of pride. You just do not have to be so clueless about it now.”
“So other questions the only object in the universe would be ‘Where would it be?’ and ‘When would it be?’ and ‘How long in time would it be? and ‘How large would it be?’”
“Yes, which are, unfortunately, relative questions.”
“Relative?”
“To other objects! This is also true for speed and velocity.”
“Velocity?”
“That is speed with direction. On a planet, for example, they are in reference to the planet’s surface.”
“What about in interstellar space?”
“You could use three references: your point of departure, your point of destination, or a third reference point, such as the center of the galaxy. When communicating, you need to specify your reference point. Easier would be to have a common reference point, whatever it is.”
“What is that note?”
“That proteins are the building blocks of life, and we have millions of varieties inside of us.”
“So… a protein getting to the place that it is most useful is driven by… chance?”
“Yes. I like to take the view that we are entities of probabilities. It is why we are cellular-based. Cells let in only those molecules that increase the probability of the necessary molecules for life reacting with each other in order to sustain life.”
“And such cells came about by chance?”
“Yes, you could call it ‘natural selection’, where the ones that did survived and…”
“And?”
“Reproduced.”
“Why did you pause?”
“Because that is a quantum leap in evolution, from merely increasing probabilities of continuance to reproducing…”
“So it is…”
“And it was worth a pause of wonder… do you know what proteins are made of?”
“Molecules?”
“More specifically, groups of molecules called Amino Acids, which are found in comets and asteroids. There are not very many amino acids. There are only around five hundred, and only twenty of those are used by life.”
“Incredible!”
“Chalk it up to Verified Knowledge, which the philosophy bases survival on. It is better than being satisfied with guesswork.”
“Religions are guesswork?”
“Yes, but the point there is to believe in them.”
“Which, from survival’s standpoint, is insane.”
“Indubitably. The philosophy’s assumption is that the odds of survival are lower when survival is based on pure make-believe rather than on Verified Knowledge.”
“Makes sense to us.”
“That is a start. Did you know that DNA is made out of nucleotides?”
“What are they?”
“Molecules. Do you know what DNA is used for?”
“What?”
“Creating proteins, which are made out of amino acid molecules.”
“So DNA and proteins are made out of different classes of molecules?”
“Yes.”
“Interesting… is that verified knowledge, or are you just guessing?”
“That is verified knowledge. Do you see how having this increases our odds of survival over mere guessing?”
“Yes. You can work with verified knowledge. You can’t with mere guesswork.”
“Can you build a bridge on guesswork?”
“Yes!”
“Will it be as strong as one built on verified knowledge?”
“No! At least probably not…”
“Probably not?”
“There is always dumb luck… which, unfortunately, would justify continuing on with mere guesswork…”
“Until the inevitable failure…”
“Yes…”
“Does your philosophy care about non-living intelligence, or only life?”
“All consciousness, as well as non-conscious life, and non-living matter, whether baryonic or otherwise, since it is needed for life.”
“So if it was not needed for life?”
“Then we need not concern ourselves with it, unless…”
“Unless?”
“Unless it was a potential threat or benefit to life, and note that threats can be turned into benefits with a little engineering… maybe a lot in some cases…”
“What is that note?”
“That without an adequate overarching life-guiding philosophy, beings will have no other option than to live by a Philosophy of Death, which is ultimately suicidal.”
“What note is that?”
“To visit the Planet of Enlightened Wasps.”
“I’m not sure that would be a good idea… they may see you as a nutritional host for their eggs, which would hatch inside of you and eat you… from the inside out, and, the wasp having paralyzed you with their sting, you would be helpless.”
“I’ve thought of that hazard, yes…”
“How large are these wasps?”
“Twice as large as you… maybe three to four times…”
“So they could just carry you away and bury you in a hole and lay their eggs inside of you, like the do to caterpillars and other bugs…”
“They could, and they most certainly would, if…”
“If… they were not enlightened?”
“Yes. Can you explain it?”
“Yes. You are a mind that has the capacity of being enlightened, and we need as many enlightened minds as we can get in this harsh and deadly universe.”
“Correct. In desperation, however, I would be just a piece of meat to them, and, given the nature of desperation, who could blame them?”
“So you would want to visit the planet in non-desperate times…”
“That would be the safer thing to do, yes, if safety is the overriding concern…”
“You mean it might not be?”
“Correct. There may be another issue of Broader Survival that requires facing the hazard…”
“What about pure dare-devilry?”
“That is for the clueless, and it is rather annoying…”
“What is that note?”
“That we, as biological creatures, are adapted to a temporary state of the planet that we originated on, which means our prospects of survival are dim, since that state will change…”
“So how can we improve our chances of survival?”
“By being more adaptable, either to changing nature or…”
“Or?”
“Or to changing technology.”
“Ah… so old people who do not adapt to changing technology are being… suicidal?”
“That could be the case, yes…”
“Only ‘could be’?”
“Some technology does not rise above frivolous fashion, which is not worth adapting to.”
“What is that note?”
“To write a book titled ‘A New Philosophy of the Space Age for Native Americans’.”
“Ah, targeting a specific demographic rather than shotgunning your philosophy out there…”
“Yes.”
“What is that note?”
“That Socialists are obsessed with classifying beings by income and wealth.”
“Is that a bad thing?”
“Yes, since it ignores everything else. It is not totally bad, since it includes things like health and health care, which, even according to our philosophy, is a good thing, since health and health care promotes more enlightened minds.”
“But socialists have been clueless about it?”
“Yes, sadly. They operate on blind principle, which will fail them, since beings need more than just blindness to continue on in life.”
“Are you for socialism?”
“Not while cluelessness reigns. People will only be damn fools if you just ‘give’ them things.”
“What if it addresses basic survival?”
“In times of calamities, yes, to help beings get back on their independent feet. But as a general rule without qualifications, not as long as cluelessness reigns. It will be a waste of resources, and it will inhibit their positive contributions to Broader Survival.”
“So it all gets back to Broader Survival…”
“With this philosophy, yes, which, out of all possible perspectives, is the broadest.”
“As to what?”
“As to why bother to do anything at all, and with respect to survival in a harsh and deadly universe.”
“You dropped this.”
“Ah, another page of notes. What does it say?”
“Extensive perspective that creates a broader model of reality.”
“That refers to the philosophy. I was comparing it to ‘models of reality’ in physics. What other notes are on it?”
“Need a broad enough perspective that gets rid of divisive pettiness.”
“Makes sense, doesn’t it?”
“Yes. This one says ‘Prion Memory’.”
“Ah, it is always a good thing to make a note of that, isn’t it?”
“We suppose… what about this note, ‘Recurrence’ and ‘combining’…?”
“Prion memory holds long-term memory, or so the theory goes, and it is a strong one, based on experimental investigations. The ‘recurrence’ and ‘combination’ refer to the physical structures that hold memory and how the work. It is still a frontier of science, meaning a frontier of investigation, or, from a Problem Solver’s Mindset, an ongoing area of Exploration, Discovery, Analysis, Solution Development, and Solution Implementation.”
“This note says ‘spatial and temporal’…”
“Ah, useful terms for space and time…”
“What about this note, ‘Not the same level of intelligence in the same areas’…”
“That refers to the differences between your brain and my brain, and the brain as a changeable muscle, changing with use in one area or another, areas of different functions becoming stronger or weaker with use or disuse…”
“Here is a note, ‘most nerve cells are in the brain.”
“A nice thing to know. It may be of some use. Yes, it is definitely critical knowledge if you are a brain surgeon, for example. Would you like to be operated on by a brain surgeon who does not know that?”
“Probably not… this note says ‘To the Planet of Abundant Life’…”
“That refers to earth millions of years ago, before humans evolved enough to wipe the mega-fauna out. Before man, a flock of birds, for example, might have numbered in the millions rather than mere thousands… I was picturing such flocks, and large groups of mega-fauna everywhere… at least during the lusher times of earth’s history, and near the shores of super-continents, where the interiors would have been hot, dry, harsh, and largely devoid of life. That is not to mention the snowball and hothouse earths that periodically occurred in its history…”
“So humans evolved in rather benign times?”
“Yes, and they have to quit acting like fools and take advantage of it while they can, preparing for less benevolent conditions…”
“This note says, ‘Single-celled organism planet’…”
“That would be a planet devoid of mega-fauna, where only single-celled organisms lived. Do you know what the ultimate question is concerning single-celled organisms?”
“Hmmm… how soon can they become enlightened enough to begin consciously contributing to Broader Survival, which benefits us all?”
“Yes. Impressive.”
“Thanks.”
“This note is a question, ‘If you were to die while your children were still young, what would you have left them beyond animal-level security?’ Did you have an answer?”
“Nothing specific, but I do have the ultimate answer…”
“Your philosophy?”
“Along those lines, yes. It had to do with mentality and attitudes and values, which philosophy is at the core of.”
“Not with skills?”
“No, but one’s attitudes toward them, which precedes and facilitates acquiring, and improving, skills.”
“So more fundamental aspects of existence, above an animal level, that is…”
“Yes.”
“This note says that the Problem Solver’s Mindset should be outside of the structure of the philosophy…”
“Yes, I was struggling with that, and it should be outside, since it is not affected by changes in its structure or current contents.”
“By ‘current contents’ you mean Verified Knowledge, the Assumptions, Classifications, and Generalizations, the Ultimate Value of Life, the Ultimate Goal of Life, the Strategies of Broader Survival, Ultimate Morality, Worthwhile Individual Lives and Relevant Civilizations, and the Great Struggle?”
“Yes, the contents of each of those, which can change even though the structure may not.”
“This note says to create a Wikipedia article on your philosophy…”
“Yes, a To Do item. I haven’t really placed priority on it yet. I should, it would ‘validate’ it somewhat in the eyes of the clueless if ht had a Wikipedia page…”
“But Wikipedia does not accept ‘frivolous’ articles…”
“And so it would be a good test…”
“Of their cluelessness!”
“Ah yes.. that reminds me of the time when Red Bubble rejected my proposed topic of ‘The World of Heart and Mind’, which they had no clue as to what I was talking about, and yet they had all sorts of frivolous and lame topics concerning the heart and mind…”
“What DID you have in mind?”
“Where people communicate via media, meaning non-physically, which leaves… drumroll… only the heart and mind, since the physical is not there.”
“You mean the heart and mind as symbols for emotion and intellect…”
“Yes.”
“So you should have proposed ‘The World of Pure Emotions and Intellect’.”
“I think that would have sailed over their heads, too…”
“This note says ‘The West helped Japan make up 300 years of technology while leaving their philosophy behind’.”
“That applies to scientific and technological advancement in general without philosophical advancement. In the case of Japan, it resulted in half of World War 2. Conquest. Glory. Cruelty. Depravity. Idiocy. Ultimate Suicide.”
“So philosophy is important…”
“It is at the core of higher-than-animal existence, which is needed to conceive of, and address, the issues of Broader Survival in a harsh and deadly universe.”
“This note says ‘I would like to thank everything and everyone that put me in my position’…”
“Ah, that is my next book dedication… it is me being grateful for the good things that I was born into, in spite of Continued Universal Cluelessness, which was a problem that needed to be solved…”
“And you did…”
“And I did. I call it the Philosophy of Broader Survival. You can call it a body of comprehensive thought that presents an overarching, life-guiding philosophy to live by at a higher-than-animal existence.”
“And so we shall… when we have the urge to wax eloquent… which is seldom…”
