Astral thesis

    You can leave your comments in the book of visits.

Today, 6.1.5, I have renewed my pages of New PLatea on basis of these thesis:
1) a man is not bad in his essence otherwise he could not go back to "paradise"
2) the cause of human evil is life in unsatisfied social system
3) on this planet there is not still created ideal social sytem or it was forgotten
4) reliable creations of ideal social system can be reached only in competition of more completely independent social systems

--------------------------------

The reason to my thoughts is unsatisfied status of human sociaty especialy big problems in area of power, credit and communication. I am trying to find causes and possibilities of solution.
I am interested in origin of evil and what we can consider as evil.
Thesis:
1) evil is not here as a onecause phenomenon, but as a mean of enforcing definite power aims.
2) evil arises as a consequence of order absence and sanctions or prevention
3) if I talk about evil I mean manifestation of confrontation and violence
4) if evil should be removed it is necessary to remove its causes
5) I suppose that higher priority than confrontation is enough of freedom and possibilities with their ensurance
6) simple view can not be accepted: God = good, devil = evil

I think, that the problem can be simplify this way:
1) mankind as a whole is not source of evil, concrete offenders can be shown
2) the main causes of evil are power ambitions, vengeance, human imperfection and effort of removing opponents.

ad 1)
We will miss the point 2, there are more causes and I think we can reach them through the point 1.
Point 1) my thesis: if the source of evil is mankind as it is, than guilted is not just a man but a system, in which a man lives.

argument
If the man was be bad, he would not go to "paradise". We also can not avoid the definition of evil.

if
If I accept the oppinion that evil is a concequece of order absence and santions or protections, than the evil is result of inperfect social system.
But it is possible, that bad social system is manifestation of evil, evil will or form of enforce bad will.
I incline to an oppinion that violence social system substitutes indignation of follower of other system to accept dominant system.

Believers say that a man is irreparablly bad and they invite good ones to paradise.
It means that not every man is bad.
How many of them already went to paradise and what is the criterion?
Is it possible that to paradise only those go who agree with the oppinion that an earthy man is bad.
Perfect paradox (gen. Platonov):
The effort of removing evil is one big paradox. Because it is just evil that leas mankind forward.
It is evil that gives sence to world, gives sence to milions of human inventions which would have been for nothing otherwise.
It is evil that is reason for creating more progressive technology. And these technologies have the only one aim - to remove evil forever.

definition and paradox:
It is surely truth and general oppinion. The solution I can see here: to remove evil by extrem violence and to give free space to everyone in according to this principle: not to act the evil way
And there remains just a small thing, to agree what the evil is and to create system.

system
If we agree on definition of evil, then we can establish social system.
It is necessary to have the bigest existence fence in which could be put the maximum of entites.
The rest is necessary to liquidate.

We think about evil as a manifestation of power fight. It is done according to old oppinion that "winner takes it all".
Last Universum was built on an imagination that the most able and powerful god wins over others and will manage all as Absolut. It showed that this form is not real.
The other oppinion was the social existence in system using negative energy.
This oppinion was left because the mesure of evil and negative energy became liquidational.
Alternative to it is existence on the base of all known existing subordinary forms.

The reason why I refused absolut form of existence:
It is corfirmed, that the whole cosmos is not possible to contain by one and only essential power.
Totality must have been so energic that it would deny itself and the reason for its existence, which means establishing unity and harmony between beings and groups (entities) within framework of system.

I personaly feel Being as a principle of existence as it is that connects us.
Manifestation of Being is effort to manage the space and to extend in it some inteligent form of life and social order.

If whoever understands this principle and accepts it (as I did) he becomes automaticly its part and tries to enforce himself and build systems which would enable this aim and tendences.
Definition of Being: being is a principle that is manifestating in existence, growing, managing the space and bringing inner order.

Being contains all forms of existence inclusive life forms and systems.
It has one character, selfimprovement and developing of its own existing forms.

Being = God, it can be written although the term God is not clear, is devastated and not jet exectly defined.
We consider God as creative and sanction beings who take part in forms of being, now especially of social systems creating.
Our planet is ideal social laboratory.

And what else: what concerns personal power as an aim, I do no know it it going to be successful.
Power is just a mean for reaching own imagination about existing forms.

Being as a support? Being on its own can be power support but only for someone who understood its regularities and who acts in agreement with actual aims of being.
If I consider being as a principle then it can not be source of power as it is.
The source of power are beings that have the same aims and they agreed on the way how to reach them.

I understand that I have a big personal power and I know, I already wrote it, that I can not fully use it.
I limited myself to liquidation of conflicts and fights through removing their causes but not causes of those causes, this I leave as a realizing space for others.

What is actual aim of being? Right in our time systems are changing.
We lived til now in different forms of totalite system of personal athority, but we reach the level which enables to go to order authority and agreement.
The instrument of personal power is argument which we have already tried.
The time has matured in consequence of social changes too.
There is some kind of parrallel of social maturity, universe invention, sociaty status, development of information technologies, possibility of means of production and political changes. I mean break down of parlament democracy.
I think everything was managed by Higher inteligence but it was not Absolut because it resists his aims.

I think that one of the source of evil is unability of beings to manage the dificult social systems and the second source is the order absence and rights among entities (big social groups).

Being as it is has only its inner system. It has of course tendency to oplimalize the inner system.
The experiance is then noticed as a way or warning.
Beings (gods) were not able to establish rules with system absence, maybe because they were the part of it and they could not see system from the outside.
So we together build a house which we live in and it is not convinience as we all see.

The difficulty is there because of being conflict and existence principles.
There stayed beings who prevent new development probably because of contain of their own ego, so own character reason because nobody has more crystallized character than gods have.

and more: Principle of simplification is very good but contraproductive. It limits the possibilities.
If we want to simplify anything we have to give up some possibilities.
For example operating system of PC, how many unused and needless functions does it have.

Who created gods? It is a natural growing of beings and the consequence of growing personal being.
Who decides whether a mouse works to be a rabbit and rabbit works to be a hart?
Who evoked that people work to fulfil creative functions which were fulfiled by gods?
Probably someone, who decides about selection of suitable subjects and who decides what personal qualities entitle to other growing. Or is it just personal decision? Or is it nonessential system?

I think it is due to conflicts between beings and between their conceptions.
Therefore everything takes place here, within framework of one planet and when the system is ready it will be apply to whole cosmos.
As a parable I can show a car. It it is a system, its sence is reliable and safe traveling.
How many experiances, also bad, was necessary to its development and how much more difficult are social systems.

We live in system which is always creating and also we personaly take part in it.
Critical thinking also takes part which is ability to value what is good and what in not.
Moreover we value things from the point of human view, while valueing from the point of gods view (or other subjects) is very different.

The fakt that bee queen is an author of bee drones and bees is without doubt. But who created or gave birth to bee queen?
I think that some inner system decides about developing a bee into a new bee queen.
Who decides about spiritual grows, karmic changes and predestiny of people?

Is Being just a principle or does it have essential form?
If the Being is a principle then its form and size can be arbitrary.
Principle as a thought does not have a dimension, principle is or not. Also principle can disappear.
If anything exists it has form of being. During the time being can improve itself and his size grows.

Also a single thought is a form of Being. Being can disappear when all information disappear and all forms of life.
What will be next? Nothing. If we consider Nothing as a duality to Being, what will arise from their connection.
What do they have in common? A thought? A word? Why not, I insist that a thought is the strongest of everything.

In the beginning of all there was a word (a thougth). But do you want to look for a giver of the thought?
Would you find any other form of giver of the thought exept inside being? I think no.
Anyway, who has the invention, he is powerful and can be successful. But here the circle of our searching is closing.
As a duality to Being I consider Nothing and the contain belongs to form. Everything is liable to thought.
The thought as it is seems to be the highest principle and form of Being.

resume:
To sum up, looking for thoughts and relative structures causality is the highest aim, which can be fulfiled within framework of life. This is what creators and inventors do.
This brings thesis, that Being exists on somehow lasting thoughtful background and it is possible that it can become rich and grow by new thoughts and it can be a source of a new thought.
If Being is the source of a thought (it seems like that) then it is the highest principle and nothing higher exists.

concequence:
It means that the senceful creating way of this world leads through creation of perspective social systems.
But continuing leads to social systems.
I see that the other creating time expects us and especialy in area of sociology.
Alternative is the existence on base of all known existing forms of subordinate order.

Thesis and priorities:
1) one of the sources of evil is wrong and unsuitable social system
2) experiences showed exhausting of possibilities of social system established on base good or bad.
evil as it is, is not a creative and goodness is defenceless.
3) it is necessary to build social system on base of present positive and also negative energy and principles.
4) no personal or other power can be total or absolut.
5) the solution is power, cult and credit diversification. On base common priorities.
6) present process must simplify existing forms, otherwise we could not manage the system and it would lead to chaos.
7) to give creation to positive principles and defence of system to negative principles.
8) we will value systems according to their creation not according to their defence activities.