Will 21st century therapy be quantum, metaphysical or simply logic? (No. 47 Period)

Will 21st century therapy be quantum, metaphysical or simply logic? (No. 47 Period)

When there is nothing left, there’s still more! Because you really thought to be able to tour the considerations available to humanity in just a few sheets?

Practical exercise: you’ll have to tolerate my fantasies!

As usual, I lied to you, my last example was not the last because I saved for more hunger.

Consider the government of a people is handled by the people themselves. And let us not see this manifested as an idea of God, as we have done for our house, but this time simply because there is a contradiction in the fact that the same thing is both governing and governed. So God would not have chosen to confront his Word to such an inconsistency. They do not play dirty tricks between them, you see?

So, we’ll make it directly manifest in the field of human thoughts. Then of course, also at the level of expression, as it is not because it is impossible that we cannot talk about it! Remember the toasts of mathematicians about their “countable infinity”!

And so this “possibility” of a self-governing people will take shape. The challenge will be to make it manifest itself beyond the mere plane of ideas. At best it can pretend to manifest itself in the form of demagogy. Or plutocracy, as the disembodied money suggests that there are no live individuals to constrain the people and therefore it is indeed its own governor. In any case it is an oligarchy whose oligoresponsibles are not the best known of the common people… In practice, and Plato had already understood that some 25 centuries ago: democracy is the last step before tyranny. Except just expressed as a speech, it remains at the level of human ideas. If we want the MANIFESTED version, democracy IS tyranny.

The more insidious because besides the fact of making the people responsible for the election (choosing) of its “representatives” on the pretext that the “majority of opinions” has a reality with which we tinker, especially with two rounds elections, which ensure that even a guy, whom two thirds did not want the first time, is elected to the “majority of the people”! And once elected, as we could see, they believe to be allowed anything! They are the only ones who can kill (or can order to kill, which is the same) with impunity thanks to the miraculous “state reason”, they can also borrow money for a country as they want, since it is not they who pay banks back, these banks being ultimately those who protect us by refusing too delusional loans. More generally, as they are elected for a relatively short time, they’ll forward the consequences of their bullshit on to their successors, and the “sovereign” people will continue to suffer from it!

Do you see why it is important for your paradigm to be complete to be able to discern what is possible from what is just a scam?

Like hoping that a government, even elected, can be guarantor of our freedom as it will hasten its limit by its laws. Such as the two that followed the taking of the Bastille: the prohibition of meetings and the reduction of 50% of the wages of paid workers.

In fact, it’s like the squared circle! It does exist! If the square has a side of zero size, all points are the same distance from its center, anywhere, and so it is also a circle. With a zero radius! Except that, for everybody, it is neither a “circle” nor a “square”, but just a “point”. The argument that’s meant to be killing about democracy is that it would apply for a small population like that of a village. In fact it is perfectly applicable to a population of one individual. What we all have to do: to govern ourselves and agree to be governed by ourselves. But then, where is the people? The society ? Are you still awake? So let’s go!

Since you became tolerant I still have a surprise!

Smile, I lied again. We must speak in detail about the space. As you should know, it is an idea of God, the realm of geometry. The “Geo” in question is not the Earth, but the space itself as the substance of forms that will be developing in it.

Its “first” manifestation is as an idea of God. The “next” as an idea of man. That next “after” as a mental area created on demand by our spirits. And the “last” concerns the physical space we know. The quotes above are only there to emphasize the fact that my series of “manifestation planes” is personal to me and comes only from the considerations I used from the beginning. In practice, the only “space” ordained by God and manifested by His Verb is our physical space. It should be taken into account.

And finally… Infinity!!!

Now that your paradigm is almost complete, at least as to what should be “put” there, we may enjoy to notice that it quite corresponds to Ghazali’s “triangle”: Before, Above and With! “Before” as it includes the Principle that prepares all that is possible, “Above” because God chooses what he will let manifest and which “gets down” in the image of what gravitation shows physically by making rain coming from heaven, and “With” because we’re considering all that is manifested in one form or another!

Surprised! In English, it’s called the Infinite or ALL. In Arabic, Ghazali called it Allah.

Now if you prefer the presentation of Ghazali as a “Tabernacle of the Lights,” I promise not to be jealous, if only because it is a little to him that I owe the idea of this presentation…

By the way we also see that the Anglo-Saxon mania: “If it’s possible we do it!” has the mark of our dear Lucifer, while the mark of God is rather: “If it is intelligent and consistent, I choose it!” Or better “If it’s stupid and illogical, I ignore!”. We still have a long way to be images of God without too much distortion…

Maybe you feel that this Principle is infinitely “larger” than this little universe which only manifests a few of the possibilities.

Also I booked you a surprise of some “sizes”! In the plural, of course. If only for you to see that you are not really free from relating everything back to this universe that was probably your paradigm before you were fed all that!

So: what size do you imagine that this principle can have?

I will help you.

What is the size or the volume taken by the image in a mirror?

Well, that’s nasty! I Quit!

What is the volume taken by the possibility of the seat which supports you?

Do you really feel a possibility, a ‘promise’, so to speak, (so something that does not exist yet) can occupy the least volume?

Is it starting to come?

So what is the volume occupied by the possibility of the universe?

And of all that is in it?

If your answer is anything other than a zero volume, there may be something that you missed.

Or you let yourself be influenced by the fact that this universe has to be “in” this possibility, and we will overcome it almost immediately.

Because it is time to ask what is the true dimension of this universe? Which physicists insist to tell us that it changes all the time, without always agreeing between them.

I’ll have to use geometric considerations that may be unknown to you, but as they do not exceed the level of a bachelor, it is possible that you find in your neighborhood someone who can confirm their validity, even if it makes him or her angry! We never win much to help people realize that they have been manipulated…

Colossal finesse: is it a point without volume or a point with zero volume?

Long live the difference!!!

This is a question for those who have followed! These two points are NOT AT ALL the same! You do not see well? Then another question to help: which of the two is only a principle of a point? And which is a REAL point?

It is quite common to say that the point is the principle of space, without specifying which one we speak of. Simply because the point is the geometrical element that takes up no space, such as Zero is just a digit as it does not involve any amount or that Darkness is the principle of light SINCE it is invisible. But whether the point has no volume or zero volume does not seem to make much difference. However!

A zero volume is a volume, therefore a geometric entity, and the point with zero volume is geometrically manifested as such. The correct conception of the principle of a point is to consider it WITHOUT volume, which would otherwise involve a space.

This leads to our final challenge: can the Principle be a point in the geometric sense?

Not even ! Since the principle of the point is that possibility that lies in the principle itself! Which means our Principle is not even a point: so it is tiny, almost less than nothing. Except that everything comes from it!

And the consideration of “creation ex nihilo” simply means that these countless possibilities are nothing! Which is exactly what our enemy Satan wants us to believe, to show us that he also knows “how to create from nothing” and that he is the TRUE GOD, by suggesting its own “Principles”, because ultimately, even he also needs to start from something!!

And fortunately the true Principle is there to provide for his imaginary principles such as democracy, egalitarianism, independent mathematical elements, and some others. And since he uses the Principle itself while convincing us to believe the contrary, he benefits from all the power of the latter to deduct indefinitely consequences such as “countable infinity”, and even “larger” infinites, even indefinitely, in which we will not yet have mopeds or restaurants like in the real world which is not even infinite!!!

But I told you that you were free to your considerations! So is the Principle nothing or does it contain the possibilities of ALL? Choose! But do not be surprised if your choice has consequences. Especially if you choose the first option, the first consequence is that I have nothing more to say to you… for others, go to the next post!



View all posts by