Truth vs Falsehood (42 page)

Calibration level 460 indicates erudition, 470 indicates true rationality, and level 499 indicates brilliance or likelihood of genius. One can see that the calibration level of rhetoric is not even up to the level of simple arithmetic. One wonders how it could be taken seriously or adopted as public policy to be used as the basis for court decisions, i.e., does the word “speech” mean “talking” and “writing,” or does it mean “any and all behaviors” under any circumstances? Is the Ku Klux Klan’s burning of a cross “speech”? Is public fornication “free speech”? Therefore, permissible parameters include not just content but motive, intention, and responsibility for social impact (e.g., to incite a riot).

In ancient Greece, career politicians learned the fruits of the trade of oratory from professionals who charged a fee and taught ‘rhetoric’, or how to shade the truth and present their case in order to win elections. This was a learned skill that, in excess, is called bombast, “putting on the spin,” or “just hot air.” It is meant to impress the gullible, the less educated, or the educated who have a personal agenda. This violation of truth outraged Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle, who totally demolished the credibility of the protagonists. However, they did come away from the dialog with two important conclusions: (1) intelligence as philosophy depends on fulfilling the demanding requirements of the dialectic (structure) of argument, and, (2) it is important that integrous truth be presented properly to an audience in order to facilitate its comprehension and acceptance. This is in accord with consciousness research in that verifiable truth is a product of both content and context.

Leaders often fail to supply a missing piece of information that would completely recontextualize the impact of their presentation. The downside of intellectually integrous people is that they think that truth itself should be convincing to others, which ignores the fact that just the opposite occurs—the nonintegrous hate and reject truth or label it as falsehood because it is seen as a rejection of their own motives. When truth is properly contextualized, it is empowered by credibility, and then falsehood need not even be countered because it falls of its own accord.

While truth itself stands on its own merit, oddly enough, it often has to be ‘sold’ by making it appealing or palatable. Populations with lower consciousness levels are only interested in gain. That “the truth will set you free” is a warmly accepted concept by the integrous, but to the nonintegrous, truth is a danger and an enemy that threatens their whole position.

If falsehood has legal “equal rights” with truth and, in addition, has academic approval, plus propagation by the media, then Goebbels, Hitler, Eichman, fascism, and the Holocaust were legitimate, as were Stalin, Pol Pot, and Buchenwald. It can be seen that the problem is not falsity itself but its (Luciferic) designation as truth.

The perversion of truth and integrity in our current society is already so rampant that it only recognizes the desecration of truth when it becomes bizarrely extreme, such as stating that the victims of 9/11 were really Nazi ‘Eichmans’ who deserved to die (cal. 90). The statement was later defended by sympathizers whose own capacity for rationality was seriously impaired by fallacious reasoning by stating that “the victims deserved to die because of the Iraqi war.” (Fox News, 2/04/05). The Iraqi war, factually, of course, was subsequent to the 9/11 bombing and was a consequence, not an antecedent. Thus, relativism substituted fallacy for truth to the accompaniment of “hurrahs” from the supporters who themselves were pathetic victims of academic brainwashing.

By application of the same principles that falsity is both legal and justified, then so are sedition, treason, and the treachery of espionage agents (just exercising their ‘rights’ to free speech). The same dictum then supports the ‘rights’ of hate and the forces of destruction because ‘speech’ is now legally defined so as to include action. The paradox is that if anarchy is ‘legal’, then there would no legal rights of law by which to enforce it. Law is based on truth and, therefore, without the requirement of truth, there is no law by which to protest the ‘rights’ of the lawless.

Conclusion

Freedom is an independent inner state, whereas liberty is a consequence of collective social judgments and subject to restriction in order to serve the common good. It is a serious error to confuse the two as all actions and choices have consequences.

We eventually have to accept responsibility for our choices, decisions, and their consequences. Every act, thought, and choice adds to a permanent mosaic; our decisions ripple through the universe of consciousness to affect the lives of all. Every act or decision made that supports life supports all life, including one’s own. The ripples we create return to us. What previously may have seemed to be a metaphysical statement is now established as a scientific fact.

Everything in the universe constantly gives off an identifiable energy pattern of a specific frequency that remains for all time and can be read by those who know how. Every word, deed, and intention creates a permanent record; every thought is known and recorded forever. There are no secrets, nothing is hidden, nor can it be. Everyone lives in the public domain. Our spirits stand naked in time for all to see. Everyone’s life, finally, is accountable to the universe (calibrates as ‘true’ at level 1,000).

CHAPTER 14

Countries and Politics

The evolution of consciousness, as expressed in intellectual development, proceeded over thousands of years and multiple civilizations, punctuated by periods of severe conflict, catastrophic monarchies, civil wars, and bloodshed. Out of this long, painful experience, the best intellectual insights, which were distilled as a consequence, calibrated in the mid-400s. In the establishment of America, they were combined with the genius of spiritual rather than religious inspiration and resulted in the world’s foremost dominant and successful country and culture.

Theocracies and monarchies had been tried but had fallen and served as bad examples to be avoided. After the Reformation, the countries of Europe recreated themselves in a secular rationalist model but with integrous intention. Therefore, many of them calibrated in the mid- to high 300s and became democracies based on fairness and rationality.

All in all, the Western civilized world was therefore a fertile field that welcomed the discoveries of science, and their application to human problems was astoundingly successful. Science plus its ensuing technology conquered major diseases, doubled the life span, and exalted education as the keystone to progress. The most impressive of these spectacular successes emerged, however, primarily during just the last one hundred years, which, in evolutionary time, is barely the blink of an eye. From these enormous gains in such a short time, it could be reasonably expected that the future must indeed hold even greater promise for humanity, that is, with the exception of its Achilles’ heel—international relations.

From an encyclopedic worldview, this critical area of failure glaringly stands out as the most serious and prominent problem remaining to be solved before any reliable condition of world peace can be achieved, much less guaranteed. Like a tectonic fault line or a dormant volcano, this gross defect lurks below the visible horizon like a hidden time bomb. The enemies of peace rattle their sabers and make solemn pledges to destroy the leading edge of the advance of civilization and especially its standard bearer, America. Its weapons are a combination of pseudoreligious propaganda, invective brainwashing techniques, and a paranoid perception of the Western world, purposely distorted so as to justify its aggressive actions and rhetoric. Jihad is a religious declaration of war that has resulted in a change of the whole style of the daily life of Western society, whose weaknesses are its denial, its traditional ineptitude, and its lack of a reliable science of diplomatic relations and function.

For lack of reliable data, international diplomacy is often astoundingly not only inept but actually obstructive to its ostensible goals. (The current United Nations calibrates at 185-195.) This is inevitable because, without verifiable data or a scientifically based body of knowledge, diplomacy has been like primitive exploration without a map, a compass, or a GPS (global positioning system).

Without reliable information, a whole gamut of stopgap measures ensues, accompanied by emotionalism, the pressure of public outcry, and political expediency. Surreptitious deal making and endless rhetoric, fruitless intellectualizations, and “one size fits all” political positions reinforce these. These appear to be unreliable techniques upon which to base the safety and security of entire countries and their societies.

From even a brief survey, it is obvious that the most pressing need of the world today is a reliable science upon which to base international diplomacy. To this end, an historical review provides orientation and information from which to construct a reality-based science of international relations and diplomacy.

Political Systems

Surveying the above figures is quite interesting, and we notice how closely the political structure of the Iroquois Nation is to current democracy. In fact, many of its factors were actually incorporated into the U. S. Constitution. We also see that Monarchy at 200 depends in its application upon the calibrated level of the particular monarch in charge, but it is not intrinsically out of integrity. Tribal governments can also be quite integrous, depending on who is in charge. It also reveals why either the Far-Left or the Far-Right political ideologies tend to fall to low levels of integrity. The calibration of theocracy indicates why it was carefully rejected and defended against out of historical experience by the founding fathers of the United States.

Dictatorships, for good reason, have a bad name everywhere, from Haiti to Castro, Hitler, Mussolini, Saddam Hussein, and other current, ongoing dictatorships in the world. Therefore, the preponderance of dictators sooner or later demonstrates the characteristics of grandiose, malignant, messianic narcissism, with oppression and savagery towards their own people. The philosophic basis of democracy had a long evolution in the intellectual world, and in its development, it utilized the thinking of the best minds available throughout the centuries.

Historical Societies

Political History

Major Figures

Akhenaten		220
Alexander the Great		290
Attila the Hun		90
Barbarian Hordes		35-85
Bonaparte, Napoleon		450 175
Caesar, Julius		140
Caligula		30
Charlemagne		230
Columbus, Christopher 3		20
Conquistadors 40
Constantine (Emperor)		410 385
Cortez, Hernando		85
Cromwell, Oliver		208
Disraeli, Benjamin		405
Frederick the Great		325
Henry VIII		170
Ivan, the Terrible		55
Justinian (Emperor)		435
Khan, Genghis		140
Machiavelli		225
Magna Carta		460
Mary, Queen of Scots		340
Mongol Hordes		70
Montezuma		45
Nefertiti		205
Nero		70
Peter, the Great		385 190
Pope Gregory		475
Pope Leo		475
Queen Victoria		230
Ramses I		205
Ramses II		210
Rasputin		120
Robespierre, Maximilien		405
Russian Czars		55-385
Tutankhamun		200
Vikings, Huns, Goths		55-85
Wallace, William		490
Wellington, Duke of		420