5. Precise Definitions of Key Terms
To understand and unambiguously communicate about anything, we must define the concepts in precise, measurable terms. The fact that I must start at such a basic level is evidence of how much our education and ability to think critically has been subverted and failed. Do not make the mistake of believing that because you are credentialed with a degree that you are not suffering from fuzzy thinking as a consequence of fuzzy definitions. I am an engineer with a very good education in the area of physical reality. What I design works and keeps working. Despite this, when considering mankind in an attempt to understand and explain observed behavior and history, no progress could be made until the faulty concepts of my public education were rejected and replaced by objective, measurable (realistic) concepts. Do not skip this section, no matter how intelligent and educated you may believe you are.
It is very significant that we, as a civilization no longer have generally agreed, objective definitions for the crucial concepts upon which civilization depends. As I shall prove, and as warned by others such as George Orwell, this is far from accidental. Suppress or destroy a concept by misrepresenting or changing the definition and you destroy all knowledge embodied in the concept, including the ability to discuss it rationally.
Want to get into a fight? Try to get consensus on the definition of fairness with a group of people from diverse backgrounds. They will rapidly devolve into the chaos of subjectively, by claiming that some are more equal than others and deserve special considerations because of claimed disadvantage or historical crimes committed against their group.
5.1 What is Reality?
Reality is the perceived environment of an individual described in terms of the concepts (words and definitions) used to think and understand. Personal reality is the sum total of what is accepted as fact and higher level conclusions regarding ones environment, self and others which is a product of ones understanding. In other words, reality is the world view of an individual, a product of information accepted from others (the world is round, men are evil, ...) past experience and present environment described and understood in terms of facts and concepts represented by language. Reality is what the individual considers as truth upon which all choices are based. Note that reality, as described above may be subjective and does not require truth, just the belief that ones opinions and the opinions of those you choose to trust are true.
For this reason, the philosophers whose opinions have official sanction claim there is no reality, only opinion. In a way, they are subjectively correct (but highly misleading), since mankind is suffering from having the once objective (all unbiased, honest intellects can agree) definitions of our key concepts (such as freedom) re-defined, destroying the social knowledge upon which western civilization was once based. If opinion were objective, they would be correct, since true reality (confirmed by the laws of nature) is dependent on a true description of environment and objective opinion can correctly describe the diverse environments of objective observers.
Knowledge is hierarchical, higher level knowledge is based on lower level knowledge and proven fact ad-infinitum. By re-defining key concepts, subverting education and misrepresenting history, the rug has been pulled out from under civilization and the pyramid of our civilizations organizational knowledge embodied in past law and social/economic arrangements now appear unsubstantiated and discredited, for the simple reason we have not been watching as knowledge and civilization have been re-defined to a form more profitable to our self-proclaimed masters and costly to us.
If man had the ability, the effects of destruction of mankind´s basic knowledge is as profound as if the law of gravity had been repealed, leaving us floating with no anchor or firm ground to stand upon. We, as a species have become severed from reality and are blindly plunging to disaster for our species and life on earth.
In the absence of precise and unchanging definitions and concepts, reality is a shifting thing which cannot be accurately described nor comprehended by an individual, let alone communicated to and understood by anyone else.
Without precise, generally agreed meaning, words are meaningless vibrations in the air and writing meaningless squiggles on paper or electronic patterns. Language devoid of precise meaning is incapable of conveying any sort of precise information. Your cat becomes a fuzzy, greater than three, less than five legged creature, easily misinterpreted as a dog when you try to discuss it. If mathematics is forgotten, we will have to deal in terms such as many and few and again spend several thousand years discovering the crucial concept of zero (only discovered twice in history by the ancient Babylonians and Mayans).
Until precise definitions of words and concepts are agreed, no information or knowledge discovery and sharing is possible. This is a most basic failure of education and the humanities, not stressing as absolute, non-negotiable requirements for knowledge and understanding that precise definitions of words and concepts are mandatory. A more general problem is the drift (and intentional sabotage by media misuse) of language and the loss of knowledge this results in. Believe it or not, freedom once had a precise, universally agreed (by all objective people) definition, which is discussed later in this work.
If you compare the dismal failures of the humanities to the accomplishments of scientists and engineers and acknowledge the fact that there are intelligent people in all disciplines, the divergence of accomplishment can be explained in great degree by the fact that engineers and scientists use the language of mathematics which is intolerant of lies while the humanities have no way to objectively express themselves or build knowledge from more basic truths. It is all opinion, expressed in fuzzy, ambiguous terminology, with unstated assumptions.
Even the truth I am trying to convey appears fuzzy for the simple reason that my words and concepts are interpreted, despite precise definitions in a fuzzy manner, with different meanings by different readers. The current state of affairs in like in the Bible, when God was displeased with building the tower of Babel by a united humanity to reach heaven and confused language to the point that cooperation in construction was no longer possible. This is the Bibles explanation of the origin of diversity of language and culture.
Reality (what is real) exists independent of any observer, opinion or ability to understand and describe it. Despite contrary opinions, a tree falling in an empty woods does make a noise. So, if all of the ill-formed opinions, vibrations and squiggles are ignored, we are left with provable reality:
Reality is when a force applied in an environment (for whatever rationalization) meets an equal and opposite reaction (consequence) which establishes a new balance of forces.
Reality Defined: Nature´s immutable laws under specific environmental conditions which determine the significant forces relating action and consequence and current state of affairs.
In other words, when all else, including intelligence, opinion and mankind is stripped away, we are left with reality, which is the laws of nature, relating action to consequence in an environment. There is no consequence until some force (action) is exerted in the real world. For this reason, reality is unaffected by opinions, pleadings, complaints or anything else that does not result in the application of force against matter, invoking an opposing reaction. It is possible to shout at a falling leaf to alter its path with the force of your breath, or to frighten a living creature into fleeing, but that is the extent of nature´s reaction to words.
When living creatures such as man are added to the mix, the rules of interaction with nature remain the same. No consequence until a force is exerted against matter. Between men, the rules remain the same. Until an action (or what appears to be a pending action) is performed, impacting another, there is no reaction and a state of "live and let live" or ignoring each other prevails.
It is for this reason that our far wiser ancestors said "actions speak louder than words". In past ages, words were defined much closer to (accurately described) reality than now. A more accurate saying for today´s intellectual condition is "Actions speak loudly and words speak not at all or mislead".
By these facts, I am wasting my time if my words and the facts and knowledge proven do not convince the reader that some sort of corrective action is required to change the present path of our civilization and species. Whether we execute an intelligent course correction based on proven fact and knowledge and adapt to reality or Nature deems us unworthy to survive by our unwillingness to adapt is completely up to us.
Bottom line is that nature (and your intelligent fellow men) are unaffected by what you believe, think or say. It is only what you do that is reacted to by the environment and your intelligent fellows.
Our so called leader´s agenda appears to include their short term, but not our survival. The truth is that none or very few will survive the coming resource wars and inevitable use of nuclear weapons, on the present course. It is possible that our rulers may survive the immediate collapse of civilization using hoarded supplies but will not be able to survive without a productive civilization to prey on. Our rulers have no viable survival skills except the exercise of force (destruction or threat of destruction).
As an example of nature´s operation, if you choose to destroy farmland by exploitation and improper care, you change the environment of the land to one which is incapable of food production. The laws of nature will not be able to provide food in the changed environment as a consequence, no matter how you may feel or unfair you think this is or what authorities you may whine to. The entire Nile Valley desert is aconsequence of improper farming methods in what was once the breadbasket of Egypt thousands of years ago. It is not the laws of nature that changed, the environment in which they operate was changed by mans actions.
These points of perceptual reality being defined by language and concepts have been raised by many others, most notably by George Orwell in "Politics and the English Language" R (subversion of language), written in 1946 and in 1984 R (destruction of knowledge and resulting inability to conceptualize or think), written in 1949. There is a very long list of academics and authors who have also concluded that those who seek to control and enslave their fellow men must and do seek to destroy language, knowledge and culture by subverting education and many other means.
5.2 What is Truth?
It is a proven point (to all honest intellects) that nature does not lie and therefore the laws of nature (relating action and consequence in the physical world) are consistent and do not allow contradiction. Thus, nature is the only standard of truth. In the realm of natural law, there are no lies. Truth and falsity are meaningless concepts in the real world of action and consequence. All of our science, technology and tools rely on this fact. Products based on true knowledge work (correctly perform their function) and products (including organizational structures called civilizations) based on falsity do not work and are ultimately destroyed by their contradictions. Knowledge is discovered and verified using nature as the test of truth. No product of knowledge would work unless the laws of nature they depend on are consistent everywhere that they are used.
Falsity (or Lie) is defined (by intelligence) as non-truth. Since nature does not deal in anything but action and consequence by consistent rules, truth and falsity are created concepts requiring the judgment of intelligence to differentiate between them. Falsity is a claim of something that does not exist, to someone else who must evaluate whether the claim is true or not. Truth is therefore natural and falsity is unnatural. Those who claim that natural law is unfair are therefore claiming that falsity is fair.
Thus, Truth and Falsity are artificial concepts created by intelligence requiring at least two observers, agreed language and concepts for expression and an environment or context in which natures laws of action and consequence can be seen to operate. Truth is what nature agrees with by proving the stated fact in terms of an observable response relating action to consequence under the specified environmental conditions. Falsity is what nature disagrees with. Ambiguity is what nature fails to confirm or deny, such as the existence of God.
Even though the laws of nature are absolute, the force of their consequences is contextual, depending on environment.
For example, on a large mass such as the earth, the law of gravity is undeniable and pulls all other masses such as you towards the center of mass (the earth). Smaller masses such as yourself are also pulled towards the masses of your fellows, but the force and effects are too small to be perceptible. The force of gravity, if unopposed (reacted to) by the resistance of the land on which you stand or your buoyancy in the water in which you float would result in you ending up at the center of the earth, or as close as you could get, given the space required by all other masses which are similarly affected. This is the natural consequence of having mass in an environment near a much larger mass.
If the environment is changed such that you are floating in free space, away from the gravitational effects of significant mass, the force of gravity is imperceptible, but still exists. If you observe long enough, you will find that dust particles start to orbit your mass and it will be possible to discover the law of gravity. Discovery of this knowledge is them simple part. In this environment, given the subtle (deniable) force of gravity, if this discovery interferes with the rationalizations of the current political order, you will be treated as a heretic and it will take centuries of conflict for this basic truth to be acknowledged. The life and woes of Galileo is a good example of what happens when you try to present truth that is only obvious when proven by irrefutable facts, confirmed by the laws of nature and honest thinkers. If the "blessers of truth" feel threatened, they will find it in their interest to pretend to disagree and persecute you (but, if possible, use the knowledge for private advantage), lest your fellows believe you and upset the PTB´s scams. Galileo was forced to recant by the inquisition on penalty of death and spent the rest of his life imprisoned for daring to suggest that mankind and the earth is not the center of the universe. Per historical records, Galileo was merely popularizing the previous work of Copernicus who proved the same thing and registered his work with the church. Copernicus was not persecuted for the simple reason he did not try to widely distribute his work while Galileo tried to convince others. The conclusion can only be that entrenched powers do not have a problem with knowledge, their issue is with social acceptance of knowledge and how it interferes with their lies and manipulations. Keeping knowledge private is to the PTB´s advantage.
As another example of the environmental dependence of knowledge, the conversion of iron into steel is a chemical reaction, requiring an environment with the proper elements, temperature and pressure to be created such that nature´s laws (determining action and consequence under these conditions or environment) can react to the existence of the proper environment to yield the consequence of steel.
As a final example, if you are married, the coexistence requirements of your spouse and children forms a large part of your environment and thus the truth of your existence. Your life would be very different with a different or no family, constituting a different environment and thus truth, or balance of significant forces on which you base your choices.
Truth is therefore a verifiable concept requiring environment, observers and concepts accurately described by language. In the quest for absolute truth, the effect of environment (determines significance of forces relating action and consequence), the ability and honesty of observers and the precision of language (how well it describes facts, concepts, causes and effects) are the dominant factors. The truth of nature, the degree of honesty and intellectual ability of observers, the precision of language and concepts used by observers is what determines how well we are able to discover truth or, in other words, an accurate description of action relating to consequence under specific environmental conditions.
Many believe that there is no such thing as absolute truth, only opinion. This is a misleading lie, propaganda of subverted media, government and law. If you substitute environment for opinion, you have the truth: "There is no such thing as absolute truth, only environmental truth". If you want absolute truth, you must find and verify what natures laws say is true for all or independent of environment. There is no such thing as truth in the absence of environment for the simple reason that truth is a defined concept requiring an environment (space and time, laws of nature, observers and language).
Truth Defined: Reality, as confirmed by the laws of nature under specified environmental conditions, agreed to by honest observers and expressed in precisely defined language and concepts.
For these reasons, it is absurd and intellectually dishonest to claim general truths such as mankind is evil or my God is better than your God or to search for the holy grail of absolute justice, applied equally, independent of environmental facts. Is it absolutely wrong to kill? No, not in self-defense (an environment where your existence is truly threatened by the ones you must kill to live).
- "The ability to distill facts and reality to their basic truth, uninfluenced by personal bias or motivation."
In terms of the previous definitions of Reality and Truth, objectivity is a necessary characteristic of the observer to insure that all of the facts of reality, including environmental factors are honestly observed, considered and reported.
This "truth" is something that can be agreed to by all other objective intellects. For example, we can all objectively agree on what a rock is to the point of having a precise, universally accepted scientific definition. Similarly, we can all agree that the concept of "fair" exists in theory, but all attempts at objectively defining fairness appear to have been thwarted by the fact we live in a division of labor civilization. This implies division of viewpoint, a product of our diverse environments; "fair" is subjectively (influenced by personal bias or motivation) interpreted as what we each want to improve our position in civilization, at the inevitable expense of someone else´s definition of "fairness". This is why all children intuitively know what fair is, since they are all in the same environment. I will get around to defining "fairness" and point out that this was once a universally accepted truth, one of the required and now missing pillars of civilization and law.
- "An objective definition accurately representing an element of reality or basic proven truth. The building blocks of knowledge."
The nature of a rock is fact. You cannot float in a gravity field without support is a fact. The earth rotates daily and orbits around the sun is a fact. The stars are far away suns is a fact. Most of the evil committed by man against man has been rationalized by claiming good intentions is a historical fact. Life is an event in time with a beginning, direction and end is a fact.
Fairness is a concept whose definition is subjective, making it not a fact.
- "A proven relationship between input facts, environment (conditions) and output consequence."
- "A sequence of decisions or steps (algorithm) that can reliably predict consequence from action under specified conditions."
- "A theory with overwhelming evidence in support and no contrary evidence."
- For example, Einstein´s E=m(c squared) is knowledge, since it tells us the energy of a mass can be determined by multiplying the mass by the speed of light squared.
- If you hurt someone or negatively impact their survival, they, their family and/or friends will retaliate if they are able is knowledge.
- Mankind is a part of the natural order of things is a theory with overwhelming evidence in support and no contrary evidence, making it knowledge.
- If you do not eat, you will die is knowledge.
In other words, knowledge is a true relationship between facts or basic fact forming a more complex truth.
"Knowledge is power" is true for the simple reason it allows accurate prediction of consequences and therefore allows intelligent choice to choose from possible outcomes.
That objective knowledge of human nature is privately acknowledged, but publicly suppressed by our rulers in order to create and manipulate events to their advantage resulting in our slavery and ultimate doom is the knowledge the author is endeavoring to prove to the reader.