New discovery

[peacegirl]

This new world is coming into existence not because of my will, not because I made a discovery (sooner or later it had to be found because the knowledge of what it means that man's will is not free is a definite part of reality), but only because we are compelled to obey the laws of our nature.

 

Do you really think it was an accident the solar system came into existence; an accident that the sun is just the proper distance from the earth so we don't roast or freeze; an accident that the earth revolved just at the right speed to fulfill many exacting functions; an accident that our bodies and brains developed just that way; an accident that I made my discovery exactly when I did?

[Biochemist]

...Definitions mean absolutely nothing where reality is concerned.

I think we have finally uncovered the heart of this thread. But by "heart" I , of course, meant "liver". And by "we" I meant "they"......

[bumab]

....nothing in this universe when seen in total perspective is evil since each individual must choose what is better for himself, even if that choice hurts another as a consequence.

 

That's certainly a new definition of good...

 

now, where was i.... :eek:

 

Ah, that should help here... B)

[peacegirl]

To show you how fantastic is the infinite wisdom that controls every aspect of this universe through invariable laws that we are at last getting to understand, which includes the mankind as well as the solar system, just follow this: Here is versatile man – writer, composer, artist, inventor, scientist, philosopher, theologian, architect, mathematician, chess player, prostitute, murderer, thief, etc., whose will is absolutely and positively not free despite all the learned opinions to the contrary, yet compelled by his very nature and lack of development to believe that it is since it was impossible not to blame and punish the terrible evils that came into existence out of necessity; and then permitted to perceive the necessary relations as to why will is not free and what this means for the entire world, which perception was utterly impossible without the development...and absolutely necessary for the inception of our Golden Age. In all of history have you ever been confronted with anything more incredible?

[peacegirl]

In reality, we are all the result of forces completely beyond our control but by gaining a new understanding as to why our will is not free, and what this means, man will change direction for satisfaction where the desire to hurt someone with a first blow will no longer be preferable when another alternative becomes the better choice.

 

Although Spinoza did not understand the full significance of this enigmatic corollary, he accepted it by rejecting the opposite principle of ‘an eye for an eye' by refusing to defend himself against his sister or blame her for cheating him out of his inheritance. Neither he nor his sister had a free choice because the one was willing to cheat to get what she wanted while he was willing to be cheated rather than hold her responsible.

[bumab]

Has anybody actually been responded too by PG?!

[peacegirl]

Spinoza made matters worse for himself financially, but at that moment of time he had no free choice because it gave him greater satisfaction to let her cheat him out of what he was entitled to by law. Both of them were moving in the direction of what gave them satisfaction. Spinoza's sister had no understanding of this knowledge nor did the world at that time, although Spinoza himself knew that man's will is not free.

 

Consequently, he allowed others to hurt him with a first blow by turning the other cheek. He was excommunicated from the synagogue while being God-intoxicated, which seems to be a contradiction. You would think that a person would be thrown out for being an atheist but not for being a God-intoxicated man. The fact that I know God is a reality doesn't intoxicate me. I know that the sun is also a reality but when the heat gets unbearable, should I jump for joy?

[peacegirl]

There is no comparison between Spinoza and myself. He was a gentle man, I am not. He refused to blame his sister for stealing what rightfully belonged to him because he was confused and believed she couldn't help herself. I, on the other hand, would never advocate turning the other cheek when someone can get the advantage by not turning it. He excused her conduct; but if someone tried to take what belonged to me I'd fight him tooth and nail.

 

Turning the other cheek under these conditions could make matters worse, which is why many people strongly disagree with the pacifist position. How is it humanly possible for a person not to fight back when he is being hurt first, which goes back to the justification of ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' I personally would get greater satisfaction defending myself or retaliating against those people who would do, or have done, things to hurt me and my family. I'm not a saint, but a scientist of human conduct.

[peacegirl]

Most of mankind is compelled, for greater satisfaction, to move in this direction. Therefore, it should be clear that the corollary, Thou Shall Not Blame, does not mean that you should suddenly stop blaming because you have discovered that man's will is not free. It only means at this point that we are going to follow it, to extend it, to see exactly where it takes us; something that investigators like Durant have never done because the implications prevented them from opening the door beyond the vestibule.

 

To repeat: The fact that man's will is not free only means that he is compelled to move in the direction of greater satisfaction. If you sock me I might get greater satisfaction in socking you back. However, once man understands what it means that his will is not free, this desire to sock me is prevented by your realization that I will never blame you for hurting me. You will understand this much better as we progress. Until this knowledge is understood we will be compelled to continue living in the world of free will otherwise we would only make matters worse for ourselves.

[peacegirl]

To show you how confused is the understanding of someone who doesn't grasp these principles, a local columnist interested in my ideas, so he called them, made the statement that I believe that man should not be blamed for anything he does which is true only when man knows what it means that his will is not free. If he doesn't know, he is compelled to blame by his very nature.

 

Christ also received incursions of thought from this same principle which compelled him to turn the other cheek and remark as he was being nailed to the cross, "They know not what they do", forgiving his enemies even in the moment of death. How was it possible for him to blame them when he knew that they were not responsible? But they knew what they were doing and he could not stop them even by turning the other cheek.

[peacegirl]

Religion was compelled to believe that God was not responsible for the evil in the world, whereas Spinoza and Christ believed correctly that there was no such thing as evil when seen in total perspective. But how was it possible, except for people like Christ and Spinoza, to forgive those who trespassed against them?

 

And how was it possible for those who became victims of this necessary evil to look at it in total perspective? Is it any wonder man cried out to God for understanding? The time has arrived to clear up all the confusion and reconcile these two opposite principles, which requires that you keep an open mind and proceed with the investigation. Let me show you how this apparent impasse can be rephrased in terms of possibility.

[peacegirl]

If someone is not being hurt in any way, is it possible for him to retaliate or turn the other cheek? Isn't it obvious that in order to do either he must first be hurt? But if he is already being hurt and by turning the other cheek makes matters worse for himself, then he is given no choice but to retaliate because this is demanded by the laws of his nature. Here is the source of the confusion.

 

Our basic principle or corollary, Thou Shall Not Blame, call it what you will, is not going to accomplish the impossible. It is not going to prevent man from desiring to hurt others when not to makes matters worse for himself, but it will prevent the desire to strike the very first blow. Once you have been hurt, it is normal and natural to seek some form of retaliation for this is a source of satisfaction which is the direction life is compelled to take.

[Biochemist]

..In all of history have you ever been confronted with anything more incredible?

I dunno. I thought it was pretty incredible when they made Shredded Wheat bite sized.

[peacegirl]

Therefore this knowledge cannot possibly prevent the hate and blame which man has been compelled to live with all these years as a consequence of crimes committed and many other forms of hurt; yet God's mathematical law cannot be denied, for man is truly not to blame for anything he does notwithstanding, so a still deeper analysis is required in order to see the truth and allow the cycle of hate and retaliation to be broken.

 

Down through history no one has ever known what it means that man's will is not free and how it can benefit the world, but you will be shown the answer very shortly. There is absolutely no way this new world, a world without war, crime and all forms of hurt to man by man can be stopped from coming into existence. When it will occur, however, depends on when this knowledge can be brought to light.

[Biochemist]

Has anybody actually been responded too by PG?!

She is apparently on auto-pilot.

[peacegirl]

We have been growing and developing just like a child from infancy. There is no way a baby can go from birth to old age without passing through the necessary steps, and no way man could have reached this tremendous turning point in his life without also going through the necessary stages of evil. Once it is established, beyond a shadow of doubt, that will is not free (and here is why my discovery was never found; no one could ever get beyond this impasse because of the implications), it becomes absolutely impossible to hold man responsible for anything he does. Is it any wonder the solution was never found if it lies hidden beyond this point?

[Fishteacher73]

I suddenly think this is a prime thread to have a relocation service for the SCF...