Discussion:
— DOLF, I INSIST YOU HAVE MY BABY
(too old to reply)
dolf
2018-08-23 18:33:19 UTC
Permalink
There is nothing of calibre here as even the str8 men (ie. you don’t want
the football club after all) have all got problems and their psychotropic
medication gives them erectile dysfunction...

- str8
- bi
- tri
- fag
- dag

They call it the SBTFD Community as they’re jealous of us GLBTI Community
but I say it’s still a monotone culture of prancing dicks in their shorts

- dolf
Just bend over and I'll slip it in.
— BED SORES —

“JUST HEMORRHAGIC.
WHAT OF PROLAPSE?
HOW BLOODY TRAGIC.
THE RECTAL COLLAPSE.

HOW ABOUT A ZIMMER?
AT THE OLD FOLKS HOME.
LOVE IS JUST A GLIMMER.
IN YOUR ROOM ALL ALONE.”

ROBBEDOFLIFE@{
@1: Sup: 14 (#14); Ego: 42 (#42),
@2: Sup: 11 (#25); Ego: 40 (#82),
@3: Sup: 75 (#100); Ego: 67 (#149),
@4: Sup: 66 (#166 - I AM NOT SLUGGISH {%11}); Ego: 33 (#182 - I AM NOT
FRAUDULENT IN MEASURES OF GRAIN {%6}),
@5: Sup: 21 (#187); Ego: 31 (#213),
@6: Sup: 27 (#214); Ego: 10 (#223),
@7: Sup: 67 (#281); Ego: 27 (#250),
@8: Sup: 31 (#312); Ego: 59 (#309),
@9: Sup: 78 (#390); Ego: 46 (#355),
Male: #390; Feme: #355
}

<http://www.grapple369.com?idea:{390}&idea:{355}>

G2756@{
@1: Sup: 20 (#20); Ego: 20 (#20),
@2: Sup: 25 (#45 - I AM NOT A DOER OF WRONG {%1}); Ego: 5 (#25),
@3: Sup: 75 (#120); Ego: 50 (#75),
@4: Sup: 64 (#184 - I PUT NO CHECK UPON THE WATER IN ITS FLOW {%36});
Ego: 70 (#145),
@5: Sup: 74 (#258); Ego: 10 (#155),
@6: Sup: 31 (#289); Ego: 38 (#193),
Male: #289; Feme: #193
} // #355

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #345 % #41 = #17 - Politics; I-Ching: H54 - Marriageable
Maid/Maiden, Converting the Maiden; Tetra: 65 - Inner;

THOTH MEASURE: #17 - Oh Aati, who makest thine appearance at Annu; I am not
one of prating tongue.

#VIRTUE: With Holding Back (no. #17), to have fears.
#TOOLS: Guardedness (no. #57) means to be impregnable.
#POSITION: With Compliance (no. #77), orders upheld, but
#TIME: With Contrariety (no. #6), mutual opposition.
#CANON: #157

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_157@{
@1: Sup: 17 (#17); Ego: 17 (#17),
@2: Sup: 74 (#91); Ego: 57 (#74),
@3: Sup: 70 (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9}); Ego: 77 (#151),
@4: Sup: 76 (#237); Ego: 6 (#157 - I AM NOT ONE OF PRATING TONGUE {%17}
/ I HAVE NO STRONG DESIRE EXCEPT FOR MY OWN PROPERTY {%41}),
Male: #237; Feme: #157
} // #157

#355 as [#20, #5, #50, #70, #10, #200] = kenos (G2756): {UMBRA: #15 as #345
% #41 = #17} 1) empty, vain, devoid of truth; 1a) of places, vessels, etc.
which contain nothing; 1b) of men; 1b1) empty handed; 1b2) without a gift;
1c) metaph. destitute of spiritual wealth, of one who boasts of his faith
as a transcendent possession, yet is without the fruits of faith; 1d)
metaph. of endeavours, labours, acts, which result in nothing, vain,
fruitless, without effect; 1d1) vain of no purpose;

— BARGE HIPS —

“TIS SUCH A CURSE.
THAT MY TRAMADOL.
DON’T GIVE ME SHITS.

CAN’T EVEN PURSE.
BY LOSS OF CONTROL.
AND SAGGING TITS.

VIAGRA IS CACTUS.
NOTHING TO DARE.
OR EVEN RECTUS.”

IMPOTENT@{
@1: Sup: 78 (#78); Ego: 49 (#49),
@2: Sup: 16 (#94); Ego: 4 (#53),
@3: Sup: 30 (#124); Ego: 36 (#89),
@4: Sup: 1 (#125); Ego: 63 (#152),
@5: Sup: 27 (#152); Ego: 64 (#216),
@6: Sup: 34 (#186 - I AM NOT ONE OF INCONSTANT MIND {%31}); Ego: 12 (#228 -
I HAVE NO UNJUST PREFERENCES {%40}),
@7: Sup: 33 (#219); Ego: 16 (#244),
@8: Sup: 8 (#227); Ego: 9 (#253),
@9: Sup: 6 (#233); Ego: 15 (#268),
@10: Sup: 37 (#270); Ego: 12 (#280),
Male: #270; Feme: #280
}

<http://www.grapple369.com?idea:{270}&idea:{280}>

H6106@{
@1: Sup: 20 (#20); Ego: 20 (#20),
@2: Sup: 9 (#29); Ego: 70 (#90),
@3: Sup: 18 (#47); Ego: 9 (#99),
@4: Sup: 58 (#105); Ego: 40 (#139 - I HAVE NOT SLAUGHTERED THE SACRED
ANIMALS {%13}),
@5: Sup: 68 (#173 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO UNNATURAL LUST {%27}); Ego: 10
(#149),
@6: Sup: 27 (#200 - I AM NOT A ROBBER OF SACRED PROPERTY {%8}); Ego: 40
(#189),
Male: #200; Feme: #189
} // #270

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #200 % #41 = #36 - Natural Reversals, 'Secret' Explanation; I-Ching:
H4 - Juvenile Ignorance, Youthful Inexperience, Enveloping, The young
shoot, Discovering; Tetra: 12 - Youthfulness;

THOTH MEASURE: #36 - Oh thou who doest according to thine own will, and
makest thine appearance in Tebuu; I put no check upon the water in its
flow.

#VIRTUE: With Strength (no. #36), untiring good.
#TOOLS: With Aggravation (no. #76), unending evil.
#POSITION: With Contact (no. #16), many friends.
#TIME: With Closed Mouth (no. #56), few allies.
#CANON: #184

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_184@{
@1: Sup: 36 (#36); Ego: 36 (#36),
@2: Sup: 31 (#67); Ego: 76 (#112),
@3: Sup: 47 (#114); Ego: 16 (#128),
@4: Sup: 22 (#136); Ego: 56 (#184 - I PUT NO CHECK UPON THE WATER IN ITS
FLOW {%36}),
Male: #136; Feme: #184
} // #184

#270 as [#20, #70, #90, #40, #10, #40] = `etsem (H6106): {UMBRA: #14 as
#200 % #41 = #36} 1) bone, essence, substance; 1a) bone; 1a1) body, limbs,
members, external body; 1b) bone (of animal); 1c) substance, self;

"And Adam said, This is now bone {#270 as [#20, #70, #90, #40, #10, #40] =
`etsem (H6106): bone} of my bones {#270 as [#20, #70, #90, #40, #10, #40] =
`etsem (H6106): bone}, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman,
because she was taken out of Man." [Genesis 2:23]

H3409@{
@1: Sup: 10 (#10); Ego: 10 (#10),
@2: Sup: 48 (#58); Ego: 38 (#48),
@3: Sup: 68 (#126); Ego: 20 (#68 - I DO NOT THAT WHICH OFFENDETH THE GOD
OF MY DOMAIN {%42}),
@4: Sup: 78 (#204); Ego: 10 (#78),
@5: Sup: 37 (#241); Ego: 40 (#118),
Male: #241; Feme: #118
} // #280

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #230 % #41 = #25 - What's behind it all?, Imaging the Mysterious;
I-Ching: H62 - Minor Superiority, Small Excess, Small Exceeding,
Preponderance of the small, Small surpassing; Tetra: 10 - Defectiveness,
Distortion;

THOTH MEASURE: #25 - Oh high-voiced one, who makest thy appearance in
Unsit; I am not boisterous in behaviour.

#VIRTUE: Contention (no. #25) means the shih are impartial.
#TOOLS: Inner (no. #65) means the women are partial.
#POSITION: With Going to Meet (no. #42), one knows what preceded.
#TIME: With Eternal (no. #53), one sees the later issue.
#CANON: #185

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_185@{
@1: Sup: 25 (#25); Ego: 25 (#25),
@2: Sup: 9 (#34); Ego: 65 (#90),
@3: Sup: 51 (#85); Ego: 42 (#132),
@4: Sup: 23 (#108); Ego: 53 (#185 - I AM NOT BOISTEROUS IN BEHAVIOUR
{%25}),
Male: #108; Feme: #185
} // #185

#280 as [#10, #200, #20, #10, #40] = yarek (H3409): {UMBRA: #3 as #230 %
#41 = #25} 1) thigh, side, loin, base; 1a) thigh; 1a1) outside of thigh
(where sword was worn); 1a2) loins (as the seat of procreative power); 1b)
side (flank) (of object); 1c) base;

"And Abraham said unto his eldest servant of his house, that ruled over all
that he had, Put, I pray thee, thy hand under my thigh {#280 as [#10, #200,
#20, #10, #40] = yarek (H3409): thigh}:" [Genesis 24:2]
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"



SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-24 07:50:36 UTC
Permalink
— THE COUNTRIES MOST ANTICIPATED LEGAL ADVICE HAS ARRIVED

(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 24 August, 2018

Yes indeed my appraisal by Christoph HORN and Dieter SCHÖNECKER of Immanuel
KANT’s GROUNDWORK FOR METAPHYSICS OF MORALS (1785) has arrived at my
doorstep this morning courtesy of Australia Post.

It will be my task to read it this weekend in the hope that probity and
decorum will return to the governance of this Commonwealth given its
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:

DIEU ET MON DROIT

FROM THE PREFACE WE READ A NOTION RELEVANT TO PROPRIETY OF THE LEADERSHIP
SPILL: “In the Groundwork, however, Kant develops his own characteristic
position.

He now emphasizes that an adequate form of moral philosophy has to be
‘pure’, ie. both free from all empirical elements of interest, self-love,
and natural feelings as well as free from rational concepts of perfection.

MORE GENERALLY SPEAKING, ETHICS MUST NOT BE GROUNDED ON ANTHROPOLOGY, since
morality is a demand, as Kant contends, which is addressed towards all
rational beings as rational beings.

According to Kant, ethics has to be spelled out on the basis of a ‘moral
law’ that is valid for all finite rational beings. He believes that only
from this point of view can moral motivation and moral obligation be
formulated in an appropriate way.”

We still have more machinations and intrigues of politics to go until they
settle down in the roost.

Clearly the people need to be governed...

...rather than civil disintegration by toxicity of Social Media Networks
mobilisation becoming the democratic impetus and norm.

If not, we will have the criterial semantics and purely reasoned means to
constructively appraise it’s delinquency.

LET ME SPELL IT OUT TO YOU ATHEISTS AND ROMAN CATHOLICS THAT IF DIEU ET MON
DROIT is the motto of THE SOVEREIGN. Then you are by your impious conduct:

- Impugning as cursing the SOVEREIGN;
- Impugning our entitlement to fair Justice;
- As a battle cry then impugning our BOER / ANZAC tradition whom have
engaged within theatres of war;
- Impugning our right to religious belief in the exercise of voluntary will
without coercion;

Such a statement of opposition which you gleefully make is an antagonism to
our BOER / ANZAC tradition as TREASON since a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE is
implied...

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

- Impugning as cursing the SOVEREIGN;

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

- Impugning our entitlement to fair Justice;

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

- As a battle cry then impugning our BOER / ANZAC tradition whom have
engaged within theatres of war;

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

- Impugning our right to religious belief in the exercise of voluntary will
without coercion;

H27 + H9 + H3 + H2 = #41 as #CENTRE

H54 + H18 + H6 + H3 = #81 as #WAN WU {*LOGICAL* *FALLACY* *WITHIN*
*BINOMIAL* *PYTHAGOREAN* *HETEROS* *THEORY* *OF* *NUMBER* *DERIVED*
*BELIEF* *SYSTEMS* *AND* *ROMAN* *EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE*}

= TETRAGRAMMATON HIERARCHY VALUE AS HOMOIOS THEORY OF *NUMBER*.

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

#1 - Be socially beneficial (the Artificial Intelligence equivalent of 'Do
no evil'?); {*FORMULA* *FOR* *UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

#2 - Don't introduce biases; {*FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

#3 - Be safe; {*FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS* / *MEMBRUM*
*VIRILE*}

#4 - Respect privacy; {*FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION*}

#5 - Be accountable; {*HUMAN* *NATURE* *AS* *DISCRIMINATING* *NORM*}

#6 - Be scientific; {*IMPLEMENTATION* *AS* *BINDING* *NORM*}

#7 - Limit abuse. {*ENGENDERING* *AS* *MANIFESTING* *NORM*}

Kant uses the terms necessary and necessity in quite disparate contexts and
with different meanings. He nowhere explicitly says what necessity in the
domain of morality can even mean.

For that reason, before I move onto the analysis of Kant‘s argument, I will
address more closely the logical structure of ethical principles.

One must first understand the logical form that such a principle exhibits
in order to be able to work out the basis of Kant’s central argument for a
pure moral philosophy. It will become evident that Kant‘s argument is
comprehensible if the decisive concept [of *ONTIC*] necessity is understood
as a modal operator {ie. #41 x n of the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTUS}
in the sense of modern logic. The modal status necessity, allows moral
principles to guide our counter factual, practical reflections. This aspect
of logical form can be clearly distinguished from epistemological
connotations, on the one hand, and the prescriptive or imperative character
of [*OTOLOGICAL*] normative propositions on the other. [page 3]

In consideration of Kant’s expression of the terms necessity and necessary
as conceiving of a working hypothetical premise we apply the principle
notion of *ONTIC* to the existential as necessity and it’s circumscribing
to the ontological experience of the necessary reality.

Factual necessity (existential necessity) is by definition a factually
necessary being which is not causally dependent on any other being, while
any other being is causally dependent on it.

SEE ALSO WIKIPEDIA: “Metaphysical necessity”

<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_necessity>

Our informal research task into determining the epistemological principles
and properties of metaphysical necessity has been completed and we
substantially convey as factual the hypothetical postulate that the *ONTIC*
premises as meta-descriptor prototypes conveying NATURAL LAW of NORMA
OBLIGANS by a circumscribing ethical construct of being / ousia are carried
by the ONTOLOGICAL experience of language as HEBREW / GREEK lexicon being
CATEGORIES OF UNDERSTANDING defined by a trinomial mathematical theoretical
noumenon:

45: [1]
68: [42]
84: [2]
86: [10]
102: [4]
104: [7]
115: [5]
130: [3]
139: [13]
140: [14, 16] // #14 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY; #16 - I AM NOT AN
EAVES-DROPPER
146: [15]
148: [12]
150: [28]
156: [21]
157: [17, 41] // #17 - I AM NOT ONE OF PRATING TONGUE; #41 - I HAVE NO
STRONG DESIRE EXCEPT FOR MY OWN PROPERTY
158: [23]
161: [9]
166: [11]
168: [26]
169: [18]
171: [20]
173: [27]
175: [22]
177: [29]
180: [19]
181: [24, 35] // #24 - I LEND NOT A DEAF EAR TO THE WORDS OF
RIGHTEOUSNESS; #35 - I AM NOT ONE WHO CURSETH THE KING
182: [6]
184: [36]
185: [25]
186: [31]
191: [32]
192: [39]
196: [37]
197: [33]
200: [8]
210: [30]
215: [34]
220: [38]
228: [40]



<Loading Image...>

[IMAGE: THOTH MEASURES OF HYPERSPACE AND ‘OTH {24x7x13 = #2184 as 6D / #0 -
21 MARCH 1996} CYCLE OF THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS HAS IT ANY PERENNIAL
SIGNIFICANCE OVER PYTHAGOREAN REDACTION: 1-5-6-7-2-3-4-8-9 METHODOLOGY FOR
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE?]

Whilst we publish our findings so that a peer review may be undertaken and
the core definitions can be utilised for political agreements without the
need to provide any substantial narrative of concise consensus agreement.

You are not entitled without written agreement to commercially deploy this
technological approach to Queen Victoria’s Letters Patent to the Federation
of the Australian Commonwealth of 1901 being my Grapple369 paradigm as a
trinomial mathematical theoretical noumenon as Intellectual Property which
is compliant with Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason published in 1781
/ 1787.

- dolf

Initial Post: 24 August 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-24 15:00:46 UTC
Permalink
— (SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF MORALS: #56 -
TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT AND SLANDER
AS MISNOMERED PIETY BY SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE AS BOER / ANZAC
DEFAMATION?

Nous: #56
Time: 10:10 hrs
Date: 2018.8.25
Torah: [#40, #30, #5]@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 70 (#110); Ego: 30 (#70),
@3: Sup: 75 (#185 - I AM NOT BOISTEROUS IN BEHAVIOUR {%25}); Ego: 5
(#75),
Male: #185; Feme: #75
} // #75

Dao: Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity
Tetra: #46 - Enlargement
I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding, Fullness

Latin: Multus {God who delivers from the evil} Alt: Hyaiel {God and Man
Exist} {

1. PROTECTS AGAINST WEAPONS & PERILS OF TRAVEL
2. MEDICINAL HERBS
3. WATER
4. Chumis
}

Solar Eclipse: 1 August 2008 (AEST)

Judah {Praise of the Lord; confession}

Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#434 / #383} / HETEROS {#449 / #350} / TORAH {#474 /
#403}

<http://www.grapple369.com?zen:3,row:4,col:9,nous:56&idea:{m,143}&idea:{f,132}&idea:{m,434}&idea:{f,383}&PROTOTYPE:HOMOIOS>

***@zen: 3, row: 4, col: 9, nous: 56 [Date: 2018.8.25, Super: #434 /
#51 - Natural Guides and Nursing Virtuosity; I-Ching: H47 - Oppression
(exhaustion), Confining, Entangled; Tetra: 69 - Exhaustion, Ego: #383 / #56
- Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity; I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding,
Fullness; Tetra: 46 - Enlargement]

Kant does not introduce the Preface of the Groundwork with a
characterization of the work’s content; rather he attempts first of all to
define the place of a metaphysics of morals within philosophy. For this
task, he makes use of three criteria. Kant first differentiates
philosophical theories by whether they are “formal” or “material.” Formal
philosophy, according to Kant, is equated with logic. It possesses no
specific object; rather it concerns itself, “without distinction among
Objects,” with “the universal rules of thinking in general”. In contrast,
every material philosophy “has to do with determinate objects and the laws
to which they are subjected”.

KANT: “Logic can have no empirical part, i.e., a part such that the
universal and necessary laws of thinking rest on grounds that are taken
from experience; for otherwise it would not be logic, i.e., a canon for the
understanding or reason which is valid for all thinking and must be
demonstrated. By contrast, natural and moral philosophy can each have their
empirical part, because the former must determine its laws of nature as an
object of experience, the latter must determine the laws for the will of
the human being insofar as he is affected by nature—the first as laws in
accordance with which everything happens, the second as those in accordance
with which everything ought to happen, but also reckoning with the
conditions under which it often does not happen.

One can call all philosophy, insofar as it is based on grounds of
experience, empirical, but that which puts forth its doctrines solely from
principles a priori, pure philosophy. The latter, when it is merely formal,
is called logic; but if it is limited to determinate objects of the
understanding, then it is called metaphysics.

This formulation already offers an indication of the second criterion. Kant
subdivides material theories, in turn, into two Classes. Kant distinguishes
them by with reference to the laws to which the objects that the theories
deal are subjected. He seems to assume that there are exactly two kinds of
laws. And, correspondingly, he differentiates between two types of material
philosophy: on the one hand, “physics,” or “doctrine of nature,” or,
alternatively, “natural wisdom;” and, on the other hand, “ethics,” or
“doctrine of morals,” or, alternative. “moral wisdom.” It is a matter of
the “laws of nature,” in the one case, and of the “laws of freedom,” in the
other, that each theory is respectively concerned. What can Kant mean by
this? The expression “laws of nature” seems to be relatively unproblematic.
But what is to be understood by the expression “laws of freedom” [which are
implicit to the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. exercise of
voluntary will)]?

From Kant’s elucidation one can infer a more exact interpretatlon: Laws of
nature are therefore laws “in accordance with which everything happens,”
while the laws of freedom are those “in accordance with which everything
ought to happen”. Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern
terminological distinction between descriptive statements which present an
account of how the world is as analogous to the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION
CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON
GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} an the normative statements present an
evaluative account, or an account of how the syncretic world should be as
existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} as optimally
something that should be lived up to; or that should be pursued.

At the center of a philosophical doctrine of nature, there would then stand
general descriptive judgments; that means, more precisely, statements of
law that describe how objects of nature act. And at the center of a
doctrine of morals there would stand normative judgments that exhibit a
comparable degree of generality and modal status. I will later address more
thoroughly what it could mean that some normative judgments exhibit a
comparable modal status to statements of law in the natural sciences. Such
a parallel is far from trivial. On the contrary, it is one of the critical
challenges for the interpretation of Kant’s ethical writings. The first
step toward a unified interpretation of the two kinds of laws consists in
seeing both kinds equally as propositionally structured entities that
demonstrate a clearly identifiable logical form.

Next to formality versus materiality and the two types of laws, Kant
introduces a third distinctive Characteristic of theories. He seems to
understand material theories as complex systems that can be split in
individual parts. Every material philosophical theory accordingly contains
one part that he characterizes as “pure,” “rational,” or as “a priori”, and
it may contain a second, “empirical” part. Kant presupposes that in both
the doctrine of nature and the doctrine of morals the two parts can be
isolated from each other. It follows, therefore, that there are two a
priori types of theory: on the one hand, a “metaphysics of nature,” and, on
the other, the sought after “metaphysics of morals”

Thus, a metaphysics of morals would be the following type of theory:

(a) It is not purely formal, but rather deals with definite objects.
(b) It deals with objects in so far as these are subsumed under “laws of
freedom.”
(c) It contains no empirical elements.

At this juncture Kant does not yet presuppose that such a theory actually
exists or that it would be possible for a philosophy to work out
convincingly such a theory. He has not even argued yet that it is
advantageous or even necessary for philosophy to treat the a priori part
separately from the empirical part. Kant pursues these lines of questions
in the subsequent passages. [page 4, 5]

Accordingly, we may as an ANTHROPOCENTRIC {

- regarding the human being as the central fact of the universe.
- assuming human beings to be the final aim and end of the universe.
- viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and
values.

} syncretism, consider an unified paradigmatic perspective of Kant’s idea
of an otherwise twofold metaphysics, the idea of a METAPHYSICS OF NATURE
{ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based seven number) = #294
x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS = 365.242321 days} and of a
METAPHYSICS OF MORALS {

TETRAGRAMMATON {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA: #1 + #2 + #3 +#4 = #10 } HIERARCHY
VALUE AS THE METAPHYSICAL CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE TO THE HOMOIOS THEORY OF
*NUMBER*

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

}. Physics will thus have its empirical but also a rational part; and
ethics likewise; although here the empirical part in particular could be
called practical anthropology, but the rational part could properly be
called morals.

Syncretism or the Mixed School within Chinese philosophy is an eclectic
school of thought that combined elements of Confucianism, Taoism, Mohism,
and Legalism. The Syncretist texts include the Huainanzi, Lüshi Chunqiu,
and the Shizi. The (c. 330 BCE) Shizi is the earliest of the Syncretist
texts.

And Michael Nylan's exceptional work conveys the notion that HAN DYNASTY
(206 BCE to 220 CE) sage YANG HSIUNG's two published works: Canon of
Supreme Mystery (T'AI HSÜAN CHING) within 4 BCE and the Elemental Changes
within 2 BCE are called the Mystery by its devotees as a true guide for
those seeking the Way of the sages. Today, in the West, readers will find
the Mystery an essential tool for understanding the Tao as it operates in
the cosmos, in the psyche, or in sacred texts like the l CHING. Written in
2 BCE., the Mystery represents the first grand synthesis of the dominant
strands of Chinese thought. As it weaves together elements of Confucianism,
Taoism, Yin/Yang Five Phases theory, alchemy, and astrology into a
systematic, organic whole, all the fundamental components of early Chinese
belief appear within its pages which formed the basis to the STATE ideology
of China from 134 BCE two 1911 CE, an ideology that in turn provided the
intellectual foundations for the Japanese and Korean STATES, therefore the
importance of this book can hardly be overestimated.

As a book of divination, the Mystery provides a method for weighing
alternative courses of action. As a book of philosophy, it conveys a sense
of the elemental changes in life. Intricately structured in eighty-one
tetragrams (four-line graphs), the Mystery accounts for the movements of
the sun, moon, and stars, the shifting rhythms of the seasons, the
alternations of night and day, and the ebb and flow of cosmic energy—in
short, all the dynamic relations of the realms of Heaven, Earth, and Man.

It addresses questions of Fate, assessing the degree of control that
individuals have over their destinies. It suggests the fabric that binds
families, communities, and states together. As a book of poetry, the
Mystery unfolds a literary vision of seeming simplicity but surpassing
depth. The long poem divides into short sections of rhyming couplets that
focus upon a single mundane event or familiar phenomenon.

The Roman writer Censorinus, who in his 238 CE publication DE DEI NATALI
(THE NATAL DAY), claims that the Pythagorean advocate Philolaus (470-385
BCE) as preceeding Plato (c. 429–347 BCE), being the principle proponent of
the Pythagorean doctrines on “the world’s nature is a harmonious compound
of the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF
VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the
UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} elements which is similar to
the totality of the WORLD-KOSMOS in itself and all it contains:

“JESUS {he is saved / a saviour; a deliverer} OF NAZARETH {SOVEREIGN; one
chosen or set apart; separated; crowned; sanctified} ANSWERED, *ARE*
*THERE* *NOT* *TWELVE* *HOURS* *IN* *THE* *DAY* {ie. 24 x 60 minutes =
#1440 / #72 = 20 minutes allocations}? *IF* *ANY* *MAN* *WALK* *IN* *THE*
*DAY*, *HE* *STUMBLETH* *NOT*, *BECAUSE* *HE* *SEETH* *THE* *LIGHT* {ie.

#41 x #9 = #369 as similarly Philolaus located the fire at #CENTRE and
calls it HESTIA of the ALL, the GUARDPOST OF ZEUS, the MOTHER OF THE GODS,
the ALTAR, the LINK and the MEASURE OF NATURE-GENESIS

} *OF* *THIS* *WORLD*-*KOSMOS*.

BUT IF A MAN WALK IN THE NIGHT, HE STUMBLETH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO LIGHT IN
HIM.” [John 11:9-10 (KJV)]

HESTIA AND THE PYTHAGOREANS: THE FIRE IN THE MIDDLE
“The Pythagoreans offered significant cosmological observations . . . It is
also noteworthy that the early Pythagoreans denied the geocentric and
geostatic model of the universe. According to the testimony of Aristotle
(De caelo 293.18), they placed *fire* and not earth at the centre of the
universe. The earth became a celestial body, which creates day and night by
its circular motion around Hestia (hestia meaning ‘hearth’). Ten divine
celestial bodies – ten being the perfect number, which encompasses the
whole nature of numbers – rotate rhythmically around Hestia in the
following order: the dark counter-earth (antichthon), the earth, the moon,
the sun, the five planets (Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury) and the
sphere of the fixed stars (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986). This new
cosmological model is usually attributed to Philolaus and explained through
the importance of the Monad in Pythagorean metaphysics. Since the Monad is
the divine source of all numbers and is identified with, or represented by,
the purity of the fire, the source of the celestial bodies should be a
divine fire in the centre of the cosmos (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986).” [p.
38-39, Introduction to Presocratics: A Thematic Approach to Early Greek
Philosophy with Key Readings by Giannis Stamatellos]

<https://paganreveries.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/hestia-the-queen-of-fire-part-three/>

Which the Pythagoreans had defined by a BINOMIAL notion of the THEORY OF
NUMBER which they SOVEREIGN and AUTOGENIC {ie. coming from within as
self-generated} DAEMONIC FORCE which maintains the eternal permanence of
cosmic things. Whilst Philolaus considered the natural year as comprising
of 364 and a half days in being consistent with the Chinese HAN Dynasty
(206 BCE-220CE) MYSTERIES understanding (#81 x 4.5 days = 364.5 days) of
them. [Pythagorean Sourcebook p 168, 171]

According to the 4.5 day designations of this natural year cycle into #81
sections, this would then equate the #CENTRE as 13 to 17 September;

However the Chinese DAOist cosmic perspective of the DAO-ZIRAN of NATURE by
its GRAND INCEPTION upon the midnight new moon solstice of 21 December 103
BCE as articulation of the natural year (as equivalent to the New Testament
notion as TROCHOS-course of NATURE-genesis [James 3:6]) associated to YANG
HSIUNG’s treatise that was published within 4 BCE and known as the "Canon
of Supreme Mystery", reconciled it's unified arrangement of the DAO TE
CHING's #81 sections as specifically the TRINOMIAL (tetragrammaton) notion
of the THEORY OF NUMBER as HOMOIOS paradigm value: TETRA: 60 -
ACCUMULATION, which is mapped to the PYTHAGOREAN / I CHING's H64
designations (of necessity some are repeated) as the binary paradigm value:
H26 - GREAT DOMESTICATION, RESTRAINING FORCE, GREAT ACCUMULATING, THE
TAMING POWER OF THE GREAT, GREAT STORAGE, POTENTIAL ENERGY;
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-24 15:48:49 UTC
Permalink
— (SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF MORALS: #56 -
TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT AND SLANDER
BU MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE AS BOER / ANZAC
DEFAMATION?

Nous: #56
Time: 10:10 hrs
Date: 2018.8.25
Torah: [#40, #30, #5]@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 70 (#110); Ego: 30 (#70),
@3: Sup: 75 (#185 - I AM NOT BOISTEROUS IN BEHAVIOUR {%25}); Ego: 5
(#75),
Male: #185; Feme: #75
} // #75

Dao: Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity
Tetra: #46 - Enlargement
I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding, Fullness

Latin: Multus {God who delivers from the evil} Alt: Hyaiel {God and Man
Exist} {

1. PROTECTS AGAINST WEAPONS & PERILS OF TRAVEL
2. MEDICINAL HERBS
3. WATER
4. Chumis
}

Solar Eclipse: 1 August 2008 (AEST)

Judah {Praise of the Lord; confession}

Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#434 / #383} / HETEROS {#449 / #350} / TORAH {#474 /
#403}

<http://www.grapple369.com?zen:3,row:4,col:9,nous:56&idea:{m,143}&idea:{f,132}&idea:{m,434}&idea:{f,383}&PROTOTYPE:HOMOIOS>

***@zen: 3, row: 4, col: 9, nous: 56 [Date: 2018.8.25, Super: #434 /
#51 - Natural Guides and Nursing Virtuosity; I-Ching: H47 - Oppression
(exhaustion), Confining, Entangled; Tetra: 69 - Exhaustion, Ego: #383 / #56
- Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity; I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding,
Fullness; Tetra: 46 - Enlargement]

Kant does not introduce the Preface of the Groundwork with a
characterization of the work’s content; rather he attempts first of all to
define the place of a metaphysics of morals within philosophy. For this
task, he makes use of three criteria. Kant first differentiates
philosophical theories by whether they are “formal” or “material.” Formal
philosophy, according to Kant, is equated with logic. It possesses no
specific object; rather it concerns itself, “without distinction among
Objects,” with “the universal rules of thinking in general”. In contrast,
every material philosophy “has to do with determinate objects and the laws
to which they are subjected”.

KANT: “Logic can have no empirical part, i.e., a part such that the
universal and necessary laws of thinking rest on grounds that are taken
from experience; for otherwise it would not be logic, i.e., a canon for the
understanding or reason which is valid for all thinking and must be
demonstrated. By contrast, natural and moral philosophy can each have their
empirical part, because the former must determine its laws of nature as an
object of experience, the latter must determine the laws for the will of
the human being insofar as he is affected by nature—the first as laws in
accordance with which everything happens, the second as those in accordance
with which everything ought to happen, but also reckoning with the
conditions under which it often does not happen.

One can call all philosophy, insofar as it is based on grounds of
experience, empirical, but that which puts forth its doctrines solely from
principles a priori, pure philosophy. The latter, when it is merely formal,
is called logic; but if it is limited to determinate objects of the
understanding, then it is called metaphysics.

This formulation already offers an indication of the second criterion. Kant
subdivides material theories, in turn, into two Classes. Kant distinguishes
them by with reference to the laws to which the objects that the theories
deal are subjected. He seems to assume that there are exactly two kinds of
laws. And, correspondingly, he differentiates between two types of material
philosophy: on the one hand, “physics,” or “doctrine of nature,” or,
alternatively, “natural wisdom;” and, on the other hand, “ethics,” or
“doctrine of morals,” or, alternative. “moral wisdom.” It is a matter of
the “laws of nature,” in the one case, and of the “laws of freedom,” in the
other, that each theory is respectively concerned. What can Kant mean by
this? The expression “laws of nature” seems to be relatively unproblematic.
But what is to be understood by the expression “laws of freedom” [which are
implicit to the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. exercise of
voluntary will)]?

From Kant’s elucidation one can infer a more exact interpretatlon: Laws of
nature are therefore laws “in accordance with which everything happens,”
while the laws of freedom are those “in accordance with which everything
ought to happen”. Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern
terminological distinction between descriptive statements which present an
account of how the world is being analogous to the LIMITED {#9 -
JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS /
SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the normative
statements presenting an evaluative account, or an account of how the
syncretic world should be as existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 -
ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} in being optimally something that should be
lived up to; or that should be pursued.

At the center of a philosophical doctrine of nature, there would then stand
general descriptive judgments; that means, more precisely, statements of
law that describe how objects of nature act. And at the center of a
doctrine of morals there would stand normative judgments that exhibit a
comparable degree of generality and modal status. I will later address more
thoroughly what it could mean that some normative judgments exhibit a
comparable modal status to statements of law in the natural sciences. Such
a parallel is far from trivial. On the contrary, it is one of the critical
challenges for the interpretation of Kant’s ethical writings. The first
step toward a unified interpretation of the two kinds of laws consists in
seeing both kinds equally as propositionally structured entities that
demonstrate a clearly identifiable logical form.

Next to formality versus materiality and the two types of laws, Kant
introduces a third distinctive Characteristic of theories. He seems to
understand material theories as complex systems that can be split in
individual parts. Every material philosophical theory accordingly contains
one part that he characterizes as “pure,” “rational,” or as “a priori”, and
it may contain a second, “empirical” part. Kant presupposes that in both
the doctrine of nature and the doctrine of morals the two parts can be
isolated from each other. It follows, therefore, that there are two a
priori types of theory: on the one hand, a “metaphysics of nature,” and, on
the other, the sought after “metaphysics of morals”

Thus, a metaphysics of morals would be the following type of theory:

(a) It is not purely formal, but rather deals with definite objects.
(b) It deals with objects in so far as these are subsumed under “laws of
freedom.”
(c) It contains no empirical elements.

At this juncture Kant does not yet presuppose that such a theory actually
exists or that it would be possible for a philosophy to work out
convincingly such a theory. He has not even argued yet that it is
advantageous or even necessary for philosophy to treat the a priori part
separately from the empirical part. Kant pursues these lines of questions
in the subsequent passages. [page 4, 5]

Accordingly, we may as an ANTHROPOCENTRIC {

- regarding the human being as the central fact of the universe.
- assuming human beings to be the final aim and end of the universe.
- viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and
values.

} syncretism, consider an unified paradigmatic perspective of Kant’s idea
of an otherwise twofold metaphysics, the idea of a METAPHYSICS OF NATURE
{ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based seven number) = #294
x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS = 365.242321 days} and of a
METAPHYSICS OF MORALS {

TETRAGRAMMATON {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA: #1 + #2 + #3 +#4 = #10 } HIERARCHY
VALUE AS THE METAPHYSICAL CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE TO THE HOMOIOS THEORY OF
*NUMBER*

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

}. Physics will thus have its empirical but also a rational part; and
ethics likewise; although here the empirical part in particular could be
called practical anthropology, but the rational part could properly be
called morals.

Syncretism or the Mixed School within Chinese philosophy is an eclectic
school of thought that combined elements of Confucianism, Taoism, Mohism,
and Legalism. The Syncretist texts include the Huainanzi, Lüshi Chunqiu,
and the Shizi. The (c. 330 BCE) Shizi is the earliest of the Syncretist
texts.

And Michael Nylan's exceptional work conveys the notion that HAN DYNASTY
(206 BCE to 220 CE) sage YANG HSIUNG's two published works: Canon of
Supreme Mystery (T'AI HSÜAN CHING) within 4 BCE and the Elemental Changes
within 2 BCE are called the Mystery by its devotees as a true guide for
those seeking the Way of the sages. Today, in the West, readers will find
the Mystery an essential tool for understanding the Tao as it operates in
the cosmos, in the psyche, or in sacred texts like the l CHING. Written in
2 BCE., the Mystery represents the first grand synthesis of the dominant
strands of Chinese thought. As it weaves together elements of Confucianism,
Taoism, Yin/Yang Five Phases theory, alchemy, and astrology into a
systematic, organic whole, all the fundamental components of early Chinese
belief appear within its pages which formed the basis to the STATE ideology
of China from 134 BCE two 1911 CE, an ideology that in turn provided the
intellectual foundations for the Japanese and Korean STATES, therefore the
importance of this book can hardly be overestimated.

As a book of divination, the Mystery provides a method for weighing
alternative courses of action. As a book of philosophy, it conveys a sense
of the elemental changes in life. Intricately structured in eighty-one
tetragrams (four-line graphs), the Mystery accounts for the movements of
the sun, moon, and stars, the shifting rhythms of the seasons, the
alternations of night and day, and the ebb and flow of cosmic energy—in
short, all the dynamic relations of the realms of Heaven, Earth, and Man.

It addresses questions of Fate, assessing the degree of control that
individuals have over their destinies. It suggests the fabric that binds
families, communities, and states together. As a book of poetry, the
Mystery unfolds a literary vision of seeming simplicity but surpassing
depth. The long poem divides into short sections of rhyming couplets that
focus upon a single mundane event or familiar phenomenon.

The Roman writer Censorinus, who in his 238 CE publication DE DEI NATALI
(THE NATAL DAY), claims that the Pythagorean advocate Philolaus (470-385
BCE) as preceeding Plato (c. 429–347 BCE), being the principle proponent of
the Pythagorean doctrines on “the world’s nature is a harmonious compound
of the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF
VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the
UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} elements which is similar to
the totality of the WORLD-KOSMOS in itself and all it contains:

“JESUS {he is saved / a saviour; a deliverer} OF NAZARETH {SOVEREIGN; one
chosen or set apart; separated; crowned; sanctified} ANSWERED, *ARE*
*THERE* *NOT* *TWELVE* *HOURS* *IN* *THE* *DAY* {ie. 24 x 60 minutes =
#1440 / #72 = 20 minutes allocations}? *IF* *ANY* *MAN* *WALK* *IN* *THE*
*DAY*, *HE* *STUMBLETH* *NOT*, *BECAUSE* *HE* *SEETH* *THE* *LIGHT* {ie.

#41 x #9 = #369 as similarly Philolaus located the fire at #CENTRE and
calls it HESTIA of the ALL, the GUARDPOST OF ZEUS, the MOTHER OF THE GODS,
the ALTAR, the LINK and the MEASURE OF NATURE-GENESIS

} *OF* *THIS* *WORLD*-*KOSMOS*.

BUT IF A MAN WALK IN THE NIGHT, HE STUMBLETH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO LIGHT IN
HIM.” [John 11:9-10 (KJV)]

HESTIA AND THE PYTHAGOREANS: THE FIRE IN THE MIDDLE
“The Pythagoreans offered significant cosmological observations . . . It is
also noteworthy that the early Pythagoreans denied the geocentric and
geostatic model of the universe. According to the testimony of Aristotle
(De caelo 293.18), they placed *fire* and not earth at the centre of the
universe. The earth became a celestial body, which creates day and night by
its circular motion around Hestia (hestia meaning ‘hearth’). Ten divine
celestial bodies – ten being the perfect number, which encompasses the
whole nature of numbers – rotate rhythmically around Hestia in the
following order: the dark counter-earth (antichthon), the earth, the moon,
the sun, the five planets (Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury) and the
sphere of the fixed stars (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986). This new
cosmological model is usually attributed to Philolaus and explained through
the importance of the Monad in Pythagorean metaphysics. Since the Monad is
the divine source of all numbers and is identified with, or represented by,
the purity of the fire, the source of the celestial bodies should be a
divine fire in the centre of the cosmos (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986).” [p.
38-39, Introduction to Presocratics: A Thematic Approach to Early Greek
Philosophy with Key Readings by Giannis Stamatellos]

<https://paganreveries.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/hestia-the-queen-of-fire-part-three/>

Wherefore the Pythagoreans had defined by a BINOMIAL notion of the THEORY
OF NUMBER which they regarded as SOVEREIGN and the AUTOGENIC {ie. coming
from within as self-generated} DAEMONIC FORCE which maintains the eternal
permanence of cosmic things. Whilst Philolaus considered the natural year
as comprising of 364 and a half days in being consistent with the Chinese
HAN Dynasty (206 BCE-220CE) MYSTERIES understanding (#81 x 4.5 days = 364.5
days) of them. [Pythagorean Sourcebook p 168, 171]

According to the 4.5 day designations of this natural year cycle into #81
sections, this would then equate the #CENTRE as occurring upon 13 to 17
September;

However the Chinese DAOist cosmic understanding of the DAO-ZIRAN of NATURE
with its GRAND INCEPTION upon the midnight new moon solstice of 21 December
103 BCE as an schematic articulation of the natural year (as equivalent to
the New Testament notion as TROCHOS-course of NATURE-genesis [James 3:6])
articulated as YANG HSIUNG’s treatise that was published within 4 BCE and
known as the "Canon of Supreme Mystery", reconciled it's unified
arrangement of the DAO TE CHING's #81 sections as specifically the
TRINOMIAL (tetragrammaton) notion od the HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER where the
REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE INHIBITOR perspective which is then mapped to the
ROMAN JULIAN 365.25 day notion as the basis to its EMPIRE GOVERNANCE as
then the common understanding given to the PYTHAGOREAN HETEROS THEORY OF
NUMBER and its CHINESE I CHING's H64 designations (of necessity some are
repeated) as being a common perennialist paradigmatic perspective. Whereby
the trinomial value: TETRA: 60 - ACCUMULATION is mapped to binary value:
H26 - GREAT DOMESTICATION, RESTRAINING FORCE, GREAT ACCUMULATING, THE
TAMING POWER OF THE GREAT, GREAT STORAGE, POTENTIAL ENERGY;
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-25 00:12:20 UTC
Permalink
— (SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF MORALS: #56 -
TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT AND SLANDER
BY MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE AS BOER / ANZAC
DEFAMATION?

Nous: #56
Time: 10:10 hrs
Date: 2018.8.25
Torah: [#40, #30, #5]@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 70 (#110); Ego: 30 (#70),
@3: Sup: 75 (#185 - I AM NOT BOISTEROUS IN BEHAVIOUR {%25}); Ego: 5
(#75),
Male: #185; Feme: #75
} // #75

Dao: Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity
Tetra: #46 - Enlargement
I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding, Fullness

Latin: Multus {God who delivers from the evil} Alt: Hyaiel {God and Man
Exist} {

1. PROTECTS AGAINST WEAPONS & PERILS OF TRAVEL
2. MEDICINAL HERBS
3. WATER
4. Chumis
}

Solar Eclipse: 1 August 2008 (AEST)

Judah {Praise of the Lord; confession}

Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#434 / #383} / HETEROS {#449 / #350} / TORAH {#474 /
#403}

<http://www.grapple369.com?zen:3,row:4,col:9,nous:56&idea:{m,143}&idea:{f,132}&idea:{m,434}&idea:{f,383}&PROTOTYPE:HOMOIOS>

***@zen: 3, row: 4, col: 9, nous: 56 [Date: 2018.8.25, Super: #434 /
#51 - Natural Guides and Nursing Virtuosity; I-Ching: H47 - Oppression
(exhaustion), Confining, Entangled; Tetra: 69 - Exhaustion, Ego: #383 / #56
- Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity; I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding,
Fullness; Tetra: 46 - Enlargement]

Kant does not introduce the Preface of the Groundwork with a
characterization of the work’s content; rather he attempts first of all to
define the place of a metaphysics of morals within philosophy. For this
task, he makes use of three criteria. Kant first differentiates
philosophical theories by whether they are “formal” or “material.” Formal
philosophy, according to Kant, is equated with logic. It possesses no
specific object; rather it concerns itself, “without distinction among
Objects,” with “the universal rules of thinking in general”. In contrast,
every material philosophy “has to do with determinate objects and the laws
to which they are subjected”.

KANT: “Logic can have no empirical part, i.e., a part such that the
universal and necessary laws of thinking rest on grounds that are taken
from experience; for otherwise it would not be logic, i.e., a canon for the
understanding or reason which is valid for all thinking and must be
demonstrated. By contrast, natural and moral philosophy can each have their
empirical part, because the former must determine its laws of nature as an
object of experience, the latter must determine the laws for the will of
the human being insofar as he is affected by nature—the first as laws in
accordance with which everything happens, the second as those in accordance
with which everything ought to happen, but also reckoning with the
conditions under which it often does not happen.

One can call all philosophy, insofar as it is based on grounds of
experience, empirical, but that which puts forth its doctrines solely from
principles a priori, pure philosophy. The latter, when it is merely formal,
is called logic; but if it is limited to determinate objects of the
understanding, then it is called metaphysics.

This formulation already offers an indication of the second criterion. Kant
subdivides material theories, in turn, into two Classes. Kant distinguishes
them by with reference to the laws to which the objects that the theories
deal are subjected. He seems to assume that there are exactly two kinds of
laws. And, correspondingly, he differentiates between two types of material
philosophy: on the one hand, “physics,” or “doctrine of nature,” or,
alternatively, “natural wisdom;” and, on the other hand, “ethics,” or
“doctrine of morals,” or, alternative. “moral wisdom.” It is a matter of
the “laws of nature,” in the one case, and of the “laws of freedom,” in the
other, that each theory is respectively concerned. What can Kant mean by
this? The expression “laws of nature” seems to be relatively unproblematic.
But what is to be understood by the expression “laws of freedom” [which are
implicit to the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. exercise of
voluntary will)]?

From Kant’s elucidation one can infer a more exact interpretatlon: Laws of
nature are therefore laws “in accordance with which everything happens,”
while the laws of freedom are those “in accordance with which everything
ought to happen”.

Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern terminological
distinction between descriptive statements which present an account of how
the world is being analogous to the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS
DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY
DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the normative statements presenting an
evaluative account, or an account of how the syncretic world should be as
existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} in being
optimally something that should be lived up to; or that should be pursued.

At the center of a philosophical doctrine of nature, there would then stand
general descriptive judgments; that means, more precisely, statements of
law that describe how objects of nature act. And at the center of a
doctrine of morals there would stand normative judgments that exhibit a
comparable degree of generality and modal status. I will later address more
thoroughly what it could mean that some normative judgments exhibit a
comparable modal status to statements of law in the natural sciences. Such
a parallel is far from trivial. On the contrary, it is one of the critical
challenges for the interpretation of Kant’s ethical writings. The first
step toward a unified interpretation of the two kinds of laws consists in
seeing both kinds equally as propositionally structured entities that
demonstrate a clearly identifiable logical form.

Next to formality versus materiality and the two types of laws, Kant
introduces a third distinctive Characteristic of theories. He seems to
understand material theories as complex systems that can be split in
individual parts. Every material philosophical theory accordingly contains
one part that he characterizes as “pure,” “rational,” or as “a priori”, and
it may contain a second, “empirical” part. Kant presupposes that in both
the doctrine of nature and the doctrine of morals the two parts can be
isolated from each other. It follows, therefore, that there are two a
priori types of theory: on the one hand, a “metaphysics of nature,” and, on
the other, the sought after “metaphysics of morals”

Thus, a metaphysics of morals would be the following type of theory:

(a) It is not purely formal, but rather deals with definite objects.
(b) It deals with objects in so far as these are subsumed under “laws of
freedom.”
(c) It contains no empirical elements.

At this juncture Kant does not yet presuppose that such a theory actually
exists or that it would be possible for a philosophy to work out
convincingly such a theory. He has not even argued yet that it is
advantageous or even necessary for philosophy to treat the a priori part
separately from the empirical part. Kant pursues these lines of questions
in the subsequent passages. [page 4, 5]

Accordingly, we may as an ANTHROPOCENTRIC {

- regarding the human being as the central fact of the universe.
- assuming human beings to be the final aim and end of the universe.
- viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and
values.

} syncretism, consider an unified paradigmatic perspective of Kant’s idea
of an otherwise twofold metaphysics, the idea of a METAPHYSICS OF NATURE
{ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based seven number) = #294
x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS = 365.242321 days} and of a
METAPHYSICS OF MORALS {

TETRAGRAMMATON {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA: #1 + #2 + #3 +#4 = #10 } HIERARCHY
VALUE AS THE METAPHYSICAL CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE TO THE HOMOIOS THEORY OF
*NUMBER*

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System’s Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

}. Physics will thus have its empirical but also a rational part; and
ethics likewise; although here the empirical part in particular could be
called practical anthropology, but the rational part could properly be
called morals.

Syncretism or the Mixed School within Chinese philosophy is an eclectic
school of thought that combined elements of Confucianism, Taoism, Mohism,
and Legalism. The Syncretist texts include the Huainanzi, Lüshi Chunqiu,
and the Shizi. The (c. 330 BCE) Shizi is the earliest of the Syncretist
texts.

And Michael Nylan’s exceptional work conveys the notion that HAN DYNASTY
(206 BCE to 220 CE) sage YANG HSIUNG’s two published works: Canon of
Supreme Mystery (T’AI HSÜAN CHING) within 4 BCE and the Elemental Changes
within 2 BCE are called the Mystery by its devotees as a true guide for
those seeking the Way of the sages. Today, in the West, readers will find
the Mystery an essential tool for understanding the Tao as it operates in
the cosmos, in the psyche, or in sacred texts like the l CHING. Written in
2 BCE., the Mystery represents the first grand synthesis of the dominant
strands of Chinese thought. As it weaves together elements of Confucianism,
Taoism, Yin/Yang Five Phases theory, alchemy, and astrology into a
systematic, organic whole, all the fundamental components of early Chinese
belief appear within its pages which formed the basis to the STATE ideology
of China from 134 BCE two 1911 CE, an ideology that in turn provided the
intellectual foundations for the Japanese and Korean STATES, therefore the
importance of this book can hardly be overestimated.

As a book of divination, the Mystery provides a method for weighing
alternative courses of action. As a book of philosophy, it conveys a sense
of the elemental changes in life. Intricately structured in eighty-one
tetragrams (four-line graphs), the Mystery accounts for the movements of
the sun, moon, and stars, the shifting rhythms of the seasons, the
alternations of night and day, and the ebb and flow of cosmic energy—in
short, all the dynamic relations of the realms of Heaven, Earth, and Man.

It addresses questions of Fate, assessing the degree of control that
individuals have over their destinies. It suggests the fabric that binds
families, communities, and states together. As a book of poetry, the
Mystery unfolds a literary vision of seeming simplicity but surpassing
depth. The long poem divides into short sections of rhyming couplets that
focus upon a single mundane event or familiar phenomenon.

— IRISH CATHOLIC SAINT PATRICK’S PLAGUE —

“TREASON ONLY TREASON.
TO BE SURE, TO BE SURE. {#1 - PIECE CUT OFF}
THERE IS NO OTHER REASON.
LEPRECHAUN CAUSE SO PURE.

DOES CURSE OUR SOVEREIGN.
AND FLETCH {provide (an arrow) with feathers for flight} THE PAPAL ARSE.
{#2 - LE JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL}
SUCH LOVE WHICH YOU FEIGN.
AS JINGOISTIC PIOUS FARCE.”

YOUTUBE: “Qantas Australia Home - TV Ad 1998”



SUI JURIS / MEMBRUM VIRILE@{
@1: Sup: 56 (#56); Ego: 14 (#14),
@2: Sup: 11 (#67); Ego: 70 (#84 - I AM NOT A MAN OF VIOLENCE {%2}),
@3: Sup: 28 (#95); Ego: 33 (#117),
@4: Sup: 45 (#140 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY {%14} / I AM NOT AN
EAVES-DROPPER {%16}); Ego: 33 (#150 - I INDULGE NOT IN ANGER {%28}),
@5: Sup: 8 (#148 - I AM NOT A TRANSGRESSOR {%12}); Ego: 62 (#212),
@6: Sup: 38 (#186 - I AM NOT ONE OF INCONSTANT MIND {%31}); Ego: 57 (#269),
@7: Sup: 40 Male: #436; Feme: #536
}

<http://www.grapple369.com/?idea:{436}&idea:{526}>

“And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they
worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to
make war with him?

And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies;
and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months {ie.

T’AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: 42 months / 3 = 14 x #91 [30, 30, 31] = #1274 days % #41 = #3 -
Political Prescriptions, Quietude; I-Ching: H46 - Climbing, Moving/Pushing
Upward, Ascending; Tetra: 8 - Opposition;

THOTH MEASURE: #3 - Oh thou of the Nose, who makest thine appearance at
Chemunnu; *I* *AM* *NOT* *EVIL* *MINDED*.

    #VIRTUE: With Mired (no. #3), great woe.
    #TOOLS: With Encounters (no. #43), small desire.
    #POSITION: The ways of Purity (no. #37) and ...
    #TIME: Pattern (no. #47) where some are simple and some are complex?
    #CANON: #130

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_130@{
   @1: Sup: 3 (#3); Ego: 3 (#3),
   @2: Sup: 46 (#49); Ego: 43 (#46),
   @3: Sup: 2 (#51); Ego: 37 (#83),
   @4: Sup: 49 (#100); Ego: 47 (#130 - I AM NOT EVIL MINDED {%3}),
   Male: #100; Feme: #130
} // #130

}. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name,
and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto
him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given
him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not
written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation {ie. #41
x #9 = #369 as the MEASURE OF NATURE-GENESIS} of the world. If any man have
an ear, let him hear. He that leadeth into captivity shall go into
captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword.
Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.” [Revelation 13:4-10
(KJV)]

“And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the
remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the
testimony of Jesus Christ.” [Revelation 12:17 (KJV)]

“And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See [thou do
it] not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the
testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit
of prophecy.” [Revelation 19:10 (KJV)]

SUPER (MALE) Y-M-T-A HOMOIOS THEORY ON NUMBER IDEA: {OUTER: #31 - Military
Stratagem, Quelling War; I-Ching: H32 - Perseverance, Endurance, Duration,
Constancy; Tetra: 51 - Constancy / INNER: #26 - Ambiguous Reversals, Virtue
of Gravity; I-Ching: H3 - Birth Throes, Initial Difficulties, Sprouting,
Difficulty at the beginning, Gathering support, Hoarding; Tetra: 3 - Mired}
#436 has 8 Categories:

G993@{
   @1: Sup: 2 (#2); Ego: 2 (#2),
   @2: Sup: 72 (#74); Ego: 70 (#72),
   @3: Sup: 73 (#147); Ego: 1 (#73),
   @4: Sup: 42 (#189); Ego: 50 (#123),
   @5: Sup: 47 (#236); Ego: 5 (#128),
   @6: Sup: 66 (#302); Ego: 19 (#147),
   @7: Sup: 69 (#371); Ego: 3 (#150 - I INDULGE NOT IN ANGER {%28}),
   @8: Sup: 74 (#445); Ego: 5 (#155),
   @9: Sup: 31 (#476); Ego: 38 (#193),
   Male: #476; Feme: #193
} // #436

T’AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #439 % #41 = #29 - Deeming, Non-Assertion; I-Ching: H36 -
Suppression of the Light, Sinking/Darkening of the Light, Brilliance
injured, Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 67 - Darkening;

THOTH MEASURE: #29 - Oh Kenemtu, who makest thine appearance in Kenemit;
*I* *AM* *NOT* *GIVEN* *TO* *CURSING*.

    #VIRTUE: With Decisiveness (no. #29), numerous affairs, but
    #TOOLS: With Exhaustion (no. #69), not a single happiness.
    #POSITION: With Change (no. #28), creating the new.
    #TIME: With Constancy (no. #51), cleaving to the old.
    #CANON: #177

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_177@{
   @1: Sup: 29 (#29); Ego: 29 (#29),
   @2: Sup: 17 (#46); Ego: 69 (#98),
   @3: Sup: 45 (#91); Ego: 28 (#126),
   @4: Sup: 15 (#106); Ego: 51 (#177 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO CURSING {%29}),
   Male: #106; Feme: #177
} // #177

#436 as [#2, #70, #1, #50, #5, #100, #3, #5, #200] = Boanerges (G993):
{UMBRA: #5 as #439 % #41 = #29} 1) a nickname given to James and John, the
sons of Zebedee, by the Lord. The name seems to denote fiery and
destructive zeal that may be likened to a thunder storm;

YOUTUBE: “Thunder (Imagine Dragons)”



G2300@{
   @1: Sup: 9 (#9); Ego: 9 (#9),
   @2: Sup: 14 (#23); Ego: 5 (#14),
   @3: Sup: 15 (#38); Ego: 1 (#15),
   @4: Sup: 53 (#91); Ego: 38 (#53),
   @5: Sup: 54 (#145); Ego: 1 (#54),
   @6: Sup: 11 (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS {%21}); Ego: 38 (#92),
   @7: Sup: 20 (#176); Ego: 9 (#101),
   @8: Sup: 21 (#197 - I AM NOT NOISY IN MY SPEECH {%33}); Ego: 1 (#102 - I
AM NOT RAPACIOUS {%4}),
   @9: Sup: 31 (#228 - I HAVE NO UNJUST PREFERENCES {%40}); Ego: 10 (#112),
   Male: #228; Feme: #112
} // #436

T’AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #136 % #41 = #13 - Status, Loathing Shame; I-Ching: H5 - Waiting,
Delay, Attending, Moistened, Arriving; Tetra: 17 - Holding Back;

THOTH MEASURE: #13 - Oh Eater of Blood, who makest thine appearance at the
Block; *I* *HAVE* *NOT* *SLAUGHTERED* *THE* *SACRED* *ANIMALS*.

    #VIRTUE: With Increase (no. #13), the beginning of florescence, but
    #TOOLS: With Eternal (no. #53), what lasts to the very end.
    #POSITION: With Opposition (no. #8), at court, but
    #TIME: With Inner (no. #65), on the sleeping mat
    #CANON: #139

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_139@{
   @1: Sup: 13 (#13); Ego: 13 (#13),
   @2: Sup: 66 (#79); Ego: 53 (#66),
   @3: Sup: 74 (#153); Ego: 8 (#74),
   @4: Sup: 58 (#211); Ego: 65 (#139 - I HAVE NOT SLAUGHTERED THE SACRED
ANIMALS {%13}),
   Male: #211; Feme: #139
} // #139

#436 as [#9, #5, #1, #200, #1, #200, #9, #1, #10] = theaomai (G2300):
{UMBRA: #6 as #136 % #41 = #13} 1) to behold, look upon, view attentively,
contemplate (often used of public shows); 2) to view, take a view of; 3) to
learn by looking, to see with the eyes, to perceive; 1a) of important
persons that are looked on with admiration; 2a) *IN* *THE* *SENSE* *OF*
*VISITING*, *MEETING* *WITH* *A* *PERSON*;

G2904@{
   @1: Sup: 20 (#20); Ego: 20 (#20),
   @2: Sup: 39 (#59); Ego: 19 (#39),
   @3: Sup: 40 (#99); Ego: 1 (#40),
   @4: Sup: 16 (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5}); Ego: 57 (#97),
   @5: Sup: 21 (#136); Ego: 5 (#102 - I AM NOT RAPACIOUS {%4}),
   @6: Sup: 31 (#167); Ego: 10 (#112),
   Male: #167; Feme: #112
} // #436

T’AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #691 % #41 = #35 - Great Guiding Signs?, Virtue of Benevolence;
I-Ching: H17 - Following, Allegiance; Tetra: 19 - Following;

THOTH MEASURE: #35 - Oh Tem-sepu, who makest thine appearance in Tattu; I
am not one who curseth the king.

    #VIRTUE: As to Gathering (no. #35), it is success.
    #TOOLS: With Failure (no. #75), loss of fortune.
    #POSITION: With Ascent (no. #7), high ambitions.
    #TIME: With Sinking (no. #64), low ambitions.
    #CANON: #181

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_181@{
   @1: Sup: 35 (#35); Ego: 35 (#35),
   @2: Sup: 29 (#64); Ego: 75 (#110),
   @3: Sup: 36 (#100); Ego: 7 (#117),
   @4: Sup: 19 (#119); Ego: 64 (#181 - I LEND NOT A DEAF EAR TO THE WORDS
OF RIGHTEOUSNESS {%24} / I AM NOT ONE WHO CURSETH THE KING {%35}),
   Male: #119; Feme: #181
} // #181

#436 as [#20, #100, #1, #300, #5, #10] = kratos (G2904): {UMBRA: #7 as #691
% #41 = #35} 1) *ROME*: force, strength; 2) power, might: mighty with great
power; 3) dominion; 2a) a mighty deed, a work of power;

EGO (FEMALE) Y-M-T-A HOMOIOS THEORY ON NUMBER IDEA: {OUTER: #40 - Reversal,
Avoiding Activity; I-Ching: H36 - Suppression of the Light,
Sinking/Darkening Light, Brilliance injured, Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 68
- Dimming / INNER: #34 - Great Guide, Trust in its Perfection; I-Ching: H18
- Ills to Be Cured, Arresting Decay, Correcting, Work on what has been
spoiled (decay), Decaying, Branch; Tetra: 27 - Duties} #526 has 95
Categories:

H3423@{
   @1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
   @2: Sup: 16 (#22); Ego: 10 (#16),
   @3: Sup: 26 (#48); Ego: 10 (#26),
   @4: Sup: 64 (#112); Ego: 38 (#64),
   @5: Sup: 40 (#152); Ego: 57 (#121),
   Male: #152; Feme: #121
} // #526

T’AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #526 % #41 = #34 - Great Guide, Trust in its Perfection; I-Ching:
H18 - Ills to Be Cured, Arresting Decay, Correcting, Work on what has been
spoiled (decay), Decaying, Branch; Tetra: 27 - Duties;

THOTH MEASURE: #34 - Oh Nefertmu, who makest thine appearance in Memphis;
*I* *AM* *NEITHER* *A* *LIAR* *NOR* *A* *DOER* *OF* *MISCHIEF*.

    #VIRTUE: With Kinship (no. #34), drawing close to goodness, but
    #TOOLS: With Closure (no. #74), closing out feelings of obligation.
    #POSITION: As to Closure (no. #74), both are shut off, but
    #TIME: As to Closeness (no. #33), all use the One.
    #CANON: #215

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_215@{
   @1: Sup: 34 (#34); Ego: 34 (#34),
   @2: Sup: 27 (#61); Ego: 74 (#108),
   @3: Sup: 20 (#81); Ego: 74 (#182 - I AM NOT FRAUDULENT IN MEASURES OF
GRAIN {%6}),
   @4: Sup: 53 (#134); Ego: 33 (#215 - I AM NEITHER A LIAR NOR A DOER OF
MISCHIEF {%34}),
   Male: #134; Feme: #215
} // #215

#526 as [#6, #10, #10, #200, #300] = yarash (H3423): {UMBRA: #4 as #526 %
#41 = #34} 1) to seize, dispossess, take possession off, inherit,
disinherit, occupy, impoverish, be an heir; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to take
possession of; 1a2) to inherit; 1a3) to impoverish, come to poverty, be
poor; 1b) (Niphal) to be dispossessed, be impoverished, come to poverty;
1c) (Piel) to devour; 1d) (Hiphil); 1d1) to cause to possess or inherit;
1d2) to cause others to possess or inherit; 1d3) to impoverish; 1d4) to
dispossess; 1d5) to destroy, bring to ruin, disinherit;

H4159@{
   @1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
   @2: Sup: 46 (#86 - I AM NOT A ROBBER OF FOOD {%10}); Ego: 6 (#46),
   @3: Sup: 45 (#131); Ego: 80 (#126),
   @4: Sup: 40 (#171 - I AM NOT UNCHASTE WITH ANY ONE {%20}); Ego: 76
(#202),
   Male: #171; Feme: #202
} // #526

#526 as [#40, #6, #80, #400] = mowpheth (H4159): {UMBRA: #9 as #526 % #41 =
#34} 1) wonder, sign, miracle, portent; 1a) wonder (as a special display of
God’s power); 1b) sign, token (of future event);

H6680@{
   @1: Sup: 30 (#30); Ego: 30 (#30),
   @2: Sup: 39 (#69); Ego: 9 (#39),
   @3: Sup: 45 (#114); Ego: 6 (#45 - I AM NOT A DOER OF WRONG {%1}),
   @4: Sup: 40 (#154); Ego: 76 (#121),
   Male: #154; Feme: #121
} // #526

#526 as [#30, #90, #6, #400] = tsavah (H6680): {UMBRA: #7 as #526 % #41 =
#34} 1) to command, charge, give orders, lay charge, give charge to, order;
1a) (Piel); 1a1) to lay charge upon; 1a2) to give charge to, give command
to; 1a3) to give charge unto; 1a4) to give charge over, appoint; 1a5) to
give charge, command; 1a6) to charge, command; 1a7) to charge, commission;
1a8) to command, appoint, ordain (of divine act); 1b) (Pual) to be
commanded;

H4438@{
   @1: Sup: 30 (#30); Ego: 30 (#30),
   @2: Sup: 70 (#100); Ego: 40 (#70),
   @3: Sup: 19 (#119); Ego: 30 (#100),
   @4: Sup: 39 (#158 - I AM NOT HOT OF SPEECH {%23}); Ego: 20 (#120),
   @5: Sup: 45 (#203); Ego: 6 (#126),
   @6: Sup: 40 (#243); Ego: 76 (#202),
   Male: #243; Feme: #202
} // #526

#526 as [#30, #40, #30, #20, #6, #400] = malkuwth (H4438): {UMBRA: #42 as
#526 % #41 = #34} 1) *ROYALTY*, *ROYAL* *POWER*, *REIGN*, *KINGDOM*,
*SOVEREIGN* *POWER*; 1a) royal power, dominion; 1b) reign; 1c) kingdom,
realm;

The Roman writer Censorinus, who in his 238 CE publication DE DEI NATALI
(THE NATAL DAY), claims that the Pythagorean advocate Philolaus (470-385
BCE) as preceeding Plato (c. 429–347 BCE), being the principle proponent of
the Pythagorean doctrines on “the world’s nature is a harmonious compound
of the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF
VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the
UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} elements which is similar to
the totality of the WORLD-KOSMOS in itself and all it contains:

“JESUS {he is saved / a saviour; a deliverer} OF NAZARETH {SOVEREIGN; one
chosen or set apart; separated; crowned; sanctified} ANSWERED, *ARE*
*THERE* *NOT* *TWELVE* *HOURS* *IN* *THE* *DAY* {ie. 24 x 60 minutes =
#1440 / #72 = 20 minutes allocations}? *IF* *ANY* *MAN* *WALK* *IN* *THE*
*DAY*, *HE* *STUMBLETH* *NOT*, *BECAUSE* *HE* *SEETH* *THE* *LIGHT* {ie.

#41 x #9 = #369 as similarly Philolaus located the fire at #CENTRE and
calls it HESTIA of the ALL, the GUARDPOST OF ZEUS, the MOTHER OF THE GODS,
the ALTAR, the LINK and the MEASURE OF NATURE-GENESIS

} *OF* *THIS* *WORLD*-*KOSMOS*.

BUT IF A MAN WALK IN THE NIGHT, HE STUMBLETH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO LIGHT IN
HIM.” [John 11:9-10 (KJV)]

I have before POPE FRANCIS {ie.

born 17 December 1936 as Jorge Mario Bergoglio) is the 266th and current
Pope and sovereign of the Vatican City State. Francis is the first Jesuit
pope, the first from the Americas, the first from the Southern Hemisphere,
and the first pope from outside Europe since the Syrian Gregory III, who
reigned in the 8th century

} IRELAND APOSTOLIC JOURNEY upon SATURDAY 25 AUGUST / SUNDAY 26 AUGUST 2018
FOR THE OCCASION OF THE WORLD MEETING OF FAMILIES IN DUBLIN, provided
various examples relating the neural linguistic programming process of this
consciousness which accords to the LAWS of NATURE by which one may
confidently exercise the self identity as formula of autonomy with an
appropriate and coherent use of the underlying intellectus as genitive
voluntātis.

And thereby stated the cognitive hypothesis as the theoretical obvious
concern of this dialect correspondence with this SEPTET driver to the
mathematical theoretical noumenon which provides by an equitable
distribution of trinomial number an ontological basis for the entelechy:

- the realization of potential.
- the supposed vital principle that guides the development and functioning
of an organism or other system or organization.
- such self-organization requires a special biological force which is known
as entelechy.
- the soul for the spiritus.

It therefore may be considered as quintessentially the ‘INTELLECTUS AS
GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS’ of an unencumbered will and ought to conform with the
following dialectic which chronicles the: levels / phases / stages /
duration / milestone of any perennial cycle as the dispensational
governance basis of LETTERS PATENT TO THE FEDERATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF
AUSTRALIA OF 1901 represented by a theoretical mathematical trinomial
noumenon as an Intellectual Property:

MENTALISM {#41}: #1 - Will, free will, choice / Remember the Sabbath Day

CORRESPONDENCE {#82}: #2 - desire, inclination / Honour Parents

VIBRATION {#123}: #3 - disposition towards (something or someone) / Do Not
Kill

POLARITY {#164}: #4 - favour, affection / Do Not Commit Adultery (ie. Avoid
Heteronomy Against Autonomy)

RHYTHM {#205}: #5 - last will, testament / Do Not Steal

CAUSE AND EFFECT {#246}: #6 - goal, object, purpose, intention / Do Not
Bear False Witness

ENGENDERING / ENUMERATE {#287}: #7 - signification, import / Do Not Covet
[LATIN definition: VOLUNTĀTIS]

The NOLUNTĀTIS is then a consequence of an opposition as consideration
being a question of relativity as the interoperability by mutuality on what
#8 - TRANSFORMATIVE prototype is to be deployed where the default is the
hetero-square spirogyra order:

#8 as TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE {#328}: #1 - unwillingness;

But this is in my view a matter of protocol selection which can be
identified by the classification duality of both the cryptographic # and
the vRUDOLPH DATE being determined by a cosmogonic observation as
computation of rational 22/7 from #0 of Equinox on Wednesday of 20 March
1996 associated to any EVENT as slider dispersal from calendar to the
noumenon.

The Autonomous Prototype is then the source amalgamation of the binomial,
trinomial and chrononomial (#YEAR, #DECADE, #CENTENARY and #MILLENNIUM
orientation) meta descriptor prototypes for each MIRRORED reality:

#9 as MIRRORED AUTONOMOUS PROTOTYPE OF EACH OTHER’S SOVEREIGN AUTONOMY
{#369}: #2 - ill will, negative disposition (toward something) [LATIN
definition: NOLUNTĀTIS]

HESTIA AND THE PYTHAGOREANS: THE FIRE IN THE MIDDLE
“The Pythagoreans offered significant cosmological observations . . . It is
also noteworthy that the early Pythagoreans denied the geocentric and
geostatic model of the universe. According to the testimony of Aristotle
(De caelo 293.18), they placed *fire* and not earth at the centre of the
universe. The earth became a celestial body, which creates day and night by
its circular motion around Hestia (hestia meaning ‘hearth’). Ten divine
celestial bodies – ten being the perfect number, which encompasses the
whole nature of numbers – rotate rhythmically around Hestia in the
following order: the dark counter-earth (antichthon), the earth, the #369 -
moon, the #111 - sun, the five planets (#15 - Saturn, #34 - Jupiter, #65 -
Mars, #175 - Venus, #260 - Mercury) and the sphere of the fixed stars
(Aristotle, Metaphysics 986). This new cosmological model is usually
attributed to Philolaus and explained through the importance of the Monad
in Pythagorean metaphysics. Since the Monad is the divine source of all
numbers and is identified with, or represented by, the purity of the fire,
the source of the celestial bodies should be a divine fire in the centre of
the cosmos (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986).” [p. 38-39, Introduction to
Presocratics: A Thematic Approach to Early Greek Philosophy with Key
Readings by Giannis Stamatellos]

<https://paganreveries.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/hestia-the-queen-of-fire-part-three/>

Wherefore the Pythagoreans had defined by a BINOMIAL notion of the THEORY
OF NUMBER which they regarded as SOVEREIGN and the AUTOGENIC {ie. coming
from within as self-generated} DAEMONIC FORCE which maintains the eternal
permanence of cosmic things. Whilst Philolaus considered the natural year
as comprising of 364 and a half days in being consistent with the Chinese
HAN Dynasty (206 BCE-220CE) MYSTERIES understanding (#81 x 4.5 days = 364.5
days) of them. [Pythagorean Sourcebook p 168, 171]

According to the 4.5 day designations of this natural year cycle into #81
sections, this would then equate the #CENTRE as occurring upon 13 to 17
September;

“And the LORD God said unto the serpent {#34 - JUPITER (SERPENT)}, Because
thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every
beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat
all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman,
and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt
bruise his heel {

- <http://www.grapple369.com?telos:400>

#0 MOD 22 = 22 [#TAU / #400 - Jacob {He takes by the heel, he supplants,
That supplants, undermines; the heel}] as 4000 BCE

... [THE APEIRON] ...

The apeiron is central to the cosmological theory created by Anaximander,
(c. 610 – c. 546 BCE) pre-Pythagorean (c. 570–495 BC) Greek philosopher
whose work is mostly lost. From the few existing fragments, we learn that
he believed the beginning or ultimate reality (arche) is eternal and
infinite, or boundless (apeiron), subject to neither old age nor decay,
which perpetually yields fresh materials from which everything we can
perceive is derived. Apeiron generated the opposites, hot-cold, wet-dry
etc., which acted on the creation of the world. Everything is generated
from apeiron and then it is destroyed by going back to apeiron, according
to necessity. He believed that infinite worlds are generated from apeiron
and then they are destroyed there again.

His ideas were influenced by the Greek mythical tradition and by his
teacher Thales (7th-6th century BCE). Searching for some universal
principle, Anaximander retained the traditional religious assumption that
there was a cosmic order and tried to explain it rationally, using the old
mythical language which ascribed divine control on various spheres of
reality. This language was more suitable for a society which could see gods
everywhere; therefore the first glimmerings of laws of nature were
themselves derived from divine laws.

*THE* *GREEKS* *BELIEVED* *THAT* *THE* *UNIVERSAL* *PRINCIPLES* *COULD*
*ALSO* *BE* *APPLIED* *TO* *HUMAN* *SOCIETIES*. *THE* *WORD* *NOMOS*
(*LAW*) *MAY* *ORIGINALLY* *HAVE* *MEANT* *NATURAL* *LAW* *AND* *USED*
*LATER* *TO* *MEAN* *MAN*-*MADE* *LAW*. [ref: Wikipedia 2016:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Apeiron_(cosmology)>]

#8800 MOD 22 = 22 [#TAU / #400 - Jacob {He takes by the heel, he supplants,
That supplants, undermines; the heel}] as 8800 CE

}.” [Genesis 3:14-15 (KLV)]

However the Chinese DAOist cosmic understanding of the DAO-ZIRAN of NATURE
with its GRAND INCEPTION upon the midnight new moon solstice of 21 December
103 BCE as an schematic articulation of the natural year (as equivalent to
the New Testament notion as TROCHOS-course of NATURE-genesis [James 3:6])
articulated as YANG HSIUNG’s treatise that was published within 4 BCE and
known as the “Canon of Supreme Mystery”, reconciled it’s unified
arrangement of the DAO TE CHING’s #81 sections as specifically the
TRINOMIAL (tetragrammaton) notion od the HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER where the
REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE INHIBITOR perspective which is then mapped to the
ROMAN JULIAN 365.25 day notion as the basis to its EMPIRE GOVERNANCE as
then the common understanding given to the PYTHAGOREAN HETEROS THEORY OF
NUMBER and its CHINESE I CHING’s H64 designations (of necessity some are
repeated) as being a common perennialist paradigmatic perspective. Whereby
the trinomial value: TETRA: 60 - ACCUMULATION is mapped to binary value:
H26 - GREAT DOMESTICATION, RESTRAINING FORCE, GREAT ACCUMULATING, THE
TAMING POWER OF THE GREAT, GREAT STORAGE, POTENTIAL ENERGY;

It is also possible to divide the number of days in 400 years in the
Gregorian calendar reforms as 146,097 days by 7 and that when made
divisible by 22 to obtain the remainder, and to arrange the Hebrew letters
in a pattern which has a remainder of #13 as being in the middle of the
Chinese 4 BCE published DAO TE CHING / I CHING division of the year into
364.5 days and the Jewish Kabbalah equivalent which deployed a magic square
of #369 having a distinct mathematical property at centre of #41 for the
equivalent date of 13 September.

4. FORMULA OF UNIVERSAL LAW AS SOVEREIGNTY / *REMEMBER* *THE* *SABBATH*
{3W1D}
— THE UNION OF A MAN AND A WOMAN

TETRAD - #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {BETH (DOUBLE - #1 - NATURE
CONTAINS NATURE {#4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE}) / CHERUBIM (Gk.
Cheroubim - a cherub or imaginary figures which covered the mercy seat to
the Ark of the Covenant [Exodus 25:17-22] and from where God communed with
Israel)}

+ 0, H27, H54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal
Law}

#0 MOD 22 = 22 [#TAU / #400 - Jacob {He takes by the heel, he supplants,
That supplants, undermines; the heel}] as 4000 BCE
#400 MOD 22 = 17 [#PE / #80 - Serug {Branch, Layer; twining}] as 3600 BCE
#800 MOD 22 = 12 [#LAMED / #30 - Arphaxad {I shall fail as the breast: he
cursed the breast-bottle, A healer; a releaser}] as 3200 BCE
#1200 MOD 22 = 7 [#ZAYIN / #7 - Enoch {Initiated. Figuratively to initiate
or discipline; dedicate, train up}] as 2800 BCE

5. (MOTHER) FORMULA OF HUMANITY AS HEAD OF STATE / *HONOUR* *PARENTS*
— TO THE EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHERS,

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #1 + #2 = #3 as #MIND (DING-DONG BY PSYCHO-SEXUAL
IMPUNITY): MARION (MOTHER) STATUTE AS BABYLONIAN FASCIST WHOREDOM ON SAINT
PATRICK’S DAY 17 MARCH 2017

MONAD - #1 - NATURE CONTAINS NATURE: {ALEPH (*MOTHER* - SCALES OF MERIT) /
SERAPHIM {Heb. Saraph Gk. Ophis - burning, that is, (figuratively)
poisonous (serpent); specifically a fiery (serpent) or symbolical creature
(from their copper color))} {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA {1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10}

TETRAD - #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {BETH (DOUBLE - #1 - NATURE
CONTAINS NATURE {#4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE}) / CHERUBIM (Gk.
Cheroubim - a cherub or imaginary figures which covered the mercy seat to
the Ark of the Covenant [Exodus 25:17-22] and from where God communed with
Israel)}

PENTAD - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}

+ 0, H9, H18 {ie. System’s Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}

#1600 MOD 22 = 2 [#BETH / #2 - Seth {Substituted, Compensated; That God has
heard my prayer and has delivered me out of affliction. Power & Strength;
put; who puts; fixed}] as 2400 BCE
#2000 MOD 22 = 19 [#QOPH / #100 - Terah {Station, delay, a station of
Israel in the wilderness, To breathe; scent; blow}] as 2000 BCE

6. FORMULA OF AUTONOMY AS INDIVIDUAL / *DO* *NOT* *KILL*
— VOLUNTARILY

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #3 + #4 = #7 as #SCIENCE (POOH-POOH DEFECATION AS ANAL
SADISTIC / RETENTIVE / FIXATION) - FASCIST SWASTIKA / PYTHAGOREAN FORMULA
EMPATHY AS SUBSTITUTED VIRTUE UPON THE ANZAC TRADITION ON SATURDAY
(SABBATH) 8 OCTOBER 2016.

PENTAD - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}

HEXAD - #4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE / #1 - NATURE CONTAINS NATURE:
{DALETH (DOUBLE - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE {#6 - FORM OF NATURE}) /
*DOMINIONS* (Gk. Kuriotes - mastery, that is, (concretely and collectively)
rulers:—dominion, government)}

#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE / NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE: {ZAYIN /
*PRINCIPALITIES* (Gk. *EXOUSIA* - (in the sense of ability); privilege,
that is, (subjectively) *force*, capacity, competency, freedom, or
(objectively) mastery (concretely magistrate, superhuman, potentate,
*token* *of* *control*), delegated influence:—authority, jurisdiction,
liberty, power, right, strength)}

+ 0, H3, H6 {ie. Self identity - Formula of Autonomy}

#2400 MOD 22 = 14 [#NUN / #50 - Heber {The region beyond, One that passes;
anger}] as 1600 BCE

7. FORMULA OF PROGRESSION / *AVOID* *SPIRITUAL* *ADULTERY* *AS*
*HETERONOMY* *AGAINST* *AUTONOMY* {CIRCA 49J7W} [John 5:43-47]
— ENTERED INTO FOR LIFE.

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #5 + #6 = #11 as #OPINION (BOW-WOW BY RABID DOGS):
Collegium Pontificum: *COLLEGE* *OF* *PONTIFFS* (510 BCE) AS PROPONENTS OF
THE PYTHAGOREAN [BABYLONIAN WHOREDOM] AS HETEROS BINOMIAL METHODOLOGY BEING
THE THEORY OF NUMBER AND INTELLECTUAL TETRAD {#15 CE ... #34 CE ... #65 CE
... #111 (#36 / #666)} COMPRISING THE CONSPIRATORIAL MURDEROUS INTENT
[WHICH] FOLLOWS IN THE UMBRA OF THAT ISLAMIC PALESTINIAN FERAL DOG MAHMOUD
ABBAS ON SATURDAY (SABBATH) 14 JANUARY 2017 VISITING THE VATICAN EMBASSY AS
A ‘PLACE (#6) OF PRIDE (#5)’ AS INAUGURATION OF THE VATICAN-BASED MISSION
OF PALESTINIAN EMBASSY.

#5 - ACT OF NATURE / #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {HE / *VIRTUES*
(Gk. Arete - excellence (intrinsic or attributed):—praise, virtue)} and

#6 - FORM OF NATURE / #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {VAV / *POWERS* (Gk.
*ARCHE* - a commencement, or (concrete) *chief* (*in* *various*
*applications* *of* *order*, *time*, *place* *or* *rank*):—beginning,
corner, (at the, the) first (estate), *magistrate*, power, principality,
principle, rule)} multiplied by themselves, represent, and retain
themselves.

HEPTAD - #11 / #8 - TRANSFORMING NATURE {KAF (DOUBLE - #4 - NATURE AMENDED
IN ITS NATURE: {#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE}) / Government & Non-Government
Organisations}

+ H1, H2, H3 {ie. Formula of Progression of individual phenomena}

THE MAJOR PREMISE {YANG/FATHER/HEAVEN/MALE/FORM - Formula of Universal
Law}, which contains the law of that will: 7 x 24 *courses* *of* *priests*
x 13 = 2184 days of the ‘oth cycle = 6D or 6 x 364 associated to the
‘constant sequence of sun and moon’ as 354 x 3 + 30 day intercalation =
1092 days x 2 = 2184 days.

“And God spake all these words, saying, ‘I am the LORD thy God, which have
brought thee out of the land of Egypt {that troubles or oppresses;
anguish}, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before
me...” [Exodus 20:1-3 (KJV)]

#2800 MOD 22 = 9 [#TETH / #9 - Lamech {Powerful, Poor; made low}] as 1200
BCE
#3200 MOD 22 = 4 [#DALETH / #4 - Kenan {Fixed, (nestlings; figuratively a
chamber or dwelling:-nest, room), buyer; owner}] as 800 BCE

8. DISCRIMINATING NORM (HUMAN NATURE) AS OBJECTIVE GROUNDING OF INFINITY /
*DO* *NOT* *STEAL* {72J + 3(3²+1)/2}

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #7 + #8 = #15 as #SENSE (TA-TA AS SYSTEMATIC
ELIMINATION BY ANNIHILATION): *EMBLEM* *OF* *THE* *BRITISH* *FLAG*,
*POLICE* *AND* *EMERGENCY* *SERVICES* *SYMBOL* as Collegium Vinariorum:
College of *WINE* Dealers AS WELLINGTON SHIRE KIDS DAY ON SATURDAY
(SABBATH) 4 MARCH 2017 AS ALSO GLBTI MARDI GRAS CELEBRATION / UNLAWFUL
LIQUOR BAN BY ACTING SERGEANT JASON MCCOY / ALLEGED EVENT @ STAR HOTEL OF
26 MARCH 2017 / WELLINGTON LIQUOR ACCORD 30 MAY 2017 / RECEIVED 5 JUNE 2017
AS HABITUAL DISRESPECTFUL CONDUCT BY THE IGNORANT SALE STATION OF THE
VICTORIA POLICE.

#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE / NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE: {ZAYIN /
*PRINCIPALITIES* (Gk. *EXOUSIA* - (in the sense of ability); privilege,
that is, (subjectively) *force*, capacity, competency, freedom, or
(objectively) mastery (concretely magistrate, superhuman, potentate,
*token* *of* *control*), delegated influence:—authority, jurisdiction,
liberty, power, right, strength)}

#8 - TRANSFORMING NATURE / ACT OF NATURE: {CHETH / ARCHANGELS (Gk.
Archaggelos - a chief angel)}

#15 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {SAMEK}

= #36 (ie. H27 - Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law +
H9 - System’s Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity)

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE}

THE MINOR PREMISE {YIN/MOTHER/EARTH/FEMALE/MATTER - Formula of Humanity},
which contains the command to behave in accordance with the law, that is,
the principle of subsumption under the law: x 49 = 6J or 294 x 364 days or
365.2425 x 293 years - Vernal Equinox Wednesday 20 March 1996 / 21 March =
1 Nisan 5756;

AS BEING A LOGICAL GROUNDING OF INFINITY;

“... Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the
LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon
the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And
showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my
commandments...” [Exodus 20:5-6 (KJV)]

#3600 MOD 22 = 21 [#SHIN / #300 - Isaac {He laughs}] as 400 BCE
#4000 MOD 22 = 16 [#AYIN / #70 - Reu {Friend, His friend; his shepherd}

As ‘eye’, ‘to see’, and by extension, to understand and obey, it represents
the primeval light, that is the spiritual light of God [Genesis 1:3] as
distinct to the celestial lights [Genesis 1:14-18]] = #0 CE

9. BINDING NORM (NORMA OBLIGANS - MARRIAGE?) AS FAUX SUBJECTIVE GROUNDING
OF INFINITY / *DO* *NOT* *BEAR* *FALSE* *WITNESS*

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD IMPLEMENTATION: #9 + #10 = #19

#9 - AUTONOMOUS NATURE / #6 - FORM OF NATURE: {TETH / ANGELS (Gk. Aggelos -
a messenger; especially an ‘angel’; by implication a church pastor or
ecclesiastic)}

#10 - TOTALITY OF NATURE / ENGENDERING NATURE: {YOD / Sovereignty}

#19 - ENGENDERING NATURE: {QOPH - *OATHS* OF DIEU ET MON DROIT}

As BINDING NORM (NORMA OBLIGANS - MARRIAGE?), AS FAUX SUBJECTIVE GROUNDING
OF INFINITY / *DO* *NOT* *BEAR* *FALSE* *WITNESS* *BY* PYTHAGOREAN
[BABYLONIAN] HETEROS (MALE/FEMALE MARRIAGE — WHAT IS SIN & WICKEDNESS?)
being a binary (ie. gender and spermatic as bifurcated entities) unnatural
autonomic transformative prototype imposed upon the biological natural
order and commences the symbolic associator series as the MACROCOSM:

Thus in the Pythagorean HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER, the sacred notion of
marriage according to the religious mysteries of Roman State Religion and
Empire Governance is as a hieros gamos or heirogamy (‘holy marriage’) in
being the natural and common law entitlement to invoke a coacervation of
the feminine and the masculine within a sexual ritual that plays out a
marriage as between a god and a goddess, especially when enacted in a
symbolic ritual where human participants represent by the planetary
deities:

PYTHAGORAS HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER BEING A METATHESIS AS CANON OF
TRANSPOSITION IS THE DETERMINED MEANS BY WHICH A DEMIURGE SEEKS TO
THREATEN, DESTABILISE AND OVERTHROW A SOVEREIGNTY BY USE OF MARRIAGE.

As the practice of Roman Imperial Governance, Social Culturing and
enactment of a State Religion as a practice of the Mysteries by a
designation of seven grades {ie. the macrocosm in which all phenomenon
occurs):

This distinctive reliance upon the Pythagorean sophistic conjectural vast
OPINION of CENTRE #0 CE v’s #CENTRE (#123 = JUDGMENT / #246 = ANGEL
GABRIEL) OF #41 AS 13 to 17 SEPTEMBER 2001 as an occultism made against the
transcendent and equilibrium properties that are intrinsic to the Magic
Squares and into this matter or substance of thing (materia, substantia:
#15CE ... #34CE ... #65CE ... #111CE ... #175CE ... #260CE ... 369CE), as
his means to purvey the binary distillation so as to derive the notion of
gender and spermatic attributions as bifurcated elements, so then convey
the proof of its SCIENTIFIC essence of a thing (essentia, ousia: ) only by
then being a potentiality obtained by means of reduction made upon the
Magic squares, whereas the form {#36 (ie. H27 - Realm of its Nature as
Heaven - Formula of Universal Law + H9 - System’s Cosmology as Earth -
Formula of Humanity)}, as considered in itself as actuality by a CANON OF
TRANSPOSITION, requires an embodiment #111 (#36/#666 - Sol Invictus):

(HETEROS as *1* - *MONAD*, *2* - *DUAD*, *3* - *TRIAD*) THEORY OF NUMBER
and the reliance upon the Theorem: c² = a² + b² which is otherwise
associated to Roman Empire Governance, Roman Catholicism (et al) and
fascist (see image above).

#4400 MOD 22 = 11 [#KAF / #20 - Shem {Exhalted Name, Name, renown}] = #400
CE
#4800 MOD 22 = 6 [#VAV / #6 - Jared {Descent/A ruling; commanding; coming
down}] = #800 CE
#5200 MOD 22 = 1 [#ALEPH / #1 - Adam {Taken from 4 corners, Earthy; red}] =
#1200 CE
#5600 MOD 22 = 18 [#TSADE / #90 - Nahor {Snorting, Hoarse; dry; hot}] =
#1600 CE
#6000 MOD 22 = 13 [#MEM / #40 - Shelah {Sprout/That breaks; that unties;
that undresses}

As waters, peoples, nations, languages and tongues; the spring of Torah
being the source of knowledge and wisdom] = #2000 Y2K / Equinox of
Wednesday DATE(1996,3,20) + (5 * 364) + 182 days = Wednesday
DATE(2001,9,12) with Equinox of Saturday DATE(2001,9,23) commencing the
Sabbath year of ‘oth cycle

10. MANIFESTING NORM (NORMA DENUNTIANS) / *DO* *NOT* *COVET* {122J3W1D +
9(9²+1)/2}

THE CONCLUSION {ZHUN/SON/SEA/ENUMERATE/OFFSPRING - Formula of Autonomy},
which contains the verdict (sentence), what is laid down as right in the
case at hand: ... 6,000 as 122J3W1D + 9(9²+1)/2 as #369 with Septet #41
centric on 13-17 September 2001 / 18 September = 1 Tishri 5762.

“...Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD
will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.’” [Exodus 20:7
(KJV)]

AS BEING A SUBJECTIVE GROUNDING OF INFINITY AS ETERNITY.

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD CENTRE: #11 + #12 = #23 AS Y-M-T-A = 23 ELEMENTS / THE
SEX CHROMOSOME

#11 - TRANSFORMING NATURE: {KAF (DOUBLE - #4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE
{#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE}) / Government & Non-Government Organisations}

#12 - AUTONOMOUS NATURE: {LAMED / General Populace}

#6400 MOD 22 = 8 [#CHET / #8 - Methuselah {Man of the dart/javelin (weapon,
missile, sprout), He has sent his death}]
#6800 MOD 22 = 3 [#GIMEL / #3 - Enosh {Husband, (certain, mortal) man;
sick; despaired of; forgetful}]
#7200 MOD 22 = 20 [#RESH / #200 - Abraham {Father of a multitude, chief of
multitude}]
#7600 MOD 22 = 15 [#SAMEK / #60 - Peleg {Division}]
#8000 MOD 22 = 10 [#YOD / #10 - Noah {Rest, Repose; consolation}]
#8400 MOD 22 = 5 [#HE / #5 - Mahalalel {Praise (fame) of God}]
#8800 MOD 22 = 22 [#TAU / #400 - Jacob {He takes by the heel, he supplants,
That supplants, undermines; the heel}] as 8800 CE

YOUTUBE: “Doctor Who - The Parting of the Ways - Bad Wolf speech”

-


In many instances, the Torah also uses words and phrases in ways that
cannot be understood in their literal sense. There are a number of very
obvious examples of this in the narrative of the Creation, for the
metaphysical events that took place at that time were far removed from the
natural order of the world we know today. They could not have been
accurately described in ways that we can understand, nor in language that
we can relate to. For example, the Torah tells us how God brought the world
into being through speech, when in fact He created the world through a form
of thought. When the Torah describes God’s thought process as speech, it
makes it easier for us to grasp the idea on our own level. [(c) 2001 by
Rabbi Daniel Travis and www.Torah.org]

The Jewish Kabbalah seeks to define the nature of the universe and the
human being, the nature and purpose of existence, and various other
ontological questions. It also presents methods to aid understanding of the
concepts and thereby attain spiritual realisation.

- dolf

AN EXPANDED PDF COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT WILL BE AVAILABLE FROM THIS URL:

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/Augustus.pdf>

Initial Post: 25 August 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-25 07:19:59 UTC
Permalink
(DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018): THE INDISPENSABILITY OF A PURE MORAL PHILOSOPHY

The Kantian appeal for a pure moral philosophy begins with a reference
to the usefulness of the division of labor. [And here] Kant raises the
question whether philosophy would not benefit from such a division.
Ultimately, he is not concerned with whether the burden of elaborating
philosophical theories should be distributed among the shoulders of a
multitude of persons.[Page 6]

We would contend against this notion as being an impotent chimeric {ie.
a thing which is hoped for but is illusory or impossible to achieve} of
idealism {ie. the unrealistic belief in or pursuit of perfection} such
that one may declare "the economic sovereignty you claim to defend is a
chimera".

And thusly, it is in and of itself an oblique contradiction of Kant's
own characteristic position development where he emphasizes that an
adequate form of moral philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from
all empirical elements of interest, self-love, and natural feelings as
well as free from rational concepts of perfection:

“And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very
good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

HETEROS PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #342)@{
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 20 (#26); Ego: 14 (#20),
@3: Sup: 42 (#68); Ego: 22 (#42),
@4: Sup: 72 (#140 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY (%14); I AM NOT AN
EAVES-DROPPER (%16)); Ego: 30 (#72),
@5: Sup: 29 (#169 - I TROUBLE MYSELF ONLY WITH MY OWN AFFAIRS
(%18)); Ego: 38 (#110),
@6: Sup: 75 (#244); Ego: 46 (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS (%21)),
@7: Sup: 48 (#292); Ego: 54 (#210 - I AM NOT OF AGGRESSIVE HAND (%30)),
@8: Sup: 29 (#321); Ego: 62 (#272),
@9: Sup: 18 (#339); Ego: 70 (#342),
Male: #339; Feme: #342
} // #342

TORAH PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #369)@{
@1: Sup: 16 (#16); Ego: 16 (#16),
@2: Sup: 33 (#49); Ego: 17 (#33),
@3: Sup: 51 (#100); Ego: 18 (#51),
@4: Sup: 10 (#110); Ego: 40 (#91),
@5: Sup: 51 (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES (%9)); Ego: 41 (#132),
@6: Sup: 12 (#173 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO UNNATURAL LUST (%27)); Ego:
42 (#174),
@7: Sup: 76 (#249); Ego: 64 (#238),
@8: Sup: 60 (#309); Ego: 65 (#303),
@9: Sup: 45 (#354); Ego: 66 (#369),
Male: #354; Feme: #369
} // #369

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he
rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God
blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had
rested from all his work which God created and made.” [Genesis 1:31-2:3
(KJV)]

Thusly if the Sabbath as a sacred principle of nature which is the
ultimate good as perfection: “And he said unto them, The sabbath was
made for man, and not man for the sabbath.” [Mark 2:27 (KJV)]

It’s meritorious purpose as a benefit to humankind is found firstly
within the ACT TO WILL by VOLUNTĀTIS {ie. MENTALISM {#41}: #1 - WILL,
FREE WILL, CHOICE as to engaged within actions that endeavour to #1 - BE
SOCIALLY BENEFICIAL (the Artificial Intelligence equivalent of 'DO NO
EVIL'?); {*FORMULA* *FOR* *UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}} by it’s remembrance and
then the voluntary avoidance of labour as the absence of any WILL TO ACT.

H2257@{
   @1: Sup: 8 (#8); Ego: 8 (#8),
   @2: Sup: 10 (#18); Ego: 2 (#10),
   @3: Sup: 40 (#58); Ego: 30 (#40),
   @4: Sup: 41 (#99); Ego: 1 (#41),
   Male: #99; Feme: #41
} // #41

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #40 % #41 = #40 - Reversal, Avoiding Activity; I-Ching: H36 -
Suppression of the Light, Sinking/Darkening Light, Brilliance injured,
Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 68 - Dimming;

THOTH MEASURE: #40 - Oh Neheb-kau, who makest thy appearance at thy
cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *UNJUST* *PREFERENCES*.

    #VIRTUE: Law (no. #40) means to facilitate union with All-under-Heaven.
    #TOOLS: Labouring (no. #80) means to lack achievement despite
strenuous efforts.
    #POSITION: With Duties (no. #27), to exhaust oneself.
    #TIME: With Fostering (no. #81), to increase oneself.
    #CANON: #228

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_228@{
   @1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
   @2: Sup: 39 (#79); Ego: 80 (#120),
   @3: Sup: 66 (#145); Ego: 27 (#147),
   @4: Sup: 66 (#211); Ego: 81 (#228 - I HAVE NO UNJUST PREFERENCES {%40}),
   Male: #211; Feme: #228
} // #228

#41 as [#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): {UMBRA: #6 as #40 %
#41 = #40} 1) *HURT*, *DAMAGE*, *INJURY*;

"Take heed now that ye fail not to do this: why should damage {#41 as
[#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): hurt} grow to the hurt of
the kings?" [Ezra 4:22]

Rather Kant, with this rhetorical consideration, introduces an
explicitly methodological train of thought. He asks “whether the nature
of the science {ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based
seven number) = #294 x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS =
365.242321 days} does not require the empirical part always to be
carefully separated from the rational [as the INTELLECTUS AS GENETIVE
VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. voluntary will)]:

"And God said, Let us make {ie.

*APPOINT* AS HAVING INCEPTION OF 22 / 7 WITH A GENESIS {DAO OF NATURE
(CHINESE: ZIRAN) / COURSE (GREEK: TROCHOS) OF NATURE (GREEK: GENESIS)}
REPRISE UPON EQUINOX OF WEDNESDAY 20 MARCH 1996 / #0 - NEW MOON OF
THURSDAY 21 MARCH 1996

} man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over
the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle,
and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon
the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;
male and female created he them." [Genesis 1:26-27 (KJV)]

And he confines this question to the sub-question "Whether one is not of
the opinion that it: is of the utmost necessity to work out once a pure
moral philosophy which is fully cleansed of everything that might be in
any way empirical and belong to anthropology“

The passage that is introduced by this question contains, at the same
time, a positive response — the thesis that there must be a “pure moral
philosophy” is “self evident." And indeed for Kant this evidence arises
“out of the common idea of duty and the moral law” (ibid.). Kant’s
cursory argumentation for this thesis is difficult to grasp.
Undoubtedly, it constitutes one of the key argumentative passages of the
Groundwork. [Page 6]

It is perhaps presumptuous of us at only page #6 of #323 to already be
taking issue with the robustness of Kant's otherwise cogent thesis that
there must be a “pure moral philosophy” which is “self evident" given
that there are seven days designates within our understanding of the
cosmology which is understood universally as an implicit law of nature.

Yet for Kant this anthropological evidence arises “out of the common
idea of duty and the moral law” which is also certainly self evidently a
contradiction of his initial postulate that any adequate form of moral
philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from all empirical elements
of interest, self-love, and natural feelings in the dutiful display of
filial affection by VOLUNTĀTIS {CORRESPONDENCE {#82}: #2 - desire,
inclination / Honour Parents} relating to the “honour bestowed upon
one's matrimonial or common law parents” which is due from a son or
daughter:

H3513@{
   @1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
   @2: Sup: 56 (#62); Ego: 50 (#56),
   @3: Sup: 76 (#138); Ego: 20 (#76),
   @4: Sup: 78 (#216); Ego: 2 (#78),
   @5: Sup: 1 (#217); Ego: 4 (#82),
   Male: #217; Feme: #82
} // #82

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #82 % #41 = #41 - Playing with Reversal, Sameness in Difference;
I-Ching: H26 - Great Domestication, Restraining Force, Great
Accumulating, The taming power of the great, Great storage, Potential
energy; Tetra: 60 - Accumulation;

THOTH MEASURE: #41 - Oh thou of raised head, who makest thine appearance
at thy cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *STRONG* *DESIRE* *EXCEPT* *FOR* *MY*
*OWN* *PROPERTY*.

    #VIRTUE:
    #TOOLS: Fostering (no. #81) receives all the rest.
    #POSITION: As to Resistance (no. #22), it is contradiction, but
    #TIME: As to Unity (no. #54), it is conforming.
    #CANON: #157

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_157@{
   @1: Sup: 81 (#81); Ego: 81 (#81),
   @2: Sup: 22 (#103); Ego: 22 (#103),
   @3: Sup: 76 (#179); Ego: 54 (#157 - I AM NOT ONE OF PRATING TONGUE
{%17} / I HAVE NO STRONG DESIRE EXCEPT FOR MY OWN PROPERTY {%41}),
   Male: #179; Feme: #157
} // #157

#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513): {UMBRA: #37 as #82 % #41
= #41} 1) to be heavy, be weighty, be grievous, be hard, be rich, be
honourable, be glorious, be burdensome, be honoured; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to
be heavy; 1a2) to be heavy, be insensible, be dull; 1a3) *TO* *BE*
*HONOURED*; 1b) (Niphal); 1b1) to be made heavy, be honoured, enjoy
honour, be made abundant; 1b2) to get oneself glory or honour, gain
glory; 1c) (Piel); 1c1) to make heavy, make dull, make insensible; 1c2)
to make honourable, honour, glorify; 1d) (Pual) to be made honourable,
be honoured; 1e) (Hiphil); 1e1) to make heavy; 1e2) to make heavy, make
dull, make unresponsive; 1e3) to cause to be honoured; 1f) (Hithpael);
1f1) to make oneself heavy, make oneself dense, make oneself numerous;
1f2) to honour oneself;

"And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom {their secret; their
cement} and Gomorrah {rebellious people} is great, and because their sin
is very grievous {#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513):
honour};" [Genesis 18:20]

5. (MOTHER) FORMULA OF HUMANITY AS HEAD OF STATE / *HONOUR* *PARENTS*

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #1 + #2 = #3 as #MIND

MONAD - #1 - NATURE CONTAINS NATURE: {ALEPH (*MOTHER* - SCALES OF MERIT)
/ SERAPHIM {Heb. Saraph Gk. Ophis - burning, that is, (figuratively)
poisonous (serpent); specifically a fiery (serpent) or symbolical
creature (from their copper color))} {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA {1 + 2 + 3 + 4
= 10}

TETRAD - #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {BETH (DOUBLE - #1 - NATURE
CONTAINS NATURE {#4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE}) / CHERUBIM (Gk.
Cheroubim - a cherub or imaginary figures which covered the mercy seat
to the Ark of the Covenant [Exodus 25:17-22] and from where God communed
with Israel)}

PENTAD - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}

+ 0, H9, H18 {ie. System’s Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}

Thusly, at this juncture in our ingestion of Kant’s thesis, we shall
reserve our future conjectures upon any rhetorical artifices which he
may deploy until we have considered further what nominative descriptions
that he conveys by such postulates.

- dolf

SEE ALSO: "(SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF
MORALS: #56 - TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
THEFT AND SLANDER BY MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE
AS BOER / ANZAC DEFAMATION?"

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/Augustus.pdf>
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND*
*ROMAN* *CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5,
#200 as harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a
extortioner, a robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL*
*AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private Street on the edge of the Central Business District dated 16th
May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as a Notice
of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS AS DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in
1993), first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN
CHING {ie. Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated
with the theory of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology
reliant upon the seven visible planets as cosmological mother image and
the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF
NATURE-genesis [James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial
tetragrammaton x 4.5 day = #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER
which is an amalgam of the 64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as
trinomial tetragrammaton rather than its encapsulated contrived use as
the microcosm to redefine the macrocosm as the quintessence of the
Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial canon of transposition as HETEROS
THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006
defines a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is
permissible to extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN
BEING AS A CONSCIOUS REALITY OF HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED
WITHIN THE TEMPORAL REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND
RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS.
dolf
2018-08-25 07:46:58 UTC
Permalink
(DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018): THE INDISPENSABILITY OF A PURE MORAL PHILOSOPHY

The Kantian appeal for a pure moral philosophy begins with a reference
to the usefulness of the division of labor. [And here] Kant raises the
question whether philosophy would not benefit from such a division.
Ultimately, he is not concerned with whether the burden of elaborating
philosophical theories should be distributed among the shoulders of a
multitude of persons.[Page 6]

We would contend against this notion as being an impotent chimeric {ie.
a thing which is hoped for but is illusory or impossible to achieve} of
idealism {ie. the unrealistic belief in or pursuit of perfection} such
that one may declare "the economic sovereignty you claim to defend is a
chimera".

And thusly, it is in and of itself an oblique contradiction of Kant's
own characteristic position development where he emphasizes that an
adequate form of moral philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from
all empirical elements of interest, self-love, and natural feelings as
well as free from rational concepts of perfection:

“And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very
good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

HETEROS PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #342)@{
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 20 (#26); Ego: 14 (#20),
@3: Sup: 42 (#68); Ego: 22 (#42),
@4: Sup: 72 (#140 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY (%14); I AM NOT AN
EAVES-DROPPER (%16)); Ego: 30 (#72),
@5: Sup: 29 (#169 - I TROUBLE MYSELF ONLY WITH MY OWN AFFAIRS
(%18)); Ego: 38 (#110),
@6: Sup: 75 (#244); Ego: 46 (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS (%21)),
@7: Sup: 48 (#292); Ego: 54 (#210 - I AM NOT OF AGGRESSIVE HAND (%30)),
@8: Sup: 29 (#321); Ego: 62 (#272),
@9: Sup: 18 (#339); Ego: 70 (#342),
Male: #339; Feme: #342
} // #342

TORAH PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #369)@{
@1: Sup: 16 (#16); Ego: 16 (#16),
@2: Sup: 33 (#49); Ego: 17 (#33),
@3: Sup: 51 (#100); Ego: 18 (#51),
@4: Sup: 10 (#110); Ego: 40 (#91),
@5: Sup: 51 (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES (%9)); Ego: 41 (#132),
@6: Sup: 12 (#173 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO UNNATURAL LUST (%27)); Ego:
42 (#174),
@7: Sup: 76 (#249); Ego: 64 (#238),
@8: Sup: 60 (#309); Ego: 65 (#303),
@9: Sup: 45 (#354); Ego: 66 (#369),
Male: #354; Feme: #369
} // #369

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he
rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God
blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had
rested from all his work which God created and made.” [Genesis 1:31-2:3
(KJV)]

Thusly if the Sabbath as a sacred principle of nature which is the
ultimate good as perfection: “And he said unto them, The sabbath was
made for man, and not man for the sabbath.” [Mark 2:27 (KJV)]

It’s meritorious purpose as a benefit to humankind is found firstly
within the ACT TO WILL by VOLUNTĀTIS {ie. MENTALISM {#41}: #1 - WILL,
FREE WILL, CHOICE as to engaged within actions that endeavour to #1 - BE
SOCIALLY BENEFICIAL (the Artificial Intelligence equivalent of 'DO NO
EVIL'?); {*FORMULA* *FOR* *UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}} by it’s remembrance and
then the voluntary avoidance of labour as the absence of any WILL TO ACT.

H2257@{
   @1: Sup: 8 (#8); Ego: 8 (#8),
   @2: Sup: 10 (#18); Ego: 2 (#10),
   @3: Sup: 40 (#58); Ego: 30 (#40),
   @4: Sup: 41 (#99); Ego: 1 (#41),
   Male: #99; Feme: #41
} // #41

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #40 % #41 = #40 - Reversal, Avoiding Activity; I-Ching: H36 -
Suppression of the Light, Sinking/Darkening Light, Brilliance injured,
Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 68 - Dimming;

THOTH MEASURE: #40 - Oh Neheb-kau, who makest thy appearance at thy
cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *UNJUST* *PREFERENCES*.

    #VIRTUE: Law (no. #40) means to facilitate union with All-under-Heaven.
    #TOOLS: Labouring (no. #80) means to lack achievement despite
strenuous efforts.
    #POSITION: With Duties (no. #27), to exhaust oneself.
    #TIME: With Fostering (no. #81), to increase oneself.
    #CANON: #228

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_228@{
   @1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
   @2: Sup: 39 (#79); Ego: 80 (#120),
   @3: Sup: 66 (#145); Ego: 27 (#147),
   @4: Sup: 66 (#211); Ego: 81 (#228 - I HAVE NO UNJUST PREFERENCES {%40}),
   Male: #211; Feme: #228
} // #228

#41 as [#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): {UMBRA: #6 as #40 %
#41 = #40} 1) *HURT*, *DAMAGE*, *INJURY*;

"Take heed now that ye fail not to do this: why should damage {#41 as
[#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): hurt} grow to the hurt of
the kings?" [Ezra 4:22]

Rather Kant, with this rhetorical consideration, introduces an
explicitly methodological train of thought. He asks “whether the nature
of the science {ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based
seven number) = #294 x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS =
365.242321 days} does not require the empirical part always to be
carefully separated from the rational [as the INTELLECTUS AS GENETIVE
VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. voluntary will)]:

"And God said, Let us make {ie.

*APPOINT* AS HAVING INCEPTION OF 22 / 7 WITH A GENESIS {DAO OF NATURE
(CHINESE: ZIRAN) / COURSE (GREEK: TROCHOS) OF NATURE (GREEK: GENESIS)}
REPRISE UPON EQUINOX OF WEDNESDAY 20 MARCH 1996 / #0 - NEW MOON OF
THURSDAY 21 MARCH 1996

} man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over
the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle,
and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon
the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;
male and female created he them." [Genesis 1:26-27 (KJV)]

And he confines this question to the sub-question "Whether one is not of
the opinion that it: is of the utmost necessity to work out once a pure
moral philosophy which is fully cleansed of everything that might be in
any way empirical and belong to anthropology“

The passage that is introduced by this question contains, at the same
time, a positive response — the thesis that there must be a “pure moral
philosophy” is “self evident." And indeed for Kant this evidence arises
“out of the common idea of duty and the moral law” (ibid.). Kant’s
cursory argumentation for this thesis is difficult to grasp.
Undoubtedly, it constitutes one of the key argumentative passages of the
Groundwork. [Page 6]

It is perhaps presumptuous of us at only page #6 of #323 to already be
taking issue with the robustness of Kant's otherwise cogent thesis that
there must be a “pure moral philosophy” which is “self evident" given
that there are seven days designates within our understanding of the
cosmology which is understood universally as an implicit law of nature.

Yet for Kant this anthropological evidence arises “out of the common
idea of duty and the moral law” which is also certainly self evidently a
contradiction of his initial postulate that any adequate form of moral
philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from all empirical elements
of interest, self-love, and natural feelings in the dutiful display of
filial affection by VOLUNTĀTIS {CORRESPONDENCE {#82}: #2 - desire,
inclination as to engaged within actions that #2 - Don't introduce
biases; {*FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}} relating to the “honour bestowed
upon one's matrimonial or common law parents” which is due from a son or
daughter:

H3513@{
   @1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
   @2: Sup: 56 (#62); Ego: 50 (#56),
   @3: Sup: 76 (#138); Ego: 20 (#76),
   @4: Sup: 78 (#216); Ego: 2 (#78),
   @5: Sup: 1 (#217); Ego: 4 (#82),
   Male: #217; Feme: #82
} // #82

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #82 % #41 = #41 - Playing with Reversal, Sameness in Difference;
I-Ching: H26 - Great Domestication, Restraining Force, Great
Accumulating, The taming power of the great, Great storage, Potential
energy; Tetra: 60 - Accumulation;

THOTH MEASURE: #41 - Oh thou of raised head, who makest thine appearance
at thy cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *STRONG* *DESIRE* *EXCEPT* *FOR* *MY*
*OWN* *PROPERTY*.

    #VIRTUE:
    #TOOLS: Fostering (no. #81) receives all the rest.
    #POSITION: As to Resistance (no. #22), it is contradiction, but
    #TIME: As to Unity (no. #54), it is conforming.
    #CANON: #157

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_157@{
   @1: Sup: 81 (#81); Ego: 81 (#81),
   @2: Sup: 22 (#103); Ego: 22 (#103),
   @3: Sup: 76 (#179); Ego: 54 (#157 - I AM NOT ONE OF PRATING TONGUE
{%17} / I HAVE NO STRONG DESIRE EXCEPT FOR MY OWN PROPERTY {%41}),
   Male: #179; Feme: #157
} // #157

#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513): {UMBRA: #37 as #82 % #41
= #41} 1) to be heavy, be weighty, be grievous, be hard, be rich, be
honourable, be glorious, be burdensome, be honoured; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to
be heavy; 1a2) to be heavy, be insensible, be dull; 1a3) *TO* *BE*
*HONOURED*; 1b) (Niphal); 1b1) to be made heavy, be honoured, enjoy
honour, be made abundant; 1b2) to get oneself glory or honour, gain
glory; 1c) (Piel); 1c1) to make heavy, make dull, make insensible; 1c2)
to make honourable, honour, glorify; 1d) (Pual) to be made honourable,
be honoured; 1e) (Hiphil); 1e1) to make heavy; 1e2) to make heavy, make
dull, make unresponsive; 1e3) to cause to be honoured; 1f) (Hithpael);
1f1) to make oneself heavy, make oneself dense, make oneself numerous;
1f2) to honour oneself;

"And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom {their secret; their
cement} and Gomorrah {rebellious people} is great, and because their sin
is very grievous {#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513):
honour};" [Genesis 18:20]

5. (MOTHER) FORMULA OF HUMANITY AS HEAD OF STATE / *HONOUR* *PARENTS*

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #1 + #2 = #3 as #MIND

MONAD - #1 - NATURE CONTAINS NATURE: {ALEPH (*MOTHER* - SCALES OF MERIT)
/ SERAPHIM {Heb. Saraph Gk. Ophis - burning, that is, (figuratively)
poisonous (serpent); specifically a fiery (serpent) or symbolical
creature (from their copper color))} {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA {1 + 2 + 3 + 4
= 10}

TETRAD - #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {BETH (DOUBLE - #1 - NATURE
CONTAINS NATURE {#4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE}) / CHERUBIM (Gk.
Cheroubim - a cherub or imaginary figures which covered the mercy seat
to the Ark of the Covenant [Exodus 25:17-22] and from where God communed
with Israel)}

PENTAD - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}

+ 0, H9, H18 {ie. System’s Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}

Thusly, at this juncture in our ingestion of Kant’s thesis, we shall
reserve our future conjectures upon any rhetorical artifices which he
may deploy until we have considered further what nominative descriptions
that he conveys by such postulates.

- dolf

SEE ALSO: "(SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF
MORALS: #56 - TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
THEFT AND SLANDER BY MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE
AS BOER / ANZAC DEFAMATION?"

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/Augustus.pdf>
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND*
*ROMAN* *CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5,
#200 as harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a
extortioner, a robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL*
*AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private Street on the edge of the Central Business District dated 16th
May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as a Notice
of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS AS DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in
1993), first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN
CHING {ie. Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated
with the theory of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology
reliant upon the seven visible planets as cosmological mother image and
the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF
NATURE-genesis [James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial
tetragrammaton x 4.5 day = #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER
which is an amalgam of the 64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as
trinomial tetragrammaton rather than its encapsulated contrived use as
the microcosm to redefine the macrocosm as the quintessence of the
Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial canon of transposition as HETEROS
THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006
defines a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is
permissible to extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN
BEING AS A CONSCIOUS REALITY OF HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED
WITHIN THE TEMPORAL REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND
RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS.
Colonel Edmund J. Burke
2018-08-25 14:05:16 UTC
Permalink
How many replies is that now, Dolf?
LOL
dolf
2018-08-25 14:54:17 UTC
Permalink
I’ve had infinitely more answers from Almighty God than I have any
meaningful dialog or rational responses from you.

[irish newsgroups omitted]
Post by Colonel Edmund J. Burke
How many replies is that now, Dolf?
LOL
Re: — NON REQUITTED RECOMPENSE FOR CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE
Post by Colonel Edmund J. Burke
10 AUGUST 2018
#22 - Point to Reversal?, Humility's Increase; I-Ching: H8 - Closeness,
Seeking Unity, Grouping, Holding together, Alliance; Tetra: 34 - Kinship,
Ego: #348 / #42 - Generating Things, Reason's Modifications; I-Ching: H60 -
Control, Restraint, Articulating, Limitation, Moderation; Tetra: 52 -
Measure]
SDA CHURCH
53 STAWELL STREET,
*SALE* VICTORIA 3850
There has been no response from the SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH to my
earlier 12 MARCH 2018 letter of complaint seeking resolution for historical
instances of childhood sexual abuse perpetuated by a then CHURCH ELDER
named BILL HUGHES.
Within my former letter, I had incorrectly conveyed the date my father's
self inflicted gunshot death which was on 20 MARCH 1976 as only a
typo-graphical and not being a historic error since his funeral was
conducted at your CHURCH.
The address by which you can correspond for legal purposes is that of my
[omitted]
The name Dolf BOEK is the SUI JURIS and MEMBRUM VIRILE (statehood) identity
in which I desire that this matter is to be dealt with by a proper respect
shown by your RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY OF FAITH for the dignity of persons.
Accompanying my 12 MARCH 2018 letter was a document conveying a series
photographs involving the demolition of a YORK STREET address where Mr.
BILL HUGHES was once domiciled and some fondling abuses are alleged to have
taken place. This is event is narrated by spontaneous speech assigned to
the temporal dynamic natural association as CATEGORIES OF UNDERSTANDING
(Hebrew / Greek lexicon) obtained from a trinomial mathematical theoretical
noumenon (cf: Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason published 1781 /
1784) which ought to establish the integrity of my claim which is not
reliant on any parties death.
<Loading Image...>
[IMAGE: LETTERS PATENT TO THE FEDERATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
OF 1901 Represented by a Theoretical Mathematical Trinomial Noumenon as
Intellectual Property]
A HOUSE BEING DEMOLISHED {
<Loading Image...>
<Loading Image...>
AUGUST 2017 OF HOUSE DEMOLITION IN PROGRESS WITHIN YORK STREET, SALE]
<http://www.grapple369.com?time:11.9&idea:{361}&idea:{433}>
<http://www.grapple369.com?time:10.0&idea:{388}&idea:{442}>
{#17 as #295} 1) (the act of) building, erection;
#385 = #10, #20, #200, #60, #40, #50, #5 = kircem (H3765): {#1 as #320} 1)
(Piel) to tear apart, ravage, tear off;
TODAY AND STOOD {
#385 = #80, #100, #5, #80, #70, #50 = prepo (G4241): {#17 as #1065} 1) to
stand out, to be conspicuous, to be eminent; 2) to be becoming, seemly,
fit;
} AT THE FENCE AND A WORKMAN CAME TO SPEAK TO ME.
I THANKED THEM FOR THEIR EFFORTS AND AS I EXPLAINED, I WAS BESET UPON BY A
PEDOPHILE {
#345 = #40, #5, #30, #70, #200 = melos (G3196): {#16 as #345} 1) a member,
limb: a member of the human body; 1a) of bodies given up to criminal
intercourse, because they are as it were members belonging to the harlot's
body;
#385 = #1, #4, #10, #20, #8, #40, #1, #300, #1 = adikema (G92): {#12 as
#84} 1) a misdeed, evil doing, iniquity;
} WITHIN THAT VERY HOUSE WHEN I WAS A CHILD {
#385 = #80, #1, #10, #4, #10, #70, #10, #200 = paidion (G3813): {#16 as
#225} 1) a young child, a little boy, a little girl; 1a) infants; 1b)
children, little ones; 1c) an infant; 1c1) of a (male) child just recently
children (like children) in intellect For Synonyms see entry 5868}.
"DID YOU GET JUSTICE?" {
#385 = #80, #100, #70, #8, #3, #1, #3, #70, #50 = proago (G4254): {#18 as
#1054} 1) to lead forward, lead forth; 2) to go before; 1a) one from a
place in which he has lain hidden from view, as from a prison; 1b) in a
forensic sense, to bring one forth to trial; 2a) preceding, prior in time,
previous; 2b) to proceed, go forward; 2b1) in a bad sense, to go further
than is right. or proper;
} HE INQUIRED.
I REPLIED, "NO I DID NOT EVER, BECAUSE HE DIED BEFORE HAND. AND TODAY HAS
COME MY JUSTICE {
#239 = #40, #90, #4, #100, #5 = tsedaqah (H6666): {#3 as #199} 1) justice,
righteousness; 1a) righteousness (in government); 1a1) of judge, ruler,
king; 1a2) of law; 1a3) of Davidic king Messiah; 1b) righteousness (of
God's attribute); 1c) righteousness (in a case or cause); 1d)
righteousness, truthfulness; 1e) righteousness (as ethically right); 1f)
righteousness (as vindicated), justification, salvation; 1f1) of God; 1f2)
prosperity (of people); 1g) righteous acts}
BY YOUR ACTIONS NOW {
#385 = #5, #80, #200, #100 = pereq (H6563): {#7 as #380} 1) parting of
ways, breaking in upon, plunder, crossroad;
} AND WITH A BLESSING FROM ALMIGHTY GOD WHICH WAS GRANTED TO ME BEFORE THE
BEGINNING {
#385 = #80, #100, #70, #50, #70, #5, #10 = pronoeo (G4306): {#19 as #1175}
1) to perceive before, foresee; 2) to provide, think of beforehand; 2a) to
provide for one; 2b) to take thought for, care for a thing;
} OF TIME ITSELF."
NEITHER HAS THE CHURCH EVER APOLOGISED.
AS I SAID TO A FORMER CHURCH MEMBER WITHIN THE STREET TODAY WHO EXITED THE
ARMY DISPOSALS STORE {
#385 = #1, #3, #70, #100, #1, #10, #200 = agora (G58): {#11 as #175} 1) any
assembly, especially of the people; 2) the place of assembly; 3) market
place, street; 2a) for public debating; 2b) for elections; 2c) for trials;
2d) for buying and selling; 2e) for all kinds of business;
}, SO REMEMBER YOUR DISRESPECT {
#385 = #1, #30, #1, #7, #70, #50, #5, #10, #1, #10, #200 = alazoneia
(G212): {#13 as #175} 1) empty, braggart talk; 2) an insolent and empty
assurance, which trusts in its own power and resources and shamefully
despises and violates divine laws and human rights; 3) an impious and empty
presumption which trusts in the stability of earthy things;
#385 = #4, #1, #20, #50, #5, #300, #5 = dakno (G1143): {#14 as #875} 1) to
bite with the teeth; 2) metaphor: to wound the soul, cut lacerate, rend
with reproaches;
} UNTIL THE DAY YOU DIE."
YOUTUBE: "The Road to Wellville Trailer"

— HAIL MARYS —
"MARCHING TO SION.
TRYING TO GET WELL.
HAIL MARY *PION*.
ORGANS THAT SWELL.
WANTING TO CONFESS.
SADISM OF THE NUNS.
PRIESTS WHO BLESS.
FORGIVE NIGHTLY SINS.”
@1: Sup: 64 (#64); Ego: 7 (#7),
@2: Sup: 9 (#73); Ego: 39 (#46),
@3: Sup: 61 (#134); Ego: 68 (#114),
@4: Sup: 53 (#187); Ego: 15 (#129),
@5: Sup: 54 (#241); Ego: 5 (#134),
@6: Sup: 18 (#259); Ego: 24 (#158 - I AM NOT HOT OF SPEECH {%23}),
@7: Sup: 72 (#331); Ego: 61 (#219),
@8: Sup: 45 (#376); Ego: 2 (#221),
@9: Sup: 5 (#381); Ego: 58 (#279),
Male: #381; Feme: #279
}
<http://www.grapple369.com/?idea:{m,381}&idea:{f,279}>
@1: Sup: 1 (#1); Ego: 1 (#1),
@2: Sup: 58 (#59); Ego: 57 (#58),
@3: Sup: 17 (#76); Ego: 40 (#98),
@4: Sup: 57 (#133); Ego: 40 (#138),
Male: #133; Feme: #138
} // #381
UMBRA: #341 % #41 = #13 - Status, Loathing Shame; I-Ching: H5 - Waiting,
Delay, Attending, Moistened, Arriving; Tetra: 17 - Holding Back;
THOTH MEASURE: #13 - Oh Eater of Blood, who makest thine appearance at the
Block; I have not slaughtered the sacred animals.
#VIRTUE: With Increase (no. #13), the beginning of florescence, but
#TOOLS: With Eternal (no. #53), what lasts to the very end.
#POSITION: With Opposition (no. #8), at court, but
#TIME: With Inner (no. #65), on the sleeping mat
#CANON: #139
@1: Sup: 13 (#13); Ego: 13 (#13),
@2: Sup: 66 (#79); Ego: 53 (#66),
@3: Sup: 74 (#153); Ego: 8 (#74),
@4: Sup: 58 (#211); Ego: 65 (#139 - I HAVE NOT SLAUGHTERED THE SACRED
ANIMALS {%13}),
Male: #211; Feme: #139
} // #139
#381 as [#1, #300, #40, #40] = 'asham (H817): {UMBRA: #0 as #341 % #41 =
#13} 1) guilt, offense, guiltiness; 1a) offense, trespass, fault; 1b)
guilt, guiltiness; 1c) compensation (for offense); 1d) trespass offering,
guilt offering;
@1: Sup: 38 (#38); Ego: 38 (#38),
@2: Sup: 39 (#77); Ego: 1 (#39),
@3: Sup: 69 (#146 - I AM NOT A LAND-GRABBER {%15}); Ego: 30 (#69),
@4: Sup: 77 (#223); Ego: 8 (#77),
@5: Sup: 36 (#259); Ego: 40 (#117),
Male: #259; Feme: #117
} // #279
UMBRA: #279 % #41 = #33 - Achievable Goals, Virtue of Discrimination;
I-Ching: H9 - Lesser Domestication, Minor Restraint, Small Accumulating,
The taming power of the small, Small harvest; Tetra: 35 - Gathering;
THOTH MEASURE: #33 - Oh thou Horned one, who makest thine appearance at
Sais; I am not noisy in my speech.
#VIRTUE: With Closeness (no. #33), no possible gap, but
#TOOLS: With Completion (no. #73), no possible change.
#POSITION: With Massing (no. #59), affairs emptying.
#TIME: With Legion (no. #32), affairs filling.
#CANON: #197
@1: Sup: 33 (#33); Ego: 33 (#33),
@2: Sup: 25 (#58); Ego: 73 (#106),
@3: Sup: 3 (#61); Ego: 59 (#165),
@4: Sup: 35 (#96); Ego: 32 (#197 - I AM NOT NOISY IN MY SPEECH {%33}),
Male: #96; Feme: #197
} // #197
#279 as [#200, #1, #30, #8, #40] = Salem (G4532): {UMBRA: #13 as #279 % #41
= #33} 1) the place where Melchizedek was king and thought to be the
ancient name of Jerusalem;
"For this Melchisedec, king of *Salem* {#279 as [#200, #1, #30, #8, #40] =
Salem (G4532): Salem}, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham
returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;" [Hebrews 7:1]
I hope that the SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH will give proper consideration
into the matter since the ROYAL COMMISSION into INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSES to
CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE has concluded.
TRUTHFULLY
DOLF BOEK
Nous: #29
Time: 00:10 hrs
Date: 2018.3.23
@1: Sup: 5 (#5); Ego: 5 (#5),
@2: Sup: 10 (#15); Ego: 5 (#10),
@3: Sup: 15 (#30); Ego: 5 (#15),
Male: #30; Feme: #15
} // #15
Dao: Deeming, Non-Assertion
Tetra: #67 - Darkening
I-Ching: H36 - Suppression of the Light, Sinking/Darkening of the Light,
Brilliance injured, Intelligence hidden
Latin: Dominator {God in three persons} Alt: Lavyah {Absence of Desire
Before God} {
1. HELPS AGAINST THE UNGODLY & SLANDERERS
2. MISSIONARIES
3. PRIESTS & PRELATES
4. Chantare
}
Jotham {The perfection of the Lord}
Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#317 / #418} / HETEROS {#447 / #402} / TORAH {#439 /
#398}
<http://www.grapple369.com?zen:3,row:1,col:3,nous:29&idea:{m,72}&idea:{f,44}&idea:{m,317}&idea:{f,418}&PROTOTYPE:HOMOIOS>
hrs, Super: #317 / #44 - Moderate Values, Setting Up Precepts; I-Ching: H1
- Pure Yang, Creative Principle/Heaven, Force, Strong action, The key, God;
H36 - Suppression of the Light, Sinking/Darkening of the Light, Brilliance
injured, Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 67 - Darkening]
@1: Sup: 8 (#8); Ego: 8 (#8),
@2: Sup: 12 (#20); Ego: 4 (#12),
@3: Sup: 18 (#38); Ego: 6 (#18),
@4: Sup: 13 (#51); Ego: 76 (#94),
Male: #51; Feme: #94
} // #418
UMBRA: #23 % #41 = #23 - Constancy of Guiding Concepts, Emptiness &
Non-Existence; I-Ching: H18 - Ills to Be Cured, Arresting Decay,
26 - Endeavour;
THOTH MEASURE: #23 - Oh thou who raisest thy voice, and makest thine
appearance in Urit; I am not hot of speech.
#VIRTUE: With Ease (no. #23), a leveling, but
#TOOLS: With Watch (no. #63), a collapse.
#POSITION: With Enlargement (no. #46), no bounds.
#TIME: With Endeavor (no. #26), no duplicity.
#CANON: #158
@1: Sup: 23 (#23); Ego: 23 (#23),
@2: Sup: 5 (#28); Ego: 63 (#86 - I AM NOT A ROBBER OF FOOD {%10}),
@3: Sup: 51 (#79); Ego: 46 (#132),
@4: Sup: 77 (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS {%21}); Ego: 26 (#158 - I AM
NOT HOT OF SPEECH {%23}),
Male: #156; Feme: #158
} // #158
#418 as [#8, #4, #6, #400] = chedvah (H2304): {UMBRA: #0 as #23 % #41 =
#23} 1) joy, gladness;
@1: Sup: 8 (#8); Ego: 8 (#8),
@2: Sup: 65 (#73); Ego: 57 (#65),
@3: Sup: 3 (#76); Ego: 19 (#84 - I AM NOT A MAN OF VIOLENCE {%2}),
@4: Sup: 13 (#89); Ego: 10 (#94),
Male: #89; Feme: #94
} // #418
UMBRA: #408 % #41 = #39 - Achieving Oneness, Root of Order; I-Ching: H28 -
Major Superiority, Excess, Great Exceeding, Preponderance of the great,
Great surpassing, Critical mass; Tetra: 76 - Aggravation;
THOTH MEASURE: #39 - Oh thou of beautiful shoulder, who makest thine
appearance at ....; I am not swollen with pride.
#VIRTUE: With Residence (no. #39), attaining to rank, but
#TOOLS: With Difficulties (no. #79), meeting with demotion.
#POSITION: With Encounters (no. #43), coming upon difficulties.
#TIME: With Packing (no. #31), awaiting the proper time.
#CANON: #192
@1: Sup: 39 (#39); Ego: 39 (#39),
@2: Sup: 37 (#76); Ego: 79 (#118),
@3: Sup: 80 (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS {%21}); Ego: 43 (#161 - I AM
NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9}),
@4: Sup: 30 (#186 - I AM NOT ONE OF INCONSTANT MIND {%31}); Ego: 31
(#192 - I AM NOT SWOLLEN WITH PRIDE {%39}),
Male: #186; Feme: #192
} // #192
#418 as [#8, #300, #100, #10] = chesheq (H2837): {UMBRA: #1 as #408 % #41 =
#39} 1) desire, thing desired;
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 25 (#31); Ego: 19 (#25),
@3: Sup: 31 (#62); Ego: 6 (#31),
@4: Sup: 7 (#69); Ego: 57 (#88),
@5: Sup: 13 (#82); Ego: 6 (#94),
Male: #82; Feme: #94
} // #418
UMBRA: #700 % #41 = #3 - Political Prescriptions, Quietude; I-Ching: H46 -
Climbing, Moving/Pushing Upward, Ascending; Tetra: 8 - Opposition;
THOTH MEASURE: #3 - Oh thou of the Nose, who makest thine appearance at
Chemunnu; I am not evil minded.
#VIRTUE: With Mired (no. #3), great woe.
#TOOLS: With Encounters (no. #43), small desire.
#POSITION: The ways of Purity (no. #37) and ...
#TIME: Pattern (no. #47) where some are simple and some are complex?
#CANON: #130
@1: Sup: 3 (#3); Ego: 3 (#3),
@2: Sup: 46 (#49); Ego: 43 (#46),
@3: Sup: 2 (#51); Ego: 37 (#83),
@4: Sup: 49 (#100); Ego: 47 (#130 - I AM NOT EVIL MINDED {%3}),
Male: #100; Feme: #130
} // #130
#418 as [#6, #100, #6, #300, #6] = qashash (H7197): {UMBRA: #3 as #700 %
#41 = #3} 1) to gather, assemble, collect, gather stubble or sticks; 1a)
(Qal) to gather together; 1b) (Poel) to gather stubble; 1c) (Hithpoel) to
gather oneself together;
@1: Sup: 20 (#20); Ego: 20 (#20),
@2: Sup: 21 (#41); Ego: 1 (#21),
@3: Sup: 78 (#119); Ego: 57 (#78),
@4: Sup: 2 (#121); Ego: 5 (#83),
@5: Sup: 11 (#132); Ego: 9 (#92),
@6: Sup: 19 (#151); Ego: 8 (#100),
@7: Sup: 39 (#190); Ego: 20 (#120),
@8: Sup: 44 (#234); Ego: 5 (#125),
@9: Sup: 13 (#247); Ego: 50 (#175 - I AM NOT A TRANSGRESSOR {%22}),
Male: #247; Feme: #175
} // #418
UMBRA: #699 % #41 = #2 - Contrast of Terms, Self-Culture; I-Ching: H11 -
Peace, Pervading, Greatness; Tetra: 16 - Contact;
THOTH MEASURE: #2 - Oh thou who boldest the fire, and makest thine
appearance in Cher-aba; I am not a man of violence.
#VIRTUE: With Full Circle (no. #2), a return to virtue.
#TOOLS: With Defectiveness (no. #10), the crooked.
#POSITION: With Going to Meet (no. #42), a counter turn towards
punishment.
#TIME: With Bold Resolution (no. #30), the straight?
#CANON: #84
@1: Sup: 2 (#2); Ego: 2 (#2),
@2: Sup: 12 (#14); Ego: 10 (#12),
@3: Sup: 54 (#68 - I DO NOT THAT WHICH OFFENDETH THE GOD OF MY DOMAIN
{%42}); Ego: 42 (#54),
@4: Sup: 3 (#71); Ego: 30 (#84 - I AM NOT A MAN OF VIOLENCE {%2}),
Male: #71; Feme: #84
} // #84
{UMBRA: #7 as #699 % #41 = #2} 1) to lay down, deposit, lay up; 2) to lay
by or up for one's self, for future use; 3) to lay up favour for one's self
with any one, to gain favour with (to do something for one which may win
favour);
@1: Sup: 80 (#80); Ego: 80 (#80),
@2: Sup: 81 (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9}); Ego: 1 (#81),
@3: Sup: 19 (#180 - I COMMIT NOT ADULTERY WITH ANOTHER'S WIFE {%19});
Ego: 19 (#100),
@4: Sup: 20 (#200 - I AM NOT A ROBBER OF SACRED PROPERTY {%8}); Ego: 1
(#101),
@5: Sup: 24 (#224); Ego: 4 (#105),
@6: Sup: 13 (#237); Ego: 70 (#175 - I AM NOT A TRANSGRESSOR {%22}),
@7: Sup: 73 (#310); Ego: 60 (#235),
@8: Sup: 74 (#384); Ego: 1 (#236),
Male: #384; Feme: #236
} // #317
UMBRA: #586 % #41 = #12 - Numbing Effect of the Conventional, Abstaining
25 - Contention;
THOTH MEASURE: #12 - Oh thou of the Bright Teeth, who makest thine
appearance in the Unseen Land; I am not a transgressor.
#VIRTUE: With Youthfulness (no. #12), to have little, but
#TOOLS: With Measure (no. #52), to have no lack.
#POSITION: With Reach (no. #15), thoughts that comprehend.
#TIME: With Exhaustion (no. #69), thoughts that confound.
#CANON: #148
@1: Sup: 12 (#12); Ego: 12 (#12),
@2: Sup: 64 (#76); Ego: 52 (#64),
@3: Sup: 79 (#155); Ego: 15 (#79),
@4: Sup: 67 (#222); Ego: 69 (#148 - I AM NOT A TRANSGRESSOR {%12}),
Male: #222; Feme: #148
} // #148
#11 as #586 % #41 = #12} 1) unexpected, uncommon, incredible, wonderful;
@1: Sup: 57 (#57); Ego: 57 (#57),
@2: Sup: 67 (#124); Ego: 10 (#67),
@3: Sup: 68 (#192 - I AM NOT SWOLLEN WITH PRIDE {%39}); Ego: 1 (#68 - I
DO NOT THAT WHICH OFFENDETH THE GOD OF MY DOMAIN {%42}),
@4: Sup: 74 (#266); Ego: 6 (#74),
Male: #266; Feme: #74
} // #317
UMBRA: #311 % #41 = #24 - Important Distinctions, Trouble from Indulgence;
I-Ching: H5 - Waiting, Delay, Attending, Waiting, Moistened, Arriving;
Tetra: 18 - Waiting;
THOTH MEASURE: #24 - Oh divine Babe, who makest thy appearance in Annu; I
lend not a deaf ear to the words of Righteousness.
#VIRTUE: With Joy (no. #24), raising high, but
#TOOLS: With Sinking (no. #64), hiding below.
#POSITION: As to Response (no. #41), it is the present, but
#TIME: As to Measure (no. #52), it is the past.
#CANON: #181
@1: Sup: 24 (#24); Ego: 24 (#24),
@2: Sup: 7 (#31); Ego: 64 (#88),
@3: Sup: 48 (#79); Ego: 41 (#129),
@4: Sup: 19 (#98); Ego: 52 (#181 - I LEND NOT A DEAF EAR TO THE WORDS OF
RIGHTEOUSNESS {%24} / I AM NOT ONE WHO CURSETH THE KING {%35}),
Male: #98; Feme: #181
} // #181
#317 as [#300, #10, #1, #6] = siy' (H7863): {UMBRA: #9 as #311 % #41 = #24}
1) loftiness (of pride);
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 46 (#52); Ego: 40 (#46),
@3: Sup: 51 (#103); Ego: 5 (#51),
@4: Sup: 8 (#111); Ego: 38 (#89),
@5: Sup: 18 (#129); Ego: 10 (#99),
@6: Sup: 24 (#153); Ego: 6 (#105),
@7: Sup: 74 (#227); Ego: 50 (#155),
Male: #227; Feme: #155
} // #317
UMBRA: #261 % #41 = #15 - Mastering Guiding Discourse, Revealers of Virtue;
I-Ching: H61 - Inner Trust, Inner Truth, Center Returning; Tetra: 1 -
Centre;
THOTH MEASURE: #15 - Oh Lord of Righteousness, who makest thine appearance
in the place of Righteousness; I am not a land-grabber.
#VIRTUE: With Reach (no. #15), dailys increasing its kind.
#TOOLS: With Diminishment (no. #55), daily depleting its type.
#POSITION: With Resistance (no. #22), intolerance, but
#TIME: With Unity (no. #54), magnanimity.
#CANON: #146
@1: Sup: 15 (#15); Ego: 15 (#15),
@2: Sup: 70 (#85); Ego: 55 (#70),
@3: Sup: 11 (#96); Ego: 22 (#92),
@4: Sup: 65 (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9}); Ego: 54 (#146 - I
AM NOT A LAND-GRABBER {%15}),
Male: #161; Feme: #146
} // #146
#317 as [#6, #40, #5, #200, #10, #6, #50] = herown (H2032): {UMBRA: #1 as
#261 % #41 = #15} 1) physical conception, pregnancy, conception;
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-25 23:05:51 UTC
Permalink
-- (DRAFT: 26 AUGUST 2018): THE INDISPENSABILITY OF A PURE MORAL PHILOSOPHY

(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 26 August, 2018

The Kantian appeal for a pure moral philosophy begins with a reference
to the usefulness of the division of labor. [And here] Kant raises the
question whether philosophy would not benefit from such a division.
Ultimately, he is not concerned with whether the burden of elaborating
philosophical theories should be distributed among the shoulders of a
multitude of persons.[Page 6]

We would contend against this notion as being an impotent chimeric {ie.
a thing which is hoped for but is illusory or impossible to achieve} of
idealism {ie. the unrealistic belief in or pursuit of perfection} such
that one may declare "the economic sovereignty you claim to defend is a
chimera".

And thusly, it is in and of itself an oblique contradiction of Kant's
own characteristic position development where he emphasizes that an
adequate form of moral philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from
all empirical elements of interest, self-love, and natural feelings as
well as free from rational concepts of perfection:

“And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very
good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

HETEROS PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #342)@{
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 20 (#26); Ego: 14 (#20),
@3: Sup: 42 (#68); Ego: 22 (#42),
@4: Sup: 72 (#140 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY (%14); I AM NOT AN
EAVES-DROPPER (%16)); Ego: 30 (#72),
@5: Sup: 29 (#169 - I TROUBLE MYSELF ONLY WITH MY OWN AFFAIRS
(%18)); Ego: 38 (#110),
@6: Sup: 75 (#244); Ego: 46 (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS (%21)),
@7: Sup: 48 (#292); Ego: 54 (#210 - I AM NOT OF AGGRESSIVE HAND (%30)),
@8: Sup: 29 (#321); Ego: 62 (#272),
@9: Sup: 18 (#339); Ego: 70 (#342),
Male: #339; Feme: #342
} // #342

TORAH PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #369)@{
@1: Sup: 16 (#16); Ego: 16 (#16),
@2: Sup: 33 (#49); Ego: 17 (#33),
@3: Sup: 51 (#100); Ego: 18 (#51),
@4: Sup: 10 (#110); Ego: 40 (#91),
@5: Sup: 51 (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES (%9)); Ego: 41 (#132),
@6: Sup: 12 (#173 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO UNNATURAL LUST (%27)); Ego:
42 (#174),
@7: Sup: 76 (#249); Ego: 64 (#238),
@8: Sup: 60 (#309); Ego: 65 (#303),
@9: Sup: 45 (#354); Ego: 66 (#369),
Male: #354; Feme: #369
} // #369

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he
rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God
blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had
rested from all his work which God created and made.” [Genesis 1:31-2:3
(KJV)]

Thusly if the Sabbath as a sacred principle of nature which is the
ultimate good as perfection: “And he said unto them, The sabbath was
made for man, and not man for the sabbath.” [Mark 2:27 (KJV)]

It’s meritorious purpose as a benefit to humankind is found firstly
within the ACT TO WILL by VOLUNTĀTIS {ie. MENTALISM {#41}: #1 - WILL,
FREE WILL, CHOICE as to engage within actions that endeavour to #1 - BE
SOCIALLY BENEFICIAL (the Artificial Intelligence equivalent of 'DO NO
EVIL'?); {*FORMULA* *FOR* *UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}} by it’s remembrance and
then the voluntary avoidance of labour as the absence of any WILL TO ACT.

H2257@{
@1: Sup: 8 (#8); Ego: 8 (#8),
@2: Sup: 10 (#18); Ego: 2 (#10),
@3: Sup: 40 (#58); Ego: 30 (#40),
@4: Sup: 41 (#99); Ego: 1 (#41),
Male: #99; Feme: #41
} // #41

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #40 % #41 = #40 - Reversal, Avoiding Activity; I-Ching: H36 -
Suppression of the Light, Sinking/Darkening Light, Brilliance injured,
Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 68 - Dimming;

THOTH MEASURE: #40 - Oh Neheb-kau, who makest thy appearance at thy
cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *UNJUST* *PREFERENCES*.

#VIRTUE: Law (no. #40) means to facilitate union with All-under-Heaven.
#TOOLS: Labouring (no. #80) means to lack achievement despite
strenuous efforts.
#POSITION: With Duties (no. #27), to exhaust oneself.
#TIME: With Fostering (no. #81), to increase oneself.
#CANON: #228

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_228@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 39 (#79); Ego: 80 (#120),
@3: Sup: 66 (#145); Ego: 27 (#147),
@4: Sup: 66 (#211); Ego: 81 (#228 - I HAVE NO UNJUST PREFERENCES {%40}),
Male: #211; Feme: #228
} // #228

#41 as [#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): {UMBRA: #6 as #40 %
#41 = #40} 1) *HURT*, *DAMAGE*, *INJURY*;

"Take heed now that ye fail not to do this: why should damage {#41 as
[#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): hurt} grow to the hurt of
the kings?" [Ezra 4:22]

Rather Kant, with this rhetorical consideration, introduces an
explicitly methodological train of thought. He asks “whether the nature
of the science {ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based
seven number) = #294 x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS =
365.242321 days} does not require the empirical part always to be
carefully separated from the rational [of the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE
VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. voluntary will)]:

"And God said, Let us make {ie.

*APPOINT* AS HAVING INCEPTION OF 22 / 7 WITH A GENESIS {DAO OF NATURE
(CHINESE: ZIRAN) / COURSE (GREEK: TROCHOS) OF NATURE (GREEK: GENESIS)}
REPRISE UPON EQUINOX OF WEDNESDAY 20 MARCH 1996 / #0 - NEW MOON OF
THURSDAY 21 MARCH 1996

} man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over
the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle,
and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon
the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;
male and female created he them." [Genesis 1:26-27 (KJV)]

And he confines this question to the sub-question "Whether one is not of
the opinion that it: is of the utmost necessity to work out once a pure
moral philosophy which is fully cleansed of everything that might be in
any way empirical and belong to anthropology“

The passage that is introduced by this question contains, at the same
time, a positive response — the thesis that there must be a “pure moral
philosophy” is “self evident." And indeed for Kant this evidence arises
“out of the common idea of duty and the moral law” (ibid.). Kant’s
cursory argumentation for this thesis is difficult to grasp.
Undoubtedly, it constitutes one of the key argumentative passages of the
Groundwork. [Page 6]

It is perhaps presumptuous of us at only page #6 of #323 to already be
taking issue with the robustness of Kant's otherwise cogent thesis that
there must be a “pure moral philosophy” which is “self evident" given
that there are seven day designates within our understanding of the
cosmology which is understood universally as an implicit law of nature.

GOVERNMENT SHILL #2 (***@GMAIL.COM) @ 1633 HOURS ON 25 AUGUST
2018: “The Kantian appeal for a pure moral philosophy begins with a
reference to the usefulness of the division of labor. Kant raises ... a
glass and...

YOUTUBE: “The Philosopher’s Song (Monty Python)”

<https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=2m51s&v=PtgKkifJ0Pw>

'IMMANUEL KANT WAS A REAL PISSANT
WHO WAS VERY RARELY STABLE.
HEIDEGGER, HEIDEGGER WAS A BOOZY BEGGAR
WHO COULD THINK YOU UNDER THE TABLE.
DAVID HUME COULD OUT CONSUME
SCHOPENHAUER AND HEGEL,
AND WITTGENSTEIN WAS A BEERY SWINE
WHO WAS JUST AS SLOSHED AS SCHLEGEL.

THERE'S NOTHING NIETZSCHE COULDN'T TEACH YA
'BOUT THE RAISIN' OF THE WRIST.
SOCRATES HIMSELF WAS PERMANENTLY PISSED.

JOHN STUART MILL, OF HIS OWN FREE WILL,
AFTER HALF A PINT OF SHANDY WAS PARTICULARLY ILL.
PLATO, THEY SAY, COULD STICK IT AWAY,
'ALF A CRATE OF WHISKEY EVERY DAY!
ARISTOTLE, ARISTOTLE WAS A BUGGER FOR THE BOTTLE,
AND HOBBES WAS FOND OF HIS DRAM.
AND RENE DESCARTES WAS A DRUNKEN FART:
"I DRINK, THEREFORE I AM."

YES, SOCRATES HIMSELF IS PARTICULARLY MISSED;
A LOVELY LITTLE THINKER, BUT A BUGGER WHEN HE'S PISSED.'

24 beers in a carton. 24 hours in a day. Hmmmm......."

DOLF @ 0812 HOURS ON 26 AUGUST 2018: “It may have escaped your notice,
as is self-evident from your burlesque constipated turd 💩 haemorrhoidal
opinion that the subject we are contending with is a consideration of
profound intellectual accomplishments conveyed by a book which
articulates the merit as collective mind of no fewer than FOURTEEN {#14}
eminent university professors:

THE COUNTRIES MOST ANTICIPATED LEGAL ADVICE HAS ARRIVED

Yes indeed my appraisal by Christoph HORN and Dieter SCHÖNECKER (Eds.)
of Immanuel KANT’s GROUNDWORK FOR METAPHYSICS OF MORALS (1785) has
arrived at my doorstep this morning of 24 August 2108 courtesy of
Australia Post.

It will be my task to read it this weekend in the hope that probity and
decorum will return to the governance of this Commonwealth given its
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:

DIEU ET MON DROIT

Whilst it is prudent to establish the starting point of necessity as to
any premises for the continuity of enquiry, I recognise as my ignorance
with respect to the learned as the educated and the gravitas of the
subject matter to say nothing of those whom may have given their lives
as something other than marsupial roadkill as RECTUS for the
foundational cause—it is best to proceed with caution and in a sturdy
and thoughtful manner rather than with the intoxication of
self-entitlement which you bestow."

Yet for Kant this anthropological evidence arises “out of the common
idea of duty and the moral law” which is also certainly self evidently a
contradiction of his initial postulate that any adequate form of moral
philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from all empirical elements
of interest, self-love, and natural feelings in the dutiful display of
filial affection by VOLUNTĀTIS {CORRESPONDENCE {#82}: #2 - desire,
inclination as to engaged within actions that #2 - Don't introduce
biases; {*FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}} relating to the “honour bestowed
upon one's matrimonial or common law parents” which is due from a son or
daughter:

H3513@{
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 56 (#62); Ego: 50 (#56),
@3: Sup: 76 (#138); Ego: 20 (#76),
@4: Sup: 78 (#216); Ego: 2 (#78),
@5: Sup: 1 (#217); Ego: 4 (#82),
Male: #217; Feme: #82
} // #82

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #82 % #41 = #41 - Playing with Reversal, Sameness in Difference;
I-Ching: H26 - Great Domestication, Restraining Force, Great
Accumulating, The taming power of the great, Great storage, Potential
energy; Tetra: 60 - Accumulation;

THOTH MEASURE: #41 - Oh thou of raised head, who makest thine appearance
at thy cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *STRONG* *DESIRE* *EXCEPT* *FOR* *MY*
*OWN* *PROPERTY*.

#VIRTUE:
#TOOLS: Fostering (no. #81) receives all the rest.
#POSITION: As to Resistance (no. #22), it is contradiction, but
#TIME: As to Unity (no. #54), it is conforming.
#CANON: #157

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_157@{
@1: Sup: 81 (#81); Ego: 81 (#81),
@2: Sup: 22 (#103); Ego: 22 (#103),
@3: Sup: 76 (#179); Ego: 54 (#157 - I AM NOT ONE OF PRATING TONGUE
{%17} / I HAVE NO STRONG DESIRE EXCEPT FOR MY OWN PROPERTY {%41}),
Male: #179; Feme: #157
} // #157

#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513): {UMBRA: #37 as #82 % #41
= #41} 1) to be heavy, be weighty, be grievous, be hard, be rich, be
honourable, be glorious, be burdensome, be honoured; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to
be heavy; 1a2) to be heavy, be insensible, be dull; 1a3) *TO* *BE*
*HONOURED*; 1b) (Niphal); 1b1) to be made heavy, be honoured, enjoy
honour, be made abundant; 1b2) to get oneself glory or honour, gain
glory; 1c) (Piel); 1c1) to make heavy, make dull, make insensible; 1c2)
to make honourable, honour, glorify; 1d) (Pual) to be made honourable,
be honoured; 1e) (Hiphil); 1e1) to make heavy; 1e2) to make heavy, make
dull, make unresponsive; 1e3) to cause to be honoured; 1f) (Hithpael);
1f1) to make oneself heavy, make oneself dense, make oneself numerous;
1f2) to honour oneself;

"And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom {their secret; their
cement} and Gomorrah {rebellious people} is great, and because their sin
is very grievous {#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513):
honour};" [Genesis 18:20]

5. (MOTHER) FORMULA OF HUMANITY AS HEAD OF STATE / *HONOUR* *PARENTS*

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #1 + #2 = #3 as #MIND

MONAD - #1 - NATURE CONTAINS NATURE: {ALEPH (*MOTHER* - SCALES OF MERIT)
/ SERAPHIM {Heb. Saraph Gk. Ophis - burning, that is, (figuratively)
poisonous (serpent); specifically a fiery (serpent) or symbolical
creature (from their copper color))} {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA {1 + 2 + 3 + 4
= 10}

TETRAD - #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {BETH (DOUBLE - #1 - NATURE
CONTAINS NATURE {#4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE}) / CHERUBIM (Gk.
Cheroubim - a cherub or imaginary figures which covered the mercy seat
to the Ark of the Covenant [Exodus 25:17-22] and from where God communed
with Israel)}

PENTAD - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}

+ 0, H9, H18 {ie. System’s Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}

Thusly, at this juncture in our ingestion of Kant’s thesis, we shall
reserve our future conjectures upon any rhetorical artifices which he
may deploy until we have considered further what nominative descriptions
that he conveys by such postulates.

- dolf

SEE ALSO: "(SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF
MORALS: #56 - TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
THEFT AND SLANDER BY MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE
AS BOER / ANZAC DEFAMATION?"

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/Augustus.pdf>

Initial Post: 25 August 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND*
*ROMAN* *CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5,
#200 as harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a
extortioner, a robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL*
*AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private Street on the edge of the Central Business District dated 16th
May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as a Notice
of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS AS DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in
1993), first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN
CHING {ie. Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated
with the theory of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology
reliant upon the seven visible planets as cosmological mother image and
the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF
NATURE-genesis [James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial
tetragrammaton x 4.5 day = #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER
which is an amalgam of the 64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as
trinomial tetragrammaton rather than its encapsulated contrived use as
the microcosm to redefine the macrocosm as the quintessence of the
Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial canon of transposition as HETEROS
THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006
defines a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is
permissible to extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN
BEING AS A CONSCIOUS REALITY OF HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED
WITHIN THE TEMPORAL REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND
RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS.
dolf
2018-08-26 05:10:50 UTC
Permalink
-- (DRAFT: 26 AUGUST 2018): THE INDISPENSABILITY OF A PURE MORAL PHILOSOPHY

(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 26 August, 2018

Immanuel Kant (22 April 1724 to 12 February 1804) whom was initially
educated within theology as ostensibly the Pythagorean binomial
perennialist (Latin) school of thought and note worthy are his second
(1756) and third (1755) dissertations:

The Employment in Natural Philosophy of Metaphysics Combined with
Geometry—also known as the Monodologia Physica which contrasted the
Newtonian methods of thinking with those employed in the philosophy then
prevailing in German universities;

In a third dissertation, "New Elucidation of the First Principles of
Metaphysical Cognition", Kant analyzed especially the principle of
sufficient reason, which in Wolff’s formulation asserts that for
everything there is a sufficient reason why it should be rather than not
be. Although critical, Kant was cautious and still a long way from
challenging the assumptions of Leibnizian metaphysics.

And of his criticism of Leibnizian rationalism Kant's principal work of
this period was published by 1764 as "An Inquiry into the Distinctness
of the Fundamental Principles of Natural Theology and Morals". Within
this work he attacked the claim of Leibnizian philosophy that philosophy
should model itself on mathematics and aim at constructing a chain of
demonstrated truths based on self-evident premises. Kant argued that
mathematics proceeds from definitions that are arbitrary, by means of
operations that are clearly and sharply defined, upon concepts that can
be exhibited in concrete form. In contrast with this method, he argued
that philosophy must begin with concepts that are already given, “though
confusedly or insufficiently determined,” so that philosophers cannot
begin with definitions without thereby shutting themselves up within a
circle of words. Philosophy cannot, like mathematics, proceed
synthetically; it must analyze and clarify. The importance of the moral
order, which he had learned from Rousseau, reinforced the conviction
received from his study of Newton that a synthetic philosophy is empty
and false.

Within 1770 he became a full professor at the University of Konigsberg,
teaching metaphysics and logic. The Inaugural Dissertation of 1770 that
he delivered on *ASSUMING* *HIS* *NEW* *POSITION* *ALREADY* *CONTAINED*
*MANY* *OF* *THE* *IMPORTANT* *ELEMENTS* *OF* *HIS* *MATURE*
*PHILOSOPHY*. As indicated in its title, De Mundi Sensibilis atque
Intelligibilis Forma et Principiis: Dissertatio (“On the Form and
Principles of the Sensible and Intelligible Worlds”), the implicit
dualism of the Träume is made explicit, and it is made so on the basis
of a wholly un-Leibnizian interpretation of the distinction between
sense and understanding. Sense is not, as Leibniz had supposed, a
confused form of thinking but a source of knowledge in its own right,
although the objects so known are still only “appearances”—the term that
Leibniz also used. They are appearances because all sensing is
conditioned by the presence, in sensibility, of the forms of time and
space, which are not objective characteristics or frameworks of things
but “pure intuitions.” But though all knowledge of things sensible is
thus of phenomena, it does not follow that nothing is known of things as
they are in themselves. Certainly, humans have no intuition, or direct
insight, into an intelligible world, but the presence in them of certain
“pure intellectual concepts”—such as those of possibility, existence,
necessity, substance, and cause—enables them to have some descriptive
knowledge of it. By means of these concepts they can arrive at an
exemplar that provides them with “the common measure of all other things
as far as real.” This exemplar gives them an idea of perfection for both
the theoretical and practical orders: in the first, it is that of the
Supreme Being, God; in the latter, that of moral perfection. [cf:
Britannia Encyclopaedia]

After the Dissertation, Kant published virtually nothing for 11 years
until 1781, Immanuel Kant disseminated the first edition to Critique of
Pure Reason with the second in 1787, as an enormous work and one of the
most important on Western thought. Although the adolescent Kant loathed
his Pietist as Lutheran schooling, he had deep respect and admiration
for his parents, especially his mother, whose “genuine religiosity” he
described as “not at all enthusiastic.” According to his biographer,
Manfred Kuehn, Kant’s parents probably influenced him much less through
their Pietism than through their artisan values of “hard work, honesty,
cleanliness, and independence,” which they taught him by example. [cf:
Kuehn 2001, 38, 44. See also 54]

Thus in the consideration given to Kantian appeal for a pure moral
philosophy as beginning with a reference to the usefulness of the
division of labor. Here Kant raises the question whether philosophy
would not also benefit from such a division. Ultimately, he is not
concerned with whether the burden of elaborating philosophical theories
should be distributed among the shoulders of a multitude of persons.[Page 6]

We would however contend against this notion as being an impotent
chimeric {ie. a thing which is hoped for but is illusory or impossible
to achieve} of idealism {ie. the unrealistic belief in or pursuit of
perfection} such that one may declare "the economic sovereignty you
claim to defend is a chimera".

And thusly, it is in and of itself an oblique contradiction of Kant's
own characteristic position development where he emphasizes that an
adequate form of moral philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from
all empirical elements of interest, self-love, and natural feelings as
well as free from rational concepts of perfection:

“And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very
good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

HETEROS PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #342)@{
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 20 (#26); Ego: 14 (#20),
@3: Sup: 42 (#68); Ego: 22 (#42),
@4: Sup: 72 (#140 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY (%14); I AM NOT AN
EAVES-DROPPER (%16)); Ego: 30 (#72),
@5: Sup: 29 (#169 - I TROUBLE MYSELF ONLY WITH MY OWN AFFAIRS
(%18)); Ego: 38 (#110),
@6: Sup: 75 (#244); Ego: 46 (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS (%21)),
@7: Sup: 48 (#292); Ego: 54 (#210 - I AM NOT OF AGGRESSIVE HAND (%30)),
@8: Sup: 29 (#321); Ego: 62 (#272),
@9: Sup: 18 (#339); Ego: 70 (#342),
Male: #339; Feme: #342
} // #342

TORAH PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #369)@{
@1: Sup: 16 (#16); Ego: 16 (#16),
@2: Sup: 33 (#49); Ego: 17 (#33),
@3: Sup: 51 (#100); Ego: 18 (#51),
@4: Sup: 10 (#110); Ego: 40 (#91),
@5: Sup: 51 (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES (%9)); Ego: 41 (#132),
@6: Sup: 12 (#173 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO UNNATURAL LUST (%27)); Ego:
42 (#174),
@7: Sup: 76 (#249); Ego: 64 (#238),
@8: Sup: 60 (#309); Ego: 65 (#303),
@9: Sup: 45 (#354); Ego: 66 (#369),
Male: #354; Feme: #369
} // #369

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he
rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God
blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had
rested from all his work which God created and made.” [Genesis 1:31-2:3
(KJV)]

Thusly if the Sabbath as a sacred principle of nature which is the
ultimate good as perfection: “And he said unto them, The sabbath was
made for man, and not man for the sabbath.” [Mark 2:27 (KJV)]

It’s meritorious purpose as a benefit to humankind is found firstly
within the ACT TO WILL by VOLUNTĀTIS {ie. MENTALISM {#41}: #1 - WILL,
FREE WILL, CHOICE as to engage within actions that endeavour to #1 - BE
SOCIALLY BENEFICIAL (the Artificial Intelligence equivalent of 'DO NO
EVIL'?); {*FORMULA* *FOR* *UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}} by it’s remembrance and
then the voluntary avoidance of *LABOURING* as the absence of any WILL
TO ACT.

H2257@{
@1: Sup: 8 (#8); Ego: 8 (#8),
@2: Sup: 10 (#18); Ego: 2 (#10),
@3: Sup: 40 (#58); Ego: 30 (#40),
@4: Sup: 41 (#99); Ego: 1 (#41),
Male: #99; Feme: #41
} // #41

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #40 % #41 = #40 - Reversal, Avoiding Activity; I-Ching: H36 -
Suppression of the Light, Sinking/Darkening Light, Brilliance injured,
Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 68 - Dimming;

THOTH MEASURE: #40 - Oh Neheb-kau, who makest thy appearance at thy
cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *UNJUST* *PREFERENCES*.

#VIRTUE: Law (no. #40) means to facilitate union with All-under-Heaven.
#TOOLS: *LABOURING* (no. #80) means to lack achievement despite
strenuous efforts.
#POSITION: With *DUTIES* (no. #27), to exhaust oneself.
#TIME: With Fostering (no. #81), to increase oneself.
#CANON: #228

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_228@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 39 (#79); Ego: 80 (#120),
@3: Sup: 66 (#145); Ego: 27 (#147),
@4: Sup: 66 (#211); Ego: 81 (#228 - I HAVE NO UNJUST PREFERENCES {%40}),
Male: #211; Feme: #228
} // #228

#41 as [#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): {UMBRA: #6 as #40 %
#41 = #40} 1) *HURT*, *DAMAGE*, *INJURY*;

"Take heed now that ye fail not to do this: why should damage {#41 as
[#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): hurt} grow to the hurt of
the kings?" [Ezra 4:22]

Rather Kant, with this rhetorical consideration, introduces an
explicitly methodological train of thought. He asks “whether the nature
of the science {ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based
seven number) = #294 x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS =
365.242321 days} does not require the empirical part always to be
carefully separated from the rational [of the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE
VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. voluntary will)]:

"And God said, Let us make {ie.

*APPOINT* AS HAVING INCEPTION OF 22 / 7 WITH A GENESIS {DAO OF NATURE
(CHINESE: ZIRAN) / COURSE (GREEK: TROCHOS) OF NATURE (GREEK: GENESIS)}
REPRISE UPON EQUINOX OF WEDNESDAY 20 MARCH 1996 / #0 - NEW MOON OF
THURSDAY 21 MARCH 1996

} man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over
the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle,
and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon
the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;
male and female created he them." [Genesis 1:26-27 (KJV)]

And he confines this question to the sub-question "Whether one is not of
the opinion that it: is of the utmost necessity to work out once a pure
moral philosophy which is fully cleansed of everything that might be in
any way empirical and belong to anthropology“

The passage that is introduced by this question contains, at the same
time, a positive response — the thesis that there must be a “pure moral
philosophy” is “self evident." And indeed for Kant this evidence arises
“out of the common idea of *DUTY* and the moral law” (ibid.). Kant’s
cursory argumentation for this thesis is difficult to grasp.
Undoubtedly, it constitutes one of the key argumentative passages of the
Groundwork. [Page 6]

It is perhaps presumptuous of us at only page #6 of #323 to already be
taking issue with the robustness of Kant's otherwise cogent thesis that
there must be a “pure moral philosophy” which is “self evident" given
that there are seven day designates within our understanding of the
cosmology which is understood universally as an implicit law of nature.

GOVERNMENT SHILL #2 (***@GMAIL.COM) @ 1633 HOURS ON 25 AUGUST
2018: “The Kantian appeal for a pure moral philosophy begins with a
reference to the usefulness of the division of labor. Kant raises ... a
glass and...

YOUTUBE: “The Philosopher’s Song (Monty Python)”

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=2m51s&v=PtgKkifJ0Pw>

'IMMANUEL KANT WAS A REAL PISSANT
WHO WAS VERY RARELY STABLE.
HEIDEGGER, HEIDEGGER WAS A BOOZY BEGGAR
WHO COULD THINK YOU UNDER THE TABLE.
DAVID HUME COULD OUT CONSUME
SCHOPENHAUER AND HEGEL,
AND WITTGENSTEIN WAS A BEERY SWINE
WHO WAS JUST AS SLOSHED AS SCHLEGEL.

THERE'S NOTHING NIETZSCHE COULDN'T TEACH YA
'BOUT THE RAISIN' OF THE WRIST.
SOCRATES HIMSELF WAS PERMANENTLY PISSED.

JOHN STUART MILL, OF HIS OWN FREE WILL,
AFTER HALF A PINT OF SHANDY WAS PARTICULARLY ILL.
PLATO, THEY SAY, COULD STICK IT AWAY,
'ALF A CRATE OF WHISKEY EVERY DAY!
ARISTOTLE, ARISTOTLE WAS A BUGGER FOR THE BOTTLE,
AND HOBBES WAS FOND OF HIS DRAM.
AND RENE DESCARTES WAS A DRUNKEN FART:
"I DRINK, THEREFORE I AM."

YES, SOCRATES HIMSELF IS PARTICULARLY MISSED;
A LOVELY LITTLE THINKER, BUT A BUGGER WHEN HE'S PISSED.'

24 beers in a carton. 24 hours in a day. Hmmmm......."

DOLF @ 0812 HOURS ON 26 AUGUST 2018: “It may have escaped your notice,
as is self-evident from your burlesque constipated turd 💩 haemorrhoidal
opinion that the subject we are contending with is a consideration of
profound intellectual accomplishments conveyed by a book which
articulates the merit as collective mind of no fewer than FOURTEEN {#14}
eminent university professors:

THE COUNTRIES MOST ANTICIPATED LEGAL ADVICE HAS ARRIVED

Yes indeed my appraisal by Christoph HORN and Dieter SCHÖNECKER (Eds.)
of Immanuel KANT’s GROUNDWORK FOR METAPHYSICS OF MORALS (1785) has
arrived at my doorstep this morning of 24 August 2108 courtesy of
Australia Post.

It will be my task to read it this weekend in the hope that probity and
decorum will return to the governance of this Commonwealth given its
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:

DIEU ET MON DROIT

Whilst it is prudent to establish the starting point of necessity as to
any premises for the continuity of enquiry, I recognise as my ignorance
with respect to the learned as the educated and the gravitas of the
subject matter to say nothing of those whom may have given their lives
as something other than marsupial roadkill as RECTUS for the
foundational cause—it is best to proceed with caution and in a sturdy
and thoughtful manner rather than with the intoxication of
self-entitlement which you bestow."

Yet for Kant this anthropological evidence arises “out of the common
idea of *DUTY* and the moral law” which is also certainly self evidently
a contradiction of his initial postulate that any adequate form of moral
philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from all empirical elements
of interest, self-love, and natural feelings in the dutiful display of
filial affection by VOLUNTĀTIS {CORRESPONDENCE {#82}: #2 - desire,
inclination as to engaged within actions that #2 - Don't introduce
biases; {*FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}} relating to the “honour bestowed
upon one's matrimonial or common law parents” which is due from a son or
daughter:

H3513@{
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 56 (#62); Ego: 50 (#56),
@3: Sup: 76 (#138); Ego: 20 (#76),
@4: Sup: 78 (#216); Ego: 2 (#78),
@5: Sup: 1 (#217); Ego: 4 (#82),
Male: #217; Feme: #82
} // #82

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #82 % #41 = #41 - Playing with Reversal, Sameness in Difference;
I-Ching: H26 - Great Domestication, Restraining Force, Great
Accumulating, The taming power of the great, Great storage, Potential
energy; Tetra: 60 - Accumulation;

THOTH MEASURE: #41 - Oh thou of raised head, who makest thine appearance
at thy cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *STRONG* *DESIRE* *EXCEPT* *FOR* *MY*
*OWN* *PROPERTY*.

#VIRTUE:
#TOOLS: Fostering (no. #81) receives all the rest.
#POSITION: As to Resistance (no. #22), it is contradiction, but
#TIME: As to Unity (no. #54), it is conforming.
#CANON: #157

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_157@{
@1: Sup: 81 (#81); Ego: 81 (#81),
@2: Sup: 22 (#103); Ego: 22 (#103),
@3: Sup: 76 (#179); Ego: 54 (#157 - I AM NOT ONE OF PRATING TONGUE
{%17} / I HAVE NO STRONG DESIRE EXCEPT FOR MY OWN PROPERTY {%41}),
Male: #179; Feme: #157
} // #157

#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513): {UMBRA: #37 as #82 % #41
= #41} 1) to be heavy, be weighty, be grievous, be hard, be rich, be
honourable, be glorious, be burdensome, be honoured; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to
be heavy; 1a2) to be heavy, be insensible, be dull; 1a3) *TO* *BE*
*HONOURED*; 1b) (Niphal); 1b1) to be made heavy, be honoured, enjoy
honour, be made abundant; 1b2) to get oneself glory or honour, gain
glory; 1c) (Piel); 1c1) to make heavy, make dull, make insensible; 1c2)
to make honourable, honour, glorify; 1d) (Pual) to be made honourable,
be honoured; 1e) (Hiphil); 1e1) to make heavy; 1e2) to make heavy, make
dull, make unresponsive; 1e3) to cause to be honoured; 1f) (Hithpael);
1f1) to make oneself heavy, make oneself dense, make oneself numerous;
1f2) to honour oneself;

"And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom {their secret; their
cement} and Gomorrah {rebellious people} is great, and because their sin
is very grievous {#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513):
honour};" [Genesis 18:20]

5. (MOTHER) FORMULA OF HUMANITY AS HEAD OF STATE / *HONOUR* *PARENTS*

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #1 + #2 = #3 as #MIND WHETHER AS FORMULA OF HETEROS
PROGRESSION / THESIS ON IT'S HOMOIOS BASIS

MONAD - #1 - NATURE CONTAINS NATURE: {ALEPH (*MOTHER* - SCALES OF MERIT)
/ SERAPHIM {Heb. Saraph Gk. Ophis - burning, that is, (figuratively)
poisonous (serpent); specifically a fiery (serpent) or symbolical
creature (from their copper color))} {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA {1 + 2 + 3 + 4
= 10}

TETRAD - #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {BETH (DOUBLE - #1 - NATURE
CONTAINS NATURE {#4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE}) / CHERUBIM (Gk.
Cheroubim - a cherub or imaginary figures which covered the mercy seat
to the Ark of the Covenant [Exodus 25:17-22] and from where God communed
with Israel)}

PENTAD - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}

+ 0, H9, H18 {ie. System’s Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}

Thusly in summation, as to the problem of discernment and knowledge
assimilation into a coherent syncretism, at this juncture in our
ingestion of Kant’s acumen as thesis, we ought to prudently reserve our
further conjectures upon any rhetorical artifices which he may of
necessity deploy until we have fully considered what are the nominative
descriptions applied as their grounding in explanations and the explicit
nature of the underlying dialectic as its capacity and means by which
Kant conveys any such postulates.

For instance, Karl Marx (5 May 1818 – 14 March 1883) and Friedrich
Engels (28 November 1820 – 5 August 1895) proposed that Georg Hegel's
(27 August 1770 – 14 November 1831) subsequent dialectic was too
abstract. The dialect which HEGEL proposes is:

#1 - THESIS
#2 - ANTI-THESIS
#3 - SYNTHESIS
#4 - PROGRESSION

This concept of dialectics was given new life by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
Hegel as a proponent of German Idealism has been seen in the 20th
century as the originator but as an explicit phrase it originated with
Johann Gottlieb Fichte (28 November 1820 – 5 August 1895), whose
dialectically synthetic model of nature and of history made it, as it
were, a fundamental aspect of the nature of reality instead of regarding
the contradictions into which dialectics leads as a sign of the
sterility of the dialectical method, as Immanuel Kant was considered by
many to have tended to do within his Critique of Pure Reason.
[Nicholson, J. A. (1950). Philosophy of religion. New York: Ronald Press
Co. Page 108]

As Walter Kaufmann (1 July 1921 – 4 September 1980) astutely affirms of
Hegel's criticism of the triad model commonly misattributed to him,
adding that "the only place where Hegel uses the three terms together
occurs in his lectures on the history of philosophy, on the last page
but one of the section on Kant—where Hegel roundly reproaches Kant for
having 'EVERYWHERE POSITED THESIS, ANTITHESIS, SYNTHESIS'"

In contradiction to this Hegelian idealism, Marx presented his own
dialectic method as an anthropological consideration as sensibility of
the world, which he claims to be "direct opposite" of Hegel's method:
'My dialectic method is not only different from the Hegelian, but is its
direct opposite.' Where the dialectical method is itself an
anthropological construct, which is at base an OPINE {ie. hold and state
as one's opinion; origin late Middle English: from Latin opinari think,
believe} as existentialism purveying a characteristic mode of
quantitative expression as being essentially idiomatic:

'I THINK THEREFORE I AM'

But when, as occurs in the distillation of vodka which at a high proof
is devoid of SENSIBILITY where all taste and odour has been eliminated
making vodka a neutral spirit begging for self-entitlement, it is then
sublimated into its superlative form as substantially an epitaph of
merit as valedictory acceptability by an occasion of agreeability as an
opportune expression of a truism, where it is formerly inducted into a
Hall of Fame as a maxim life. As OSTENSIBLY being a discourse between
two or more people holding different points of view about a subject but
wishing to establish the truth through reasoned arguments as being
ostensibly:

#1 - PROGRESS
#2 - SYNTHESIS
#3 - ANTI-THESIS
#4 - THESIS

YOUTUBE: "The Script - Hall of Fame (Official Video)"




Dialectical materialism accepts the evolution of the natural world and
the emergence of new qualities of being at new stages of evolution. As
Zbigniew Antoni Jordan (11 August 1911 - 6 October 1977), notes, "Engels
made constant use of the metaphysical insight that the higher level of
existence emerges from and has its roots in the lower; that the higher
level constitutes a new order of being with its irreducible laws; and
that this process of evolutionary advance is governed by laws of
development which reflect basic properties of 'matter in motion as a
whole'." [The Evolution of Dialectical Materialism: A Philosophical and
Sociological Analysis (London: Macmillan, 1967), p 167]

Marx criticized classical materialism as another idealist
philosophy—idealist because of its transhistorical understanding of
material contexts. The Young Hegelian Ludwig Feuerbach had rejected
Hegel's idealistic philosophy and advocated materialism. Despite being
strongly influenced by Feuerbach, Marx rejected Feuerbach's version of
materialism as inconsistent. The writings of Engels, especially
Anti-Dühring (1878) and Dialectics of Nature (1875–82), were the source
of the main doctrines of dialectical materialism.

Marx's own writings are almost exclusively concerned with understanding
human history in terms of systemic processes, based on modes of
production (broadly speaking, the ways in which societies are organized
to employ their technological powers to interact with their material
surroundings). This is called historical materialism. More narrowly,
within the framework of this general theory of history, most of Marx's
writing is devoted to an analysis of the specific structure and
development of the capitalist economy.

Other scholars have argued that despite Marx's insistence that humans
are natural beings in an evolving, mutual relationship with the rest of
nature, Marx's own writings pay inadequate attention to the ways in
which human agency is constrained by such factors as biology, geography,
and ecology.

Dialectical materialism adapts the Hegelian dialectic for traditional
materialism, which examines the subjects of the world in relation to
each other within a dynamic, evolutionary environment, in contrast to
metaphysical materialism, which examines parts of the world within a
static, isolated environment.

For his part, Engels applies a "dialectical" approach to the natural
world in general, arguing that contemporary science is increasingly
recognizing the necessity of viewing natural processes in terms of
interconnectedness, development, and transformation. Some scholars have
doubted that Engels's "dialectics of nature" is a legitimate extension
of Marx's approach to social processes.

Engels exemplifies this quintessential characteristic of Pythagorean
methodology of sophistry by postulating three laws of dialectics from
his reading of Hegel's Science of Logic. Engels elucidated these laws as
the materialist dialectic in his work Dialectics of Nature:

THE LAW OF THE UNITY AND CONFLICT OF OPPOSITES {MIND: #1 + #2 = #3
(PENTAD) - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}}

THE LAW OF THE PASSAGE OF QUANTITATIVE {ie. measure by having magnitude
or spatial extent} CHANGES INTO QUALITATIVE {ie. determine comparative
size, appearance, value and superlative forms} CHANGES {SCIENCE: #3 + #4
= #7 - ENGENDERING NATURE / #4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE: {ZAYIN /
*PRINCIPALITIES* (Gk. *EXOUSIA* - (in the sense of ability); privilege,
that is, (subjectively) *force*, capacity, competency, freedom, or
(objectively) mastery (concretely magistrate, superhuman, potentate,
*token* *of* *control*), delegated influence:—authority, jurisdiction,
liberty, power, right, strength)}}

THE LAW OF THE NEGATION OF THE NEGATION {OPINION: #5 + #6 = #11 (HEPTAD)
- TRANSFORMING NATURE: {KAF (DOUBLE - #4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE
{#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE}) / Government & Non-Government Organisations}}

That the dialectic method is therefore understood as being a process of
determined SENSIBILITY where the product is "enlightenment, whereby the
philosopher is educated so as to achieve knowledge of the supreme good,
the Form of the Good." {SENSE: #7 + #8 = #15 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE:
{SAMEK}}

Accordingly dialectical materialism is understood as an aspect of the
broader subject of materialism, which asserts the primacy of the
material world: in short, matter precedes thought. Materialism is a
realist philosophy of science, which holds that the world is material;
that all phenomena in the universe consist of "matter in motion,"
wherein all things are interdependent and interconnected and develop
according to natural law; that the world exists outside us and
independently of our perception of it; that thought is a reflection of
the material world in the brain, and that the world is in principle
knowable.

However within the third chapter of the "Analytic of Principles," on
phenomena and noumena, Kant in Critique of Pure Reason (1781 and second
edition 1787) emphasizes that because the categories must always be
applied to data provided by SENSIBILITY in order to provide cognition,
and because the data of sensibility are structured by the
transcenden­tally ideal forms of intuition, the categories give us
knowledge only of things as they appear with sensibility ("phenomena,"
literally "that which appears").

Although through pure understanding (nous in Greek) we may think of
objects independently of their being given in sensibil­ity, we can never
cognize them as such non-sensible entities ("noumena," literally "that
which is thought" as a subject of some 112 mentions). The meaning of
Kant's use of the term "phenomena" is self-evident, but the meaning of
"noumena" is not, since it literally means not "things as they are in­
dependently of appearing to us" but something more like "things as they
are understood by pure thought." Yet Kant appears to deny that the human
understanding can comprehend things in the latter way."

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/kant-first-critique-cambridge.pdf>

Thus I am proffering an informed and reasoned opinion as that which
Immanuel Kant states is an impossibility for a human being to accomplish
by transcendent sapiential thought and capably demonstrate it's temporal
congruence as coherence by a mathematical theoretical noumenon as an
Intellectual Property which Immanuel Kant himself calls noumena as the
proof of a valid and rational concept attained by pure thought.

Whilst the HOMOIOS ternary conception of the THEORY OF NUMBER is in all
probability a SENSIBILITY of which Immanuel Kant appears cognisant and
that is exemplified by the conveyance of them as explicit
meta-prototypes descriptors within the formative of his CATEGORICAL
IMPERATIVE postulates {#1 - Formula of Universal Law / #2 - Formula of
Humanity / #3 - Formula of Autonomy} conveyed within his Groundwork for
the Metaphysics of Morals (1785) / Critique of Pure Reason (1781 / 1787)
it is then a conundrum as to commensurability of his articulation in
rationally deriving the purest and logical essence of being and whether
his anthropocentric reality still deploys a counterfactual and
impractical intuition which is provisioned by the genitive prescriptive
or the biological normative propositions as imposition made by an
encapsulated dialectic:

PROGRESSION: Lesser Yin (shaoyin: West / Autumn / Metal)
+ 0, H27 - YI [Nourishment / ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts Nature)
below + GEN (ie. #8 - Transforming Nature) above], H54 - GUIMEI
[*MARRYING* *MAID* / DUI (ie. #7 - Engendering Nature) below + ZHEN (ie.
#3 - Nature Surmounts Nature) above] {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven
- Formula of Universal Law}

SYNTHESIS: Greater Yin (taiyin: North / Winter / Water and which also
refers to the Moon)
+ 0, H9 - XIAOXU [Lesser Domestication/QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature)
below + SUN (ie. #4- Nature Amended in its Nature) above], H18 - GU
[Ills to Be Cured / SUN (ie. #4- Nature Amended in its Nature) below +
GEN (ie. #8 - Transforming Nature) above] {ie. System's Cosmology as
Earth - Formula of Humanity}

ANTI-THESIS: Lesser Yang (shaoyang: East / Spring / Wood)
+ 0, H3 - ZHUN [Birth Throws / ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts Nature)
below + KAN (ie. #1 - Nature Contains Nature) above] as 'fundamentality
[yuan], prevalence [heng], fitness [li] and constancy [zhen]', H6 - SONG
/ *JIHAD*? [Contention/KAN (ie. #1 - Nature Contains Nature) below +
QIAN (ie. #6) above] {ie. Self identity as Sea - Formula of Autonomy}

THESIS: Greater Yang (taiyang: South / Summer / Fire and which also
refers to the Sun)
+ H1 - *MONAD*: QIAN [Pure Yang / QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature) above +
QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature) below] as MALE, H2 - *DUAD*: KUN [Pure
Yin / KUN (ie. #2 - Nature Rejoices in its Nature) above + KUN (ie. #2)
below] as FEMALE, H3 - *TRIAD*: ZHUN [Birth Throws / ZHEN (ie. #3 -
Nature Surmounts Nature) below + KAN (ie. #1 - Nature Contains Nature)
above] {ie. Fountains as Formula of Progression of individual phenomena}

= TETRAGRAMMATON HIERARCHY VALUE AS HOMOIOS THEORY OF *NUMBER*.

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE}

The consideration is then one of criteria basis upon which the
anthropological conceptional notion of its sapient freedom {Humanity /
Autonomy} is formulated as either a binomial methodology by a
TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE applied as an encapsulation of an anti-thetical
anthropocentric identity

JEWISH VIEW: H54 - GUIMEI [Marrying Maid / DUI (ie. #7 - Engendering
Nature) below + ZHEN (ie. #3 - Transforming Nature) above] {ie. Realm of
its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law} + H18 - GU [Ills to Be
Cured / SUN (ie. #4 - Nature Amended in its Nature) below + GEN (ie. #8
- Transforming Nature) above] {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - Formula
of Humanity} = #72 - Self-Love, Holding Oneself Dear; I-Ching: H39 -
Adversity, Obstacles, Limping, Obstruction, Afoot; Tetra: 79 - Difficulties)

GENTILE VIEW: H27 - YI [Nourishment / ZHEN (ie. #3) below + GEN (ie. #8)
above] {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law} +
H9 - XIAOXU [Lesser Domestication / QIAN (ie. #6) below + SUN (ie. #4)
above] {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity} = H36 -
MINGYI [Suppression of the Light / LI (ie. #9) below + KUN (ie. #1) above])"

Nevertheless when this trinomial HOMOIOS {#81 bits} conception of
#NUMBER deploys a binomial (64 bits) encapsulation it introduces a
logical contradiction of incommensurability against the viability of SUI
JURIS / MEMRUM VIRILE which properly is the paradigmatic providence
within the Formula of Autonomy by its purveyance of permissibility only
within the construct of an INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMY in deployment of a
TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE AS CANON OF TRANSPOSITION within the bifurcated
HETEROS {@1 - GENDER {MARRIAGE} / @5 - PHALLUS {HERITAGE} conception of
#NUMBER as the philosophical basis to its methodology since the MOBIUS
‘8’ LOOP OF PYTHAGOREAN SOPHISTRY AS WISDOM SO CALLED is not homoiotic
as anthropocentric but rather “homeomorphic to a circle”.

Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern terminological
distinction between such Formula of Universal Law descriptive statements
made against the Formula of Humanity which present an account on how the
cosmology of world is being similarly analogous to the LIMITED {#9 -
JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS /
SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the normative
statements presenting an evaluative account, or an account of how the
syncretic world should be as existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 -
ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} in being optimally something that should be
lived up to; or that should be pursued.

Thusly having given a preliminary definition to our anthropocentric
criteria as impetus for enquiry, we will now consider the practicality
of Kant's reasoning and whether his Categorical Imperative is truly free
of the strictures which is the Latin worldview of perennial biological
duality as the HETEROS viability of things "independently of their
appearing to us" and whether there is to be deduced by a HOMOIOS noumena
modality as the vital basis for a singularity of existence by which
humanity is rationally capable of conceiving "things as they are
understood by pure thought."

- dolf

SEE ALSO: "(SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF
MORALS: #56 - TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
THEFT AND SLANDER BY MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE
AS BOER / ANZAC DEFAMATION?"

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/Augustus.pdf>

Initial Post: 25 August 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND*
*ROMAN* *CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5,
#200 as harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a
extortioner, a robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL*
*AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private Street on the edge of the Central Business District dated 16th
May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as a Notice
of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS AS DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in
1993), first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN
CHING {ie. Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated
with the theory of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology
reliant upon the seven visible planets as cosmological mother image and
the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF
NATURE-genesis [James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial
tetragrammaton x 4.5 day = #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER
which is an amalgam of the 64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as
trinomial tetragrammaton rather than its encapsulated contrived use as
the microcosm to redefine the macrocosm as the quintessence of the
Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial canon of transposition as HETEROS
THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006
defines a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is
permissible to extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN
BEING AS A CONSCIOUS REALITY OF HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED
WITHIN THE TEMPORAL REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND
RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS.
dolf
2018-08-26 07:43:03 UTC
Permalink
-- (DRAFT: 26 AUGUST 2018): THE INDISPENSABILITY OF A PURE MORAL PHILOSOPHY

(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 26 August, 2018

Immanuel Kant (22 April 1724 to 12 February 1804) whom was initially
educated within theology as ostensibly the Pythagorean binomial
perennialist (Latin) school of thought and note worthy are his second
(1756) and third (1755) dissertations:

The Employment in Natural Philosophy of Metaphysics Combined with
Geometry—also known as the Monodologia Physica which contrasted the
Newtonian methods of thinking with those employed in the philosophy then
prevailing in German universities;

In a third dissertation, "New Elucidation of the First Principles of
Metaphysical Cognition", Kant analyzed especially the principle of
sufficient reason, which in Wolff’s formulation asserts that for
everything there is a sufficient reason why it should be rather than not
be. Although critical, Kant was cautious and still a long way from
challenging the assumptions of Leibnizian metaphysics.

And of his criticism of Leibnizian rationalism Kant's principal work of
this period was published by 1764 as "An Inquiry into the Distinctness
of the Fundamental Principles of Natural Theology and Morals". Within
this work he attacked the claim of Leibnizian philosophy that philosophy
should model itself on mathematics and aim at constructing a chain of
demonstrated truths based on self-evident premises. Kant argued that
mathematics proceeds from definitions that are arbitrary, by means of
operations that are clearly and sharply defined, upon concepts that can
be exhibited in concrete form. In contrast with this method, he argued
that philosophy must begin with concepts that are already given, “though
confusedly or insufficiently determined,” so that philosophers cannot
begin with definitions without thereby shutting themselves up within a
circle of words. Philosophy cannot, like mathematics, proceed
synthetically; it must analyze and clarify. The importance of the moral
order, which he had learned from Rousseau, reinforced the conviction
received from his study of Newton that a synthetic philosophy is empty
and false.

Within 1770 he became a full professor at the University of Konigsberg,
teaching metaphysics and logic. The Inaugural Dissertation of 1770 that
he delivered on *ASSUMING* *HIS* *NEW* *POSITION* *ALREADY* *CONTAINED*
*MANY* *OF* *THE* *IMPORTANT* *ELEMENTS* *OF* *HIS* *MATURE*
*PHILOSOPHY*. As indicated in its title, De Mundi Sensibilis atque
Intelligibilis Forma et Principiis: Dissertatio (“On the Form and
Principles of the Sensible and Intelligible Worlds”), the implicit
dualism of the Träume is made explicit, and it is made so on the basis
of a wholly un-Leibnizian interpretation of the distinction between
sense and understanding. Sense is not, as Leibniz had supposed, a
confused form of thinking but a source of knowledge in its own right,
although the objects so known are still only “appearances”—the term that
Leibniz also used. They are appearances because all sensing is
conditioned by the presence, in sensibility, of the forms of time and
space, which are not objective characteristics or frameworks of things
but “pure intuitions.” But though all knowledge of things sensible is
thus of phenomena, it does not follow that nothing is known of things as
they are in themselves. Certainly, humans have no intuition, or direct
insight, into an intelligible world, but the presence in them of certain
“pure intellectual concepts”—such as those of possibility, existence,
necessity, substance, and cause—enables them to have some descriptive
knowledge of it. By means of these concepts they can arrive at an
exemplar that provides them with “the common measure of all other things
as far as real.” This exemplar gives them an idea of perfection for both
the theoretical and practical orders: in the first, it is that of the
Supreme Being, God; in the latter, that of moral perfection. [cf:
Britannia Encyclopaedia]

After the Dissertation, Kant published virtually nothing for 11 years
until 1781, Immanuel Kant disseminated the first edition to Critique of
Pure Reason with the second in 1787, as an enormous work and one of the
most important on Western thought. Although the adolescent Kant loathed
his Pietist as Lutheran schooling, he had deep respect and admiration
for his parents, especially his mother, whose “genuine religiosity” he
described as “not at all enthusiastic.” According to his biographer,
Manfred Kuehn, Kant’s parents probably influenced him much less through
their Pietism than through their artisan values of “hard work, honesty,
cleanliness, and independence,” which they taught him by example. [cf:
Kuehn 2001, 38, 44. See also 54]

Thus in the consideration given to Kantian appeal for a pure moral
philosophy as beginning with a reference to the usefulness of the
division of labor. Here Kant raises the question whether philosophy
would not also benefit from such a division. Ultimately, he is not
concerned with whether the burden of elaborating philosophical theories
should be distributed among the shoulders of a multitude of persons.[Page 6]

We would however contend against this notion as being an impotent
chimeric {ie. a thing which is hoped for but is illusory or impossible
to achieve} of idealism {ie. the unrealistic belief in or pursuit of
perfection} such that one may declare "the economic sovereignty you
claim to defend is a chimera".

And thusly, it is in and of itself an oblique contradiction of Kant's
own characteristic position development where he emphasizes that an
adequate form of moral philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from
all empirical elements of interest, self-love, and natural feelings as
well as free from rational concepts of perfection:

“And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very
good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

HETEROS PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #342)@{
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 20 (#26); Ego: 14 (#20),
@3: Sup: 42 (#68); Ego: 22 (#42),
@4: Sup: 72 (#140 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY (%14); I AM NOT AN
EAVES-DROPPER (%16)); Ego: 30 (#72),
@5: Sup: 29 (#169 - I TROUBLE MYSELF ONLY WITH MY OWN AFFAIRS
(%18)); Ego: 38 (#110),
@6: Sup: 75 (#244); Ego: 46 (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS (%21)),
@7: Sup: 48 (#292); Ego: 54 (#210 - I AM NOT OF AGGRESSIVE HAND (%30)),
@8: Sup: 29 (#321); Ego: 62 (#272),
@9: Sup: 18 (#339); Ego: 70 (#342),
Male: #339; Feme: #342
} // #342

TORAH PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #369)@{
@1: Sup: 16 (#16); Ego: 16 (#16),
@2: Sup: 33 (#49); Ego: 17 (#33),
@3: Sup: 51 (#100); Ego: 18 (#51),
@4: Sup: 10 (#110); Ego: 40 (#91),
@5: Sup: 51 (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES (%9)); Ego: 41 (#132),
@6: Sup: 12 (#173 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO UNNATURAL LUST (%27)); Ego:
42 (#174),
@7: Sup: 76 (#249); Ego: 64 (#238),
@8: Sup: 60 (#309); Ego: 65 (#303),
@9: Sup: 45 (#354); Ego: 66 (#369),
Male: #354; Feme: #369
} // #369

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he
rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God
blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had
rested from all his work which God created and made.” [Genesis 1:31-2:3
(KJV)]

Thusly if the Sabbath as a sacred principle of nature which is the
ultimate good as perfection: “And he said unto them, The sabbath was
made for man, and not man for the sabbath.” [Mark 2:27 (KJV)]

It’s meritorious purpose as a benefit to humankind is found firstly
within the ACT TO WILL by VOLUNTĀTIS {ie. MENTALISM {#41}: #1 - WILL,
FREE WILL, CHOICE as to engage within actions that endeavour to #1 - BE
SOCIALLY BENEFICIAL (the Artificial Intelligence equivalent of 'DO NO
EVIL'?); {*FORMULA* *FOR* *UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}} by it’s remembrance and
then the voluntary avoidance of *LABOURING* as the absence of any WILL
TO ACT.

H2257@{
@1: Sup: 8 (#8); Ego: 8 (#8),
@2: Sup: 10 (#18); Ego: 2 (#10),
@3: Sup: 40 (#58); Ego: 30 (#40),
@4: Sup: 41 (#99); Ego: 1 (#41),
Male: #99; Feme: #41
} // #41

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #40 % #41 = #40 - Reversal, Avoiding Activity; I-Ching: H36 -
Suppression of the Light, Sinking/Darkening Light, Brilliance injured,
Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 68 - Dimming;

THOTH MEASURE: #40 - Oh Neheb-kau, who makest thy appearance at thy
cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *UNJUST* *PREFERENCES*.

#VIRTUE: Law (no. #40) means to facilitate union with All-under-Heaven.
#TOOLS: *LABOURING* (no. #80) means to lack achievement despite
strenuous efforts.
#POSITION: With *DUTIES* (no. #27), to exhaust oneself.
#TIME: With Fostering (no. #81), to increase oneself.
#CANON: #228

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_228@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 39 (#79); Ego: 80 (#120),
@3: Sup: 66 (#145); Ego: 27 (#147),
@4: Sup: 66 (#211); Ego: 81 (#228 - I HAVE NO UNJUST PREFERENCES {%40}),
Male: #211; Feme: #228
} // #228

#41 as [#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): {UMBRA: #6 as #40 %
#41 = #40} 1) *HURT*, *DAMAGE*, *INJURY*;

"Take heed now that ye fail not to do this: why should damage {#41 as
[#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): hurt} grow to the hurt of
the kings?" [Ezra 4:22]

Rather Kant, with this rhetorical consideration, introduces an
explicitly methodological train of thought. He asks “whether the nature
of the science {ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based
seven number) = #294 x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS =
365.242321 days} does not require the empirical part always to be
carefully separated from the rational [of the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE
VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. voluntary will)]:

"And God said, Let us make {ie.

*APPOINT* AS HAVING INCEPTION OF 22 / 7 WITH A GENESIS {DAO OF NATURE
(CHINESE: ZIRAN) / COURSE (GREEK: TROCHOS) OF NATURE (GREEK: GENESIS)}
REPRISE UPON EQUINOX OF WEDNESDAY 20 MARCH 1996 / #0 - NEW MOON OF
THURSDAY 21 MARCH 1996

} man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over
the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle,
and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon
the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;
male and female created he them." [Genesis 1:26-27 (KJV)]

And he confines this question to the sub-question "Whether one is not of
the opinion that it: is of the utmost necessity to work out once a pure
moral philosophy which is fully cleansed of everything that might be in
any way empirical and belong to anthropology.“

The passage that is introduced by this question contains, at the same
time, a positive response — the thesis that there must be a “pure moral
philosophy” is “self evident." And indeed for Kant this evidence arises
“out of the common idea of *DUTY* and the moral law” (ibid.). Kant’s
cursory argumentation for this thesis is difficult to grasp.
Undoubtedly, it constitutes one of the key argumentative passages of the
Groundwork. [Page 6]

It is perhaps presumptuous of us at only page #6 of #323 to already be
taking issue with the robustness of Kant's otherwise cogent thesis that
there must be a “pure moral philosophy” which is “self evident" given
that there are seven day designates within our understanding of the
cosmology which is understood universally as an implicit law of nature.

GOVERNMENT SHILL #2 (***@GMAIL.COM) @ 1633 HOURS ON 25 AUGUST
2018: “The Kantian appeal for a pure moral philosophy begins with a
reference to the usefulness of the division of labor. Kant raises ... a
glass and...

YOUTUBE: “The Philosopher’s Song (Monty Python)”

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=2m51s&v=PtgKkifJ0Pw>

'IMMANUEL KANT WAS A REAL PISSANT
WHO WAS VERY RARELY STABLE.
HEIDEGGER, HEIDEGGER WAS A BOOZY BEGGAR
WHO COULD THINK YOU UNDER THE TABLE.
DAVID HUME COULD OUT CONSUME
SCHOPENHAUER AND HEGEL,
AND WITTGENSTEIN WAS A BEERY SWINE
WHO WAS JUST AS SLOSHED AS SCHLEGEL.

THERE'S NOTHING NIETZSCHE COULDN'T TEACH YA
'BOUT THE RAISIN' OF THE WRIST.
SOCRATES HIMSELF WAS PERMANENTLY PISSED.

JOHN STUART MILL, OF HIS OWN FREE WILL,
AFTER HALF A PINT OF SHANDY WAS PARTICULARLY ILL.
PLATO, THEY SAY, COULD STICK IT AWAY,
'ALF A CRATE OF WHISKEY EVERY DAY!
ARISTOTLE, ARISTOTLE WAS A BUGGER FOR THE BOTTLE,
AND HOBBES WAS FOND OF HIS DRAM.
AND RENE DESCARTES WAS A DRUNKEN FART:
"I DRINK, THEREFORE I AM."

YES, SOCRATES HIMSELF IS PARTICULARLY MISSED;
A LOVELY LITTLE THINKER, BUT A BUGGER WHEN HE'S PISSED.'

24 beers in a carton. 24 hours in a day. Hmmmm......."

DOLF @ 0812 HOURS ON 26 AUGUST 2018: “It may have escaped your notice,
as is self-evident from your burlesque constipated turd 💩 haemorrhoidal
opinion that the subject we are contending with is a consideration of
profound intellectual accomplishments conveyed by a book which
articulates the merit as collective mind of no fewer than FOURTEEN {#14}
eminent university professors:

THE COUNTRIES MOST ANTICIPATED LEGAL ADVICE HAS ARRIVED

Yes indeed my appraisal by Christoph HORN and Dieter SCHÖNECKER (Eds.)
of Immanuel KANT’s GROUNDWORK FOR METAPHYSICS OF MORALS (1785) has
arrived at my doorstep this morning of 24 August 2108 courtesy of
Australia Post.

It will be my task to read it this weekend in the hope that probity and
decorum will return to the governance of this Commonwealth given its
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:

DIEU ET MON DROIT

Whilst it is prudent to establish the starting point of necessity as to
any premises for the continuity of enquiry, I recognise as my ignorance
with respect to the learned as the educated and the gravitas of the
subject matter to say nothing of those whom may have given their lives
as something other than marsupial roadkill as RECTUS for the
foundational cause—it is best to proceed with caution and in a sturdy
and thoughtful manner rather than with the intoxication of
self-entitlement which you bestow."

Yet for Kant this anthropological evidence arises “out of the common
idea of *DUTY* and the moral law” which is also certainly self evidently
a contradiction of his initial postulate that any adequate form of moral
philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from all empirical elements
of interest, self-love, and natural feelings in the dutiful display of
filial affection by VOLUNTĀTIS {CORRESPONDENCE {#82}: #2 - desire,
inclination as to engaged within actions that #2 - Don't introduce
biases; {*FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}} relating to the “honour bestowed
upon one's matrimonial or common law parents” which is due from a son or
daughter:

H3513@{
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 56 (#62); Ego: 50 (#56),
@3: Sup: 76 (#138); Ego: 20 (#76),
@4: Sup: 78 (#216); Ego: 2 (#78),
@5: Sup: 1 (#217); Ego: 4 (#82),
Male: #217; Feme: #82
} // #82

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #82 % #41 = #41 - Playing with Reversal, Sameness in Difference;
I-Ching: H26 - Great Domestication, Restraining Force, Great
Accumulating, The taming power of the great, Great storage, Potential
energy; Tetra: 60 - Accumulation;

THOTH MEASURE: #41 - Oh thou of raised head, who makest thine appearance
at thy cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *STRONG* *DESIRE* *EXCEPT* *FOR* *MY*
*OWN* *PROPERTY*.

#VIRTUE:
#TOOLS: Fostering (no. #81) receives all the rest.
#POSITION: As to Resistance (no. #22), it is contradiction, but
#TIME: As to Unity (no. #54), it is conforming.
#CANON: #157

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_157@{
@1: Sup: 81 (#81); Ego: 81 (#81),
@2: Sup: 22 (#103); Ego: 22 (#103),
@3: Sup: 76 (#179); Ego: 54 (#157 - I AM NOT ONE OF PRATING TONGUE
{%17} / I HAVE NO STRONG DESIRE EXCEPT FOR MY OWN PROPERTY {%41}),
Male: #179; Feme: #157
} // #157

#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513): {UMBRA: #37 as #82 % #41
= #41} 1) to be heavy, be weighty, be grievous, be hard, be rich, be
honourable, be glorious, be burdensome, be honoured; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to
be heavy; 1a2) to be heavy, be insensible, be dull; 1a3) *TO* *BE*
*HONOURED*; 1b) (Niphal); 1b1) to be made heavy, be honoured, enjoy
honour, be made abundant; 1b2) to get oneself glory or honour, gain
glory; 1c) (Piel); 1c1) to make heavy, make dull, make insensible; 1c2)
to make honourable, honour, glorify; 1d) (Pual) to be made honourable,
be honoured; 1e) (Hiphil); 1e1) to make heavy; 1e2) to make heavy, make
dull, make unresponsive; 1e3) to cause to be honoured; 1f) (Hithpael);
1f1) to make oneself heavy, make oneself dense, make oneself numerous;
1f2) to honour oneself;

"And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom {their secret; their
cement} and Gomorrah {rebellious people} is great, and because their sin
is very grievous {#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513):
honour};" [Genesis 18:20]

5. (MOTHER) FORMULA OF HUMANITY AS HEAD OF STATE / *HONOUR* *PARENTS*

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #1 + #2 = #3 as #MIND WHETHER AS FORMULA OF HETEROS
PROGRESSION / THESIS ON IT'S HOMOIOS BASIS

MONAD - #1 - NATURE CONTAINS NATURE: {ALEPH (*MOTHER* - SCALES OF MERIT)
/ SERAPHIM {Heb. Saraph Gk. Ophis - burning, that is, (figuratively)
poisonous (serpent); specifically a fiery (serpent) or symbolical
creature (from their copper color))} {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA {1 + 2 + 3 + 4
= 10}

TETRAD - #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {BETH (DOUBLE - #1 - NATURE
CONTAINS NATURE {#4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE}) / CHERUBIM (Gk.
Cheroubim - a cherub or imaginary figures which covered the mercy seat
to the Ark of the Covenant [Exodus 25:17-22] and from where God communed
with Israel)}

PENTAD - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}

+ 0, H9, H18 {ie. System’s Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}

Thusly in summation, as to the problem of discernment and knowledge
assimilation into a coherent syncretism, at this juncture in our
ingestion of Kant’s acumen as thesis, we ought to prudently reserve our
further conjectures upon any rhetorical artifices which he may of
necessity deploy until we have fully considered what are the nominative
descriptions applied as their grounding in explanations and the explicit
nature of the underlying dialectic as its capacity and means by which
Kant conveys any such postulates.

For instance, Karl Marx (5 May 1818 – 14 March 1883) and Friedrich
Engels (28 November 1820 – 5 August 1895) proposed that Georg Hegel's
(27 August 1770 – 14 November 1831) subsequent dialectic was too
abstract. The dialect which HEGEL proposes is:

#1 - THESIS
#2 - ANTI-THESIS
#3 - SYNTHESIS
#4 - PROGRESSION

This concept of dialectics was given new life by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
Hegel as a proponent of German Idealism has been seen in the 20th
century as the originator but as an explicit phrase it originated with
Johann Gottlieb Fichte (28 November 1820 – 5 August 1895), whose
dialectically synthetic model of nature and of history made it, as it
were, a fundamental aspect of the nature of reality instead of regarding
the contradictions into which dialectics leads as a sign of the
sterility of the dialectical method, as Immanuel Kant was considered by
many to have tended to do within his Critique of Pure Reason.
[Nicholson, J. A. (1950). Philosophy of religion. New York: Ronald Press
Co. Page 108]

As Walter Kaufmann (1 July 1921 – 4 September 1980) astutely affirms of
Hegel's criticism of the triad model commonly misattributed to him,
adding that "the only place where Hegel uses the three terms together
occurs in his lectures on the history of philosophy, on the last page
but one of the section on Kant—where Hegel roundly reproaches Kant for
having 'EVERYWHERE POSITED THESIS, ANTITHESIS, SYNTHESIS'"

In contradiction to this Hegelian idealism, Marx presented his own
dialectic method as an anthropological consideration and sensibility of
the world, which he claims to be "direct opposite" of Hegel's method:
'My dialectic method is not only different from the Hegelian, but is its
direct opposite.' Where the dialectical method is itself an
anthropological construct, which is at base an OPINE {ie. hold and state
as one's opinion; origin late Middle English: from Latin opinari think,
believe} as existentialism purveying a characteristic mode of
quantitative expression in being essentially idiomatic:

'I THINK THEREFORE I AM'

But when, as occurs in the distillation of vodka which at a high proof
is devoid of SENSIBILITY where all taste and odour has been eliminated
making vodka a neutral spirit begging for self-entitlement, it is then
sublimated into its superlative form as substantially an epitaph of
merit in valedictory acceptability by an occasion of agreeability as an
opportune expression of a truism, where it is formerly inducted into a
Hall of Fame as a maxim life. As OSTENSIBLY being a discourse between
two or more people holding different points of view about a subject but
wishing to establish the truth through reasoned arguments as its imperative:

#1 - PROGRESS
#2 - SYNTHESIS
#3 - ANTI-THESIS
#4 - THESIS

YOUTUBE: "The Script - Hall of Fame (Official Video)"

http://youtu.be/mk48xRzuNvA

Dialectical materialism accepts the evolution of the natural world and
the emergence of new qualities of being at new stages of evolution. As
Zbigniew Antoni Jordan (11 August 1911 - 6 October 1977), notes, "Engels
made constant use of the metaphysical insight that the higher level of
existence emerges from and has its roots in the lower; that the higher
level constitutes a new order of being with its irreducible laws; and
that this process of evolutionary advance is governed by laws of
development which reflect basic properties of 'matter in motion as a
whole'." [The Evolution of Dialectical Materialism: A Philosophical and
Sociological Analysis (London: Macmillan, 1967), p 167]

Marx criticized classical materialism as another idealist
philosophy—idealist because of its transhistorical understanding of
material contexts. The Young Hegelian Ludwig Feuerbach had rejected
Hegel's idealistic philosophy and advocated materialism. Despite being
strongly influenced by Feuerbach, Marx rejected Feuerbach's version of
materialism as inconsistent. The writings of Engels, especially
Anti-Dühring (1878) and Dialectics of Nature (1875–82), were the source
of the main doctrines of dialectical materialism.

Marx's own writings are almost exclusively concerned with understanding
human history in terms of systemic processes, based on modes of
production (broadly speaking, the ways in which societies are organized
to employ their technological powers to interact with their material
surroundings). This is called historical materialism. More narrowly,
within the framework of this general theory of history, most of Marx's
writing is devoted to an analysis of the specific structure and
development of the capitalist economy.

Other scholars have argued that despite Marx's insistence that humans
are natural beings in an evolving, mutual relationship with the rest of
nature, Marx's own writings pay inadequate attention to the ways in
which human agency is constrained by such factors as biology, geography,
and ecology.

Dialectical materialism adapts the Hegelian dialectic for traditional
materialism, which examines the subjects of the world in relation to
each other within a dynamic, evolutionary environment, in contrast to
metaphysical materialism, which examines parts of the world within a
static, isolated environment.

For his part, Engels applies a "dialectical" approach to the natural
world in general, arguing that contemporary science is increasingly
recognizing the necessity of viewing natural processes in terms of
interconnectedness, development, and transformation. Some scholars have
doubted that Engels's "dialectics of nature" is a legitimate extension
of Marx's approach to social processes.

Engels exemplifies this quintessential characteristic of Pythagorean
methodology of sophistry by postulating three laws of dialectics from
his reading of Hegel's Science of Logic. Engels elucidated these laws as
the materialist dialectic in his work Dialectics of Nature:

THE LAW OF THE UNITY AND CONFLICT OF OPPOSITES {MIND: #1 + #2 = #3
(PENTAD) - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}}

THE LAW OF THE PASSAGE OF QUANTITATIVE {ie. measure by having magnitude
or spatial extent} CHANGES INTO QUALITATIVE {ie. determine comparative
size, appearance, value and superlative forms} CHANGES {SCIENCE: #3 + #4
= #7 - ENGENDERING NATURE / #4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE: {ZAYIN /
*PRINCIPALITIES* (Gk. *EXOUSIA* - (in the sense of ability); privilege,
that is, (subjectively) *force*, capacity, competency, freedom, or
(objectively) mastery (concretely magistrate, superhuman, potentate,
*token* *of* *control*), delegated influence:—authority, jurisdiction,
liberty, power, right, strength)}}

THE LAW OF THE NEGATION OF THE NEGATION {OPINION: #5 + #6 = #11 (HEPTAD)
- TRANSFORMING NATURE: {KAF (DOUBLE - #4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE
{#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE}) / Government & Non-Government Organisations}}

That the dialectic method is therefore understood as being a process of
determined SENSIBILITY where the product is "enlightenment, whereby the
philosopher is educated so as to achieve knowledge of the supreme good,
the Form of the Good." {SENSE: #7 + #8 = #15 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE:
{SAMEK}}

Accordingly dialectical materialism is understood as an aspect of the
broader subject of materialism, which asserts the primacy of the
material world: in short, matter precedes thought. Materialism is a
realist philosophy of science, which holds that the world is material;
that all phenomena in the universe consist of "matter in motion,"
wherein all things are interdependent and interconnected and develop
according to natural law; that the world exists outside us and
independently of our perception of it; that thought is a reflection of
the material world in the brain, and that the world is in principle
knowable.

However within the third chapter of the "Analytic of Principles," on
phenomena and noumena, Kant in Critique of Pure Reason (1781 and second
edition 1787) emphasizes that because the categories must always be
applied to data provided by SENSIBILITY in order to provide cognition,
and because the data of SENSIBILITY are structured by the
transcenden­tally ideal forms of intuition, the categories give us
knowledge only of things as they appear with sensibility ("phenomena,"
literally "that which appears").

Although through pure understanding (nous in Greek) we may think of
objects independently of their being given in sensibil­ity, we can never
cognize them as such non-sensible entities ("noumena," literally "that
which is thought" as a subject of some 112 mentions). The meaning of
Kant's use of the term "phenomena" is self-evident, but the meaning of
"noumena" is not, since it literally means not "things as they are in­
dependently of appearing to us" but something more like "things as they
are understood by pure thought." Yet Kant appears to deny that the human
understanding can comprehend things in the latter way."

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/kant-first-critique-cambridge.pdf>

Thus I am proffering an informed and reasoned opinion as that which
Immanuel Kant states is an impossibility for a human being to accomplish
by transcendent sapiential thought and capably demonstrate it's temporal
congruence as coherence by a mathematical theoretical noumenon as an
Intellectual Property which Immanuel Kant himself calls noumena as the
proof of a valid and rational concept attained by pure thought.

Whilst the HOMOIOS ternary conception of the THEORY OF NUMBER is in all
probability a SENSIBILITY of which Immanuel Kant appears cognisant and
that is exemplified by the conveyance of them as explicit
meta-prototypes descriptors within the formative of his CATEGORICAL
IMPERATIVE postulates {#1 - Formula of Universal Law / #2 - Formula of
Humanity / #3 - Formula of Autonomy} conveyed within his Groundwork for
the Metaphysics of Morals (1785) / Critique of Pure Reason (1781 / 1787)
it is then a conundrum as to commensurability of his articulation in
rationally deriving the purest and logical essence of being and whether
his anthropocentric reality still deploys a counterfactual and
impractical intuition which is provisioned by the genitive prescriptive
or the biological normative propositions as imposition made by an
encapsulated dialectic:

PROGRESSION: Lesser Yin (shaoyin: West / Autumn / Metal)
+ 0, H27 - YI [Nourishment / ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts Nature)
below + GEN (ie. #8 - Transforming Nature) above], H54 - GUIMEI
[*MARRYING* *MAID* / DUI (ie. #7 - Engendering Nature) below + ZHEN (ie.
#3 - Nature Surmounts Nature) above] {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven
- Formula of Universal Law}

SYNTHESIS: Greater Yin (taiyin: North / Winter / Water and which also
refers to the Moon)
+ 0, H9 - XIAOXU [Lesser Domestication/QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature)
below + SUN (ie. #4- Nature Amended in its Nature) above], H18 - GU
[Ills to Be Cured / SUN (ie. #4- Nature Amended in its Nature) below +
GEN (ie. #8 - Transforming Nature) above] {ie. System's Cosmology as
Earth - Formula of Humanity}

ANTI-THESIS: Lesser Yang (shaoyang: East / Spring / Wood)
+ 0, H3 - ZHUN [Birth Throws / ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts Nature)
below + KAN (ie. #1 - Nature Contains Nature) above] as 'fundamentality
[yuan], prevalence [heng], fitness [li] and constancy [zhen]', H6 - SONG
/ *JIHAD*? [Contention/KAN (ie. #1 - Nature Contains Nature) below +
QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature) above] {ie. Self identity as Sea -
Formula of Autonomy}

THESIS: Greater Yang (taiyang: South / Summer / Fire and which also
refers to the Sun)
+ H1 - *MONAD*: QIAN [Pure Yang / QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature) above +
QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature) below] as MALE, H2 - *DUAD*: KUN [Pure
Yin / KUN (ie. #2 - Nature Rejoices in its Nature) above + KUN (ie. #2
- Nature Rejoices in its Nature) below] as FEMALE, H3 - *TRIAD*: ZHUN
[Birth Throws / ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts Nature) below + KAN (ie.
#1 - Nature Contains Nature) above] {ie. Fountains as Formula of
Progression of individual phenomena}

= TETRAGRAMMATON HIERARCHY VALUE AS HOMOIOS THEORY OF *NUMBER*.

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE}

The consideration is then one of criteria basis upon which the
anthropological conceptional notion of its sapient freedom {Humanity /
Autonomy} is formulated as either a binomial methodology by a
TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE applied as an encapsulation of an anti-thetical
anthropocentric identity

JEWISH VIEW: H54 - GUIMEI [Marrying Maid / DUI (ie. #7 - Engendering
Nature) below + ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts Nature) above] {ie.
Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law} + H18 - GU
[Ills to Be Cured / SUN (ie. #4 - Nature Amended in its Nature) below +
GEN (ie. #8 - Transforming Nature) above] {ie. System's Cosmology as
Earth - Formula of Humanity} = #72 - Self-Love, Holding Oneself Dear;
I-Ching: H39 - Adversity, Obstacles, Limping, Obstruction, Afoot; Tetra:
79 - Difficulties)

GENTILE VIEW: H27 - YI [Nourishment / ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts
Nature) below + GEN (ie. #8 - Transforming Nature) above] {ie. Realm of
its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law} + H9 - XIAOXU [Lesser
Domestication / QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature) below + SUN (ie. #4 -
Nature is Amended in its Nature) above] {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth
- Formula of Humanity} = H36 - MINGYI [Suppression of the Light / LI
(ie. #9 - Autonomous Nature) below + KUN (ie. #1 - Nature Contains
Nature) above])"

Nevertheless when this trinomial HOMOIOS {#81 bits} ontological
conception of #NUMBER deploys a binomial {64 bits} encapsulation as
artifice it then introduces a logical contradiction {H54 + H18 + H6 + H3
= #81} within it’s DISCRIMINATING NORM and the SOCIETAL ORDER of things
by an incommensurability made against the proprietary, propriety and
probity as the viability of SUI JURIS / MEMRUM VIRILE which properly is
the paradigmatic providence as *ONTIC* necessity {H27 + H9 + H3 + H2 =
#41} as a SOVEREIGN and central characteristic within the Formula of
Autonomy by its purveyance of permissibility only within the construct
of an INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMY in deployment of a TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE
AS CANON OF TRANSPOSITION within the bifurcated HETEROS {@1 - GENDER
{MARRIAGE} / @5 - PHALLUS {HERITAGE} conception of #NUMBER as the
philosophical basis to its methodology since the MOBIUS ‘8’ LOOP OF
PYTHAGOREAN SOPHISTRY AS WISDOM SO CALLED is not homoiotic as
anthropocentric but rather “homeomorphic to a circle”.

Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern terminological
distinction between such Formula of Universal Law descriptive statements
made against the Formula of Humanity which present an account on how the
cosmology of world is being similarly analogous to the LIMITED {#9 -
JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS /
SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the normative
statements presenting an evaluative account, or an account of how the
syncretic world should be as existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 -
ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} in being optimally something that should be
lived up to; or that should be pursued.

Thusly having given a preliminary definition to our anthropocentric
criteria as impetus for enquiry, we will now consider the practicality
of Kant's reasoning and whether his Categorical Imperative is truly free
of the strictures which is the Latin worldview of perennial biological
duality as the HETEROS viability of things "independently of their
appearing to us" and whether there is to be deduced by a HOMOIOS noumena
modality as the vital basis for a singularity of existence by which
humanity is rationally capable of conceiving "things as they are
understood by pure thought."

- dolf

SEE ALSO: "(SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF
MORALS: #56 - TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
THEFT AND SLANDER BY MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE
AS BOER / ANZAC DEFAMATION?"

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/Augustus.pdf>

Initial Post: 25 August 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND*
*ROMAN* *CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5,
#200 as harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a
extortioner, a robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL*
*AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private Street on the edge of the Central Business District dated 16th
May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as a Notice
of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS AS DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in
1993), first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN
CHING {ie. Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated
with the theory of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology
reliant upon the seven visible planets as cosmological mother image and
the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF
NATURE-genesis [James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial
tetragrammaton x 4.5 day = #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER
which is an amalgam of the 64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as
trinomial tetragrammaton rather than its encapsulated contrived use as
the microcosm to redefine the macrocosm as the quintessence of the
Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial canon of transposition as HETEROS
THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006
defines a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is
permissible to extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN
BEING AS A CONSCIOUS REALITY OF HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED
WITHIN THE TEMPORAL REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND
RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS.
dolf
2018-08-26 08:13:18 UTC
Permalink
-- (DRAFT: 26 AUGUST 2018): THE INDISPENSABILITY OF A PURE MORAL PHILOSOPHY

(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 26 August, 2018

Immanuel Kant (22 April 1724 to 12 February 1804) whom was initially
educated within theology as ostensibly the Pythagorean binomial
perennialist (Latin) school of thought and note worthy are his second
(1756) and third (1755) dissertations:

The Employment in Natural Philosophy of Metaphysics Combined with
Geometry—also known as the Monodologia Physica which contrasted the
Newtonian methods of thinking with those employed in the philosophy then
prevailing in German universities;

In a third dissertation, "New Elucidation of the First Principles of
Metaphysical Cognition", Kant analyzed especially the principle of
sufficient reason, which in Wolff’s formulation asserts that for
everything there is a sufficient reason why it should be rather than not
be. Although critical, Kant was cautious and still a long way from
challenging the assumptions of Leibnizian metaphysics.

And of his criticism of Leibnizian rationalism Kant's principal work of
this period was published by 1764 as "An Inquiry into the Distinctness
of the Fundamental Principles of Natural Theology and Morals". Within
this work he attacked the claim of Leibnizian philosophy that philosophy
should model itself on mathematics and aim at constructing a chain of
demonstrated truths based on self-evident premises. Kant argued that
mathematics proceeds from definitions that are arbitrary, by means of
operations that are clearly and sharply defined, upon concepts that can
be exhibited in concrete form. In contrast with this method, he argued
that philosophy must begin with concepts that are already given, “though
confusedly or insufficiently determined,” so that philosophers cannot
begin with definitions without thereby shutting themselves up within a
circle of words. Philosophy cannot, like mathematics, proceed
synthetically; it must analyze and clarify. The importance of the moral
order, which he had learned from Rousseau, reinforced the conviction
received from his study of Newton that a synthetic philosophy is empty
and false.

Within 1770 he became a full professor at the University of Konigsberg,
teaching metaphysics and logic. The Inaugural Dissertation of 1770 that
he delivered on *ASSUMING* *HIS* *NEW* *POSITION* *ALREADY* *CONTAINED*
*MANY* *OF* *THE* *IMPORTANT* *ELEMENTS* *OF* *HIS* *MATURE*
*PHILOSOPHY*. As indicated in its title, De Mundi Sensibilis atque
Intelligibilis Forma et Principiis: Dissertatio (“On the Form and
Principles of the Sensible and Intelligible Worlds”), the implicit
dualism of the Träume is made explicit, and it is made so on the basis
of a wholly un-Leibnizian interpretation of the distinction between
sense and understanding. Sense is not, as Leibniz had supposed, a
confused form of thinking but a source of knowledge in its own right,
although the objects so known are still only “appearances”—the term that
Leibniz also used. They are appearances because all sensing is
conditioned by the presence, in sensibility, of the forms of time and
space, which are not objective characteristics or frameworks of things
but “pure intuitions.” But though all knowledge of things sensible is
thus of phenomena, it does not follow that nothing is known of things as
they are in themselves. Certainly, humans have no intuition, or direct
insight, into an intelligible world, but the presence in them of certain
“pure intellectual concepts”—such as those of possibility, existence,
necessity, substance, and cause—enables them to have some descriptive
knowledge of it. By means of these concepts they can arrive at an
exemplar that provides them with “the common measure of all other things
as far as real.” This exemplar gives them an idea of perfection for both
the theoretical and practical orders: in the first, it is that of the
Supreme Being, God; in the latter, that of moral perfection. [cf:
Britannia Encyclopaedia]

After the Dissertation, Kant published virtually nothing for 11 years
until 1781, Immanuel Kant disseminated the first edition to Critique of
Pure Reason with the second in 1787, as an enormous work and one of the
most important on Western thought. Although the adolescent Kant loathed
his Pietist as Lutheran schooling, he had deep respect and admiration
for his parents, especially his mother, whose “genuine religiosity” he
described as “not at all enthusiastic.” According to his biographer,
Manfred Kuehn, Kant’s parents probably influenced him much less through
their Pietism than through their artisan values of “hard work, honesty,
cleanliness, and independence,” which they taught him by example. [cf:
Kuehn 2001, 38, 44. See also 54]

Thus in the consideration given to Kantian appeal for a pure moral
philosophy as beginning with a reference to the usefulness of the
division of labor. Here Kant raises the question whether philosophy
would not also benefit from such a division. Ultimately, he is not
concerned with whether the burden of elaborating philosophical theories
should be distributed among the shoulders of a multitude of persons.[Page 6]

We would however contend against this notion as being an impotent
chimeric {ie. a thing which is hoped for but is illusory or impossible
to achieve} of idealism {ie. the unrealistic belief in or pursuit of
perfection} such that one may declare "the economic sovereignty you
claim to defend is a chimera".

And thusly, it is in and of itself an oblique contradiction of Kant's
own characteristic position development where he emphasizes that an
adequate form of moral philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from
all empirical elements of interest, self-love, and natural feelings as
well as free from rational concepts of perfection:

“And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very
good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

HETEROS PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #342)@{
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 20 (#26); Ego: 14 (#20),
@3: Sup: 42 (#68); Ego: 22 (#42),
@4: Sup: 72 (#140 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY (%14); I AM NOT AN
EAVES-DROPPER (%16)); Ego: 30 (#72),
@5: Sup: 29 (#169 - I TROUBLE MYSELF ONLY WITH MY OWN AFFAIRS
(%18)); Ego: 38 (#110),
@6: Sup: 75 (#244); Ego: 46 (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS (%21)),
@7: Sup: 48 (#292); Ego: 54 (#210 - I AM NOT OF AGGRESSIVE HAND (%30)),
@8: Sup: 29 (#321); Ego: 62 (#272),
@9: Sup: 18 (#339); Ego: 70 (#342),
Male: #339; Feme: #342
} // #342

TORAH PROTOTYPE: (DAY #6 as #369)@{
@1: Sup: 16 (#16); Ego: 16 (#16),
@2: Sup: 33 (#49); Ego: 17 (#33),
@3: Sup: 51 (#100); Ego: 18 (#51),
@4: Sup: 10 (#110); Ego: 40 (#91),
@5: Sup: 51 (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES (%9)); Ego: 41 (#132),
@6: Sup: 12 (#173 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO UNNATURAL LUST (%27)); Ego:
42 (#174),
@7: Sup: 76 (#249); Ego: 64 (#238),
@8: Sup: 60 (#309); Ego: 65 (#303),
@9: Sup: 45 (#354); Ego: 66 (#369),
Male: #354; Feme: #369
} // #369

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he
rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God
blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had
rested from all his work which God created and made.” [Genesis 1:31-2:3
(KJV)]

Thusly if the Sabbath as a sacred principle of nature which is the
ultimate good as perfection: “And he said unto them, The sabbath was
made for man, and not man for the sabbath.” [Mark 2:27 (KJV)]

It’s meritorious purpose as a benefit to humankind is found firstly
within the ACT TO WILL by VOLUNTĀTIS {ie. MENTALISM {#41}: #1 - WILL,
FREE WILL, CHOICE as to engage within actions that endeavour to #1 - BE
SOCIALLY BENEFICIAL (the Artificial Intelligence equivalent of 'DO NO
EVIL'?); {*FORMULA* *FOR* *UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}} by it’s remembrance and
then the voluntary avoidance of *LABOURING* as the absence of any WILL
TO ACT.

H2257@{
@1: Sup: 8 (#8); Ego: 8 (#8),
@2: Sup: 10 (#18); Ego: 2 (#10),
@3: Sup: 40 (#58); Ego: 30 (#40),
@4: Sup: 41 (#99); Ego: 1 (#41),
Male: #99; Feme: #41
} // #41

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #40 % #41 = #40 - Reversal, Avoiding Activity; I-Ching: H36 -
Suppression of the Light, Sinking/Darkening Light, Brilliance injured,
Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 68 - Dimming;

THOTH MEASURE: #40 - Oh Neheb-kau, who makest thy appearance at thy
cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *UNJUST* *PREFERENCES*.

#VIRTUE: Law (no. #40) means to facilitate union with All-under-Heaven.
#TOOLS: *LABOURING* (no. #80) means to lack achievement despite
strenuous efforts.
#POSITION: With *DUTIES* (no. #27), to exhaust oneself.
#TIME: With Fostering (no. #81), to increase oneself.
#CANON: #228

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_228@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 39 (#79); Ego: 80 (#120),
@3: Sup: 66 (#145); Ego: 27 (#147),
@4: Sup: 66 (#211); Ego: 81 (#228 - I HAVE NO UNJUST PREFERENCES {%40}),
Male: #211; Feme: #228
} // #228

#41 as [#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): {UMBRA: #6 as #40 %
#41 = #40} 1) *HURT*, *DAMAGE*, *INJURY*;

"Take heed now that ye fail not to do this: why should damage {#41 as
[#8, #2, #30, #1] = chabal (Aramaic) (H2257): hurt} grow to the hurt of
the kings?" [Ezra 4:22]

Rather Kant, with this rhetorical consideration, introduces an
explicitly methodological train of thought. He asks “whether the nature
of the science {ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based
seven number) = #294 x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS =
365.242321 days} does not require the empirical part always to be
carefully separated from the rational [of the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE
VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. voluntary will)]:

"And God said, Let us make {ie.

*APPOINT* AS HAVING INCEPTION OF 22 / 7 WITH A GENESIS {DAO OF NATURE
(CHINESE: ZIRAN) / COURSE (GREEK: TROCHOS) OF NATURE (GREEK: GENESIS)}
REPRISE UPON EQUINOX OF WEDNESDAY 20 MARCH 1996 / #0 - NEW MOON OF
THURSDAY 21 MARCH 1996

} man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over
the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle,
and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon
the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;
male and female created he them." [Genesis 1:26-27 (KJV)]

And he confines this question to the sub-question "Whether one is not of
the opinion that it: is of the utmost necessity to work out once a pure
moral philosophy which is fully cleansed of everything that might be in
any way empirical and belong to anthropology“

The passage that is introduced by this question contains, at the same
time, a positive response — the thesis that there must be a “pure moral
philosophy” is “self evident." And indeed for Kant this evidence arises
“out of the common idea of *DUTY* and the moral law” (ibid.). Kant’s
cursory argumentation for this thesis is difficult to grasp.
Undoubtedly, it constitutes one of the key argumentative passages of the
Groundwork. [Page 6]

It is perhaps presumptuous of us at only page #6 of #323 to already be
taking issue with the robustness of Kant's otherwise cogent thesis that
there must be a “pure moral philosophy” which is “self evident" given
that there are seven day designates within our understanding of the
cosmology which is understood universally as an implicit law of nature.

GOVERNMENT SHILL #2 (***@GMAIL.COM) @ 1633 HOURS ON 25 AUGUST
2018: “The Kantian appeal for a pure moral philosophy begins with a
reference to the usefulness of the division of labor. Kant raises ... a
glass and...

YOUTUBE: “The Philosopher’s Song (Monty Python)”

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=2m51s&v=PtgKkifJ0Pw>

'IMMANUEL KANT WAS A REAL PISSANT
WHO WAS VERY RARELY STABLE.
HEIDEGGER, HEIDEGGER WAS A BOOZY BEGGAR
WHO COULD THINK YOU UNDER THE TABLE.
DAVID HUME COULD OUT CONSUME
SCHOPENHAUER AND HEGEL,
AND WITTGENSTEIN WAS A BEERY SWINE
WHO WAS JUST AS SLOSHED AS SCHLEGEL.

THERE'S NOTHING NIETZSCHE COULDN'T TEACH YA
'BOUT THE RAISIN' OF THE WRIST.
SOCRATES HIMSELF WAS PERMANENTLY PISSED.

JOHN STUART MILL, OF HIS OWN FREE WILL,
AFTER HALF A PINT OF SHANDY WAS PARTICULARLY ILL.
PLATO, THEY SAY, COULD STICK IT AWAY,
'ALF A CRATE OF WHISKEY EVERY DAY!
ARISTOTLE, ARISTOTLE WAS A BUGGER FOR THE BOTTLE,
AND HOBBES WAS FOND OF HIS DRAM.
AND RENE DESCARTES WAS A DRUNKEN FART:
"I DRINK, THEREFORE I AM."

YES, SOCRATES HIMSELF IS PARTICULARLY MISSED;
A LOVELY LITTLE THINKER, BUT A BUGGER WHEN HE'S PISSED.'

24 beers in a carton. 24 hours in a day. Hmmmm......."

DOLF @ 0812 HOURS ON 26 AUGUST 2018: “It may have escaped your notice,
as is self-evident from your burlesque constipated turd 💩 haemorrhoidal
opinion that the subject we are contending with is a consideration of
profound intellectual accomplishments conveyed by a book which
articulates the merit as collective mind of no fewer than FOURTEEN {#14}
eminent university professors:

THE COUNTRIES MOST ANTICIPATED LEGAL ADVICE HAS ARRIVED

Yes indeed my appraisal by Christoph HORN and Dieter SCHÖNECKER (Eds.)
of Immanuel KANT’s GROUNDWORK FOR METAPHYSICS OF MORALS (1785) has
arrived at my doorstep this morning of 24 August 2108 courtesy of
Australia Post.

It will be my task to read it this weekend in the hope that probity and
decorum will return to the governance of this Commonwealth given its
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:

DIEU ET MON DROIT

Whilst it is prudent to establish the starting point of necessity as to
any premises for the continuity of enquiry, I recognise as my ignorance
with respect to the learned as the educated and the gravitas of the
subject matter to say nothing of those whom may have given their lives
as something other than marsupial roadkill as RECTUS for the
foundational cause—it is best to proceed with caution and in a sturdy
and thoughtful manner rather than with the intoxication of
self-entitlement which you bestow."

Yet for Kant this anthropological evidence arises “out of the common
idea of *DUTY* and the moral law” which is also certainly self evidently
a contradiction of his initial postulate that any adequate form of moral
philosophy has to be ‘pure’, ie. both free from all empirical elements
of interest, self-love, and natural feelings in the dutiful display of
filial affection by VOLUNTĀTIS {CORRESPONDENCE {#82}: #2 - desire,
inclination as to engaged within actions that #2 - Don't introduce
biases; {*FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}} relating to the “honour bestowed
upon one's matrimonial or common law parents” which is due from a son or
daughter:

H3513@{
@1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
@2: Sup: 56 (#62); Ego: 50 (#56),
@3: Sup: 76 (#138); Ego: 20 (#76),
@4: Sup: 78 (#216); Ego: 2 (#78),
@5: Sup: 1 (#217); Ego: 4 (#82),
Male: #217; Feme: #82
} // #82

T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #82 % #41 = #41 - Playing with Reversal, Sameness in Difference;
I-Ching: H26 - Great Domestication, Restraining Force, Great
Accumulating, The taming power of the great, Great storage, Potential
energy; Tetra: 60 - Accumulation;

THOTH MEASURE: #41 - Oh thou of raised head, who makest thine appearance
at thy cavern; *I* *HAVE* *NO* *STRONG* *DESIRE* *EXCEPT* *FOR* *MY*
*OWN* *PROPERTY*.

#VIRTUE:
#TOOLS: Fostering (no. #81) receives all the rest.
#POSITION: As to Resistance (no. #22), it is contradiction, but
#TIME: As to Unity (no. #54), it is conforming.
#CANON: #157

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_157@{
@1: Sup: 81 (#81); Ego: 81 (#81),
@2: Sup: 22 (#103); Ego: 22 (#103),
@3: Sup: 76 (#179); Ego: 54 (#157 - I AM NOT ONE OF PRATING TONGUE
{%17} / I HAVE NO STRONG DESIRE EXCEPT FOR MY OWN PROPERTY {%41}),
Male: #179; Feme: #157
} // #157

#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513): {UMBRA: #37 as #82 % #41
= #41} 1) to be heavy, be weighty, be grievous, be hard, be rich, be
honourable, be glorious, be burdensome, be honoured; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to
be heavy; 1a2) to be heavy, be insensible, be dull; 1a3) *TO* *BE*
*HONOURED*; 1b) (Niphal); 1b1) to be made heavy, be honoured, enjoy
honour, be made abundant; 1b2) to get oneself glory or honour, gain
glory; 1c) (Piel); 1c1) to make heavy, make dull, make insensible; 1c2)
to make honourable, honour, glorify; 1d) (Pual) to be made honourable,
be honoured; 1e) (Hiphil); 1e1) to make heavy; 1e2) to make heavy, make
dull, make unresponsive; 1e3) to cause to be honoured; 1f) (Hithpael);
1f1) to make oneself heavy, make oneself dense, make oneself numerous;
1f2) to honour oneself;

"And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom {their secret; their
cement} and Gomorrah {rebellious people} is great, and because their sin
is very grievous {#82 as [#6, #50, #20, #2, #4] = kabad (H3513):
honour};" [Genesis 18:20]

5. (MOTHER) FORMULA OF HUMANITY AS HEAD OF STATE / *HONOUR* *PARENTS*

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #1 + #2 = #3 as #MIND WHETHER AS FORMULA OF HETEROS
PROGRESSION / THESIS ON IT'S HOMOIOS BASIS

MONAD - #1 - NATURE CONTAINS NATURE: {ALEPH (*MOTHER* - SCALES OF MERIT)
/ SERAPHIM {Heb. Saraph Gk. Ophis - burning, that is, (figuratively)
poisonous (serpent); specifically a fiery (serpent) or symbolical
creature (from their copper color))} {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA {1 + 2 + 3 + 4
= 10}

TETRAD - #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {BETH (DOUBLE - #1 - NATURE
CONTAINS NATURE {#4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE}) / CHERUBIM (Gk.
Cheroubim - a cherub or imaginary figures which covered the mercy seat
to the Ark of the Covenant [Exodus 25:17-22] and from where God communed
with Israel)}

PENTAD - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}

+ 0, H9, H18 {ie. System’s Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}

Thusly in summation, as to the problem of discernment and knowledge
assimilation into a coherent syncretism, at this juncture in our
ingestion of Kant’s acumen as thesis, we ought to prudently reserve our
further conjectures upon any rhetorical artifices which he may of
necessity deploy until we have fully considered what are the nominative
descriptions applied as their grounding in explanations and the explicit
nature of the underlying dialectic as its capacity and means by which
Kant conveys any such postulates.

For instance, Karl Marx (5 May 1818 – 14 March 1883) and Friedrich
Engels (28 November 1820 – 5 August 1895) proposed that Georg Hegel's
(27 August 1770 – 14 November 1831) subsequent dialectic was too
abstract. The dialect which HEGEL proposes is:

#1 - THESIS
#2 - ANTI-THESIS
#3 - SYNTHESIS
#4 - PROGRESSION

This concept of dialectics was given new life by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
Hegel as a proponent of German Idealism has been seen in the 20th
century as the originator but as an explicit phrase it originated with
Johann Gottlieb Fichte (28 November 1820 – 5 August 1895), whose
dialectically synthetic model of nature and of history made it, as it
were, a fundamental aspect of the nature of reality instead of regarding
the contradictions into which dialectics leads as a sign of the
sterility of the dialectical method, as Immanuel Kant was considered by
many to have tended to do within his Critique of Pure Reason.
[Nicholson, J. A. (1950). Philosophy of religion. New York: Ronald Press
Co. Page 108]

As Walter Kaufmann (1 July 1921 – 4 September 1980) astutely affirms of
Hegel's criticism of the triad model commonly misattributed to him,
adding that "the only place where Hegel uses the three terms together
occurs in his lectures on the history of philosophy, on the last page
but one of the section on Kant—where Hegel roundly reproaches Kant for
having 'EVERYWHERE POSITED THESIS, ANTITHESIS, SYNTHESIS'"

In contradiction to this Hegelian idealism, Marx presented his own
dialectic method as an anthropological consideration and SENSIBILITY of
the world, which he claims to be "direct opposite" of Hegel's method:
'My dialectic method is not only different from the Hegelian, but is its
direct opposite.' To Hegel, the life-process of the human brain, ie.
the process of thinking, which, under the name of 'the Idea', he even
transforms into an independent subject, is the demiurgos {ie.

Substance of thing (materia, substantia: #15CE ... #34CE ... #65CE ...
#111CE ... #175CE ... #260CE ... 369CE), is the means to purvey the
binary distillation so as to derive the notion of gender and spermatic
attributions as bifurcated elements, so then convey the proof of its
SCIENTIFIC essence of a thing (essentia, ousia: #260 ... #175 ... #65
... #34 ... #369 ... #111 ... #15)

} of the real world, and the real world is only the external, phenomenal
form of 'the Idea'. With me, on the contrary, the idea is nothing else
than the material world reflected by the human mind {#260}, and
translated into forms of thought {#15}. [Marx, Karl. "Afterword (Second
German Ed.)". Capital. 1: 14. Retrieved 28 December 2014]

That it not only shares an organisational / institutional orbital
association to other regimes which are constituted by Pythagorean
Perennialist / A-U-M belief systems, furthermore it has a connection to
a vassal perspective {ie. *AS* *PRINCIPLE* *OF* *#AIDING*, *#WILLINGLY*
*OR* *#UNWILLINGLY* *THE* *DISSOLUTION* *OF* *THE* *STATE*} as
subjugation to the mechanised autonomic transformative gnostic process
of extrusion as the "different substance or hypostasis" impetus for
Roman Imperial / Religious Empire Governance which pervaded throughout
Europe as the world created and ruled by a lesser divinity, the demiurge
as oligarch. That the oligarchy ("the rule of the few") or the
ecclesiastical hierarchy adopted by Islam, the Vatican City / State and
German Fascism, have often become instruments of transformation, by
insisting upon monarchs ("the rule of the one") or dictators share power
or giving credibility and impetus to that process of change, such as
occurred by the 20 July 1933 signing of the Concordat with the German
Reich, thereby opening the door to governance by other 'party' elements
of society.

Where the dialectical method is itself an anthropological construct,
which is at base an OPINE {ie. hold and state as one's opinion; origin
late Middle English: from Latin opinari think, believe} as
existentialism purveying a characteristic mode of quantitative
expression in being essentially idiomatic:

'I THINK THEREFORE I AM'

But when, as occurs in the distillation of vodka which at a high proof
is devoid of SENSIBILITY where all taste and odour has been eliminated
making vodka a neutral spirit begging for self-entitlement, it is then
sublimated into its superlative form as substantially an epitaph of
merit in valedictory acceptability by an occasion of agreeability as an
opportune expression of a truism, where it is formerly inducted into a
Hall of Fame as a maxim life. As OSTENSIBLY being a discourse between
two or more people holding different points of view about a subject but
wishing to establish the truth through reasoned arguments as its imperative:

#1 - PROGRESS
#2 - SYNTHESIS
#3 - ANTI-THESIS
#4 - THESIS

YOUTUBE: "The Script - Hall of Fame (Official Video)"

http://youtu.be/mk48xRzuNvA

Dialectical materialism accepts the evolution of the natural world and
the emergence of new qualities of being at new stages of evolution. As
Zbigniew Antoni Jordan (11 August 1911 - 6 October 1977), notes, "Engels
made constant use of the metaphysical insight that the higher level of
existence emerges from and has its roots in the lower; that the higher
level constitutes a new order of being with its irreducible laws; and
that this process of evolutionary advance is governed by laws of
development which reflect basic properties of 'matter in motion as a
whole'." [The Evolution of Dialectical Materialism: A Philosophical and
Sociological Analysis (London: Macmillan, 1967), p 167]

Marx criticized classical materialism as another idealist
philosophy—idealist because of its transhistorical understanding of
material contexts. The Young Hegelian Ludwig Feuerbach had rejected
Hegel's idealistic philosophy and advocated materialism. Despite being
strongly influenced by Feuerbach, Marx rejected Feuerbach's version of
materialism as inconsistent. The writings of Engels, especially
Anti-Dühring (1878) and Dialectics of Nature (1875–82), were the source
of the main doctrines of dialectical materialism.

Marx's own writings are almost exclusively concerned with understanding
human history in terms of systemic processes, based on modes of
production (broadly speaking, the ways in which societies are organized
to employ their technological powers to interact with their material
surroundings). This is called historical materialism. More narrowly,
within the framework of this general theory of history, most of Marx's
writing is devoted to an analysis of the specific structure and
development of the capitalist economy.

Other scholars have argued that despite Marx's insistence that humans
are natural beings in an evolving, mutual relationship with the rest of
nature, Marx's own writings pay inadequate attention to the ways in
which human agency is constrained by such factors as biology, geography,
and ecology.

Dialectical materialism adapts the Hegelian dialectic for traditional
materialism, which examines the subjects of the world in relation to
each other within a dynamic, evolutionary environment, in contrast to
metaphysical materialism, which examines parts of the world within a
static, isolated environment.

For his part, Engels applies a "dialectical" approach to the natural
world in general, arguing that contemporary science is increasingly
recognizing the necessity of viewing natural processes in terms of
interconnectedness, development, and transformation. Some scholars have
doubted that Engels's "dialectics of nature" is a legitimate extension
of Marx's approach to social processes.

Engels exemplifies this quintessential characteristic of Pythagorean
methodology of sophistry by postulating three laws of dialectics from
his reading of Hegel's Science of Logic. Engels elucidated these laws as
the materialist dialectic in his work Dialectics of Nature:

THE LAW OF THE UNITY AND CONFLICT OF OPPOSITES {MIND: #1 + #2 = #3
(PENTAD) - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}}

THE LAW OF THE PASSAGE OF QUANTITATIVE {ie. measure by having magnitude
or spatial extent} CHANGES INTO QUALITATIVE {ie. determine comparative
size, appearance, value and superlative forms} CHANGES {SCIENCE: #3 + #4
= #7 - ENGENDERING NATURE / #4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE: {ZAYIN /
*PRINCIPALITIES* (Gk. *EXOUSIA* - (in the sense of ability); privilege,
that is, (subjectively) *force*, capacity, competency, freedom, or
(objectively) mastery (concretely magistrate, superhuman, potentate,
*token* *of* *control*), delegated influence:—authority, jurisdiction,
liberty, power, right, strength)}}

THE LAW OF THE NEGATION OF THE NEGATION {OPINION: #5 + #6 = #11 (HEPTAD)
- TRANSFORMING NATURE: {KAF (DOUBLE - #4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE
{#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE}) / Government & Non-Government Organisations}}

That the dialectic method is therefore understood as being a process of
determined SENSIBILITY where the product is "enlightenment, whereby the
philosopher is educated so as to achieve knowledge of the supreme good,
the Form of the Good." {SENSE: #7 + #8 = #15 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE:
{SAMEK}}

Accordingly dialectical materialism is understood as an aspect of the
broader subject of materialism, which asserts the primacy of the
material world: in short, matter precedes thought. Materialism is a
realist philosophy of science, which holds that the world is material;
that all phenomena in the universe consist of "matter in motion,"
wherein all things are interdependent and interconnected and develop
according to natural law; that the world exists outside us and
independently of our perception of it; that thought is a reflection of
the material world in the brain, and that the world is in principle
knowable.

However within the third chapter of the "Analytic of Principles," on
phenomena and noumena, Kant in Critique of Pure Reason (1781 and second
edition 1787) emphasizes that because the categories must always be
applied to data provided by SENSIBILITY in order to provide cognition,
and because the data of SENSIBILITY are structured by the
transcenden­tally ideal forms of intuition, the categories give us
knowledge only of things as they appear with sensibility ("phenomena,"
literally "that which appears").

Although through pure understanding (nous in Greek) we may think of
objects independently of their being given in sensibil­ity, we can never
cognize them as such non-sensible entities ("noumena," literally "that
which is thought" as a subject of some 112 mentions). The meaning of
Kant's use of the term "phenomena" is self-evident, but the meaning of
"noumena" is not, since it literally means not "things as they are in­
dependently of appearing to us" but something more like "things as they
are understood by pure thought." Yet Kant appears to deny that the human
understanding can comprehend things in the latter way."

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/kant-first-critique-cambridge.pdf>

Thus I am proffering an informed and reasoned opinion as that which
Immanuel Kant states is an impossibility for a human being to accomplish
by transcendent sapiential thought and capably demonstrate it's temporal
congruence as coherence by a mathematical theoretical noumenon as an
Intellectual Property which Immanuel Kant himself calls noumena as the
proof of a valid and rational concept attained by pure thought.

Whilst the HOMOIOS ternary conception of the THEORY OF NUMBER is in all
probability a SENSIBILITY of which Immanuel Kant appears cognisant and
that is exemplified by the conveyance of them as explicit
meta-prototypes descriptors within the formative of his CATEGORICAL
IMPERATIVE postulates {#1 - Formula of Universal Law / #2 - Formula of
Humanity / #3 - Formula of Autonomy} conveyed within his Groundwork for
the Metaphysics of Morals (1785) / Critique of Pure Reason (1781 / 1787)
it is then a conundrum as to commensurability of his articulation in
rationally deriving the purest and logical essence of being and whether
his anthropocentric reality still deploys a counterfactual and
impractical intuition which is provisioned by the genitive prescriptive
or the biological normative propositions as imposition made by an
encapsulated dialectic:

PROGRESSION: Lesser Yin (shaoyin: West / Autumn / Metal)
+ 0, H27 - YI [Nourishment / ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts Nature)
below + GEN (ie. #8 - Transforming Nature) above], H54 - GUIMEI
[*MARRYING* *MAID* / DUI (ie. #7 - Engendering Nature) below + ZHEN (ie.
#3 - Nature Surmounts Nature) above] {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven
- Formula of Universal Law}

SYNTHESIS: Greater Yin (taiyin: North / Winter / Water and which also
refers to the Moon)
+ 0, H9 - XIAOXU [Lesser Domestication/QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature)
below + SUN (ie. #4- Nature Amended in its Nature) above], H18 - GU
[Ills to Be Cured / SUN (ie. #4- Nature Amended in its Nature) below +
GEN (ie. #8 - Transforming Nature) above] {ie. System's Cosmology as
Earth - Formula of Humanity}

ANTI-THESIS: Lesser Yang (shaoyang: East / Spring / Wood)
+ 0, H3 - ZHUN [Birth Throws / ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts Nature)
below + KAN (ie. #1 - Nature Contains Nature) above] as 'fundamentality
[yuan], prevalence [heng], fitness [li] and constancy [zhen]', H6 - SONG
/ *JIHAD*? [Contention/KAN (ie. #1 - Nature Contains Nature) below +
QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature) above] {ie. Self identity as Sea -
Formula of Autonomy}

THESIS: Greater Yang (taiyang: South / Summer / Fire and which also
refers to the Sun)
+ H1 - *MONAD*: QIAN [Pure Yang / QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature) above +
QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature) below] as MALE, H2 - *DUAD*: KUN [Pure
Yin / KUN (ie. #2 - Nature Rejoices in its Nature) above + KUN (ie. #2
- Nature Rejoices in its Nature) below] as FEMALE, H3 - *TRIAD*: ZHUN
[Birth Throws / ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts Nature) below + KAN (ie.
#1 - Nature Contains Nature) above] {ie. Fountains as Formula of
Progression of individual phenomena}

= TETRAGRAMMATON HIERARCHY VALUE AS HOMOIOS THEORY OF *NUMBER*.

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE}

The consideration is then one of criteria basis upon which the
anthropological conceptional notion of its sapient freedom {Humanity /
Autonomy} is formulated as either a binomial methodology by a
TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE applied as an encapsulation of an anti-thetical
anthropocentric identity

JEWISH VIEW: H54 - GUIMEI [Marrying Maid / DUI (ie. #7 - Engendering
Nature) below + ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts Nature) above] {ie.
Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law} + H18 - GU
[Ills to Be Cured / SUN (ie. #4 - Nature Amended in its Nature) below +
GEN (ie. #8 - Transforming Nature) above] {ie. System's Cosmology as
Earth - Formula of Humanity} = #72 - Self-Love, Holding Oneself Dear;
I-Ching: H39 - Adversity, Obstacles, Limping, Obstruction, Afoot; Tetra:
79 - Difficulties)

GENTILE VIEW: H27 - YI [Nourishment / ZHEN (ie. #3 - Nature Surmounts
Nature) below + GEN (ie. #8 - Transforming Nature) above] {ie. Realm of
its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law} + H9 - XIAOXU [Lesser
Domestication / QIAN (ie. #6 - Form of Nature) below + SUN (ie. #4 -
Nature is Amended in its Nature) above] {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth
- Formula of Humanity} = H36 - MINGYI [Suppression of the Light / LI
(ie. #9 - Autonomous Nature) below + KUN (ie. #1 - Nature Contains
Nature) above])"

Nevertheless when this trinomial HOMOIOS {#81 bits} ontological
conception of #NUMBER deploys a binomial {64 bits} encapsulation as
artifice it then introduces a logical contradiction {H54 + H18 + H6 + H3
= #81} within it’s DISCRIMINATING NORM and the SOCIETAL ORDER of things
by an incommensurability made against the proprietary, propriety and
probity as the viability of SUI JURIS / MEMRUM VIRILE which properly is
the paradigmatic providence as *ONTIC* necessity {H27 + H9 + H3 + H2 =
#41} as a SOVEREIGN and central characteristic within the Formula of
Autonomy by its purveyance of permissibility only within the construct
of an INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMY in deployment of a TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE
AS CANON OF TRANSPOSITION within the bifurcated HETEROS {@1 - GENDER
{MARRIAGE} / @5 - PHALLUS {HERITAGE} conception of #NUMBER as the
philosophical basis to its methodology since the MOBIUS ‘8’ LOOP OF
PYTHAGOREAN SOPHISTRY AS WISDOM SO CALLED is not homoiotic as
anthropocentric but rather “homeomorphic to a circle”.

Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern terminological
distinction between such Formula of Universal Law descriptive statements
made against the Formula of Humanity which present an account on how the
cosmology of world is being similarly analogous to the LIMITED {#9 -
JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS /
SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the normative
statements presenting an evaluative account, or an account of how the
syncretic world should be as existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 -
ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} in being optimally something that should be
lived up to; or that should be pursued.

Thusly having given a preliminary definition to our anthropocentric
criteria as impetus for enquiry, we will now consider the practicality
of Kant's reasoning and whether his Categorical Imperative is truly free
of the strictures which is the Latin worldview of perennial biological
duality as the HETEROS viability of things "independently of their
appearing to us" and whether there is to be deduced by a HOMOIOS noumena
modality as the vital basis for a singularity of existence by which
humanity is rationally capable of conceiving "things as they are
understood by pure thought."

- dolf

SEE ALSO: "(SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF
MORALS: #56 - TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
THEFT AND SLANDER BY MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE
AS BOER / ANZAC DEFAMATION?"

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/Augustus.pdf>

Initial Post: 25 August 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND*
*ROMAN* *CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5,
#200 as harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a
extortioner, a robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL*
*AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private Street on the edge of the Central Business District dated 16th
May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as a Notice
of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS AS DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in
1993), first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN
CHING {ie. Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated
with the theory of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology
reliant upon the seven visible planets as cosmological mother image and
the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF
NATURE-genesis [James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial
tetragrammaton x 4.5 day = #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER
which is an amalgam of the 64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as
trinomial tetragrammaton rather than its encapsulated contrived use as
the microcosm to redefine the macrocosm as the quintessence of the
Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial canon of transposition as HETEROS
THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006
defines a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is
permissible to extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN
BEING AS A CONSCIOUS REALITY OF HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED
WITHIN THE TEMPORAL REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND
RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO[iOS] SAPIEN[T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS.
Loading...