Don’t Blink

He never knew his history.
He grew up in a place where you don’t live, you Survive.
History, for him, was yesterday.
And the world, this human experience,
Was just a standing place, some idle dream.
To get there, you need to cross the tracks.
You will have to keep straight up McClemore, a Crooked little street, rattled with potholes, such That the ride is bumpy like a Tanzanian safari.

And, it is a strange jungle, one made of concrete, and steel.
There, too, dwells a strange creature, one Absent of history, of spirit, of lustre.
If you go, make sure that it’s during the day. People do awful things when they are trying to survive.
Excuse any machine guns, if, by chance, you see any.
Most of the children carrying them are involved in silent wars.

Wars?
War, you say?
This war will make Vietnam look like child’s play,
makes Afghanistan and Iraq look like vacation. Oh, you don’t hear any bombs dropping?
You don’t see any Blackhawks in the sky?
You don’t hear any boots marching across the terrain?
Not all wars are the same, but they do have their nasty similarities.
Still, they are never the same. Their causes, Their results, their strategems, their heroes,
are never identical.

When it is internalized the war zone is more lethal.
When you see it with your own eyes,
When you witness it as it wages its ruinous Path,

Don’t blink.

R. Walker

Americans Don’t Know Politics? — My Blog

A major issue with American politics, perhaps with any politics, is that voters, i.e., the populace that participates in the whole process, on most occasions, they, simply, don’t understand politics. The danger here is that, without a legit understanding of politics, the populace runs the risk of authorizing an idiot or tyrant or despot, into […]

via Americans Don’t Know Politics? — My Blog

Devils and Demons

As much as popular media depictions would have us believe this, Lucifer is not some red guy with horns jutting out of his forehead, a goatee, and a lower body of a goat. Nor is he some handsome fellow, sitting behind an illustrious desk inside an office of flames.

Demons, in addition, who are members of Lucifer’s army, are not hideous creatures yielding miniature pitchforks, with the intention of terror. Nor are they winged monsters that soar in the night in order to haunt the living. These entities, however, although their essence is popularly exagerrated, nonetheless, are very real, very true.

Because the notion of these fantastical beings have been thwarted by lucid exagerration, people have tended to identify them with fantasy or fairy tale or, even, mysticism. This article is intended to raise an awareness for Devils and Demons so that, upon an encounter with either of the two, one will know how to handle them. Now, how are Devils and Demons identified?

Already, it has been established that neither of them have, as it is, a physical body. And so, that popular image of Satan and his minions can, for the moment, be expelled. Since Devils and Demons have not a physical body, are we to presume that they are invisible? Maybe, maybe not?

Certainly, the science of biology informs us that our bodies are comprised of cells, mitochondria, and other molecules. These things, they say, exist, but the normal eye cannot discern them. And the physical sciences advises us that conscious reality is made up of stuff like atoms, sub-atomic particles, quarks, etc.

Yet, none of these phenomena can be spotted by the naked eye. There is, indeed, then, a plethora of phenomena surrounding us that we simply cannot see. That does not necessarily make these things, themselves, invisible; but it does make them invisible to the eyes. In this wise, similar to cells, atoms, protons, and electrons are Devils and Demons invisible.

Having touched on the anti-physical essence of them, what, then, are their natures? The nature of Devils and Demons are very basic. But, like anything that is basic, they can easily be overlooked or underestimated. Devils, who are many varied forms of Lucifer, have one primary duty: to persuade one’s thoughts into evil.

Demons, contrariwise, who are the soldiers of Lucifer, have on their orders quite another objective. Demons are responsible for showing one how to do evil. Notice, in addition, that while these duties appear similar, they are vastly different. Devils are masters of what I shall refer to as “dark persuasion.”

Through the many avenues of rhetoric they apply their spiritual tongues in efforts to invoke evil thoughts into consciousness. Thoughts, no doubt, if powerful enough, will eventually evolve into action. There are, perhaps, infinite varieties of persuasion.

These invisible spirits are apt at making themselves subliminal. By this I mean, to one who lacks “vision,” the dark persuasion could indeed seem genuine. In the beginning, it was dark persuasion that called for Adam and Eve to share fruit from that forbidden tree.

Sweet words, we see, can provoke bitter actions. The Devil, then, is not necessarily the snake, but the words that were uttered to arouse curiosity within the consciousness of Man–that is the devil. A snake is just an amphibian. Now, Demons are, like their master, just as mischievous in their natures.

Demons teach men how to do the wrong things. It is thus not by chance the word “Demon” appears in the word “Demonstrate.” They achieve their ends by very uncanny abilities. Demons are talented imitators. By imitation, however, I am not referring to physical imitation.

Devils and Demons, we have established, are not physical entities, per se, so, theoretically, they could not imitate anything physical. Their spirits, however, can be captured or imposed upon a consciousness. How, I am sure the reader is wondering, is this achieved? Demons imitate their spirits by way of art and the artist.

In particular, the language arts is the most effective vehicle to teach, or, even, to “suggest” evil tendencies. By language arts, no doubt, we are speaking of poetry–and all of her offspring. Note, it is not altogether the people who produce the art that are evil, but it is the art itself.

Devils and Demons, again, are not physical. Instead, it is the zeitgeist that is produced from the work; the morality or immorality that is taken away from it, which determines if it is a Demon or not. Through art, evil can be represented as good, and good as evil. Through tragedy, comedy, and drama, habits of evil can be demonstrated as virtuous.

Why then is it language art that is the most effective vehicle in influencing evil? Before God tossed Lucifer out of heaven, he was adored and loved by him. God always had three Angels that were considered as high Angel’s.

There’s Gabriel, who is God’s messenger, there’s Michael who is God’s general, and then there’s Lucifer, who was God’s organizer of worship. In other words, Lucifer controlled the environment for the worship of God. In order to do this, Lucifer invented music, and the arts.

These creations were created strictly and primarily for the worship and honor of God, the creator of the Universe. Music and Art, which are both synonymous, was created as a form of Gospel. However, in his thirst for worship himself, Lucifer attempted to use them to encourage men to worship him through music and the arts.

And for his violations, he was banished from heaven. Now today men are misguided by their own arts. One, on its face, might presume that art is an imitation of Life’s experience. I, indeed, believe that Life’s experience, for much of mankind, has become an imitation of art.

Once art has sprung from the depths of consciousness, it can be so powerful as to create a lifestyle, an own consciousness by itself.

At any rate, after this long harangue, I do pray that now the reader has a better understanding of Devils and Demons. It’s very simple, but can fly over ones head. Just remember, Devils want to persuade one into evil, and Demons teach them how to do it.

Corrections Deputy: The Underpaid Hero

Despite having on a daily basis to manage, handle, and, in many cases, protect violent and non violent offenders, instead of the law enforcers which they are, correctional officers are treated as low class security guards. Correctional deputies are, indubitibly, the forgotten defenders of America’s streets. Could it be, since they are not physically on the streets, like their counterparts, with sidearms and cruisers, that they have been forgotten?

When the valiant police officer apprehends the offender, he drops him off to the correctional deputy; and, until that offender’s destiny is decided by the legal process, the offender will remain under the correctional deputie’s supervision. And while in this country an offender is rightfully due to a speedy trial, a trial oftentimes is not speedy at all.

After an inmate’s case court date after court date has been continued by a judge, correctional deputies will indeed find that they have been managing the same criminal for years at a time. Here, of course, I am speaking of those brave officers that guard our jails, and not of those that guard penitenturies.

These men and women too, of the more long term penitentuaries, are much ado more credit for their staunch patience, and true empathy in dealing with convicted felons. In short, police officers, whose job is no less demanding, after apprehending a fugitive, spend very little time with them, most of the time, make more money than their counterparts, who spend months, sometimes years, decades, with them.

That is certainly not to say that street officers don’t spend as much time with offenders like corrections deputies. The time they spend with their subjects, however, are, by nature, haphazard. And so because of the random nature of their encounters with prior offenders, time to develop “relationships,” with, not only them, but, even, with the subjects of the community under their protection, usually just is not there.

In addition, there is a very small chance of an offender being apprehended by the same police officer that captured him on his prior incident. Once the offender is brought back into custody, on the other hand, the chances that he will be supervised by a familiar corrections officer are extremely high. In his numerous years on the streets, no doubt, a police officer is bound to see the same career offender as much as the Corrections deputy.

That is understood. Between the two officer types, and the offender, however, the relationships that are developed via time’s everlasting stretch are vastly different, yet intricately interwoven. The dangers that each of the officers face are slightly different, but they still are no less dangers. Their lives still are on the line, and their families still, for at least eight hours, have on their hearts the safety of their loved one.

If any law enforcement officer is to collect a comfortable salary, one would think, an officer such as a correctional deputy is justly due one. From that of the Street Officer, the corrections deputy’s jobs, their duties, and their responsibilities differ, nonetheless, they, without question, are just as, if not more, important. A comfortable salary is not the case for a corrections deputy in state governed jails and prisons, or in private owned ones.

Private prisons, no doubt, are infamous for underpaying their employees much more than government operated facilities. Somewhere in a rural area, near some small town, private prison companies construct their maximum security facility. And when it’s up and running, they hire all of the poor rural folk, and pay them a little above minimum wage.

That’s truly a heart wrenching wage to provide for one’s family. It’s even more heart wrenching when, at work, some convict tosses feces or urine or seamen into one’s face. Or, to be stabbed with shanks, brutally beaten, raped, even murdered–all of these possibilities, for an an annual income of 35,000? That’s what I call a rip-off.

Furthermore, a huge reason there are so many incidents involving police officers exercising excessive force or being downright brutal is, I believe, that many officers, after training, before they have any experience handling criminals via the jail system, they are immediately assigned to the streets as patrolman. In many police academies and departments across the nation this is an error–a huge one.

How can someone who has never patrolled a criminal, be given a weapon, and assigned to protect an area, for which, many times, he has no background in? Nor is he even an active member of the culture. Before any police officer is allowed to patrol the streets, it is appropriate, that they spend, at the very least, two years as a correctional deputy.

Spending time in the corrections arena will help season the potential street officer. It will assist in helping train their security tempermant. If an officer is well experienced in dealing with offenders while they themselves have not a duty weapon, then perhaps, when they do patrol the streets, they will summon more peaceful, practical techniques when dealing with offenders.

When I speak of peaceful and practical techniques, I am referring to techniques learned by correctional officers which allow them to avoid uses of force. Use of force, in many of the correctional facilities across the nation, are in most cases, the last resort to an ongoing, seemingly impossible situation.

In jails, most of the time, its talk down, before take down. In simpler lingo, correctional officers are talented negotiators; they have the trained instinct of appealing to the emotions of the offender in order to receive, in turn, some kind of cooperation. And most of the time this appeal to the offenders emotion, is only possible because of the relationship-quality that is exclusive for correctional deputies.

What better method to increase the effiencency of our police departments than to require before any officer steps foot on the street, they must spend time on the jail floors–amongst the subjects they will inevitably encounter?

When a person is physically sick, they admit themselves to a hospital. There, they will be miserable, of course, laying all their time away on a hospital bed. Nothing can be done for themselves; the food eaten by them was not chosen by them; and the nurse cares for them like a mother would a child.

When a person is mentally sick, they are admitted to a mental health treatment center. And here, they will, like the physically sick, undergo a similar experience. Their food, their movement, all of this is regulated by someone other than themselves. In these two cases, we have a physically sick person and a mentally sick one, but both of their destinies are, somewhat, the same.

But, there is a third sickness that has yet to be mentioned. This sickness concerns those who are morally conscious. People who wind up in jail are people who, in some way, have acquired a moral sickness, an ethical sickness.

Thus, much like the physical sick person who needs the nurse for everything, the mentally sick person who is no longer morally consious, and needs the behavior specialist for everything, the ethically sick person knows, more or less, the difference between right and wrong, and selects the latter.

And much of the time, the morally sick person winds up in a similar situation as the physically and mentally sick. The only difference is that their facilities are not hospitals or mental health centers, but jails and penitentuarys. And their care-takers are not nurses or behavioral specialist, but they are correctional deputies. These are men and women, the forgotten warriors of the streets. They are the doctors, the nurses, for the ethically sick.

It is only right, only fair that their salary reflect all of the hard work and sacrifice they endure, every single day.

Americans Don’t Know Politics?

A major issue with American politics, perhaps with any politics, is that voters, i.e., the populace that participates in the whole process, on most occasions, they, simply, don’t understand politics. The danger here is that, without a legit understanding of politics, the populace runs the risk of authorizing an idiot or tyrant or despot, into a high office where their will-power could be exercised to its fullest extent.

Americans, during election season, tend to rely on the media as their primary information source. And that, indeed, in itself, for a political scholar, should reveal that the average American’s knowledge of politics is minuscule, at best. To use the media, i.e., as a guide in making a wise decision when making a vote is just not enough.

The American media, usually any nation’s media for that matter is nothing but trickery and rhetoric. Therefore, to truly make a wise decision in making a vote, there will have to be more than just what the television, radios, and newspaper articles inform them about. This information indeed is only meant to sway one’s opinion hither or thither.

It is meant to present an opponent as good or bad, or vice versa. It’s a mere drama, a shallow competition. In having a political discussion with a typical American political comentator, one who enjoys thinking of themself as concerned and involved in America’s political atmosphere, they will on most cases, use the media to support their arguments, as if the media is an engine for Truth–when, in reality, it is an engine for Lies.

Now, it cannot be forgotten, though often it is, that politics is a science. And so, if one is to participate in the authorization of people who will reign over them, a true understanding of politics, one would think, is beyond necessary. Obtaining wisdom concerning politics is certainly not an easy task.

Likewise, becoming a physician, one who is wise in making decisions with regard to healing or the medicinal arts did not over night, of course, stumble upon that wisdom. To become a doctor or a lawyer or an engineer, it takes time and dedication. It is the same for the political scientist, though their craft is not as financially rewarding as its counterparts, its requirements for wisdom are no different.

Now American politics revolve around two ideologies, more or less, which are conservatism and liberalism. The two ideologies are represented by two political factions: Republican (conservative) and Democrat (liberal). When the founding fathers, who had their Masonic Moors and Egyptian literature to guide them, constructed the American government, they had one thing in mind: Balance.

For them, similar to the Ancient Egyptians, the notion of balance truly is a map designed by God himself. When God created the Universe, in his omnipotent wisdom, he created it completely symmetrical. In other words, there’s up, there’s down, there’s hot, there’s cold, and everything has an opposite.

The Egyptians, indeed, took this notion of balance to a level that no nation hitherto has achieved. However, America’s Republic, though nowhere near as sublime as its Ancient predecessor, is a brilliant work of balance. The balance of American politics, its struggle of opposites, I believe, is a major factor contributing to its longevity.

Again, it still has quite a long ways to go to equal the Ancient Egyptians, but due to its balanced political struggle, it indeed possesses the potential to survive for many centuries to come. Much of our government’s system of checks and balances is obvious. And so, in grade school, we learn about the three branches of government: executive, legislative, and judicial.

And we learn about how they all work together and how neither of them really possess any more power than the other. These facts, of course, are all a requirement if one is to have, at least, a basic understanding of American government. Even those simple facts, believe it or not, nowadays, ironically mid an epoch of unrivaled information, still are unknown by a great majority of Americas voters.

There are also balances within American politics that are not as easily observable by one without political wisdom. It is the job of the wise voter to know who or what or why they are making such a weighty decision. One, in order to make a wise decision in a vote, must have a sturdy foundation in political history and political literature.

Political history no doubt advises us as to the nobility or infamy of sovereigns in the past. It allows us to use prior experiences as a torch to illuminate the pathway to successful government. Political literature, on the other hand, affords the ability to obtain a political mindset. To delve deep into the minds of historical figures, the minds of noble men, is but a means to, in turn, shape noble men of the present.

Now, in American politics, however, one must be able to recognize the hidden balances. What, then, do I mean by hidden balance? Republican and Democrat represent, in addition, something that is hardly recognized by an ordinary voter. They represent a fundamental balance–a balance, in shaping a successful government, that cannot go underestimated. And that hidden balance is Good and Evil.

Now, what is good, what is evil, can be debated some other time. For now it suffices only to define each ideology and allow the reader to decide. Republican, as we discussed above, represents conservative. In America Republicans (conservatives) are catorigized as, more or less, religious, rich and frugal, family oriented, etc. This, of course, is not concrete.

There are multiple engenderments of Republicans. I am only speaking, I must admit, stereotypically. And Democrats (liberal) usually are less religious, liberal with money, not very family oriented. Notice also that the prefix Demo has never denoted a positive meaning. From this prefix there are words such as Demon, Demolition, Demolish. All of which are no doubt frightening words.

The reason, I think, this prefix appears in the word Democracy is because a democracy, historically, has been a frightening idea. It’s a government where there is no government, and all is ruled by the populace. That sounds like chaos. Note, that Amerca is not a democracy, but a Republic. In a Republic, the populace, through whatever system, authorize who they deem responsible and wise to rule.

Theoretically, of course. If the people in a Republic are oblivious to true political wisdom, then still it could end in chaos. And notice, as well, that the prefix Re, begins the word Republic. A much, so to speak, positive word, meaning to do over and over. Who knows which, of the hidden balance, truly represents the Good or Evil?

That decision is determined by wise voters–presuming, of course, they take the time to evolve into political scientist. And if, indeed, they elect to choose, then they will choose, and they will choose wisely.

The Dangers of Fortnite

Though often portrayed as harmless, gleeful, and merry, modern video games are sub consciously shaping American children into sociopathic killers. Video games are vastly more dangerous, psychologically, than television and radio, per se. And if not carefully observed and thoroughly explained, the virtual world video games attempt to simulate will indeed become “realities.” Now, Radio, on a phenomenological level, is one-fold.

By this, I mean, in its application it, exclusively, revolves around the dispersing of language. This, no doubt, in no way subtracts from its potency as a psychological vehicle, in marketing, and in other persuasive agendas. Television, on the other hand, adds another variable to the formula.

Television, on a phenomenological level, is two-fold inasmuch as in its application, it revolves around the dispersing of language, and imagery. This, indeed, adds to the persuasivity of the device. One last conduit of media that I failed to mention above, but still is indespinsible to the discussion is the computer.

Computers, of course, add yet another variable to the formula. Computers, on a phenomenological level, are three-fold in that they involve language (spoken or written), imagery, and, what I shall refer to as, “user-ship.”

Usership is an important idea for the discussion before us. This usership brings the “mental” into a kind of “network.” Usership is a tool that, during this technological epoch, can be engendered in myriad different facets. A traditional computer uses usership with its mouse and its graphic interface. This allows the mind to not only listen and observe, but to “participate.”

Video games, which are extensions of computers, take this “participation” and intensifies it. It, I must say, is quite the “experience.” Hold on. Then again, it’s not quite the experience: verily, it’s not an experience at all. And unfortunately, for many of our glorious, courageous, and patriotic American children, from all backgrounds, and of all shades, its extremely difficult for them to distinguish between real experiences and imitative experience.

A truly devout, strick, loving, and caring parent will no doubt chastise me for my claim. They will say that through their good parenting and guidance their child will not be led astray. And they most certainly will be correct, for our wise ancestor King Solomon tells us to “train up a child the way he should go, and when he is older, he shall not depart from it.”

It is not that I am challenging one’s judgement as a parent in allowing their children to play any video game they fancy. Nor am I being a hypocrite. For I, with my eternally youthful spirit, on many an occasion, have fancied the adrenaline rush of virtual simulation. It’s for this very reason that I am concerned.

I have witnessed a generation grow up playing Grand Theft Auto, and, when they are well into their teens, they’re getting arrested for carjacking. And most of their first time stealing a car or carjacking some helpless person was on a video game.

Of course, probably they were introduced to the idea of these crimes by the T.V, or by some song on the radio. I would say by their environment, as well, but their environment is only a reflection of what’s going on inside its homes. Thus, if kids are playing games that encourage crimes (and violent ones at that); if they are seeing films and hearing songs that encourage the same thing; then, what do we expect their environments to look like?

The current game that has captured the minds of American Youth is a game called “Fortnite.” In summary, its a violent, wasteland, every man for himself, type of game that connects a network of users to one battlefield, to build forts, to hideout, to even practice guerilla warefare, as if in a true anarchical wasteland.

We have yet to see what type of zeitgeist it will produce in a future generation. But if it’s anything like the Grand Theft Auto generation, then I think we have a lot to worry about. Aristotle, in his infinite wisdom, once said, somewhere along the lines, that the future of a society depends on the education and wisdom of its children. Is it wise to allow our “future” to virtually go to war? It could be. But I seriously doubt it.

But there is one thing we all know for sure: there is nothing like the real thing.

These Shoes My Feet Hold…..

These shoes my feet hold
Done walked many roads
Are scuffed up, very old,
And carry with them many holes
From walking when it was hot
From walking when it was cold
These shoes my feet hold
No, they aren’t fancy or made of gold
These shoes have seen all terrain,
Concrete, and wood.
The walks they have had a wonder to behold
Take a walk in these shoes, one could,
But what’s a shoe without a sole?

Walker 2018

The Whisper

Life began in innocence
What’s wisdom, without experience?
Without knowledge, mind is delirious
What the spirit is, no one will remember this
Once upon a time didn’t exist
And before light was born there was an abyss
And so heaven reached out, and gave them a kiss,
And Death, out of jealousy, aimed at the heart its sorrow , but it missed
Love will cause a drift
Behold, Change! the big shift
You’d dare venture the edge, the steep cliff?
It may be living that they all dread
Not much of it to be done, but much of it to be said
Before opposites were wed,
Balance was dead
And from that void of instability,
Equality rose like bread
Oh mighty Sun, We praise the light ye shed
Mankind is the god that bled.
It was From himself that he fled
Only thought moves faster than light
Ones self is outta sight
And finding it is quite the plight
Trust, everything will be alright.

Walker 2018

The Fountain of Youth

If you are about to quit, don’t just yet
The fountain of Youth is in your sweat

If you are working hard, out of breath
Thinking you can’t take another step

If you are about to quit, don’t just yet
The fountain of Youth is in your sweat

If surrender is evermore a threat,
And giving up seems the easiest bet

If you are about to quit, don’t just yet
The fountain of youth is in your sweat

Sail into the bouyant sea of Life,
catch your dreams in a net,

And Soar amongst the clouds
As if you were a human jet

If you are about to quit, don’t just yet
The fountain of youth is in your sweat

And when you grow old and wise
They’ll call you a vet,

After all these years you haven’t grown old yet
That old saying, and don’t you forget

If you are about to quit, don’t just yet
The fountain of Youth is in your sweat

Walker 2018

Physical World, Not Real?

In this article, I will argue that thoughts about the physical world are more true, more real than the physical world itself. Our thoughts, it appears, are the only “true” things ever experienced. If thoughts are the only real things, one might inquire, then, what about the physical world? Are we to presume, as well, that it is not real? That sort of declaration, on its face, are grounds for a mental disorder, no? Not only is it a ridiculous statement, it’s a logical error.

Certainly it is not correct to deduce a non physical world on the basis of our thoughts being the only accessible truth. Instead of denying the existence of a physical world, perhaps it is more appropriate to reevaluate what by “physical,” we are attempting to designate. In other words, mildly, what is the physical world? What are those mighty mountains and curving rivers; those arborous valleys, and barren deserts; that deep ocean, and azure tinted sky? What, on earth, is it?

The physical world, itself, I think, is a different kind of thought. It is the type of thought that all humans can possess collectively, and, more or less, can agree upon. Notice that the uncanny nature of thoughts, unless otherwise disclosed, is that they cannot be known but by who yields them. An individual’s thoughts are their own private treasures. The physical world is not that sort of thought. It’s the exact opposite of that variety of thought. It’s the only thought we have that’s “thought” for us; that’s pre-concieved, understood, and manifested. When we think of opposites, we think of hot/cold, wet/dry, matter/anti-matter or left/right.

What is thinking’s opposite? One, if they are as straightforward as I, would be hesitant to answer with, simply, “not thinking.” Indeed, it seems logical enough. It’s not however that simple. This notion of “not thinking” will be discussed later on. For now it suffices to know that not thinking is not the opposite of thinking.

If they are even more straightforward as I, when they discover that not thinking is not the answer, they’ll probably settle with “doing.” And while it seems like a worthy rebuttle, because thinking itself is a “doing,” it cannot be concluded that it is thinking’s opposite. The opposite of thinking is–drumroll please–the physical world. The physical world is the thought that’s “thought” for us. It is the thought that triggers sensations for us like sight, sound, touch, smell, and taste.

Come, walk with me into the woods. Here, observe this pine tree, rub its bark, finger its green needles, and smell its sweet sap. Step away from the tree. Now, mentally, observe that same tree. The image of it, hold it. Now, rub its bark. Is it not just as before? Finger its green needles, are they not just as soft? Smell its sweet sap, is the scent not just as pleasant?

How could I ever imagine, that something happening on the inside of me is less true, less real than what is on the outside of me? Which of the pine trees are the real pine tree, the mental or the physical? Truth is, they are the same in essence, different in nature. They, the two pine trees, are the same thought thought in different ways.

The physical world, again, is an extension of one’s mind. It depends on the mind, because the mind is its source. When consciousness goes, it goes. We know not whether, in one’s hour of departure, if it stays or leaves. The world cannot survive without consious minds; and, even if it could survive without them, how could that ever concern little ole human beings? What does it matter to human beings, if there are no thoughts around? What does it matter if there is no “Being” around? How could there ever “be” without any beings?

What, then, is metaphysics? Metaphysics is the study of the physical world’s relationship to consciousness. It is how humans have come to understand and make use of their consiousness–in particular, their reasoning senses. While metaphysical philosophers, all the while, thought they were reflecting upon something physical, in my eyes, they in truth were reflecting upon themselves.

What is Death? Death is the end of thoughts. And this returns the discussion once more to “not thinking.” Death tends to be percieved from the perspective of the mourners. This is so because the mourners are the ones who bury and quote prayers for the deceased. It is they who mourn and live on until, no doubt, it is their own time to be buried. The soul that has perished, however, will always be the true mourner. For, it is he who has fallen from his loved ones–it is he who has fallen from the world.

When thoughts die, so does every thing thoughts encompass. Upon Death, one does not abandon the physical world and their loved ones, but their loved ones, along with the physical world, accompany them on their journey. Simply put, when the user exits the game, everything in her user-universe exits with her.

The physical world is a thought that is exclusively individual. Quite paradoxically, while being exclusively individual, it is at the same time exclusively collective, in as much as all of generally sane individuals have the same idea of the physical world in mind. It is the physical world, which I have argued is a different kind of thought, that connects mankind into one consious unity.

At any rate perhaps we will continue this argument another time in more detail. I have argued that thoughts are more true and real than the physical world. I also argued that the physical world itself is a different kind of thought. These reflections were on my mind some time, and so I decided to share them. I hope, having endured my longwindedness, I did encourage further inquiry upon the issue on your behalf……