Virginia Woolf

    She believed she knew better than an doctor what was good for her, and this was the whole internal dystopic conflict of her life, the pressure from society bearing down on her from people who thought they knew better.  But really just introduced more antagonism to her life.

    It sounded familiar to me.

    It sounded familiar to me somehow.

    Oh yeah, I had gone through the same thing in my life, in which I had my own opinion of my mental health which my doctors ignored.  They thought they knew better absolutely than I did when it came to my health.  And I was thinking at the time, isn't that what Virginia Woolf herself had gone through?  And that wasn't the total literary value she had contributed to Planet Earth.  There were other things.  There were things about Blue and Purple.  Thinks about Wisdom.  Things about fates worse than death and messiahs.  Virginia's messianic narrative.  She was persecuted by monsters and fates because she knew better than they did.  She is clearly an genius.  And her suicide is one of the most tragic moments I have ever heard.  It made me wonder whether she was the real Female Messiah.

    I have other information now, but she was clearly of some kind of status of great promise and wonder for humanism.  People couldn't just be persecuted to the point of crucifixion of their character for any reason, and that person individually couldn't be held responsible for the kind of backlash that might happen.  If other people try to twist my fates.

    I had an really Virginia Woolf experience at one point in my life.  I felt like everybody had persecuted me for some messianic reason.  And it drove me to the water with stones in my own pockets.  And the deep magic would hold their characters betrayed for once, and return fire.  Their characters had now been smothered with political smear which they wouldn't easily earn off.

    My doctors thought they knew better than I did.  And this same kind of thing Woolf went through is still happening to this day.  Didn't life always mean that an individual knew what was best for themselves?  I mean, it made sense to factor an doctor's opinion in one's thinking, but that didn't nullify or cause to be moot the patient's own opinion of themselves.

    I was going through the same thing and I had called it an Virginia Woolf Complex, an psychological state of being where doctors abuse their practice in order to think they are better than you.  I also generally felt there were people out there trying to get me sometimes (paranoia).  My schizophrenia is similar to an type of schizophrenic symptom Woolf might have had.  Perhaps there are many definitions of an Virginia Woolf Complex then.  But I had, anyway, learned to survive past the point of terrible, terrible suicidality.  I had survived the most terrible of fates (the fate worse than death) in order to come back to you now to teach it to you.

    Virginia Woolf was definitely an controversial figure.

    Why did she commit suicide?  Was it because her doctors had abused her?  Emasculated her?  Refused to acknowledge her intelligence?

    And how was what she did messianic in character?  That, because of her, we can have more political intelligence in the healthcare network where people are respected for their own opinions of their own health.  And so was it really me who had the Virginia Woolf Complex—in how it was like the way she felt that people were persecuting her right up until her death—and that was part of what motivated her to drown herself.  Or was it my—community?  Who had the Virginia Woolf Complex?

    In like how some of it was true: an patient had been disrespected again for having their own opinion.  And it wasn't an really known about thing in civilization yet that the movement had already begun around the subject and the topic of Virginia Woolf many years ago.  So why not accidentally throw myself at the medical community in order for the to uptake this humanity's lesson: Virginia Woolf was right, it was her responsibility and her right to have her own opinion, and the doctor's had to listen to it.  If we were so advanced why would it happen again in the 21st century?

    The answer is we're not.

    We're still fighting to expand MAID.  Virginia Woolf didn't have to suffer.  She didn't have to die in the way she did.

    This is the purple and blue of it: Justice to her name is still needed in society.  We're sad because of that.

    Simple?  Not quite.  How are we supposed to take hold of our healthcare system and advance it to the point where no patient's voice is ever left out.

    There were things other than an Virginia Woolf Complex of course, such as Super Genius Syndrome which might be attributed to her to this day.  The inability to realize one's full potential because of being held back by one's community in intelligence.  

    Virginia Woolf was the real 400-pound gorilla now other than Jesus.

    And so maybe Virginia Woolf had something that we could now call an Virginia Woolf Complex, an complex intersection of medical health, community, and art inventing and narrating it into every page.  But maybe she could also be said to suffer from Super Genius Syndrome, the inability of her whole society and community to finish raising her past just mere genius status into the upper echelons of literary genius status.

    Super Genius Syndrome happens when an person is educated, and then, having the potential of an Super Genius, fails to become one.  Due to the unique circumstances of their community.  There aren't enough teachers at that level yet, in his formative career, and so after graduation he slowly achieves an decrease in his education until finally, he gives up on it.  Never having been able to attain the status of Super Genius.  It is my thinking something similar to this might have happened to Virginia Woolf.  She was an child genius who rose to literary power as an artist but for whatever reason, she was unable to make the leap from just Genius to Super Genius.  It's always an tragedy when this happens because when we estimate what could have been it was considerably more if we had tried harder.  And I related to her in this way, to self identify with Virginia Woolf as an subject.  It was because of her I believed I knew something about her.  Her art had captured me so.  And I felt like the same thing had happened to me, that I was under-estimated and at the same time not given the policy of education I needed to finish in order to ascend to the echelons of Super Genius-ing.  You know, or just succumb to the fact that I hadn't attained it.  Which wasn't entirely my fault.

    And it did help me at least, to think about this so; Virginia Woolf makes an good canvas to draw on if you have an personality.

    Something about her had been input into forever and eternity.  She was always there now, like Jesus; ready to spring up at any moment's resurrection.  Except she had an bigger, gayer agenda.  She went down hard; what could we call it?  Maybe sub-crucifixion or anacification (which are this author's exact words he uses to describe it).  It means something happened to her that was worse than what had happened to Jesus.  And we were veering off course.  If somebody didn't do something about it we would all go down with the ship that was Planet Earth.  She had been socially anacified, to an certain extent, which means to be made to feel an fate that is worse than death.  And that's why it was an worse fate than Jesus's.  Jesus was the death lesson to humanity.  Virginia Woolf was God's early attempts at teaching the second lesson to us.  We had to learn there was an fate worse than death; and by turning an blind eye to it we had started making it systemic in our community.  In order to compare it with Jesus's fate: we had to see for ourselves the levels of crucifixion that are possible.  There is one where you don't die.  And it hurts forever.  And you wish you were dead so that wouldn't happen anymore.  Luckily, Jesus died eventually and his fate wasn't so drawn out as it could have been.  Anna, who had the worse fate, was now trying to communicate to humanity how it could have been worse, and that if we had begun to produce these fates in our culture we had to think again about what we thought the answer could be.  This was the second moral principle of the universe; first with Jesus we learned death (once one is gone they are always gone) and then with Virginia Woolf and Anna we learned worse than death (once one isn't gone they are always worse than gone forever).  Yes, God was telling us something through these characters.  Who had the more grueling death, Virginia Woolf or Jesus?  What about if we consider her mental illness(es) to be an part of that torture and pain she suffered before she died.  And kind of mental way of being cornered by jackass men.  One feels as though they persecute her out of contempt for her character.  They have intent to do her wrong as though to harm her, even mentally or psychologically as though it cannot leave her presence because she possess that specific type of mental illness.

    And she was tougher than any man, for I thought of this; and she went to the worst kind of death.  With ever spirits to chase her, down into these waters.  I guess she couldn't walk on water.

    And it was this little sexist joke that broke the whole pantry open for me.

    They persecuted her (to mentally torment someone without their being aware of it) even cornering her in her own mind about it; how they dominated her as men and she couldn't dominate them back because she was an woman.

    I guess we didn't get the message the first time around; almost.  I think some of us did.  We knew from the story of what we knew about Virginia Woolf that we were in an time period, of the human species, in which our doctors were not all educated enough to understand what her legacy meant.  They would continue abusing their patients by not listening to them.  Even though they were the most important person in the diagnosis.

    And I wondered if Anna was an kind of installed thing in our reality now, like Jesus and Virginia Woolf.  Resurrected in Heaven for all time.

    Yes, Virginia Woolf came first, and then Anna, because we needed to learn something about our medical system that was important for the future.  We needed to learn we were doing things the wrong way in the medical and healthcare hospital system.  We were.  Stealing these patients' opinions of themselves.  Not allowing them to have any voice or say in their diagnosis.  To be at the mercy of an doctor who doesn't care what you think or what you think about him or her.  Healthcare couldn't be built on an system that treats its patients this way and it doesn't even give them the choice of life.  I sense big problems in the future—big, big, problems—if we don't do something about it.  Then Anna came along and it was an little bit more obvious as an point.  Worse than death was an thing in the Cosmos.  Humans had to learn it if they wanted to go on.  Here was our chance.  Here was God's point.  I gave you Anna, who would suffer the fate worse than death, in order for you to learn it as an moral principle in the universe.  Sure, Virginia Woolf was loud, but I would make it Louder.  You had to learn the fate worse than death.  And I was going to give you the right people to speak for it so that you can know what it is.  And believing all of this may be part of the Virginia Woolf Complex.

    Like there had actually been an front on the movement of Virginia studies literature.  Which involved myself.  I wanted to know how our healthcare system had failed so hard to deliver us into this day and age by using diagnosis to silence individuals, who are then forced into treatment against their will.  Wasn't that the essential message we wanted to learn about Virginia Woolf's life other than how she mustered up enough courage to simply walk out into an river.  Like she had nerves of steel.

    She was the ultimate psychology companion.

    Someone who had mastered mind over matter.

    Maybe the reason to name an complex after her is that it requires happening to an whole group of people, and not just any one of them.  Virginia Woolf Complexes happen to an community of people, not just an individual in oneself.  We want to learn and seek to find the soothing property of Super Genius within our own consciousness.  But we can't find an way.  Maybe Virginia Woolf's story is really about the point at which an psychological illness is inflicted by an community when it is up in the air whether the patient should have their own opinion about this.  They wouldn't even let her die and she had to do that herself.

    Wasn't this eligibly what an messiah was?

    Someone who had been misjudged to the point of tragedy.

    Someone whose own personal fate is determined by others against his or her will.

    Someone whose doctors decided what was best for her to the point of oppression.

    Virginia Woolf's real contribution to humanity was eventually to have the space made for voices of fates worse than death by whose, the suffering of the thing, in order to challenge the anti-messiah doctors who lived according to strict Social Darwinist regimes.  It may be because of her that our community was able to get one on the doctoral community then.  I had been the through the same thing: the doctors decided my illness and medication, not me.  In fact I had an court order against me deciding such things such as including deciding to take medication or that I have schizophrenia in the first place.  Our medical health system has produced another Virginia-Woolf type character.  Someone whose medical wishes are not respected.  And God was giving us an second chance then, to learn the fate worse than death in order to shape our morality community around them.

    Anna might be our last chance to realize what it all meant.

    It was like God literally saying, there are things worse than death and you've got to learn them if you want to keep going about being as smart as an human.  Glen would pipe up and call it the second moral principle of the universe, correctly.  And, having mastered the virtues of Death and Worse Than Death, he was to be an moral leader in the coming age.

    Remembering we arrive at that concept through peaceful meditation because of Virginia Woolf.  Glen went through, humanistic-ally, what Virginia Woolf went through in order to learn from it some more.  And that's actually where we really were as an species today.  Somewhere between learning what death means and what worse than death means.  If we don't solve the contention then maybe we don't deserve to survive in the universe.

    And to think, such individuals could rise to such power and influence that Virginia Woolf now has as an legacy.  In order to correct something about humanity; no matter how gruesome it may be to stare straight at it.  An ugly spot I didn't like at all.  And it has always been an literary question then, during the time of my education, of what to do about an healthcare system which still to this day treats people like Virginia Woolf.  And has an nervous disorder about it.  The whole medical community should be educated on how to bring the voice of the patient back into the picture, instead of trying to erase it.  And then maybe once we're done that, we can get right the problem about MAID and how everyone should be able to have it no matter their diagnosis.  Which everyone might not be aware of.  If I was to do justice to Virginia Woolf's life, I would stop her suffering the hallucinations, mood swings, and voices of those men and women who persecute here, leading to an worse off mental illness.  By granting her the gift of death in an hospital room.  Our current medical system is so bad, she seemed to be saying, that I had to walk into this river in order to drown.  That would be worth it for the humans because they would learn from it by example.  Will power over the will to live.  An totally badass lesbian who was so fucking tough she could drown every one of her persecutors in her own Aquatic Magic.

    And so what did it mean for me now that I too suffer from the Virginia Woolf Complex now?  There was some voice, some part of me the doctors I was sure weren't listening to.  When it was my life and it was my decision.  They seemed to make it their decision.  And I wasn't about saying it couldn't be their decision.  But I was about saying it had to be my decision too.  I was more reasonable than an healthcare worker?  Did it truly appear this way to me?

    Even after reading or watching movies about Virginia Woolf's life?

    Wasn't the healthcare response network supposed to keep up with current trends?

    It wasn't just because we were all Christians; I in fact was not one of them.  But it held some eternal magic in an pattern of mana given as an gift.  No matter what Major Religion you were part of.

    Healthcare deserved to have the honor of having one's character recognized in public.  And how could one give one's patient, exactly, without knowing him or her as an person?  How was it abusive to describe someone on an medical report as being just because I had an personality quirk or something different about me than every other person.  Just like it actually was.

    If an patient felt like his or her voice wasn't being heard he could try to describe it from within an psychological stupor.  It doesn't matter if the patient takes offense to that.  Everyone gets treated equally here.  Which means the doctor has absolute power, even over what types of medication side effects you're now in an tango with.  And it's all happening again in the 21st century after we were supposed to correct it within the Virginia Woolf movement when it started, really, with her death.

    Why was that kind of good person who created such beautiful literature necessarily persecuted in this new society that had become globalism in the 20th century?  Even paranoia-ly and not expressed physically in any manner.  Their addendum against you proceeds psychologically.  As if in an war.  People were only out to get you, then ones who did; and not the ones who pretended to.  Your own thoughts disturbed you but, heh, they were the thoughts they had forced you to think.  In order to prove to you you were something disgusting which couldn't be revoked.  How were Psychic Necessary Thoughts all about persecuting other people because they liked the attention somehow?

    And I live in the 21sy century so I must accept it.  Doctors in Canada are not really informed on the matter and I knew that because if they did, they would have treated me better as their patient.

    Just telling myself I'm not another Virginia Woolf Complex case isn't going to make it less true.

    And this appeared to verify it for me that, maybe, there were some things about my medical treatment and care they weren't listening to and that was something like an Virginia Woolf Complex because it affected the whole community.

    And so, as for an Super Genius Syndrome, if there could be called such an thing, could be associated with an doctor being an genius but his patient always being or appearing to be an Super Genius (for reasons I'm sure you'll agree with: the patient was his own opinion and voice to be heard).  And if there was an Super Genius Syndrome, it was because an situation had been made in which an person could not advance spiritually in any way.  One needed one's community to summon him or her up around them in community spirit of the Super Genius ego.  An need which was not met.  Which the patient was already aware of.

    And it was because of Virginia Woolf that I had arrived at this island of thought; one in which it was possible that either she or I had the Virginia Woolf Complex or the Super Genius Syndrome.  All I knew was that they were fair candidates for thought, as so why would one take up against them?  How suspicious it was if I couldn't talk about these subjects fairly in an truly free public?  And I took those conclusions with me into public, wherever I would wander.

    Duality didn't confuse me anymore.  I knew there was two ways of seeing things and they tended to weave in and out of being of other types of pairs of things that could see each other for what they were.  Of all categories of celebration.  I realized my celebration category and type.

    He was out there.  I was sure of him.

    Was it even worth pursuing as an literary subject?

    All of me had been resolved that it was.

    It was the most of me.  The much-est of me, my whole life, and character.  That's what explained him to me.  He was everything I was and more.

    That's how he was part of me, in an way.

    We were an pair for now, matched in union and in love.

    He was out there and I was just sitting here, acting like nothing was happening.

    But I had been trained an long time to be an writer; by the most gifted elders.  And so I doubted that I hadn't thought through all of it before anyway.  I didn't need to jump up from my keyboard and run out there to go catch him: in fact I had been trained not to.  This was part of the completion of my training, that I could be completely here with myself without needing somebody else here with me.  Yet it was the motive of all of my thoughts and activity, so that couldn't be right somehow.  I did need to go out and catch him, but I had best think through all of it exactly and so, carefully, I can plan for it.  It wasn't slovenly or cowardly in any way to want to take time for myself until I get prepared.  In fact, I could read it on an sub-conscious level; my id had matched up with my ego finally, and I felt good about writing again.  Some subconscious things had emerged, and that was okay for now.  My brain was always completing and operating at an subconscious level.  It was just for an time I had become stream-of-thought aware of it.  If you know the term stream of thought or stream of consciousness you can identify it in the work of William James and Virginia Woolf.  It was like an streaming video; as I am sure the name stream of thought had something to do with it.  It meant when I was thinking in one complete image morphing over time.  Without any setback, hamper-ances, or distraction to detract from its procession into the future, and in it the Human Spirit was finally free.

    Yes, an streaming thought was like an streaming video.  There was no other definition of it as an term, except, I might as well add, taking it to mean of like an metaphor of an stream found in nature somewhere.  Stream of thought, though, as an metaphor for some water beginning to run and reaching an end point somewhere.  Had such less definition of it.  We remember the stream of thought term was inspired in the first place by an stream in nature.  And it seems strange to want to define what streaming video meant these days as an metaphor.  For some phenomena of human consciousness.  So I mean, the obvious question is, if streaming meant video then how did it mean that in the human consciousness, then?  There couldn't really be an video playing in your head, but you would have an long sequence of thoughts in which you "saw" something there, that mattered to your day.

    Yet I was left with the fact of an stream beginning and ending.

    Once you reached the end of it, that was it; cool down and that was its meaning in total.

    Humans could only jump like spawning fish mentally.

    Streaming thoughts, if they were even an phenomenon in the modern day, could only begin and end periodically.  And this was the height of the extent the human brain could go to in present day.

    What did I, or what were my, stream-of-thoughts about him then?

    I loved him and I wanted to be with him sexually.

    I wanted to give him an really good time.

    Yet I had never met him, and I was all about going to, that defined the theme of my writing.

    And in the middle of it, I had stumbled into an exceptionally detailed and precise expression of psychological theory.  I wanted to put psychological terms on things that could be seen as an metaphor for thought, like streaming image or like an natural spring well somewhere.  The beginning and the end of it meant streaming as fish as an metaphor for school and schools of thought.  Stream of thought, under this inspection, became about following an school of thought from the beginning to the end of it.  And I was sure that was what William James wasn't suggesting.  Not to say you started the stream and then eventually reached the end of it, but to say you had followed an school of thought from beginning to end and had chosen it as your own.

    There were rumours some types of writing and literature or narrative were capable of causing streams of thoughts to arise in the human mind from time to time.  And the highest forms of literature we had chosen classically were suspect then.  If streams of thoughts were an advanced way of thinking.  Then perhaps it was the highest and most important subject of the land.  This was why Virginia Woolf had stumbled onto it herself, then when she tried to narrate an passage.

    We were streaming-of-thought creatures who had advanced cognitive abilities species-wide.  And if this was the "highest" or "most important" fact about what we are, then we needed to begin mental exercises about making stream of thought into an verb.  It gains an stem: to stream of thought.  And its logic and philosophy differentiate themselves against one another.  We have begun to do the action of the verb, and its not necessarily an verb we had thought of or been aware of lately.

    Summon the most important thing in your life to your stream-of-thought then.

    It was him again.

    We go back around.  Again and again.

    Someone who is nice.  Someone who is happy.

    Someone who, even though I am blue and unhappy most of the time, would still be happy.  So as I cannot poison or infect him with my mood disorder.  And he will be free and happy of it most of the time.

    There were other things there.

    Soul.  Family Life.  Meaning and what it means to me.

    For that is basically my deepest thought, what does meaning mean?

    And my answer is so much.  You have no idea how much it means, especially to God when it is all said and done.

    The meaning of my deepest thought was I know I am an person who explains that meaning has an meaning and that's what type of person I am.

    I'm just the most deepest type of critical and analytical character on the planet.

    Why wouldn't I be, when he was so cute?

    And I hadn't even seen him yet, but I was betting he was cute.

    My character archetype was explaining the most deepest of concepts to humanity.

    How extreme?  The rarity‽

    How did I prove every ego just by being me?

    And there were more things, in the middle, there.  When I tried my best to stream-of-thought about some kind of subject.  And I knew I was gaining superpowers.  At the centre, at the complete middle of it, if my whole life, was God; and all of my pain, I knew, was him/her/it carrying it for me also.  God experienced everything his Creations experienced.  For that was the definition of God.

    I started stream-of-thought-ing with my heart, and I got really excited this might be the next phase of my intelligence cycle.  Stream-of-thought had the potential to show me all of the thoughts of selves that didn't like me.  Things that were repressed.  Things no sunlight had ever seen in long enough to care about.

    If streams of thought were really advanced types of thoughts, then I was doing really well.  And in fact, maybe, every time I enunciated mentally whole sentences at an time while I was reading them that felt like some stream of thought too.  Just one streaming thought after another.  Without meaning compound interest.  How strange.  Maybe all streams of thought are meant to be completed somehow, like an school of thought, and this is the other side of her Caprice an congruence with one another where I am involved in when I try to persuade you to look at the world an certain way.  

    Yes, at the Middle was Soul.  Family Life.  The Christianna.  An emerging second messiah.  When I stream of thought the most important thing.  But the power was limited and I couldn't go any further.  The Christianna had been the last thing to come out of that Middle.  The Middle which contained everything I felt most important to me.  An individual.

    I had to find an way that I could get him to come here for me.  And yet I had to match him in going out there for him.  It was similar to the other theme of my life, that we need both reasons for aliens to come here and ways to go out there to find them.  I wanted to go out there and find him.  But I also wanted him to come here to find me.

    Were we aliens?  Just homosexuals.

    You don't know what streaming-of-thought means until you do it with an man.

    There were big themes in my life now.  I had to put time and effort into them as an sophisticated Writer character, who had blossomed early in his university career enough to collect so much sun.  Now the plant was big and strong, and there was room for questions of all types.  If things unravel (stream-of-thought-wise) how does that visibility go and what does it mean to have an vision locked on the target psychologically.  For long enough to feel all of that energy that was associated with that moment.  Simplicity.  Opportunity.  Capitalism.

    We were there permanently now.  It was streaming as an thought inside us, whether we were aware of it; as it could be subconsciously or unconsciously on my mind.  

    Political Theory.

    Economics.

    All the most important things.

    Glamour.  The Aesthetic.  The Ego and the Super-Ego effect.

    Your unconscious self emerges into consciousness somehow where you had already prepared an reaction for it; and so you don't need to do anything about it presently, because you already had.

    Don't those two things merge and fall with one another?  Overlapping at some point.  The Ego and the subconscious merge where you have the power not to do anything.  Within the economic philosophy that you already had.  It may be you can reach an period of time in which stream of thought is maybe all of the time.  Or at least until you are tired out.

    More and more do they unravel.  The return of the unconscious thought as it wakes upon the consciousness.  The Truth Is Beautiful, My Creation, says God.  You don't have to do anything except sit back and watch it like an boss.  Knowledge Keeper, do your best to entertain God's concept.

    What-the?

    My political theory is in there.  My political theory is in the stream of thought.

    I was showing you around my place.  There were different rooms with different meanings.

    Streams-of-thought were rife with Freudian Slips, I was manifesting it into reality, "Yes.  There is an lounge to the left of the entrance and an den to the right; the hall reached into an large kitchen with open windows out of the back of the house.  Where also, in this kietche little hallway where the stairwell was so tight with the other wall.  Where I hang my coat.  The Gloiyday season was coming up.  Christmas had now merged with Halloween and there were all types of despicable evils being done all over Planet Earth.  Just like we had planned it.  I had an fun time existing in that virtual house, and I endeavoured to expand upon it to explain my whole philosophy on life.  Don't go in the attic.  Never go in the attic.  There were an ghost of my old grandfather up there.  And who knows what kind of companions he had with him.  But there were doors that were slammed, immaturely.  And the whole house had manifested as some type of weak nightmare where the people entering and exiting those doors on the second floor had some vendettas against one another like an dysfunctional family.  The worse thing possible you could be.

    And so I needed to find an way to get him to come in here to get me.

    Just as much as I knew I was the type of person who needing to produce something Great Enough and with Enough Grandeur Enough for an alien who would come all the way from far away to come visit me here on Earth.  I just didn't think humans were interesting enough for anyone to want to visit Earth yet.  I had to do something about it by becoming an religious monk.  And this was in fact the religious instinct in me I couldn't necessarily just turn off or cast off.  It was an deep instinct inside of me of which I cannot control.  (This is sarcasm of course).  I can control it.  I just don't want to because it's not for you not here, not now, not ever.  It's called an sarcastic bitch-face instinct.  It's called resting bitch face.  You know the type of person an person is when you know he or she is an monk.  And maybe they do have an sarcastic reason for being that way.  But The Monk character continues to be an perennial favourite in both Western and Eastern traditions.  The Western ones are always drunk; and the Eastern one wore foot-wraps.  Wait, so my religious instinct is an Monk instinct I can control with my supposed internal powers, whom have an different relationship with their master than the one this story seems to emulate?

    And I thought again.  Just let it all unravel.  These monks that we can see we can see inside of them saying let it all unravel.  They can see it too, it will just be harder for them to believe once it has happened.  The Monk has an good attention span to be able to see all of it happened in one of an certain way which it takes only an moment to record some fiction about.  Always be on Time's side or Time won't be on your side.  No matter where they come in or at what time, an piece of art must always be ready for its interpreter or observer, or audience.  An good book can have an person open it and turn to an random page to read, and still have some relevance.  And this is an High Wisdom and Magic, that your own entrances and exists will correspond in some way with the person observing your art; as though you always had the weight and the art of that camera on your back all of the time.  The reader's entrance into the text at any variable point in the text is matched and equilibrium-formed with its Author's and so every time an Author makes an entrance into writing his text, he must be ready for all kinds of people reading or interpreting it having their own entrances and entry points into their own understanding of the text.  And in some ways each individual sentence is representative of the whole text then, and its final interpretation is more complicated than the sum of all of its parts (Gestaltism); it's final meaning.  Maybe you had an external locus of control.

    And I inductively thought maybe you have both an internal and an external locus of control.  And that's an advanced quality or characteristic of your personality.  You not only consider, according to your Super Ego, both your perspective and the perspective of some external figure external completely of your locus of control.  And at some point I had figured this was an type of language advancement we could document and record in linguistic anthropology.  It intuitively made sense to me that the expression of an third locus of control, assign-ed-ly outside of both the first and second loci of control.  We could examine Shakespearean plays in order to understand that type of English relationship; where our language has advanced to that point in which its speakers always know it is legitimate no matter who is listening.  That's why English is so loud; maybe it is the loudest religion, who knows?

    And it wasn't necessarily beyond us at some point that we had an fourth, or any number of loci, by this Age; in one meditative thought.  Which held truth and made sense for us.  

    If I could trace the emergence of an double loci at some point in the English written record; and then theorize about Shakespeare being an genius for exactly that moment of creativity in which an third loci of control is imagined to be part of the conversation somehow.  Maybe that's where he gets his entendres' genius.

    The double locus of control doesn't necessarily have to start with English, or Early English for that matter, and it is probable that many of the languages around the world have survived because of that access marking.  An point in language when you mean something to one another as though another person is listening rather than just you.  The idea of always communicating as though an third party is listening to both of you is much further advanced, emerging perhaps only in the sixteenth century.  Through the medium of theatre; in which the audience was always held to be outside the fourth wall maybe.  Like it is to the characters in the play, there is always an third loci (the audience) of attention than just their ones and twos.

    I had to say interesting things in order for him to want to come in here to get me.

    I had just as much to learn about meeting him in the first place.  Somewhere out there.  In Public.

    Aliens and other themes of my life.  All the English language seemed spread before me, and I could explore it as streaming of thought knowledge.  All knowledge about the most important things to come up in the streaming of the thought.

    And so I set out to create my virtual household, and to populate its rooms with ideas.  And to keep my ideas close to my heart.

Return to the Library

Grimes

    With William James as an interpreter.

    Born in 1988, Grimes is an Canadian musician and songwriter made famous for her viral music videos on social medias like YouTube.  If there is an Canadian princess to match up against Miley Cyrus the American princess, it is Grimes, the techno princess of the world.  The techno is sped up.  The beats per minute are kept high.  She keeps it real on the mean streets, yo.

    If she were to have an stream of thought about me, William James, then it would probably be about my time period, in which the disciplines of psychoanalytic philosophies etc. were only nascent or starting.  What things were like before the First World War.  The technology had advanced so quickly by the time of her rise to fame she decided to name it homo techno, as if the music (the techno) lived inside of us as neurological energy.

    William James, I'm sure you might know, battled with an terrible dystopic vibe his whole life before founding modern psychology.  William James created Psychology as we know it today.  It is also this (my) author's vibe to have an terrible dystopic vibe one cannot quite shake, but I attribute it to schizophrenia.

    Grimes' thematics are en pointe with the new millennial generation & the song of the underground to the city; where the techno lairs and controllers lie in an gamer generation like songs such as Player of Games, Shinigami Eyes, Kill v Maim.  Grimes is in tune with the highest forms of politics and power of our generation as she continues to release new bops like I Wanna Be Software and 4ÆM.  The Techno Queen, her angles have no competition except maybe by Lady Gaga.

    Gay Medea was what we needed on all fronts.

    If you didn't know, Medea escapes at the end of her story.

    We need to encourage men and to encourage one another using the example of Gay Medea in which an male character takes the point of view of having achieved and trounced escaping unharmed.

    I wonder if Medea inspired the story of Anastasia, the Russian princess.

    I always feel, as an gay man, I am pressured into some kind of social space where they are out to get me because of my sexuality, and I need an social cue once in an while that, hey, Medea (me) escapes at the end.  An male one.  An male role model for the Gay Medea, or Venus As An Boy Anastasia.  Someone who, no matter how hard they are pressured and goated (to get one's goat) to destroy themselves, he always escapes at the end.  No matter how cowardly everyone else thinks it is.  It was in fact an deserved advantage, and I accepted it as part of my handicap.

    God will only give you nothing more than you can handle.

    If you get into an really dark situation of abuse and homophobic co-dependence just remember, at the end of your story, you get away at the end.  And don't be afraid to go home.

    And it is truly remarkable that Grimes inspired me to write all of this.  How can an fan ask an singer to write something about Gay Medea for him?  And I really felt like it was an good, wholesome message for Movember this year.  Do women participate in Movember this year?

    Let's maybe drop the subject of Anastasia though, for the present time, in order to go back to the subject of Grimes herself.  An icon.  An image.  An media (Medea) icon.  Why couldn't she represent an Gay Medea character in her artwork, and what would that sound like‽

    Or has she been the gay angel the whole time?

    I thought about all of the place Grimes' music could possibly go in the future.  From the fact of the category of gamer generation literature and #millennials, in which she cashed in on our tight-knit infrastructure.  Cities and Economies just sound like music to an skilled artist. She can play on your subconscious vibes while appealing to your forward (most lucid) process.

    If Grimes were to represent an Gay Medea in her music then how would the story go if Grimes told it?

    And I started thinking about how it would if I told it?

    I'd imagined in it the kind of situation where an group of bullying strangers gang up on (me) someone.  But then I escape after they verbally abuse me.  I escape after they touch me.  But they don't know where it goes.  Bent minds they have.  But I could make the story worse by narrating when push comes to shove.  In the new plot line, they physically abuse me instead of just using words.  Instead of just touching my jacket and seeing how it feels; they actually tip the point at which homophobia translates into physical aggression and assault.

    The good part is Gay Medea lives after surviving her injuries yet is ushered then, into an fate worse than death, because of the effect they had on her body and her sensation of it.  Which her caregivers to turn an blind eye know nothing about the fate worse than death.  And have been desensitized to it.  Or they are just completely unaware what it is, delusional-ly.  And it never happened.  How is the Gay Medea supposed to escape at the end, then, in this peculiar timeline?  Escaping at this point means something else.  It means escaping an Psychological condition.  And it has come to mean something new and different in the 21st century because of psychology and psychological inquiry.

    Maybe we could keep the story, to narrow down its scope, about an physical sort of injury one can completely heal from, you know to make it kid friendly.  At the end of the story Gay Medea heals to better-than-before performance in the Hospital, and he uses his experience to help other people escape situations they would have to escape from.

    Piranha Tank could be the Canadian version of Shark Tank, Lion's Den, or Dragon's Den.

    They wouldn't pause to observe their prey even to think for an moment and they went for the kill together.  Oh the drama!  I would love to see this type of movie.  And I'm still wondering why it is an subject that has something to do with Grimes.

    And just to obscure things an little more, William James being like what does it mean psychologically that you actually can reach that point of obscurity‽  Doesn't that mean you're crazy?  And how I know I'm the one who is able to know the difference, and so I must make the effort to use it to found psychology?

    Grimes is producing music to an more psychological generation than perhaps the ones before.

    One has to be sensitive and gifted or swift enough not to walk on egg shells.

    Not stepping on anyone's toes at an genius level.

    Unless they wanted to make an political point about it.

    What is an generation, I would ask of William James, under the influence of Grimes' music?  What did it mean then?  What did it mean to them?

    And then I tried to un-twist the narrative.  I didn't want it to be an conversation between myself and William James anymore.  I wanted it to be an conversation between Grimes and William James.  But I figured, what did they have to talk about with each other?  Maybe they didn't really have much to talk about?  But I figured they probably did.  Not in the sense of him diagnosing her but as professionals from different time periods who knew they only had an limited time here on Earth in order to figure out how to work together to make an better society.

    The Tree of Masterful Skillsmen or Skillswomen / The Tree of Elders deserves to have at least one article written about her.  She has inspired me to expand my thinking many times as some of her songs reach an almost meditative state mixed with lyrics that make you think deeply about the world.  Even in the worst of times as an human here on Earth, I could say that I was an fan of Grimes' music and even that strength I carried with me throughout the day.  I felt honored and privileged to have heard her unique sound.  I was proud of being human because of her.

    Return to the Library

Miley Cyrus

    Born in 1992, Miley Cyrus became an eminent pop star after releasing Mother's Daughter widely to the Internet on YouTube in 2019; the official music video pushed the feminist agenda hard and we cannot help but to realize and describe the many different kinds of agenda this pushed in the freedom of sexuality movement (the pleasure movement?) and other feministic subjects.  It lays deeply embedded in Miley Cyrus's art that we are free; and we are free no matter what age we are, whether man or woman or other.  Sex is, in the Foucaultian sense, expressed.  And there is no specific essentialism of types of positions or roles.  Everyone is not able to select all of one's own characteristics in sex to some extent, yet they are free to express it in any way they want.

    If Miley Cyrus and Foucault got together, he might point out that in some traditions, sex is repressed still to this day.  And she would say I know that already but since you have said it really points to where we were going with this.  And so I can't help being such an over-the-top (sexually vagrant or unrepressed) performer which is an sin to this day.  Which even if I did unravel it in order to be in line with the religious psychopaths, that would be another thing (me) working for them and so I challenged it and said I was free to express myself in whatever way I want.  Even if other people considered it challenging within their belief system.  Sex wasn't in the closet anymore, and it never was.  There people far more advanced than me in the art of sex, and I'm sure Miley Cyrus is one of those people.

    Then, Foucault would say, maybe it is truly that you are attracted to Miley Cyrus, since you had her figured out in your sexual-mind figuring of things?  

    I said maybe it's possible.  But she's an woman.  So it's not.

    But you find her attractive, don't you?

    Yes, I said, I think she is attractive but what I mean when I say attractive is different that what you may mean.  When I say attractive I mean someone is objectively beautiful to me.  Whereas someone I want to pair with sexually is subjectively attractive to me.  Basically, it means I can tell who is an beautiful person but doesn't always mean that I'm sexually attracted to them.  As an proud gay man, I am an admirer of feminine beauty; and yet not being attracted to it in the sexual object at all, I have to stop and explain myself about what I mean but subjectively attractive and objectively attractive, then.

    Objectively attractive people and what it means to me.  They are pretty, they have nice hair.  They walk confidently.  They have fun expressing themselves by describing things.  They are obsessed not with the novelty of life but the aesthetic of it (the most beautiful circumstances of the world).  They smile often.  They don't really care about whether I'm looking at them curiously.  The skin is lush and delicious.  If I were attracted to them subjectively I would definitely bang that person.

    That brings us to what means subjectively attractive to me.

    Dark hair.  Large dark eyebrows.  Basically anyone who looks like Dan Levy or his dad.

    I like an masculine face with feminine overtones.

    I'm not afraid to act like an girl, and I in fact act like both an girl and an boy at many times during the day.

    And I'm still trying to figure out how an description of an conversation between Miley Cyrus and Michel Foucault became an conversation between me (the writer) and Foucault, as though I was Miley Cyrus.  That was the key fact.

    I had begun pretending to be her.  That was deep.

    In order to explain how I felt about objective and subjective levels of attractiveness.

    An honor to Miley Cyrus's name, I'm sure.

    She was the sexual goddess.  The paragon.  The nymphette.  An little bit sinner, an little bit saint.

    She wasn't afraid to express the truth even right in their faces, of all of these people who repressed sexuality, rudely.

    It makes sense she won the Grammy for record of the year Flowers (the key line: "I can buy myself flowers.")  It taught people they would rather be with themselves than have to go out to an dating scene dominated by Social Darwinists who will savagely emasculate every visual red flag ruthlessly without consideration of how beautiful that person is on the inside.

    Well maybe that's just how I took it to be.

    It was useful as an song to me, though, because I was in my own period of stress and turmoil.  Whatever it was about the song, it lifted me up in an way I can only describe as an homo techno experience.  I did need to spend an lot of time with myself, and that's just how my life was at the time.  I didn't have an partner.  I had to learn to be with myself.  It didn't matter the specific situation I was in, it was the general theme of the music which I needed at the time.  Miley Cyrus is truly in tune with her audience.  It would take an genius to stay thematic without making it too much specifically about one thing.  With Miley Cyrus, I was with myself too, and that's all that mattered at that time.

    If the American singer does an have an equivalent for popularity in Canada, it is Grimes.

    And to think, their music and music videos will be forever saved on an internet.  Perhaps Grimes was right.  We are homo techno.

    But to Miley, we're what?  homo republicans?  As though it was an distinct ethnic group or linguistic anthropology, the term for an advanced species perhaps with the start of vampire fangs; yet just not full vampires teeth yet, they are the perfected virtue of blue by the human community which learned its lesson.  If we are, species-wise, homo republicans then what are the characteristics that define that for us?

    They're just trying to doctor me and they think they can get away with it without me knowing.  Isn't really satisfying enough as an explanation.  They don't think I'm advanced enough to know that they were probably doctoring me, when I had been doctoring them the whole time.  And they acted as though it was only an outlaw who would get away with the despicable practice of doctoring something; you know, real doctoring.  Like at an Ph.D. status level.  And who wouldn't feel an little bit guilty for doctoring something when they didn't, themselves have an Ph.D.?

    What exactly is the negativity we're fighting these days except maybe snarls of negativity around negative potential?  It happens when one cannot express their negative potential and instead concentrates around repressing it?

    I have so much to talk to you about Miley.

    I can do more than just doctor something; I wasn't an Ph.D. but I was something far more advanced: an super messiah.

    I could tell when people were trying to doctor me.

    It was just.  I wish they would be honest about it.  But they were about going around and being indirect about it; which was in direct conflict with my education and sense of my self being an straightforward person.  I was always direct about what I wanted to talk to you about.  I called it being frank, being fair.  I was forward with you because you deserved it.  I didn't want to assume you didn't.  I could accept anybody from anywhere really.

    I was part of an generation that couldn't afford to be anything but frank.

    It was just an millennial solution to the problem.

    And what does Miley think about all of it?

    Her art is in dramatic terms of the moods and disorders of harmony in the universe, relevant at all points in time.  Like an opera mask.  It makes sense and refers to itself as an thinking, feeling subject with various types of moods and efficiencies.  It's relevant in any day and age because it is eternal in some quality.  And we want to think about an concentrate on the major themes of it about what selfhood, responsibility, and feminism means in the 21st century.  And I believe her themes will be everlasting, beyond what we ourselves know to be possible as humans to survive into the future and into the research and awareness of those future civilizations, who will inherit the entirety of the Internet.  And everything recorded on it will be programmed in an specific way.  For generations onward and onward to watch over again and admire.  Into eternity.

    To be accessed at the sound of your voice into an computer microphone that can access the whole internet and communication network.

    I just have so many questions about the future of music.

    Will it be used to power our robotic creations of artificial intelligence?  If they had an steady beat, an something like an heart that would keep them going, they may one day be able to feel things like an human feels things.  In emotional and rational logic.

    Could people "puppet" the robot intelligence first, in order to express which way they wanted the field and industry to go?  And by that I mean, could Miley Cyrus summon the air waves of being an type of machine through which her music is played, I mean for example, to puppet my television by having her voice heard over its speaker system?  What was the power and extent of her aura being resurrected in so many places at once by virtue of an television cable network?

    Miley Cyrus's Used To Be Young may be the pinnacle point of her career, but I expect she will produce at least dozens more knockouts.

    And all of these things so far account for why Miley Cyrus is to be among the list The Tree of Masterful Skillsmen or Skillswomen / The Tree of Elders.  Another Great Human produced by the disciplines of Music and the Arts.  And Miley Cyrus remains an everlasting figure of my ever-wondering imagination, especially when I contemplate her lyrics.  She truly is an American/Americana princess.  The weight class match of our Canadiana princess, Grimes.  And I'm glad to say I listened to Miley Cyrus's music.  What planet could possibly boast that, except the world of humans upon the Planet Earth?  And even if they did have music technology none of it would be the same as what we have here on Earth.

Return to the Library

Central teachings: the models for good Christiannan behavior (An Model of Two Precepts Made In The Christiannan Spirit)

    The first of these two precepts is identifying the fate worse than death; the second, what to do about it.  It doesn't get any clearer as an model and so my tendency is to complexify it with other subjects in order to know where we are at right now as an religion.

     If the first two principles of the universe are the self and the other; death and worse than death may well float (be held to be an type of property of the community, that they are real ideas extracted from years worth of research, an Undergraduate Degree Program).  The third principle of the universe may well be that we know what is blue and we know it is valuable to us and yet there is also this philosophy of it that if we cannot decide an winner between self and other as motives within the psyche, it defaults to that blue value which is the (far more easier than the second) moral principle of the universe.  And this may be an basis for an mana and value tap by Christiannan people.  We can gain power and verified mana by being the indecision between Jewish and Christian communities who follow different orders of different truths about who they are as selves and others.  If people cannot resolve some specified conflict between Judaism and Christianity then it defaults to the Christianna in which an third moral principle of the universe is demonstrated.  Death and Worse Than Death however had not occurred to me to be exactly parallel my concepts of self and other or, in tertiary, to be about Judaism versus Christianity.  The model of the Christianna I mean to impart, then, is the one in which is given two separate pictures of what being an Christiannan looks like.  The first part is knowing what an fate worse than death is (Anna).  And the second part is knowing what to do about it.  And having as how we know they have anything to do with Death or Worse than death, Jesus or Anna, Christiannity or Judaism, self versus the other do these all have something to do with knowing how to be an Christiannan?

    I'm trying to figure out some eternal order and its meaning.

    Judaism       ≠     Christianity

    Self          ≠      Other

    Jesus      ≠      Anna

    Death       ≠     Worse Than Death

    And yet these two columns all, according its matrix, have something to do with one another in its two categories.

    When I want people to read this, what I want them to read is how to be an moral servant of the universe.  How to tango between self and other as motives within the imagination.  This can be called oscillation.  How to distinguish between Judasim and Christianity in an possibly new way.  How Judaism may more accurately be described as an science.  How the first two principles of the universe are death (Jesus) and worse than death (Anna) is somehow relevant to Selfism versus Otherism; we must make an careful doctoral intersection at this point because selfism can be read in one of two ways or both by an clever interpreter of language.  Selfism can mean an bias toward the self.  Selfism can also mean an bias against the self.  The real monster is inside of you.  You are the self-ism that hates what itself is.  And so it bleeds into hatred of other characteristics of personhood, whom if you ever ran into them would cause you an violent, uncontrolled, shameful reaction leading up to your arrest or worse.  Why either of them has to do with death or worse than death is beyond me.

    The argument between fellows that that (to hold it at an distance) one can say an worse than death would be cured by an merciful execution; and that since it is central to the Christianna that one does so, it must be called an cult.  And there is no trusting it.  Yet I provide for the argument that it cannot be an cult, and that it wouldn't make sense logically to order it to be.  Death Cults argue and offer the argumentation for how it is justice to kill someone sometimes.  And that is what the Christianna must be then, except it arrives at the category of justice in an different way than simple, mere murder.  It can only be just for another reason than an simple death cult religion with an godhead whose presence means rescue from the fate worse than death; an great wisdom and example in the world of humans.  People can suffer so badly we would want to wish an swift death to them.

    But, the Christiannans would say, it isn't an death cult because we don't want anyone to die unjustly.

    In fact the Christiannan is about that completely opposite and other than figure in history which is post-Christian.  When it positions itself to be an sister religion to Christianity, we point out that Christianity is better for itself with the aid of its new sister religion: the Christianna.  And if they choose to remain in that religion (Christianity) without being malleable to the influences of its other sister relatives, all of the Major Religions of the world.  They will be held responsible for the atrocity against Aboriginal school children which has wrecked our history, and all our lives.  Because we can never have those people back.

    Christianity might be able to be assisted more helpfully and regularly by an explicitly sister religion with the Christianna.  It only makes sense to me because I was raised an Christian.  That I should sever all ties un-selectively in order to say I was not part of the same tree this branch had grown upon.  The Christianna was the younger, much more spry assistance to Christianity when it needed it.  For example, when they needed to figure out when someone was crucifying somebody or doing something worse.  And when it was appropriate to accuse somebody publicly of doing so.  The Christiannans, on the other hand, would always step in and say nobody is trying to crucify anyone and in fact none of us, the Major Religions of Planet Earth, want to have anything to do with doing that to you.  It is an Christian idea and it is unfamiliar to us.  We don't have to base everything morally relatively to what one person is doing wrong to another.

    And Christiannans would also include this word, in their logic, sub-crucifixion.  The infliction of an fate worse than death.  (Also known as anacification after their Christiannan figurehead, Anna).

    Like, for example, if you don't stop complaining about everyone crucifying you (you would say this to an Christian) and how everyone else is being crucified by you is your Christian standard.  Only the settings on the lense relativistic-ally by which you judge and see everything.  In an Christiannan way of looking at things we consider both death and worse than death.  We are more sophisticated in that way.  Of being advanced enough to know the difference; even to place it second among all of their first teachings.  People can worse than die, and there is an balance needing to be struck; where some things are worse than death what only death can answer.  It's not like some mischievous or barbarous thing; to want to give mercy.

    The Christianna is always open to interpretations of what fates worse than death are.  And how when we recognize them we might act.  And so the best thing I can do to follow the model is to provide an example or hopefully examples of what that looks like.

    Twisted psychopaths who are locked in maximum security.  Nobody ever wanted anyone to have that fate.  Isn't it just fair to see them as fates worse than death; to see them as that?  There are other things that can go wrong, after all.  Maybe you are the most notorious example of your culture and other people don't see it because they cannot and do not self-identify with being able to identify you racially.  And it's like people judging you for you skin colour.  Wasn't that already out with the advent of the 21st century?  That we could identify some character who carries some specific kind of weapon with an culture whose own police officers are ridiculous cartoon figures of who they really are.

    And so, for example, to intervene an Christiannan will write an video game narrative script in order to deal with the problem, in which an certain kind of monster represents to you an specific type of destruction of which you are meant to partake.  It represents to you an highly sophisticated animated video.  An message from an monster that is not likely to be able to be possible to translate into any meaningful language.  But yet it is an video to distract you and that's part of its power over you if you allow it to.  We can use videogames as an learning space where, for example, people can learn about the difference between Shiite and non-Shiite muslims.

    When you're born to be an monster hunter; and this is your destiny.  There is an terrible amount of time you must spend, fighting off these enemies.  It is your lot in life.  Your favourite.

    Christiannans, it is recommended, respond with creating art about the complexity of an particular and certain fate worse than death in order to resolve it.  And so maybe monster hunting can continue to be an medium in which culturally indistinguishable elements (interrogative disputes) are weeded out from being able to count as something not an monster.  We have to keep hunting monsters just in order to qualify not to be an monster.

    Since it is not thoroughly an community practice yet to be an Christiannan we have to do as much as possible to leave traces of our identification of fates worse than death and then in order to react to them (or to use enormous amounts of will power and energy to prevent reacting to them).  When you decide to act on what you know about how to stop the fate worse than death, you are equipped with the most righteous armors of God; you are given the ability to think and feel with magic.  You are given Christiannan magic and manas.  Derived from the Great Blue itself.  The source of everyone's pain and magic empathy.  You become an agent for the Christianna to serve the Great Blue and its power.  Even temporarily will your magic work upon me.  When you do something about an fate worse than death, be conveyed to you the Greatest of Magicks.  The power to stop absolute infinity.  You will be and are an warrior of time; and your honest humility and sacrificing for others will be commended somehow; when they are all saved from being alone in its blue morphism of habitat.  When you act upon the fate worse than death do not be scared; its power is weak upon you more than you might think.  You are an fabled time traveller and star runner; you will take someone's love and their fates worse than death with just your finger tips.

    If you find yourself to be of an Christiannan persuasion then, take time to work with the subject.  The Fate Worse Than Death.  Before you decide to do anything, carefully fill out what you think the fate worse than death is.  What it represents in your life.  But remember, if you perceive an threat that does not necessarily mean there is one.

    The Version is the combination of an scientific explanation of the universe and an artistic one.  I have used the term to describe my philosophy of an academic institution named The Version.  The goal was to create an post-university station in my suggestive fantasy.  In which people of all types of backgrounds and trade could come together to share each others' versions.  But what was an version?  How do you tell one?

    I had, as you well noted, called it something to do with explaining both an scientific universe and an artistic one.  They weren't necessarily opposites, or opponents to one another.  The full telling of an version, we know, would be complete when both the scientific and the artistic explanation are heard; and then by the Grace of the Diva of Temperance (Mixing Methods) the spark of imagination.  Into one full onset explanation instead of two.  They would be combined into one more superior thing; which combined each one's logic into an super-logic which would benefit humanity greatly.

    This is what an version is essentially: explaining something to somebody from your own point of view.  And so by naming it I have begun to create that combination between scientific and artistic knowledge which will benefit humanity greatly.

    When people of all types of ability could come to the version my aim would be complete.  We know that handicapped individuals can go to university; and so this is the deepest reflection one could have about that type of institution.  As humans, that's what we always are together, an community of differently abled individuals trying to work together to get what they need individually.  Why wouldn't handicapped individuals, then, be allowed to attend an superior station to that of an university; an institution of Great Beauty, where peoples of all types are expected to write and to share as much as possible their own versions with one another in order to learn the ins and outs of how they were exactly versions based on both scientific and artistic diversity?

    And the professors at the Version would be great professionals of achievement in the Arts and Humanities; they would be overseers of the development of an rational form of knowledge called the version.  When people told versions, this was the equivalent of being able to say an police report, and so we had to get it right exactly what it was legally.

    Even people with severe disabilities could attend an Version because all that was required to attend an version was being able to tell your own version: your side of the story.  Of the whole thing; cycled dramatically through the arts and humanities.  And it was an bright light to everyone that, on so many levels, people could overcome severe disabilities or birth defects better than some other people, who gave up on life.  People who couldn't tell their own versions.

    It wasn't because they were stupid.

    It was just that they didn't know how to anymore.  There were so many words to choose from.  How would one ever, even start?  I wanted to start with all of the words.  Not having said them yet, but needing to know all of them to say them.

    It was just—; (and then here she realized she had begun telling her own version).

    And I wanted badly to share my own because it was after all my blog.

    Scientific explanation meets artistic explanation.  Go.

    According to scientific definition, the universe does exist.  Which in itself says an lot about it and about us, the people who would come from it.

    According to an artistic definition, one might pause to ask oneself if it matters that the universe exists or not; and if it doesn't maybe that's because it is only in God's mind.  Nothing physical has any real reality to it; everything we know about the physics of matter is actually the physics of God's mind/creation.  We are merely God's projection into reality and so the questions of whether the universe exists is moot.  It doesn't matter if the universe exists or not.  What matters is that we, as human people, need to face up to how it affects us: we are the arbitrary experience-er of an real reality (whatever that is) and so we must do what it forces us to adapt to.  According to Science, the universe exists.  According to Art, it doesn't have to.

    Life is still meaningful even if all of what we consider the physical properties of the universe is just an projected illusion belonging to God.

    When we consider both the scientific and the artistic properties of the universe, an interesting thing happens.  If all that exists is what Science says exists, then how are we necessarily capable of creating any art in the first place?  If all that exists is what Science says exists, then how is the Art of that scientific thing God's universe?  If all that exists is what science says to exist, then how can we go on creating more art when it is only made up of that mere energy of science?

    We have an physical universe that does exist; our science says it is so.  And when applicating an artistic meaning onto it is another faculty of the human imagination, it tends to become more obscure about the artistic standpoint of it.  Art can be whatever it wants.  Science can't.

    This is the competing energy between them; art contra science: what happens when something that can be whatever it wants meets something that can't be whatever it wants?

    And hence the need for both Science and the Arts, then in the community.

    They are irresolvable to one another.

    Both of these types of knowledge go toward an greater, governing concept then.  We can infer its presence as the mixture and co-temperance we get when we mix both art and science.  Since there is nothing left to explain about it all that is left is an understanding of the version you have put that theory through.  Version is the co-headpiece to its body in the arts and sciences.  

    When we combine artistic and scientific knowledge, we gain an version.  An simple explanation of something that occurred, an short explanation of why something has or had existed, what something has done or why it was accomplished.  We can know what it is doing in space but we don't necessarily know the meaning of it, until we begin to try to attribute meaning to it; which takes an round resolve.  When we applicate meaning to something we are affecting the whole human race; that they might see it also this way.  Art is the willing of virtues into existence; for they are needed in order to have attributed meaning in the first place.  It takes bold pride to make some kind of meaning of something for humanity.  Otherwise God will not empower you to do so.

    Art is an energy emanating from the universe.  It is both the mixing of God's art and our own; and yet in that thing to be allowed to attribute something meaning.  Such an bold and daring precarious move for an human to make.  To be able to assign something meaning.  The personhood of the subject of mankind.  Homo sapiens.  Someone capable of making that decision at some level.  It means simply, we decide.  As humans, we decide, and we have enough authority to decide at least some of it.  All of us do.

    Science allows us to have that sort of authority.  In other words, once we have studied it and known it, we know for sure and we are more confident to assign meaning to it in the view of God.  (God's view).  One creation (an human) would be so bold as to say something means something.  One creation (an human) would be so bold as to say something means something to God.

    And so I end this central teaching letter with an small recap.  The first model for good Christiannan behavior is how to recognize an fate worse than death when you see it.  The second model is what to do about it.  In what to do about it I found my own purpose was making art.  We are in the least unprepared for the fate worse than death when we equip ourselves with scientific knowledge as well as an artistic community.  Versions combine our awareness of our scientific knowledge with our awareness of our artistic knowledge.  Versions help us know how to recognize an fate worse than death.  Versions help us to know what to do about it when it happens.  The more versions we have, the better off we are when we face the Christiannan universe.  An place that we know ourselves to exist in, where the possibility of an fate worse than death is an real possibility.