BAD Belief?

What is Belief? Belief is the opposite of knowing/contemplation/pondering/thinking-about.

so-little-whys perhaps

“one definition of religion is to believe in another’s Knowledge of the divine” – somanywhys.com

Belief is to not contemplate and to not contemplate spawns Knowledge and anointing thereof. Knowledge exaltation or ‘fact’ is the gene of deviciveness to which one can identify/anoint with and thus declare other; and this is bad. In this article, belief is shown to be the opposite of knowing. Belief is proven to be bad virtue.

Note for this article: alternate terms for knowing are thinking, pondering, cogitation, mentation, contemplation, ‘learning’, transcendence, philosophy

We will conduct 2 thought experiments, a discussion then conclusion.

Experiment 1

Teacher: Have you ever thought which hand you like the best? Which hand is your favourite? Your left or your right hand?

Student: Ah, no.

Teacher: Why?

Student: I guess, they are all just part of me. 

Teacher: So you are the whole and they are parts of you? They are constituents of the constitution that is ‘you’?

Student: Yes

Teacher: Do you treat them with any difference? Do you care for them equally?

Student: well..no difference i guess. I treat them equally though i have not really thought about that but i do i guess. 

Teacher: No I wouldn’t suspect you would have thought of that before and that is fine. Why do you think you have treated them equally, even if you have not intended to-do-so?

Student: I guess i take care of them and treat them equally as they are part of myself. As you mentioned, they are a constituent of the constitution of me.

Teacher: ok can we say that when something is part of us, we treat it with great care and when ‘things’ are part of us, we tend to treat them equally?

Student: yes that makes sense.   

Teacher: Ok this is Experiment 1. Remember this.

Experiment 2

Teacher: Let’s now look at people. Have you ever thought which person you like best? Which person is your favourite? Your mother/father/family/friend or other people that you do not know their names for example?

Student: Well yes. My family first, then my friends and then people I do not know I guess.

Teacher: Why?

Student: I guess I order my care for these people by how much I assume they care for me. 

Teacher: Ok, let’s call this order of care ‘The Tree of Hierarchy of Care’.…and just to confirm, am I right in assuming that by ‘care’ you mean how much they have and are willing to proliferate you, nourish you, give to you, help you live your life, help you live?

Student: yes i guess that’s it.

Teacher: ok. This may sound silly but let’s cover it. All these people are not part of you, unlike your 2 hands, they are not a constituent of your constitution?

Student: yes of course. 

Teacher: This is Experiment 2. Let’s proceed to discuss.

Discussion:

Teacher: In experiment 1, you said that your hands were part of you and thus you treat and have treated them equally? 

Student: Correct

Teacher: In experiment 2, you said that people were not part of you, were not constituents of the constitution that is you. You then said that you order the people by the amount of ‘care’ or by how much they have/will help you live (i.e. proliferate)?

Student: Yes Mum/Dad/family then friends, then other people. This is the people, who are not part of me, ordered by how much they have/will help me live.

Teacher: Ok excellent. Now can we say the following:

  1. If something is part of you (a constituent of your constitution) you,  whether you are aware of it or not (your virtue), will treat it equally?

Student: Yes

Teacher: ok let’s call this rule 1. Secondly, can we also say the following:

  1. If something is not part of you, you will treat it a ‘not-equal’ amount, determined by how much it has/will help you live (proliferate)?

Student: gosh it sounds harsh but yes that is correct.

Teacher: ok lets call this rule 2.

Teacher: So, 

Rule 1:  If something is part of you (a constituent of your constitution) you, you will treat it equally.

Rule 2: If something is not part of you, you will treat it a ‘not-equal’ amount, determined by how much it has/will help you live (proliferate)?

Conclusion

Teacher: Is it good truth that caring for other people is good?

Student: Yes absolutely

Teacher: And by other people, we mean phenomena that is not a constituent of you, that is outside your ‘you’ constitution?

Student: Yes

Teacher: ok great. Lets just say for argument sake that this ‘you’ constitution included other people as its constituents. By Rule 1, would you treat it equally, like your left and right hand?

Student: By Rule 1 yes, like my left and right hand in this case, they would be treated equally.

Teacher: Yes of coarse. Well guess what?

Student: oh dear, what?

Teacher: The ‘you’ constitution is a belief no-more-or-less than in that of fairies.

Student: Wait, what?

Teacher: Indeed it is and it is the first problem in philosophy called the mind/Mind Problem. ‘We’ believe-in or constitute a Mind (uppercase intended) from the mind (lowercase) potential… But in-fact, that is not my largest point here.

Student: Oh really, now I’m scared

Teacher: haha don’t be. The moral and most important point here is around the badness of constitutions. Constitution is another name for doctrine/decree/absolute Knowledge/rule or ‘fact’. Constituents are the premises/foundations/determinants/underpinnings that give life to (proliferate) a constitution.

Teacher: As per Rule 2, you only and explicitly treat other people (or an-other per se) with less equalness, if and only if they are not part of your ‘you’ constitution. And, as mentioned this is unequivocally a belief! You are thus unintentionally believing in something that promotes inequality to which you said is bad. You are believing-in or are ushering in bad!

Student: oh dear… yes i see. So what can be done?

Teacher: I want you to go back through our conversation and exchange the word person for Knowledge. You see, like a person, the idea that Knowledge is absolute and thus has an other that is ‘other Knowledge’ is all belief. If we look at Knowledge through the lens of Rule 1 & Rule 2, they become:

Rule 3:  If an others’ Knowledge is part of your Knowledge (a constituent of your Knowledge), you will treat it equally.

Rule 4: If an others’ Knowledge is not part of your Knowledge, you will treat it a ‘not-equal’ amount, determined by how much it has/will help your Knowledge live (proliferate)?

Teacher: Do you see?

Student: Oh dear, i see and it is all a belief wow. So i believe-in a ‘me’ constitution which creates others who i can than order my care too based on how much they help me live. 

Student: Transform that to Knowledge; I believe-in Knowledge constitutions or doctrines which creates others, which !oh gosh! are also a belief, who are not part-of/a-constituent-of/a-patron-of/a-believer-in who i can than order my care too based on how much they help ‘my Knowledge’ live.

Teacher: Now do you see?

Student: wait what what? Ohhh…… yes ah, i do see. The thing that underpins all of this is belief and belief can cause divisiveness and bad though wait, it seems to cause both good and bad?

Teacher: Oh yes indeed though if you want to examine all of history, you will see that your revelation around belief-caused-divisiveness, is a very safe truth. 

Student: oh wow yes i get it. When belief ‘beliefs-in’ or creates all of these doctrines or facts, whether it is people/others or Knowledge/not-Knowledge, the net result is and can only be Rule 2 to which is and only is the proliferation of bad… So how do you stop bad belief?

Teacher: Bang! That is the question. As you discovered, bad belief creates Knowledge, knowing or pondering or contemplation collapses Knowledge. Knowing is the opposite to belief, knowing triumphs belief. Through knowing, Rule 1 is proliferated, Rule 2 defeated and thus divisiveness turns into unification with the proliferation of humility, compassion and grace.

Teacher: Always remember, Knowledge per se is not bad, just not for anointing. The more we venerate Knowledge, the more bad belief required and that is less good belief that is knowing (contemplation), the true divinity of ‘what is human’. Through knowing, acquire/better/strengthen Knowledge though do not exalt it. Place it back on the shelf and continue with the virtue of knowing.

Teacher: Now with this Knowledge, you will no longer unintentionally believe in something that promotes inequality in Rule 2 to which is bad. With this Knowledge, you will anoint the divine knowing and use – only – Knowledge and place it back on the shelf when you are finished contemplating (knowing) it. You will do all of this knowing that a net good will proliferate. This is a virtue.
Teacher: Final thought. With Knowledge of the above and the fact that our – current – society is in net degeneration through divisiveness and me-ism, it begs the question “why are we not taught this Knowledge”?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s