— (SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF MORALS: #56 -
TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT AND SLANDER
BY MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE AS BOER / ANZAC
DEFAMATION?
Nous: #56
Time: 10:10 hrs
Date: 2018.8.25
Torah: [#40, #30, #5]@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 70 (#110); Ego: 30 (#70),
@3: Sup: 75 (#185 - I AM NOT BOISTEROUS IN BEHAVIOUR {%25}); Ego: 5
(#75),
Male: #185; Feme: #75
} // #75
Dao: Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity
Tetra: #46 - Enlargement
I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding, Fullness
Latin: Multus {God who delivers from the evil} Alt: Hyaiel {God and Man
Exist} {
1. PROTECTS AGAINST WEAPONS & PERILS OF TRAVEL
2. MEDICINAL HERBS
3. WATER
4. Chumis
}
Solar Eclipse: 1 August 2008 (AEST)
Judah {Praise of the Lord; confession}
Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#434 / #383} / HETEROS {#449 / #350} / TORAH {#474 /
#403}
<http://www.grapple369.com?zen:3,row:4,col:9,nous:56&idea:{m,143}&idea:{f,132}&idea:{m,434}&idea:{f,383}&PROTOTYPE:HOMOIOS>
***@zen: 3, row: 4, col: 9, nous: 56 [Date: 2018.8.25, Super: #434 /
#51 - Natural Guides and Nursing Virtuosity; I-Ching: H47 - Oppression
(exhaustion), Confining, Entangled; Tetra: 69 - Exhaustion, Ego: #383 / #56
- Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity; I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding,
Fullness; Tetra: 46 - Enlargement]
Kant does not introduce the Preface of the Groundwork with a
characterization of the work’s content; rather he attempts first of all to
define the place of a metaphysics of morals within philosophy. For this
task, he makes use of three criteria. Kant first differentiates
philosophical theories by whether they are “formal” or “material.” Formal
philosophy, according to Kant, is equated with logic. It possesses no
specific object; rather it concerns itself, “without distinction among
Objects,” with “the universal rules of thinking in general”. In contrast,
every material philosophy “has to do with determinate objects and the laws
to which they are subjected”.
KANT: “Logic can have no empirical part, i.e., a part such that the
universal and necessary laws of thinking rest on grounds that are taken
from experience; for otherwise it would not be logic, i.e., a canon for the
understanding or reason which is valid for all thinking and must be
demonstrated. By contrast, natural and moral philosophy can each have their
empirical part, because the former must determine its laws of nature as an
object of experience, the latter must determine the laws for the will of
the human being insofar as he is affected by nature—the first as laws in
accordance with which everything happens, the second as those in accordance
with which everything ought to happen, but also reckoning with the
conditions under which it often does not happen.
One can call all philosophy, insofar as it is based on grounds of
experience, empirical, but that which puts forth its doctrines solely from
principles a priori, pure philosophy. The latter, when it is merely formal,
is called logic; but if it is limited to determinate objects of the
understanding, then it is called metaphysics.
This formulation already offers an indication of the second criterion. Kant
subdivides material theories, in turn, into two Classes. Kant distinguishes
them by with reference to the laws to which the objects that the theories
deal are subjected. He seems to assume that there are exactly two kinds of
laws. And, correspondingly, he differentiates between two types of material
philosophy: on the one hand, “physics,” or “doctrine of nature,” or,
alternatively, “natural wisdom;” and, on the other hand, “ethics,” or
“doctrine of morals,” or, alternative. “moral wisdom.” It is a matter of
the “laws of nature,” in the one case, and of the “laws of freedom,” in the
other, that each theory is respectively concerned. What can Kant mean by
this? The expression “laws of nature” seems to be relatively unproblematic.
But what is to be understood by the expression “laws of freedom” [which are
implicit to the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. exercise of
voluntary will)]?
From Kant’s elucidation one can infer a more exact interpretatlon: Laws of
nature are therefore laws “in accordance with which everything happens,”
while the laws of freedom are those “in accordance with which everything
ought to happen”. Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern
terminological distinction between descriptive statements which present an
account of how the world is being analogous to the LIMITED {#9 -
JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS /
SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the normative
statements presenting an evaluative account, or an account of how the
syncretic world should be as existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 -
ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} in being optimally something that should be
lived up to; or that should be pursued.
At the center of a philosophical doctrine of nature, there would then stand
general descriptive judgments; that means, more precisely, statements of
law that describe how objects of nature act. And at the center of a
doctrine of morals there would stand normative judgments that exhibit a
comparable degree of generality and modal status. I will later address more
thoroughly what it could mean that some normative judgments exhibit a
comparable modal status to statements of law in the natural sciences. Such
a parallel is far from trivial. On the contrary, it is one of the critical
challenges for the interpretation of Kant’s ethical writings. The first
step toward a unified interpretation of the two kinds of laws consists in
seeing both kinds equally as propositionally structured entities that
demonstrate a clearly identifiable logical form.
Next to formality versus materiality and the two types of laws, Kant
introduces a third distinctive Characteristic of theories. He seems to
understand material theories as complex systems that can be split in
individual parts. Every material philosophical theory accordingly contains
one part that he characterizes as “pure,” “rational,” or as “a priori”, and
it may contain a second, “empirical” part. Kant presupposes that in both
the doctrine of nature and the doctrine of morals the two parts can be
isolated from each other. It follows, therefore, that there are two a
priori types of theory: on the one hand, a “metaphysics of nature,” and, on
the other, the sought after “metaphysics of morals”
Thus, a metaphysics of morals would be the following type of theory:
(a) It is not purely formal, but rather deals with definite objects.
(b) It deals with objects in so far as these are subsumed under “laws of
freedom.”
(c) It contains no empirical elements.
At this juncture Kant does not yet presuppose that such a theory actually
exists or that it would be possible for a philosophy to work out
convincingly such a theory. He has not even argued yet that it is
advantageous or even necessary for philosophy to treat the a priori part
separately from the empirical part. Kant pursues these lines of questions
in the subsequent passages. [page 4, 5]
Accordingly, we may as an ANTHROPOCENTRIC {
- regarding the human being as the central fact of the universe.
- assuming human beings to be the final aim and end of the universe.
- viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and
values.
} syncretism, consider an unified paradigmatic perspective of Kant’s idea
of an otherwise twofold metaphysics, the idea of a METAPHYSICS OF NATURE
{ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based seven number) = #294
x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS = 365.242321 days} and of a
METAPHYSICS OF MORALS {
TETRAGRAMMATON {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA: #1 + #2 + #3 +#4 = #10 } HIERARCHY
VALUE AS THE METAPHYSICAL CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE TO THE HOMOIOS THEORY OF
*NUMBER*
+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}
+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}
+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}
+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}
+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}
<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>
}. Physics will thus have its empirical but also a rational part; and
ethics likewise; although here the empirical part in particular could be
called practical anthropology, but the rational part could properly be
called morals.
Syncretism or the Mixed School within Chinese philosophy is an eclectic
school of thought that combined elements of Confucianism, Taoism, Mohism,
and Legalism. The Syncretist texts include the Huainanzi, Lüshi Chunqiu,
and the Shizi. The (c. 330 BCE) Shizi is the earliest of the Syncretist
texts.
And Michael Nylan's exceptional work conveys the notion that HAN DYNASTY
(206 BCE to 220 CE) sage YANG HSIUNG's two published works: Canon of
Supreme Mystery (T'AI HSÜAN CHING) within 4 BCE and the Elemental Changes
within 2 BCE are called the Mystery by its devotees as a true guide for
those seeking the Way of the sages. Today, in the West, readers will find
the Mystery an essential tool for understanding the Tao as it operates in
the cosmos, in the psyche, or in sacred texts like the l CHING. Written in
2 BCE., the Mystery represents the first grand synthesis of the dominant
strands of Chinese thought. As it weaves together elements of Confucianism,
Taoism, Yin/Yang Five Phases theory, alchemy, and astrology into a
systematic, organic whole, all the fundamental components of early Chinese
belief appear within its pages which formed the basis to the STATE ideology
of China from 134 BCE two 1911 CE, an ideology that in turn provided the
intellectual foundations for the Japanese and Korean STATES, therefore the
importance of this book can hardly be overestimated.
As a book of divination, the Mystery provides a method for weighing
alternative courses of action. As a book of philosophy, it conveys a sense
of the elemental changes in life. Intricately structured in eighty-one
tetragrams (four-line graphs), the Mystery accounts for the movements of
the sun, moon, and stars, the shifting rhythms of the seasons, the
alternations of night and day, and the ebb and flow of cosmic energy—in
short, all the dynamic relations of the realms of Heaven, Earth, and Man.
It addresses questions of Fate, assessing the degree of control that
individuals have over their destinies. It suggests the fabric that binds
families, communities, and states together. As a book of poetry, the
Mystery unfolds a literary vision of seeming simplicity but surpassing
depth. The long poem divides into short sections of rhyming couplets that
focus upon a single mundane event or familiar phenomenon.
The Roman writer Censorinus, who in his 238 CE publication DE DEI NATALI
(THE NATAL DAY), claims that the Pythagorean advocate Philolaus (470-385
BCE) as preceeding Plato (c. 429–347 BCE), being the principle proponent of
the Pythagorean doctrines on “the world’s nature is a harmonious compound
of the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF
VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the
UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} elements which is similar to
the totality of the WORLD-KOSMOS in itself and all it contains:
“JESUS {he is saved / a saviour; a deliverer} OF NAZARETH {SOVEREIGN; one
chosen or set apart; separated; crowned; sanctified} ANSWERED, *ARE*
*THERE* *NOT* *TWELVE* *HOURS* *IN* *THE* *DAY* {ie. 24 x 60 minutes =
#1440 / #72 = 20 minutes allocations}? *IF* *ANY* *MAN* *WALK* *IN* *THE*
*DAY*, *HE* *STUMBLETH* *NOT*, *BECAUSE* *HE* *SEETH* *THE* *LIGHT* {ie.
#41 x #9 = #369 as similarly Philolaus located the fire at #CENTRE and
calls it HESTIA of the ALL, the GUARDPOST OF ZEUS, the MOTHER OF THE GODS,
the ALTAR, the LINK and the MEASURE OF NATURE-GENESIS
} *OF* *THIS* *WORLD*-*KOSMOS*.
BUT IF A MAN WALK IN THE NIGHT, HE STUMBLETH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO LIGHT IN
HIM.” [John 11:9-10 (KJV)]
HESTIA AND THE PYTHAGOREANS: THE FIRE IN THE MIDDLE
“The Pythagoreans offered significant cosmological observations . . . It is
also noteworthy that the early Pythagoreans denied the geocentric and
geostatic model of the universe. According to the testimony of Aristotle
(De caelo 293.18), they placed *fire* and not earth at the centre of the
universe. The earth became a celestial body, which creates day and night by
its circular motion around Hestia (hestia meaning ‘hearth’). Ten divine
celestial bodies – ten being the perfect number, which encompasses the
whole nature of numbers – rotate rhythmically around Hestia in the
following order: the dark counter-earth (antichthon), the earth, the moon,
the sun, the five planets (Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury) and the
sphere of the fixed stars (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986). This new
cosmological model is usually attributed to Philolaus and explained through
the importance of the Monad in Pythagorean metaphysics. Since the Monad is
the divine source of all numbers and is identified with, or represented by,
the purity of the fire, the source of the celestial bodies should be a
divine fire in the centre of the cosmos (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986).” [p.
38-39, Introduction to Presocratics: A Thematic Approach to Early Greek
Philosophy with Key Readings by Giannis Stamatellos]
<https://paganreveries.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/hestia-the-queen-of-fire-part-three/>
Wherefore the Pythagoreans had defined by a BINOMIAL notion of the THEORY
OF NUMBER which they regarded as SOVEREIGN and the AUTOGENIC {ie. coming
from within as self-generated} DAEMONIC FORCE which maintains the eternal
permanence of cosmic things. Whilst Philolaus considered the natural year
as comprising of 364 and a half days in being consistent with the Chinese
HAN Dynasty (206 BCE-220CE) MYSTERIES understanding (#81 x 4.5 days = 364.5
days) of them. [Pythagorean Sourcebook p 168, 171]
According to the 4.5 day designations of this natural year cycle into #81
sections, this would then equate the #CENTRE as occurring upon 13 to 17
September;
However the Chinese DAOist cosmic understanding of the DAO-ZIRAN of NATURE
with its GRAND INCEPTION upon the midnight new moon solstice of 21 December
103 BCE as an schematic articulation of the natural year (as equivalent to
the New Testament notion as TROCHOS-course of NATURE-genesis [James 3:6])
articulated as YANG HSIUNG’s treatise that was published within 4 BCE and
known as the "Canon of Supreme Mystery", reconciled it's unified
arrangement of the DAO TE CHING's #81 sections as specifically the
TRINOMIAL (tetragrammaton) notion od the HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER where the
REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE INHIBITOR perspective which is then mapped to the
ROMAN JULIAN 365.25 day notion as the basis to its EMPIRE GOVERNANCE as
then the common understanding given to the PYTHAGOREAN HETEROS THEORY OF
NUMBER and its CHINESE I CHING's H64 designations (of necessity some are
repeated) as being a common perennialist paradigmatic perspective. Whereby
the trinomial value: TETRA: 60 - ACCUMULATION is mapped to binary value:
H26 - GREAT DOMESTICATION, RESTRAINING FORCE, GREAT ACCUMULATING, THE
TAMING POWER OF THE GREAT, GREAT STORAGE, POTENTIAL ENERGY;
SUBJECT WAS: RE: HE WHO RECEIVES COMMUNION IS MADE HOLY AND DIVINIZED
Post by unknownHe who receives Communion is made holy and Divinized in soul and body in
the same way that water, set over a fire, becomes boiling... Communion
works like yeast that has been mixed into dough so that it leavens the
whole lump; ...Just as by melting two candles together you get one piece of
wax, so, I think, one who receives the Flesh and Blood of Jesus is fused
together with Him by this Communion, and the soul finds that he is in
Christ and Christ is in him.
St. Cyril of Alexandria, + 444
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will
raise him up at the last day. John 6:54
Draw nigh unto God and He will draw nigh unto you.
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"
SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*
Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit
<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>
SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]
Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.
It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.
<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>
The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."
That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.
<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)
After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS