Knatz.com / Personal / Overview / Chronology /
@ K. 1995 08 01
Chronological order is familiar enough that we tend not to realize how artificial, how unreal it is. I’ve organized deeds and events in my life and mapped them against the familiar calendar so that something from age twenty-one appears before something from age twenty-two. Nevertheless, what I select represents a mental order. The universe itself manifests itself in time as a jillion things happening, then another jillion things happening, some connected, some not (connections of course being mental on our part). Since things are seen by light and light travels at a finite speed, all experience is local, all apprehension of it mental. Still, chronologies are familiar and have their uses: so long as you recognize the artificiality of all perception.
The list above is “factual.” Here follows a much simpler chronology: one showing two contrasting pk attitudes:
Twenties: to entertain and transform: to reform.
Stories like The Model and Voices
Scholarship like Meta-Oxymoron
Thirties: to transform: to reform.
Forties: to transform: to reform (with some mastery of science added to the mix).
Stories like Beginning and Dark Beacon
Fifties to now: All changed, changed utterly
To record my works; not to transform or to reform you. (That’s already failed.) To record my works to indict you.
On the cross Jesus quoted scripture to interrogate God: Why hast thou forsaken me? As a child I had prayed that God would use me the way he had used Jesus. I didn’t care if I got crucified; I wanted to have an effect. This site details how my attitude toward God has grown in knowledge, maturity, and wisdom. It does not yet detail fully enough how my assessment of Jesus* as a teacher has modified: too much magic* by miles.
I now devote the bulk of my time to developing Macroinformation: not to save “you,” but as evidence that you cannot, should not, be saved. The paper was invited: but now I find that the first person to offer networking to the public (namely me, same as the first person to explain Shakespeare’s sonnets in terms of the principle epistemological battle of the millennium) has to scrounge around trying to find a committee of “scholars” to approve it. Believing that the universities have authority after they squelched my best ideas for a decade, after they ignored networking in 1970 but are all on-line in 2000 (supervising the networking), is like believing the Church had authority after they repressed knowledge of the Greek Bible (their own original source), after they threatened Galileo with torture. No, no, you can’t challenge our authority with evidence, with reason … Now they acknowledge the Septuagint (their own Jerome’s very source!) and act as though they had all along. Kleptocracy. Theft. Throw monkey wrenches into all ideas: then honor the ones that somehow aren’t defeated. Then demand credit as an ally of progress.
As my story Judgment suggests, I don’t credit mankind with the ability to know god from devil, good from evi0, sows ear from silk purse. The characters in that story think they’re experiencing Judgment Day, then see they’ve been fooled again. And I wouldn’t trust the Jewish/Christian God’s Judgment Day if it could somehow be verified to be Him. Because he’s a fraud. He didn’t create the universe. He didn’t make Man. He’s a god of kleptocracy: theft and lies and posturing. But there is judgment. And I live to gather evidence for it.
Of course what I really mean by all this is that the truth is the truth. It doesn’t matter what forty million Frenchmen, a Supreme Court, or the Holy Catholic Church says: the truth is the truth; deception, posturing, mislabeling … are what they are: deception, posturing, and mislabeling.
What I mean is that I have trained my perceptions to be both as undeluded as possible and as visionary as possible. Society only promotes and empowers those who are tractable: who know when to stone Einstein and when to deify him. An election is a contest in who can best sacrifice any principles he might have had to the mob: that’s who best represents the People.
Does the Truth (please tolerate the personification for the sake of the point) want evidence processed through a muddy lens? or a clear one? The fossil record will show well enough how sound a foundation deluding kleptocracy makes: the species is unsustainable.
(Few will see it though, fewer still admit to seeing it, till the woeful time, a time we’re already in if only up to our ankles, when kleptocracy fails: fails utterly.)
If I’m right: then the evidence will be there. If I’m not: then it doesn’t matter what I said.