The journey of developing reasonably sound perceptions of the data processed

Every day I am challenged with the thoughts of figuring out the world around me. I see some of those I have mentored moving on to in depth studies of religious and philosophical idealogies using language that I struggle to understand as I have not studied their new found 'language'.

As I deviate to a more practical application of my energies I notice that my desire to continue my journey into discovering new 'languages' and thus more enlightened perceptions is still strong. In fact, I find myself hungering for the knowledge but my body is weary from work.

I struggle with learning the new 'languages' of my one mentoree, now friend, because I wonder if it is simply a waste of my time to delve into a language that for all intents and purposes I think should be dead and devoid of life.

The battle of religious perceptions; fundamentalist vs post-modern ideals; etc. How important is it to delve into these areas? How important is it to learn a language that only .1% of the population could even partially grasp? (To clarify, by language I am referencing any new terms and concepts that exist in a particular field of study or community. For instance, if one learns mathematics they have essentially learned a new language of communication. If someone else does not understand the 'language' of mathematics then a mathemetician cannot properly communicate with that person.)

I was asked the other day if to speak about intellectual matters is 'pretentious'. I pondered the thought and answered the next day, "Intent matters." Is the intent to flaunt ones knowledge or is it to earnestly dialogue about matters that are important? The answer would be divulged upon inspection of ones intent.

Pretentious dialogue I think is the complication of a matter through the use of intricate language that could be simplified with more common words of explanation. Giving leeway to the realization that certain terminologies embody much thought in one word in order to shorten the long sentences utilized in a conversation.

I am not here, in this existance, to learn a language in order to flaunt that language over others. I exist to find a language from where I can communicate love in a rational, intelligent way to those in my community. If my language separates me from my community then perhaps I need to find an outlet to share my thoughts while doing my best to help others understand my particular 'language' and its development.

Language, for all of us has been established through our environmental upbringing, namely our culture, society, family and experiences (which are all intertwined). Our language is not indpendant of exterior influence. In fact our language is predominately influenced by such engrossing and dominating stimuli. There can be no such concept within our present cultures of a language uninfluenced by the prior mentioned ascendencies.

We, as individuals, are the result of our communal circles and thus our language will always be influenced by those communal circles. There is no escaping this reality. There is no possible way of regressing to a state of zero knowledge and rebuiliding our language inconspicuous of an a priori of communal influence.

So what is the issue for me? If the above is true, which I believe it to be, based upon my present understanding of reality, then my said interpretation of an universal actualization is limited by my belief which is based upon my communal influence since birth. My reality is merely a reflection of whatever stimuli has impacted me. I cannot interpret reality for what it really is. I can only assume that the way in which I interpret reality is sufficient for me. And thus, to use language to communicate my perceptions of my reality is even more hindered when engaging another person with a plethora of perceptions and experiences that deviate their percipience from my particular acumen.

What I then find most interesting is how a person or community can with such certainty claim to comprehend God.

And then, in what appears to be, an incredulous manner we vocalize, sermonize, postulate with great certitude and finality our perceptions of God. God, the word in itself, is arrogant on our parts to think that somehow by saying, 'God' we invoke a sentient beings anthropomorphic ear to hear our 'prayers' and 'praises' or that somehow the term 'God' actually signifies and encaptulates an eternal, infinite being. Even using the words, eternal and infinite could not and do not describe whatever it, the one, God, Though, The I, is.

If by the term God we simply mean, that which we cannot explain or understand then perhaps the term God becomes somewhat relevant to my limited language profile. But if by God a person means a sentient being who has human characteristics such as hate, anger, jealousy and the like then I am lost in the language and confused by the limitaitons it would place on this infinite concept we call God.

Will write more later.

The playground

Rielly, I agree there are many playgrounds per se. Those are religion, politics, corporate business etc. They are systems of structure that are set in place to restrict, regulate and control.

Stepping out of the playground for me is choosing not to participate in their game anymore. They make the rules, change the rules, and utilize the rules so they are the only ones who can win the game. Why be a part of it? So I can get my daily crumbs until they decide I can't even have the crumbs anymore? Why?

The only way you enter another playground is if you choose to enter another system of control, restriction and regulation. We don't have to do that. I am looking into severing myself from citizenzhip to become a sovereign person. Somewhat similar to the natives. Been researching it for a couple months now. Have a lot more to research.

The reality is that it may not work but at least I went downwaling awya from the illusion that is doing its best to wipe us out anyway.

Too many things to say so a quick summary

The illusion has crumbled. Reality. Jesus is a person. His teachings are profound but not unique. But he is not the illusion. The religious game is part of the illusion. The elite are the rulers of the game. The game is the illusion. What is the game? All of it. Everything. Religion. Politics. Law. Business. It's all an illusion.

Reality? We can choose to step away from the game. Stop playing. I am leaving the playground.

The distance between

Well now that I finally have my blog back up I can spew some more thoughts.

Relationships with friends is such a challenging thing at times. I do find it interesting that I place different expectations on some friends and not others. Some friends if I don't hear from them for a year, my connection with them will still be strong and healthy and yet with others if I don't hear from them in 2 months I feel like we are no longer friends.

Another thing I find myself doing is wanting to separate myself from friends who associate with others who are people that have hurt myself or my family. I think this is more normal but still I wonder why I do it.

What defines a friend? I like how muslims define it, to a degree. If you are a friend then they will die for you, literally. If you are not a friend then technically you are an enemy. I don't necessarily like the enemy part but I appreciate the idea of how seriously they take friendship.

There are those people in life who call me a friend but who repeatedly do things that would be contrary to what a friend is. Perhaps why some friends I can go without talking to for a year is simply because I trust them with my life and with those that are in the 2 month category it's simply because i don't trust them.

So I wonder if, friendship is really established with trust and grows as the trust grows. But I also wonder if I have unreasonable expectations of some friends. Is it fair of me to dissasociate from a friend if they choose to hang around someone who is a liar, manipulator and such? And when I say hang around, I mean allowing them into the 'inner circle'.

I guess it makes me question who I am in relation to that person. If they are willing to hang out with someone who treats me poorly and not call them into question then what does that say about our friendship? I guess I am just of the persuasion that if someone was treating my friend like crap I would say, "Hey, I think you need to work that out with them." If they would fail to do so I would say, "Hey, I think we need to stop hanging out until you resolve this issue." But maybe that is just me and maybe my expectations of some friends are just too high.

Another issue is always being the one calling. I do it and others do it to me. Even as I write this I am thinking I need to call some people who are friends because I haven't called in a while.

If, for those of you who read this blog, I havn't called in a while I apologize :) Oddly enough I think of you often. If you havn't called me in awhile, trust that I know you are my friends, hence why you are allowed to read this blog. The distance between us is only of distance, it is not of the heart.

Anyway, have to run. My wife and fam should be home soon.

test

test

Elisabeth Hasselbeck....ughhhh

Elisabeth Hasselbeck must have gone to some elite school for learning how to not listen to others and how to tow the partyline even when the facts point to a more rational conclusion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6SfmXigHpE&feature=related

The Obama Deception HQ Full length version