Заключительные Мысли, с особым Акцентом на реальные События в контексте Прямолинейного Понимания Времени и Пространства
During my numerous debates related to the dialectical understanding of time and space, I was often faced with the question: Doesn't the phrase "yesterday → today → tomorrow" completely contradict my understanding of time and space, does it? In short, in their opinion, due to my radically different understanding of the flow of time (and space), which in their opinion is even more radical than Einstein's conception, this common phrase should then be reversed and expressed as "tomorrow → today → yesterday". No matter how absurd this proposal is and how trivial these and similar questions, doubts, and reflections are, I have decided to explain and elaborate on it in more detail in this final creative article. In this way, all these ambiguities will be clarified by removing these and similar doubts and uncertainties regarding this dialectical content under consideration. All this in spite of the fact that I still believe that the answer to this dilemma can be drawn from the context of my other creative articles dedicated to the dialectical understanding of time and space.
No matter how paradoxical the answer to these ambiguities regarding their proposed solution to this dilemma ("tomorrow → today → yesterday") may sound and resonate for a long time in the ears of these well-wishers or critics of my understanding of time (and space), it is necessary to first explain the basic postulates of the Dialectical Model of Reality. Although I can already sense your curiosity and impatience as you await my solution to this enigma, continue to read this creative article carefully. To be honest, during a deeper consideration of this dialectical content, imbued with mystery, I was also surprised by these discoveries and newly acquired cognition, because they were new to me too. There is no doubt that those who claim that any criticism is welcome are right, as is any proposal, no matter how absurd and meaningless it may seem at first glance, without a deeper insight into its real dialectical content.
Dialectical Model of Reality
First of all, the dialectical understanding of time and space, in which the initiated dialectical processes of (continuous) change (dialectics) play a central role, cannot be described, represented or explained using (existing) rectilinear understandings of the flow of time and space, but rather the other way around. Let me remind you, unlike other understandings of time and space, which have focused exclusively on material processes and flows taking place in the physical universe, the dialectical understanding of time and space is also applicable to many areas of the social universe, including the (creative) consideration of its infinite internal spaces. Also note that instead of using arrows to linearly direct the constituent dialects of time, I always list them separated by commas. This rectilinear direction and expression of the course of events, built into the very essence of the rectilinear understanding of time, is its main characteristic and fundamental aspect. Since these features of it are inextricably linked to the essence of this understanding of time and space, it is always easy to extract them from the qualitative content or broader context of this concept.
Dialectical Creative Framework for Orientation and Navigation in Time DIA Space represented by its Two Paired Dialects: Time in Space ⇄ Space in Time DIA Medium of Time ⇄ Medium of Space
Furthermore, I never consider the creatively constituent dialects of time separately from the corresponding dialect of space, except to present them on this creative stage, because this prevents the initiation of the corresponding dialectical processes (of changes). This guiding idea is integrated into the dialectical model of reality, which is represented by four primary paired dialects, or concepts or aspects of the dialectical understanding of time and space. It is important to note here that the Dialectical Model of Reality, including its dialectical methods, is based on an individual way of thinking and reasoning, because the individual way of thinking is embedded in both the dialectical understanding of time and space, and in the dialectical (creatively) interactive methodological approach. This methodological consistency in interaction with processed data and first-hand information obtained (without intermediaries, that is, directly from the dialectical medium of time and space), as well as acquired experiences, new knowledge, and triggered emotional emotions (dialectically interactive content), further limits manipulation and speculation with interactively creative or creatively interactive dialectical content, depending on whether the emphasis is placed on interaction or on creation and creativity. Keep in mind that when (feelings and) emotions are overemphasized, especially negative ones, including overreliance on instinct and intuition, it also contributes to such a creative outcome, because it is not in accordance with the way the emotiv emotional and mental intellect of a human being functions. Although various concepts of emotional intelligence are being popularized, in my opinion, this simple way of expressing one-sidedness can rather be interpreted as an incitement or encouragement to various emotional, uncontrollable outbursts of being temporarily out one's mind or temporary (emotional-mental) states of madness.
Over time, this (unavoidably) leads to various forms of manifestation of emotional insanity in social reality. Especially if this (widespread) practice of external venting out emotional gall, spleen, and accumulated inner poisons and impurities on others (weaker or inferior to them) is not addressed approprately. This refers primarily to personal commitment to treating this soul illness as quickly as possible, or more precisely, decease of the polluted inner being.
- Even with much milder manifestations of emotional foolishness, as recorded in the cautionary tale of the fox who takes the opportunity to grab a piece of meat while two (angry) ravens are arguing, some will still try to defend this one-sided concept of (emotional) intelligence. For example, they most often contradict this by saying that they are well aware of all this, but that they had in mind positive expressions of emotions and feelings, not these negative ones. But the accumulated wisdom and preserved cultural treasure of previous generations also refutes this way of applied one-sidedness, which is in complete agreement with their typical, bipolar binary way of thinking and reasoning.
- For example, this is contradicted by the proverbial metaphor of a woodland grouse (capercaillie) in love or infatuated while singing its famous song during the mating season, but which sometimes ends with a fatal outcome for it. Namely, he is so captivated and enthralled with seducing and winning over his better half that he becomes completely deaf and blind to everything that is happening around him. In other words, carried away by his seductive or love song, he forgets all the dangers around him, because in those very bright moments he is blinded by overwhelming infatuation to the point of (emotional) madness or endless love, which can simply no longer be controlled or restrained. This makes it easy prey, which foxes, martens, and hunters abuse to approach it (cowardly) from behind, without it even noticing (because of its proudly raised and beautiful feathered tail). Otherwise, the black grouse (or Tetrao Urogallus) is a very cautious bird outside the breeding season, which tries to avoid any unnecessary risk or danger. But in desperate situations, even during the mating season, because it is a territorial bird that does not tolerate competition, that same "timid" bird transforms into its opposite, attacking not only foxes and other forest enemies, but also hunters armed with rifles.
- Despite all this, many have already paid the appropriate price, and new generations will continue to pay the (too high) price in real events within this (artificially) complicated social universe, whose usual patterns of behavior, reasoning, and action are based on a one-sided (unidirectional) rectilinear understanding of time and space. To note, within this central (uncultivated) deserted void of space, various outcomes of the (ever-smouldering) conflict between and among the fused spirit-mind and the reason trapped and isolated within it take place and are accomplished. This is mediated and maintained in a so-so (temporary) balance, with various materialistic incentives and compensations, as well as various irrational, incomprehensible, and inexplicable motives and behaviors, which take place in these inner spaces of this abandoned hole (full of unknowns).
(Recti)linear Creative Framework for the Orientation in Time and Space
It seems that its actors are not even aware of the hidden pitfalls of this (one-sided) manifestation of (temporary) emotional madness, because they simply cannot resist this powerful primal call (of the wilderness within them), nor similar (widespread) simple-minded, bipolar binary ways of thinking and reasoning, and in accordance with it appropriate actions. In other words, all of this is a consequence of the contemporary trend of belittling the importance of the wisdom embedded in proverbs, instructive stories, and other preserved cultural treasures left to us by previous generations so that we would not repeat their mistakes. Moreover, in this age of accelerated modernization of everything and anything by members and supporters of simple and simply-distributing mind, their new or (newly) modernized stories are being passed down to new generations, not only from school age but also from preschool, or from the cradle, if that's how you like to express it. To cut this long story short, for these modernists, the accumulated cultural treasures are dusty shelves filled with useless books of outdated knowledge, which, according to them, should be (emptied and) used in a smarter, more modern or modernized way. Or spooky drawers full of trite and worn-out phrases from old, senile and backward grandparents from long ago. I am a witness that not only have these modernized generations arrived, but now they also hold all the strings firmly in their hands. Moreover, they continue their march along these well-trodden paths of their breeders, drillmasters or re-educators, not only to further drill and educate but also to re-bring up and re-educate all those who disagree with these one-sided, simple-minded stories, concepts, and the conceptions and theories developed on them. In summary, in states of any manifestation of one-sided madness, especially emotional madness, no discussion based on a dialectical interactive approach should be initiated, because neither valid renewed theses can be expressed nor (contradictory) antitheses can be properly supplemented and argued (debate of the deaf). As a result, neither valid decisions nor valid (temporary) conclusions of the initiated dialectical debate can be made.
- Or expressed another way, in such (blinded) scenarios of Time in Space and corresponding (darkened) situations of Space in Time, the best decision is to get a good night's sleep. And since "morning is wiser than evening", all decisions and conclusions already made should be reconsidered, and only then, the correct decisions and conclusions should be made in dialectical moments of emotional and mental balance. In short, all decisions and provisional conclusions should be based on the postulates and principles of the emotional and mental intellect of a human being, and on the appropriate manifestation of intelligence.
Over time, this (unavoidably) leads to various forms of manifestation of emotional insanity in social reality. Especially if this (widespread) practice of external venting out emotional gall, spleen, and accumulated inner poisons and impurities on others (weaker or inferior to them) is not addressed approprately. This refers primarily to personal commitment to treating this soul illness as quickly as possible, or more precisely, decease of the polluted inner being.
It is also important to emphasize here that the dialectical individual understanding of time and space enables a much clearer distinction between material and physical (external) events in (considered) reality (1. Space in Time: matter embedded in the past) from other abstract, mental-rational and spiritual (internal) events, which the dialectical understanding of space and time also encompasses. This is represented by the remaining three key paired dialects and the concept of this dialectical understanding of time and space:
Methodological Creative Framework of the Dialectical Interactive Approach: Four Key Concepts of the Dialectical Understanding of Time and Space, represented by its Two Paired Dialects [Time in Space ⇄ Space in Time DIA Medium of Time ⇄ Medium of Space]
2. Time in Space (the future encapsulated in spirit),
3. Medium of Time (emotiv emotional presence dia physical presence),
4. Medium of Space (mind dia reason).
The Medium of Time and the Medium of Space function (validly) only when initiated by their connection into the Dialectical Medium of Time and Space. In this way, these four key paired dialects were reduced to three dialects dia one integrated dialect by utilizing this innate and heritable connection and translation by their continual transition and transformation at each qualitatively higher level of the achieved degree of dialectical development of the Time in Space, within the scope of time dia space encompassed. In short, this innate and heritable property of the four key paired dialects of the dialectical understanding of time and space serves as an embedded trigger for further dialectical synthesis (synthesization) of dialectical content and initiated dia-processes, which are creatively considered and re-examined. Or expressed methodologically, this property, due to its innate heritability, will itself be transferred and integrated into the developed methods of the dialectical interactive approach and thus into the resulting dialectical model of reality in making as well. As a result, not only does the dialectical understanding of time and space rest on common-sense (methodological) foundations, but the creative outcomes of the dialectical interactive approach are also based on common-sense conclusions drawn from the dialectical content under creative consideration using its methods, which are also founded on these same foundations. Consequently, although every model of reality is a simplified picture of reality, the dialectical model of reality, since it also rests on these common sense foundations through the multi-layered incorporation of these innately inherited properties of the dialectical understanding of time and space, includes this additional quality and characteristic that is inherent in the common sense of a human being. For additional information, read the creative article: Dialectic Method in Action: Its Methodical Procedures and Techniques.
All initiated material-physical, mental-rational, and spiritual dia-processes are creatively considered and re-examined in the dialectical medium of time and space with the help of this dialectical model of reality as an interface using developed methods, procedures, and other methodological techniques of the dialectical interactive approach. In this way, it is much easier to notice, perceive, and distinguish the events that take place within me ⇄ thee ⇄ us [including potential creative endeavors: a multitude of arrows directed towards Space in Time] from the external material (creative) events that actually take place around me ⇄ thee ⇄ us, which can be confirmed by the five basic human senses. For more information, which would help you better follow everything that will be presented in the following chapters related to the concept of "Yesterday → Today → Tomorrow", read the creative article "The Arrow of Time versus the Multitude of Arrows of Time".
"Yesterday → Today → Tomorrow", considered and seen from the Perspective of the Dialectical Understanding of Time and Space
Dialectically summarizing all that has been said above, it is very important to immediately note that the dialectical understanding of time and space does not deny this postulate of the rectilinear understanding of time expressed as "yesterday → today → tomorrow". In other words, an explicit renunciation of this way of expressing the flow and passage of time (and space) is not required, because this way of understanding and expressing the flow of time (and space) takes place exclusively within the framework of the external (physical) Space in Time (matter embedded in the past), and therefore does not interfere with or affect the functioning of this dialectical model of reality based on the dialectical understanding of time and space. In other words, these two understandings of time and space are based on different methodological foundations, and therefore have completely different purposes of application. For example, the rectilinear concept of time is based on its chronological flow, which is also expressed by the phrase "Yesterday → Today → Tomorrow". This common phrase has become so deeply ingrained in the human mind and intellect that it simply cannot be erased, even if there are new discoveries, insights, and knowledge that indicate it should be changed or redefined. On the other hand, since the constituent dialects of the dialectical understanding of time and space are always paired, they are suitable for considering and examining the initiated dia-processes and the resulting dia-changes in time and space, as well as for explaining and elaborating how these dia-changes arise and what causes them. The dialectical model of reality also sheds more light on the very process of creating new and renewed knowledge. In addition, the application of its dialectical methods accelerates the arduous and time-consuming process of reviving lost or hidden knowledge, as well as other related abstract concepts and topics. Precisely for this reason, its dialects have never been considered separately from each other, or used as such, which is not (always) the case with a rectilinear understanding of space and time.
Let me remind you, unlike Time in Space (the future conceived in the spirit: Now and There), these events that take place within Space in Time (Here and Now) are perceivable with the five basic human senses, which is why it could be said that Space in Time is a dialectical reinterpretation of the physical universe at a qualitatively higher stage of the development of the Time in Space, within the scope of time dia space encompassed. In other understandings of space (and time), space is viewed as a distinct whole, the physical extent of which is limited by three dimensions of matter (length, width, height). Defined as such, the physical universe, or realm of matter, is also a creative arena for testing or applying (physical) models of reality based on other (non-dialectical) concepts of space and time. As will be shown later, the rectilinear understanding of the flow of time in the sense of "Yesterday → Today → Tomorrow", seen from the methodological perspective of the dialectical interactive approach, is in fact a simplified, one-sided, incomplete, and unfinished reflection of the shadow of Time (in Space). Even when the resulting incompleteness and vagueness of this rectilinear expression of the concept of the future is supplemented by the addition of spatial determinants, the uncertainty of this external conception of the (imaginary) future does not change either: "Tomorrow [I will ride the city buses around Manchester]", that is, if you are alive until tomorrow, reach your destination, the bus drivers do not go on strike, you successfully ride the first bus, and you do not change your mind, that is, do not change your plan, and so on.
Within this container of the rectilinear understanding of time (the present), its scope of time is limited and reduced to its three key compartments ("today, tomorrow, and the day after tomorrow"), because "yesterday" cannot be changed anyway. In other words, all the magic happens within this tripartite container of the present in terms of their transition and transformation into the barely perceivable "yesterday → today → tomorrow", and so on from day to day. Or simply said, within this one-sided, rectilinear understanding of time, the future represented and reduced to "tomorrow" is daily inaugurated, sacrificed, or promoted into "today" (with its brief flash and reflection), while the past, after this sacrifice, inauguration, or promotion, is left to yesterday's "today". In this limited black and white world of the present (container), everything seems to revolve around winners and losers, while everyone else waits every day for their (fated) "tomorrow", hoping for the best or at least to stay (positioned) where they are "today" (survival).
To reconcile this methodological inconsistency of the rectilinear understanding of time (one-sidedness) with reality, I have presented this container of the encompassed present, as its main component, with three sections, because this is in better harmony with the dialectical way of thinking and reasoning. The purpose of all this is to make this three-compartment container of the present more easily compatible with the three dimensions of space, as well as to more actively re-engage those of its actors whose worldviews extend further into the future. In other words, to broaden their horizons beyond "tomorrow", that is, what will be, what they want to be, or even better, what kind of picture of reality they want to paint and create "the day after tomorrow".
Taking Einstein's four-dimensional model of reality as inspiration, since its application is already widespread, this can be further reduced to three dimensions of time, or more specifically, into three compartments of the present container, where the physical universe is the fourth dimension of this (simplified) model of physical reality. In short, it depends on the needs, that is, on the subject under consideration, because for example, the three dimensions of space only when considered (creatively) together form a complete whole (three-dimensional space). It is important to note here that this container of the present, in accordance with the dominant black and white (bipolar) worldviews, only needs two compartments ("today and tomorrow") for its bipolar functioning. Or in the extreme case, just the "today" section, for this typical final (binary) way of functioning of the concept "yesterday → today → tomorrow", as the core of the rectilinear understanding of time (the present), which is the focus of this creative article.
Although the days within this everyday life seem to change too quickly, this is nothing compared to the speed of events in the (global) financial markets, where a "day" is reduced to a nanosecond, and thus the unfolding speed of the previously discussed daily events, too. However, for some financial market players, eager for "quick" gains or "quick" compensation for losses, even this length of the 'day' is too long, so they seek to speed it up further by using the latest (and even newer) technological advances. On the other hand, nothing fundamentally changes during the implementation of short-term, medium-term, and long-term plans or political mandates, where the length of a "day" is measured by a year or years. But even this extension of the duration of the "day" is too short for most of these actors to implement what was promised, or achieve the set or desired goals. Moreover, even further slowing down or lengthening the duration of the "day" within this way of manifesting the rectilinear understanding of time, turning it into decades, centuries or millennia, does not fundamentally change anything, nor does it affect the way these established, previously mentioned procedures and ceremonies function. In other words, all of this neither essentially changes anything nor affects the events taking place within this three-compartment (or two-compartment or one-compartment) container of the encompassed time interval (the present) and corresponding space (of the physical universe).
New Discoveries and Insights within the Rectilinear Understanding of Time and Space
After all that has been creatively considered above, it could be said that all essential events within the rectilinear understanding of space and time, both in terms of the past and (this imagined) future, actually originate and occur in this expanded general medium of the rectilinear understanding of time and space (the present), externally expressed as yesterday → today → tomorrow. In short, everything is grouped, regrouped, and additionally mobbed within these three (1 or 2) key compartments of the present. The purpose of all this is to facilitate the rule and management of (subordinate) groups and masses, which is also the essence of all natocratic social orders, or natiocracy in general. This is accomplished by adapting social organisation to everyday life by appropriately filtering, harmonising, or manipulating events within this container of the present.
The rectilinear understanding of space and time arose through the emotional reflection and mental imprinting of traces of people's movement through this rectilinear physical space and time into their minds dia reason, as their perceptions of external events were felt and experienced with the five basic senses. In other words, primitive human beings during their daily struggle for survival, regardless of whether they moved forward - backward, left - right, or vice versa, always had the impression, as if they were forced to move forward all the time through this (unforgiving) physical space, in order to survive and see the next day. This way of manifesting tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow... (the future) was their main preoccupation and motto during their daily struggle for survival. Even today, in this age of Information Technology and Communications, for many inhabitants of this blue planet, this is still their main motto and preoccupation as they struggle to survive from paycheck to paycheck, or from meal to meal. In other words, during this daily struggle for survival, they do not need to revise this primary understanding of time and space that is deeply imprinted in their reason and mind. Consequently, they do not need new, more advanced ways of understanding (paired) time and space, because there is simply no time or space for this unnecessary luxury.
(Recti)linear Creative Framework for the Orientation in Time AND Space, seen from a dialectical Perspective
Although I had never thought much about what was actually happening inside this container of the present, and especially how the rectilinear understanding of time and space worked in reality, I was already familiar with everything that had been previously described, explained, and elaborated upon. First of all, each of us lives in some form of manifestation of this container of the present (the everyday model of physical reality), because it is an integral part of life's (natiocratic) reality. Furthermore, in my creative article "The Arrow of Time versus the Multitude of Arrows of Time", I used the basic ideas of the dialectical understanding of time and space to challenge the validity and correctness of the rectilinear interpretation of the flow of time as the Arrow of Time (past → present → future). What surprised me during the consideration of the concept "Yesterday → Today → Tomorrow", after a deeper insight into this dialectical content, was the discovery of the existence of a hidden structure of the original (parallel) rectilinear flow of time (and space). The highlight of this discovery was the realization and cognition that this further undermines the validity and correctness of the rectilinear conception of the flow of time as the "Arrow of Time". As a result, this has the potential to change the very essence of the current, generally accepted understanding of the linear flow of time and space (past → present → future). Have you noticed this yet? If not, focus your attention on the broader context of events surrounding this container (the present), and then dialectically summarize it by looking at the essence of these original events. And only then, you will notice that this original flow of rectilinear time does not move clockwise like the "Arrow of Time" (past → present → future) but in the opposite direction: past ← present ← future.
To avoid premature euphoria, I did not immediately present it as "future → present → past", thereby redefining the usual comprehending of rectilinear time (and space). This creator of knowledge is the author of the dialectical understanding of time and space, as well as the dialectical methodological approach, the main rule of which is not to draw too hasty or premature conclusions. In accordance with the presented dialectical model of reality, it is necessary to consider each dialectical content from all angles (philosophy, science, culture, and art) using its dialectical methods, methodological procedures, and appropriate techniques. In short, all of this should be creatively considered and realised in full accordance with the dialectical interactive approach using the dialectical method in the sense of dialectical pairing and summarizing a multitude of (newly created) theses, antitheses, syntheses and renewed theses, antitheses, and syntheses, until a provisional (temporary) conclusion of the time considered and the space covered is reached. Or, to put it another way, others should be allowed or given the chance to challenge that temporary conclusion, and thus the opportunity to change it with a new provisional conclusion of a newly mature time and space supported by strong arguments (preferably irrefutable in that range of time and space encompassed, but not in the sense of any way of manifesting absolute truth).
After this (methodological) digression from the initiated consideration of events in this container of the present, it is the right moment to continue with the initiated consideration of this dialectical content in accordance with the previously emphasized methodological approach. After the sacrifice, inauguration, or promotion of "tomorrow" into a new "today", and yesterday's day after tomorrow into a new "tomorrow", as well as the automatic transformation of all the other days behind it, which are encompassed by this concept of (imaginary) future, the door of this container (the present) closes every time after this "everyday" ceremony. In other words, all other "days" of the future, that is, this external (imaginary) future automatically flow into, or fill the compartment reserved for "tomorrow" after each reopening of the door of this container (of the present). If someone disputes this with the antithesis that the "days" of the future or this imagined future are easy to speculate and manipulate, this is not the case with the "days" of the past or the (recent) past, because the same dia-processes take place within it, but in the opposite direction. Namely, the past also moves further and further away from (this container of) the present (past ← the present), because yesterday's yesterday, like all other days of the past, automatically adjusts to these newly emerging dia-changes within this magical container of the encompassed present.
In summary, even if one manages to challenge this flow of the (imaginary external) future towards the container of the present, there has been a change in this usual rectilinear understanding of time (past ← the present → future). In short, a rectilinear understanding of time and space would then be represented as left and right movement from (this container of) the present (center). Especially because this way of time flow and understanding space (left ← center → right) would be just a revised manifestation of the rectilinear understanding of time (past ← the present → future), without any major fundamental changes. Based on what history teaches us, it is not difficult to imagine that this revised linear flow of time (and space) could also be imprinted into the human mind dia reason, or simply linguistically imposed. In short, similarly using this analogy, anyone who grew up in a Semitic cultural environment, where reading and writing is done from right to left ("past ←"), can easily adapt to reading and writing from left to right ("→ future"), and vice versa. In addition, this also proves that every model of reality, some better and some worse, only reflects and depicts true events in reality by considering and viewing these events from its own methodological perspective.
The Rectilinear Understanding of Time and Space seen from a dialectical Perspective with special reference to the Concept of the Arrow of Time
Despite all that has been said above, this creator of knowledge has not overlooked this original, primordial representation of the rectilinear flow of time in the sense of "past ← the present ← future" or translated as "future → present → past" in the sense of reading this rectilinearized flow of events from left to right. First of all, it was the main reason and motivation for considering this topic as a result of the remarks of critics of the dialectical understanding of time and space. Let me remind you, they extremely simplified, reduced, and expressed this dialectical conception of time and space as tomorrow → today → yesterday, which initiated the writing of this creative article. That they saw this dialectical content in the wrong place, or upside down by distorting the facts, is characteristic of most participants and actors of the natiocratic societal universe. Ignoring all this, time within this magical container of the present is transformed and manifested by its vague reflection and brief glimmer in the sense of "yesterday → today → tomorrow". Or more precisely, this almost imperceptible manifestation of the "yesterday → today → tomorrow" is a consequence of the (inevitable) collision of "today and tomorrow", created by a barely visible reflection of this encounter in the direction of the past and a brief glimmer of the future in the present (the new "today") before it disappears in this monotony of endless repetition, transformation, and renewal of the "days" of this external, imaginary, and lifeless future. After the extinction of this lightning reflection and the flash of turbulent events that took place within this magical box of the present, everything quiets down, calms down, and consolidates again by sinking and fitting this now clearly crystallized "Yesterday ← Today ← Tomorrow" into the natural flow of this original line of time ("past ← present ← future"). What also surprised me was the realisation that the sense of sight also functions in this previously described rectilinear manner, which I also explained in detail in the creative article chapter: "The Role of the Sense of Sight in the Origin of the Concept of the Arrow of Time". Namely, the sense of sight is able to react only to the reflection (←) of light (⇄), as well as to observe and register it as such, while the previous, initial or original path of the light ray (→) remains beyond the reach of the human sense of sight. Is this a coincidence or a general rule where everything is noticed with a delay, and therefore often turns upside down or inside out? And then, as such, a one-sided, unwhole, unfinished and incomplete observation, after being processed in the human mind, is (falsely) presented in the sense that this is exactly how the world and the (abstract and unperceivable) reality around us function.
On the other hand, this original rectilinear flow of time (and space) appears to flow at the macro level (of the physical universe) as a river, wheel, or spiral of time in the sense of "future → present → past". Or at least the flow of time without the presence of intellect in it, which in a societal universe in constant emergence and development is revised and redirected "every day". This already developed concept is known as the collision and conflict between nature, on the one hand, and culture, or the development of society and the resulting civilization, on the other hand, the consequences of which are visible all around us. But let's return to this adapted original rectilinear flow of time and space by reading it from left to right ("future → present → past"). If you carefully consider the events in the macrocosm, and primarily the events in the solar system, because it is much closer to each of us, we will notice that the Sun, after its formation, seen from this simplified rectilinear perspective, follows this original flow of time. In other words, the Sun follows this imagined original path as it moves towards the next stage of its development (red giant), and even as it dies in the sense of its transforming into a white dwarf, which will then continue to vanish at an extremely slow rate. Keep in mind that in the dialectical understanding of time and space, these phases of the life cycle of the Sun, and the development of events within it, represent initiated dia-processes accompanied by corresponding (gradual) dia-changes, which are (externally) manifested as their transition, transformation, and metamorphosis from one dialectical state to another. On the other hand, a rectilinear understanding of space and time simplifies all of this by reducing this complex dialectical content to a rectilinear representation of the basic features and outcomes of these events, such as, for example, the Arrow of Time. In other words, the model of physical reality, based on three (concrete) dimensions of matter (as space outside us) and (also on an external) rectilinear understanding of time, does not have an appropriate methodological mechanism and method to express these initiated dia-processes, as well as the resulting dia-changes (of states) caused by them.
Methodological Reasoning DIA Comprehending of the (Recti)linear Space and Time, AS SOMETHING OUTSIDE us, or around us, but not inside me ⇄ thee ⇄ us
In short, within this model of physical reality, there is no place for anything that is abstract, internally hidden, or imperceptible to the five basic senses. For this reason, all of this must be translated and physically expressed in some external (tangible or concrete) form of manifestation of matter. As the final result of this rectilinear way of thinking (rectilinearization), all these (key) events, seen from this methodological perspective, are reduced to the two poles of this (imagined) line (the emergence or birth of the Sun and its disappearance or death), which are then opposed to each other in terms of a bipolar (either-or) way of thinking. Seen from this rectilinear methodological perspective, although this adapted original flow of time ("future → present → past") also applies to us, it seems that people trapped in this "Titanic" (container of the present) swim all the time upstream of this original river, wheel, or spiral of time ("past ← present ← future") in the sense of "past → present → future (the concept of the Arrow of Time). It is as if in this way they are trying to avoid being dragged away and sucked in by this original tide of a rectilinear understanding of the past ("past ← present"), that is, to avoid being sucked in and swallowed by these original jaws of death. It is precisely this feeling that prevails while watching astronauts on TV tethered to the "International Space Station" who repair it or perform scientific experiments, in conditions and an environment where there is no up or down. In short, I see only the abyss all around them, as a primordial manifestation of this original past (and airless space), trying to drag them away or suck them in ("past ← the present").
Does this mean that there are two lines of time, seen from the perspective of this (rectilinear) methodological approach (which run in parallel, although in opposite directions)? Or, put differently, do these two lines of time represent a simplified rectilinear representation and reduction of the dialectical understanding of time and space in terms of the usual bipolar dia binary way of thinking? Note that one of them is the natural (original) line of time, while the other is the (social) timeline, which is created by revising or overwriting this original line of time in the container of the present, moving like a ray of light through a thin thread of this imaginary (external) future. Or perhaps this timeline was forged by this upstream swimming by reflecting and imprinting what was experienced into the mind of people (intellect)? Are these swimmers, swimming upstream here on Earth, perhaps preparing and training for a great escape or running away from what inevitably follows and awaits them, if they remain here on Earth until the very end? In any case, this original, natural understanding of the rectilinear flow of time and space ("future → present → past"), especially if it unfolds in the sense of a spiral of time and space, is closest to the dialectical understanding of time and space. Of course, provided that this original line of time is displayed vertically, that is, that this external depiction of the future is concealed by its symbolic implantation into the interior of the Earth. After all, isn't this external future, unlike the past, invisible, uncertain, and imaginary? In this way, this hidden (inner) Time in Space is more authentically presented, as well as the mysterious dia-processes that take place within this abstract concept and the dialect of the dialectical understanding of time and space.
In spite of all this, it should be emphasized here that even in the case when the multitude of (internal) invisible arrows of Time in Space manifest in the external Space in Time, the key actors of the established natiocratic order can regroup and transform all of this precisely in this magical container of the present, that is, reshape it in order to fit into this typical manifestation of the arrow of time (past → present → future). In other words, it could be said that they are the ones who, in every natiocratic manifestation of reality, shape, reshape, and redirect the flow of time, as well as events within the encompassed space (by simply moving a bead on a rosary). Keep in mind that all external subjects, objects and events that can be observed with the five basic senses are surrounded by the past in this one-sided rectilinear sense of understanding time, that is, with matter embedded in the past, expressed in the dialectical understanding of external Space in Time. The trouble with any expression of a linear way of thinking, and especially a rectilinear one, is that the line has two ends. As a result, any story or retelling of the same event or occurrence within this way of thinking, and therefore the understanding of time and space, too, has at least two versions. For example, all of the above can be challenged in the sense that the present (today) does not run away but simply rejects and pushes the spent "today" into the past, using the energy accumulated during that day to swallow the (new) "tomorrow", and so on every subsequent "day". But even this new story does not change the essence of these two lines of rectilinear understanding of time and space. It should also be taken into account here that some folks, and especially ancient and indigenous ethnic groups and communities, experience time and space in a completely different way than this (usual) flow of time and space.
A Dialectical, Abstract, and Universal Genome, as the General Framework for the Action of the Four Symbolic Elements
Жизненно-Важная Четырехугольная Звезда Платона, как Творческий Результат Трех Основных Диалектических Принципов, Аспектов, Свойств и Проявлений Времени в Пространстве, во Времени ДИА Пространство
Этот План Здания, основанный на Четырех Элементах этой Четырех Треугольной Звездыв был увековечен постройкой Пирамиды Хеопса в Египте
The question here is, how did these two timelines function until life appeared on Earth? First of all, this applies to the second revised timeline (the arrow of time). In short, the Sun also rose and set down at that time, the stars shone in the sky, while the vacuum existed from time immemorial. And most importantly, seen from a dialectical standpoint, the four elements (fire, earth, water, air) also shaped and reshaped this space and time through their dialectical interplay. For example, although a rocky hill appears solid at first glance, it is shaped and reshaped by the silent action of the four elements, even without the action of powerful tectonic activities, such as volcanoes and earthquakes. Keep in mind that the (smallest) landslide, even when it is not the result of the external influence of these four elements, (deep) in the Earth their silent (outwardly invisible) dia-processes (Time in Space: Now and There) also take place. As a result of these internal and external activities, a stone from one end of the Earth can complete its journey at the very other end of the Earth, without the influence or participation of (physical) intellect (of "brain"). In other words, the directed arrows of the Future hidden in the Spirit (Now and There) are patiently waiting to manifest in Space in Time (Here and Now), when all the necessary conditions for their visible external action and manifestation are met. As a result of all of the above, dialectical changes in the container of the present ("Yesterday → Today → Tomorrow") take place even without the presence of (human) intellect, and thus a revision of this original, natural timeline is also carried out. Or to put it another way, the four ancient elements through the dialectical interplay of the multitude of their triads dia one dialect (3 dia 1, continue to) shape and reshape this reality at all its levels of manifestation.
As a summary, in full accordance with the "Three Basic Dialectical Principles, Aspects, Properties and Manifestations of Time in Space, in Time DIA Space", four abstract (symbolic) elements paint and mirror, or create and multiply (countless) Fundamental Sketches of the Pyramid (Four-Triangle Star). Each of these abstract Fundamental Sketch of the Four-Triangle Star (of these pyramids in making), following the hidden embedded instructions, is built in as a concrete segment of this (begun) creative pyramid (of the dialectical understanding of time and space). In short, this abstract Basic Pyramid Sketch manifests itself as a dia-process (of changes) in some concrete form of Matter embedded in the Past (Space in Time) for the purpose of completing the initiated dia-process of shaping, reshaping, and creating (some) whole, that is, completing the construction of the begun pyramid in the physical sense. Or expressed in another way, from the (vacuum of the) ground plan of this dialectical pyramid (Time in Space), the corresponding manifestation of these four abstract elements recrystallises. Based on their constellation at a given moment, every problem or challenge of the (newly) emerging scenario in time dia the corresponding situation in space, will be answered by an appropriate way of manifesting Space in Time. This also includes their acting arbitrarily in deadlocked situations or stalemate positions.
Abstract Universal Genome
(in a Imaginary State of Dormancy):
The Unity and Overstraining Dialectical Tensions in Time DIA Space
DIA
The Four Primary dia Proto Paradigmatic Presumptions of the Dialectical Interactive Approach
It follows from this that the dialectical interplay of these four abstract elements (the Basic Sketches of the Pyramid of Time and Space) actually represents the (abstract) universal "DNA dia RNA genome" of this grandiose master plan, which is dialectically embedded not only in all that exists, but will also be mirrored and embedded in all that is (yet) to come into being. In short, this (abstract) universal "genome", which serves as the general framework for the action of the four symbolic elements, is pre-embedded into every concrete manifestation of this grandiose (God's) master plan (within the dialectical understanding of time and space). For example, this utterly abstract, pre-embedded universal "genome" is manifested and built in the DNA and RNA genome of living cells (adenine ↔ thiamine and guanine ↔ cytosine), which contains all of the instructions for their formation, dividing (replicating), and much more in a living organism, but also in everything inanimate, physically manifesting itself as four physical forces (gravitational force, electromagnetic force, weak nuclear force and strong nuclear force). In summary, the birth and death of stars, galaxies, and even the universe follow these hidden (pre-built) instructions.
For more information, open the web page "Dialectical Interactive Approach: Three Basic Dialectical Principles, Aspects, Properties and Manifestations of Time in Space, in Time DIA Space", and then direct your attention to the graphic illustration of this Primary Dialectical Cycle, or the Dialectical, Abstract, and Universal Genome, which is shown at the very beginning of this creative article. I hope these vivid images will tell you much more than any (additional,) unnecessary waste of words. This also shows that the manifestation of intellect through the (physically measurable) expression of the basic aspects of intelligence is not conditioned by the existence of a brain in the literal sense of this notion. For example, a plant or tree, although it has neither a brain nor a developed nervous system, has the "mental" (emotively emotional) abilities to learn (from acquired experience), to reason (common sense), and to solve emerging problems and life challenges, including adapting to (new emerging) changes in the environment. As a result of all of the above, dialectical processes of change, including the corresponding mental processes, would proceed smoothly in the (physical) universe, for example, in the solar system, without the presence of (human) intellect as well.
(Recti)linear Creative Framework for the Orientation in Time and Space
VERSUS
Dialectical Creative Framework for Orientation in Time dia Space
This deeper consideration of the way universal intelligence functions and manifests is very important, because I have often been faced with the question: "How does the dialectical understanding of time and space, based on individual thinking and reasoning, function when there are no people present"? First of all, this question relates to the functioning of the key dialect and concept of the Dialectical Medium of Time (the emotively emotional presence dia the physical presence of a person) and Space (his mind dia the reason). In other words, will the absence of (wo)man and her, his intellect be represented pictorially as physical and intellectual voids (holes), or more precisely, as a deserted intellectual space (mind dia reason) due to the absence of emotive emotional dia physical presence in the graphical illustration of this dialectical understanding of time and space? In summary, all these and similar questions and dilemmas are the result of a rectilinear understanding of space and time, (separately and) as something outside of us applied, which is based on the way of reasoning and logic of the widespread concept of a fused spirit and mind.
By the way, the process of photosynthesis can also be symbolically expressed as a dialectical interplay of these four ancient elements: the sun (fire), a liquid enriched with minerals (water), carbon dioxide (air), and nutrients (earth), which create the prerequisites for the smooth development of life here on Earth, generally speaking. This dialectical quartet can be further reduced and concretised in terms of the dialectical triad (3) as sunlight (fire), a liquid enriched with nutrients and minerals (water), carbon dioxide (air), which takes place on fertile soil (1: earth), or a corresponding fertile (water, air, fire) substrate, depending on the subject being creatively considered, and so on with even more details of this key biochemical dia-process. Keep in mind, the entire biosphere depends on photosynthesis to produce food, oxygen, fossilised photosynthetic fuels for energy production, and much more. All of this shows that even the greatest Creator of Knowledge (of all of us) used this dialectical, creatively interactive approach in conjunction with the interactively creative method during His seven-stage methodological procedure and application of appropriate techniques. The concept of a stage is expressed and manifested in this context as God's duration or length of a "day". In doing so, He used His acquired experience, knowledge, and wisdom gained during the dialectical synthesis of this myriad of initiated dia-processes and caused dia-changes. The outlines and echoes of this way of manifestation of the Dialectical Interactive Approach and its applied methods were also recorded in the hidden (lost) knowledge, of which only its methodological part was revealed by this creator of knowledge.
Arising DIA Enlightenment of a simple-minded Being in Time DIA Space
Either way, all this further confirms that any one-sided description, explanation or interpretation of these extremely complex dia-processes and the resulting dia-changes (states) that take place in reality opens up the possibility for various types of speculation and manipulation of this complex dialectical content, as has already been previously pointed out and emphasized, and shown and proven in the previous paragraphs and chapters. First of all, this refers to speculation and manipulation of time, because time is a far more abstract concept compared to the far more concrete manifestations of space. For this reason, creative outcomes or statements as a consequence of this manifested one-sidedness, incompleteness, and ambiguity are often, in real life, forged or simply fabricated in the human (simple) mind and reason. Or devised and imposed by key actors, as will be shown in the next chapter of this creative article. For this reason, human minds whose way of thinking and reasoning is based on the postulates of simple mind when interpreting these very complex events of reality, reflected through the prism of their models of material reality, are not only physically separated but also physically excluded from them. As a consequence of this way of interpreting space as something outside of us, they continue to express their thoughts and conclusions about events within this artificially constructed (physical) reality, as if they were unaware of this spatial and temporal distance that actually separates them from it. The result of this temporal and spatial separation is that all events within these models of (physical) reality are experienced, interpreted, and represented (as something outside of us) with a smaller, larger, or significant delay compared to actual (temporal) events.
Key Actors as Reformers of the Calendar and Shortening the Timelines
One instructive, and not-so-recent example of the chronological unreliability of the Timeline, and thus of the future (chronological) sequence of events in these outer expanses of affected time and space, are the consequences of the application of the Gregorian calendar. In short, based on the then achievements of medieval science, the Julian calendar was reformed. Let me remind you, the Julian calendar arose as a result of the calendar reform of the old Roman calendar, carried out by Gaius Julius Caesar in 46-45 B.C. The consequences of this Julian reform were even more dramatic than this Gregorian reform. For example, 46 B.C. lasted 446 days, but this has long since been erased from people's memories. It is important to note here that the purpose of this presentation is not to criticize the Julian and Gregorian calendar reforms nor the key actors of these encompassed times and spaces, but to show once again that the rectilinear understanding of time and space is conceived, devised, and forged in the human mind. For this reason, its flow and course can be easily changed and corrected, both through administrative regulations and decrees by key actors. In short, Pope Gregory XIII, as a key actor of that time, moved the current date forward by 10 days, that is, Thursday, October 4, 1582, followed by Friday, October 15, 1582. The goal of this reform was to bring the Julian calendar into line with the tropical year, as one extra day accumulates after every 128 Julian years. As a result, this leads to further deviation of the Julian calendar from the tropical year.
This new (Gregorian) way of calculating the length of a year deviates from the tropical year according to the Gregorian calendar by 0.0003 days per year. This is a negligible error compared to the Julian calendar, because according to the Gregorian calculation of the length of a year, an extra day only occurs after more than 3000 years. Currently, the difference between the Julian and Gregorian calendars is 13 days, and after the year 2100 it will increase to 14 days. Note that as a result of this change in the sense of shortening the chronological timeline, many people did not celebrate their birthday that year, nor was anyone born during this ten-day period. On the other hand, babies born just one day before the implementation of this calendar reform were not one day old. This (mathematically) did not correspond to the true state of affairs, seen from the point of view of measuring the flow of time, although this is the essence of this rectilinear understanding of time and space, especially in terms of the actual application of the considered concept "Yesterday → Today → Tomorrow". In other words, all citizens became (fictitiously) 10 days older that year. The essence of all of the above is that neither they nor the babies born aged in a physiological sense, that is, really, but only became older in the quantitative sense of this new way of measuring, calculating, and expressing the flow of time. On the other hand, babies born on 04. 10. fictitiously aged, died on 15. 10. lived 10 days longer, and so on.
All these rectilinear changes in the timeline were made in the direction of this external (imaginary) understanding of the future, or rather at its expense. In any case, the consequences of this (fictitious) acceleration or shortening of the future at the expense of the (also fictitious) extension of the duration of the past, were already leveled out the following year, for all those who survived this turbulent year. In other words, October 4, 1583, occurred 10 days earlier than it would have occurred without this calendar reform, that is, without the change or alignment of this timeline. All of this shows that events within this (chronological) timeline can easily be changed or adjusted to the (current) needs of a key actor or actors, especially in the direction of this rectilinear external understanding of this imagined concept of the future. Moreover, although during this ten-day period (of time) there was neither the day before yesterday, nor yesterday, nor today, nor tomorrow, nor the day after tomorrow, that is, neither past nor present nor future, this did not significantly affect the further smooth functioning of this usual, rectilinear understanding of the flow of time and space. It follows from this that this artificially forged timeline in the human mind can be shortened and extended according to the needs of key actors.
Furthermore, it is important to emphasize that time in this late Middle Ages flowed very slowly due to the insufficient level of technological development. As a result, the consequences of this calendar reform were far less than they would have been if this reform had been implemented after major technological revolutions. For example, just imagine what the consequences of such a calendar reform would have been in this era of the reign of Information and Communication Technology. As one example among many, try to imagine the effort and resources that would have to be invested in adapting software to the changes caused by such or similar calendar reforms. As another counter-example, consider the (real) year of Jesus' birth. Although scholars and clergy have long known that Jesus was born between 6 BCE and 4 BCE, based on the biblical story of King Herod, and not this erroneously applied year of Christ's birth, no corresponding calendar reform is being implemented. In other words, no one tried, for example, during the Industrial Revolution, and no one is trying to change the number of years since the birth of Christ now. This is not only because it is about years, not days, but primarily because of the level of technological development that has been achieved. As a result, addressing the caused and arising changes and consequences has become significantly more complex. It should be taken into account that the deeply ingrained chronological course of events in the human mind and reason is also recorded in numerous books and textbooks.
Applying the Dialectical Model of Reality in Real Life
Dialectical Creative Framework for Orientation and Navigation in the Dialectical Understanding of Time and Space
This creative article also showed how the dialectical model of reality can be applied to fill missing links, unsaidnesses, and vaguenesses of the rectilinear understanding of time (and space). In doing so, the methods of the dialectical interactive approach based on the dialectical understanding of time and space were used, which is also immortalized in the fundamental sketch of the Cheops pyramid. In a similar way, the dialectical understanding of time and space complements and supplements both Newtonian and Einsteinian understandings of space and time, as well as leaving room for a useful, common-sense framework for their smooth functioning, that is, without the typical bipolar thinking in the sense of "Either Einstein or Newton". As an example of the inconsistency of the rectilinear understanding of time with reality, note that the arrow of time (past → present → future) does not play any active role as a whole in the previously discussed original events, but rather (indirectly) within this imaginary (macro) container of time, events are chronologically recorded or registered, both on an individual and on a (higher) social level, concluding with "up to now → today" (the chronological line of time up to "today"). On the other hand, "present → future" can represent various ways of (social and individual) attempts to intervene, plan, and otherwise influence the future course of events within this imaginary part of the timeline in order to reduce uncertainty, that is, facilitate the aforementioned swimming upstream. In short, it's about managing available time and (individual) availability, as well as much more that is already covered, for example, in the Google Calendar application. This type of (active) influence on the course of the future (through expressed intentions), key actors with their proactive actions and resulting intentionality can not only try but also redirect the course of future events, and thus create the desired picture of reality ["create the future", that is, transform it into → the present → as well as redefine the past if necessary]. If they cannot implement this on a global level, then they can do it on a regional, national, local... level, which depends on the demonstrated real strength and power of this concept of an (omni)powerful earthly actor (in conjunction with other key actors).
This chronological timeline ("past → present"), as an integral part of the general, commonly understood timeline (past → present → future: the Arrow of Time), can in this (so far presented) context also represent its changing or alterable part. For example, at the individual level of keeping a personal diary of events or a chronicle of events, unlike the original (real) chronology of events (past ← present), the previously written content of the diary can later be corrected in the magical container of the present ("yesterday → today → tomorrow"), and changed in the sense of present → past [in order to conceal certain details from the past for some reason, to present its content in a different light than the real one, and so on]. At the same time, future events of the original timeline, both for those passive who do not keep a calendar ("do not plan for the future"), and for those who do (the timeline), inevitably occur in the sense of "present ← future". But all this should not be understood in the literal sense of eliminating all uncertainty, unforeseen or unexpected events, which can spoil any future planned down to the smallest detail, and even completely change its course. In short, the consequences for those who (try to) manage time ("the future"), even without these unforeseen or unexpected events, can be significant, if the calendar is not regularly updated by aligning it with newly emerging and changing circumstances, that is, by timely intervention in the sense of "present → future". Especially if it is left to another person, including artificial intelligence (at this level of development of its intellect) without any additional (personal self-) control. For example, as a result of this mismatch, an unexpected bill for a plane ticket, a reserved table in a restaurant, a reserved room in a hotel, and the like may arrive. This also applies if you personally canceled it all in reality, but you forgot to "cancel" it, that is, update it in your calendar of upcoming events.
In any case, any such or similar mistake, or negligence in general, also requires the allocation of additional time to resolve the resulting consequences. In other words, this means spending the available present ("concrete today") in → (this imaginary) future with the aim of dialectically resolving (changing) the newly created scenario in time and the corresponding situation in space. Keep in mind that managing available time and (interdependent individual) availability, as well as much more, requires this type of intervention for other reasons, both unforeseen and unforeseeable. Of course, you can activate a corresponding reminder for each individual event in the calendar, but this does not change the fact that you have to spend additional time reading these received messages. All this without mentioning the possibility that you did not notice it in time, hidden in the multitude of similar notifications, both received and re-sent by numerous (other manifestations of) reminders. All of this discussed so far is complicated enough, without even mentioning the possibility that such notifications might arrive at some inconvenient time. For example, while spending intimate moments with a loved one or loved ones. And now add to all this the possible consequences if you have made your availability available to others so that they can also plan their available time and manage their own availability by (multiple) coordinating the activities recorded in their calendars, including adding new parameters.
I hope that I have managed to conjure up this (hidden) dialectical interplay between these two lines of time (the original and the arrow of time), which do not seem to run completely parallel to each other, or separately from each other, in the sense of the typically one-sided, incomplete, or unspoken rectilinear understanding of time and space. Let me mention once again that every line has two endings (outcomes), and thus at least two versions of every story. It seems that this one-sidedness, incompleteness, and vagueness of this understanding of time and (physical) space is an ideal artistic and cultural (creative) stage for various forms of manifestation of (endless) philosophizing and learning. Either way, this rectilinear macro container, full of never-ending times gone by, is "daily" upgraded and extended with the incorporation of rings of this imaginary (external) future (past → present → future), actually (matter embedded in) the past. Moreover, since these invented and altered events (especially those of the distant past) are in conjunction with recorded data and information, often unavailable, scarce, or not properly recorded in human memory, preserved written sources and annals, as well as other ways of recording and transmitting events of the (ancient) past from generation to generation, the resulting chronological order of past events [a rectilinear chronological time line] is not always consistent with the actual events (of Space) in Time, that is, with the corresponding part of the original time line (past ← present: original chronological time line). This thesis is also supported by the now-common regrouping and changing of the chronological sequence of events in the (distant) past. For example, earthly histories are also changed and rewritten as a result of the latest findings of archaeological excavations or the latest scientific knowledge. This should also include the possibility of manipulation of the past by key actors, both contemporary and past ones, because natiocratic history has always been written by the victors, and for this reason, they are also revising it.
The dialectical model of reality, based on the dialectical understanding of time and space through the interplay of its four key dialects and concepts, in conjunction with the dialectical interactive approach and its methods, also explains and elaborates the concept of any way of manifesting proactive action with common sense. This includes a previously explained and reasoned prediction of the future course of events, including its redirection, the concept of creating the future, the process of emergence and creation of new knowledge, and the like. These are all buzzwords that are used in existing understandings of space and time, and in concepts and models of reality based on them. But these concepts are exclusively implemented, or attempted to be implemented, within the physical universe and the corresponding understanding of time in the sense of the proverbial generals after a battle. Or, to put it dialectically, it is implemented exclusively within the framework of external Space in Time (matter already embedded in the past). In the rectilinear understanding of time and space, the dialectical concept of Time in Space, including its constituent dialects, is externalized and materialized, and as such represented as something outside of us. Only then is this alienated content considered from above (often assigning itself the role of god or gods), from below, obliquely, or from (each) side. In contrast, the dialectical methodological approach views time and space as interconnected and dialectically intertwined mega-dialects shaped by dialectical contradictions, rather than as static or fixed wholes that can function separately from each other. Dialectical tensions and contradictions between these four abstract elements are resolved through their mutual harmonization by the resulting changes in the state of these paired dialects in terms of the transition and transformation of the quantitative and qualitative accumulation of Time in Space, preferably into a higher (new or renewed) quality of Space in Time. This can also include coercive and imposed ways of resolving emerging conflicts and (newly emerging) problems, as was shown in the previous chapter dedicated to the role played by key actors as calendar reformers and timeline shorteners.
On the other hand, this one-sided, external prediction of the future course of events in a rectilinear understanding of time (and space) turns into a public stage for the action of various types of forecasters, seers, "fortune tellers" and predictors of future events within the rectilinear concept of this imaginary future. This refers to the prediction of future events, both on Earth and the final outcomes of the hidden interplay of the four ancient elements in its depths, as well as the mysterious dia-processes that take place within the endless and vast expanses of the universe. Note that all of this is happening in the outer expanses of Space-Time, and that these seers predict almost nothing good for humanity as a whole, but rather mostly predict various kinds of social and natural disasters and cataclysms. This creator of knowledge would only add to this that they understood better than others that we live in a world where evil prevails over good and the Good ones, and therefore this (plotted) trajectory of events continues its movement in this (unwanted?) direction. In other words, the likelihood of such negative events in the (distant) future is very foreseeable and predictable. All this, not to mention the possibility that certain key actors organized into various (secret) associations could maliciously implement this into (social) reality.
In a broader methodological sense, everything previously said, explained, and methodologically elaborated contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of reality and existence in general, as well as the meaning and purpose of one's own existence within the considered social community. As an example and role model of the (ultimately desirable) purpose of one's own existence, in contrast to the usual underestimation of the role and creative activity of the individual, all the greatest discoveries, inventions, creative breakthroughs and further penetrations through this open window into previously unknown expanses of (hidden) knowledge were achieved by great individuals as inventors, creators or enlighteners of the mind and reason within the appropriate epoch of time and the space covered. But apart from these extraordinary creative endeavors and feats, everyone does this with each successful implementation of their own arrow of time, thereby contributing to changes in this reality, no matter how small or negligible it may seem to someone. In doing so, each of us acts based on the own, group, or mob-imposed way of distinguishing Good from Evil, which is actually the main (inconsistent) stumbling block within every natiocratically established social system.
Unfortunately, in all natiocratic social environments, this inconsistent way of distinguishing Good from Evil is not only the main stumbling block but also the subject of fruitless discussions, precisely because of the prevailing group dia mob way of thinking and reasoning, into the foundations of which this black and white (bio)chip and the corresponding processor (of a simple mind) are embedded. Let me mention that every form of manifestation of natiocracy, due to the insufficiently developed level of consciousness of its inhabitants [and especially of the ruling natiocracy elite, which, due to the absence of the pangs conscience and remourse of a human-loving inner being, when making (all key) decisions] always favors evil at the expense of good, and thus good people, seen from the perspective of the previously mentioned humane, individually creative way of thinking and reasoning. As a result, many (great and deserving) individuals, during their lifetime and creative acting, were pushed to the margins of social events, or even to the very bottom of the social ladder, by the application of these perverse natiocratic criteria for distinguishing good (right) from evil (wrong). In doing so, the ruling natiocratic elite tried to convince them of the incorrectness of their worldview, to repaint their eye-catching and sticking-out fleece with the color of the natiocratic elite, to change their attitudes, or simply to stop their harmful creative activities for society as a whole. In other words, they avoid openly saying that it is to the detriment of their deeply rooted natiocratic, selfish interests, but rather that the newly created knowledge is inapplicable or useless, going so far as to try to convince them that they actually know nothing.
Конец: Конечные Мысли
One of the reasons for the development of the dialectical model of reality was to create the prerequisites for finding and opening the hidden doors that lead to the endless inner expanses of this universe in miniature (Time in Space). Or more specifically, with the opening of this door, creative journeys can be undertaken with the aim of creating new, renewed or revived knowledge. Or if nothing else, then for the acquisition of new experiences, the cognition, and insights based on them (a creative stage for training future knowledge creators). In this way, the prerequisites are created for considering and re-examining events in the societal universe from this inner perspective (of the Dialectical Medium of Time and Space) using appropriate dialectical methods and suitable methodological procedures and techniques. These acquired experiences and cognitions also creates the conditions for a deeper understanding of this complex topic by actively and proactively participating in this first-hand observation of hidden events taking place within the societal universe. As well as to learn, without intermediaries, the real causes of this (Time in Space) before it manifests in the external Space in Time in some form of consequences and induced (domino) effects. In short, these hidden events and corresponding behaviors had until then been considered exclusively retroactively, as seen from the perspective of this external social universe. In other words, an analogy is used similar to the consideration and analysis of material processes and events in the physical universe, which are also based on external observations of the consequences of a rectilinear representation of space and time, reflected and expressed through the prism of this expanded container of the present ("yesterday → today → tomorrow"). To make a long story short, a suitable methodological approach did not even exist, including an appropriate understanding of time and space, as two necessary prerequisites for developing an adequate model of reality.
Concluding this creative article, it is worth noting that no one in recorded history has written as much about time and space as this creator of knowledge has done. In doing so, the dialectically paired time and space through its constituent key concepts and dialects have been thoroughly discussed and explained from various angles, points of view, and standpoints. It is also compared to the way how other understandings of time and space function, despite the fact that it is far easier to consider and reflect on them through the prism of this dialectical understanding of time and space, as previously demonstrated. The consideration of this ultimately complex dialectical content from the methodological perspective of the dialectical interactive approach, which from the very beginning was intended to be based on a dialectically individual way of thinking and reasoning, was not omitted. Or to put it another way, if I had somehow developed another additional understanding of time and space based on a group-mob way of thinking and reasoning, such as, for example, this prevailing (rectangular) linear understanding of (three-dimensional physical) space and time, the dialectical interactive approach could not have been developed or revived. In other words, a dialectically interactive approach developed in such a way would be methodologically inconsistent because it would not be based on a dialectically individual way of thinking and reasoning.
For this reason, the resulting dialectical interactive approach, being in full agreement with the (individual) dialectical understanding of time and space, is actually my greatest creative achievement, because it is based on a humane, creatively individual way of thinking and dealing with others. In other words, this is the crowning glory of my overall creative acting in this dialectically very short time interval and encompassed space, because it is precisely this that enables gaining deeper insight (directly) firsthand through the activation of this dialectical medium of time and space. In short, for the dialectical interactive approach to be methodologically consistent and coherent, it was necessary to develop an appropriate understanding of time and space, which was also based on a creatively individual way of thinking and reasoning. Only then, as such a consistent methodological whole, was it incorporated into the dialectical model of reality. In summary, (thesis, antithesis, synthesis of this creatively considered dialectical content dia) renewed thesis and (multiple) antitheses until the Provisional (Temporary) Conclusion of the considered Time in Space, in time dia space is reached, as the main method and feature of the dialectical interactive approach, undermines and changes the previous typical (natiocratic) way of thinking, and therefore also changes the way of creative acting. A recognizable feature of every natiocratic control mechanism is the limitation of everything (creatively) considered by various manifestations and interpretations of absolute truth, which are embedded in the core of every natiocratic socio-economic order. Special emphasis should be placed here on its covert manifestations. It is for this reason that I began my creative journey with the development of a dialectical understanding of time and space, which is based on a proactive, creatively individual way of thinking, and participation in shaping and reshaping reality, in my proposal for a potential doctoral dissertation: "Netmode, a Strategy for the 21st Century - A Dialectical Interactive Approach".
Фоновые Моделирующие Методические Установки Диалектического Интерактивного Подхода
Надеюсь что эти творческие статьи прольют больше света на это загадочное и все еще недостаточно понятое диалектическое содержание процесса создания и возникновения знания, потому что были вновь введены гораздо более широкие рамки творческой ориентации в этой диалектически созданной вечности времен ДИА бесконечность пространств внутри рассматриваемых миров диалектики. Сюда же следует добавить потенциально очень полезную РОЛЬ философии, науки, искусства и культуры, понято в смысле их интерактивного применения в творческих целях, вместо узкоспециализированного понимания своей роли в процессе создания знаний в смысле ЛИБО науки ИЛИ философии ИЛИ искусства ИЛИ культуры. Этот метод очень полезен, особенно когда речь идет о такими странными, загадочными и непостижимыми диалектическим содержаниями, потому что (хорошо известное) культурное сокровище человечества обеспечивает необходимую (слишком пренебрежённую) мудрость ушедших времен (диалект - прошлое), а также как и уже упомянутые способностей человека (этого уже далекого прошлого) ретроспективно вспомнить и снова оживить впечатление, и отпечатленные следы и узоры мыслей в памяти времени ДИА пространство.
Ангел-Хранитель Творчества и Знания
С другой стороны, лингвистические диалекты искусства и философии предоставят необходимую ЭЛАСТИЧНОСТЬ, понято в смысле создания простора для творческое маневрирование и подходяще артистические финесе, во время творческого процесса создания (нового) знания, по сравнению с не гибкостью (твёрдостью) научного (творческого) подхода, которое также неизбежно в ходе творческих поисках таких неясных, расплывчатых и призрачных целей. Имейте в виду, в течение этих огромных творческих просторов, нет научно обоснованных точек (письменные источников, археологические находки и т.п.) для лучшей ориентации в этом (внутренней) вечности времен ДИА бесконечности пространств миров диалектики.
