Case 3.3 Training the Philosophic DIA Artistic Dialect in the Living Reality
In eternal memory of my grandfather and uncle, Bobo.
I was sitting at the table together with my grandfather and uncle, chatting with them. It's afternoon, and a beautiful summer day. Usually every conversation with my uncle starts about school. How is it going, and similar questions. I am in my teens, and I took this opportunity to fascinate my uncle and grandfather with "philosophizing" my fresh knowledge of mathematics. In fact, I tried to talk to them about some of my "troubles" with math. Namely, I tried to express it to my grandfather and uncle since I was not able to do it with the scholars, that zero divided by zero is not only equal to infinity, but also to one (1) and to zero (0). First, I started explaining to them why 0 : 0 = ∞ (infinity). I did it this way: "Look at the sky," I told them. Following the movement of my hand, they glanced up at the sky. "What do you see?" was my next question. "Nothing" (0), they answered in unison. I instinctively looked at the sky, that is, at the Heavens, and also saw the sky without a single cloud, that is, "nothing" (0). At the same moment, I became aware, realizing, how long it took me to understand this simple fact, because I always saw in the Heavens, either eternity DIA infinity (∞) or something (1).
Although it was not the expected answer, I took this opportunity to agree with them, that zero (0) divided (:) by zero (0) can also be expressed in terms of external impressions of this dialectical content as zero (0). After that, I tried to explain to them that according to the teacher, 0 : 0 = ∞, that is, they would not agree with their answer. In short, my interpretation was presented in accordance with my way of considering this dialectical content. In other words, when one looks up into the sky (the Heavens), (s)he is actually looking at eternity DIA infinity, which extends beyond the sky arcade, and therefore in my opinion 0 : 0 = ∞. After that I tried to explain to them DIA the appropriate argumentation, why 0 : 0 could also be equal to one (1). I expressed it to them, it is like when one imagines the evening star in the sky [DIA space time, which was of course empty at that very moment and place], and suddenly, after waiting for it long enough (spending or wasting time DIA space), this star appears in the sky. I am not sure that I managed to convince my grandfather and uncle neither with my thesis, nor with the mathematical statement of scholars that 0 : 0 = ∞. They only agreed with me that there was something in it. At that time DIA space, I knew nothing about the concept of "birth" and emergence of ideas, that is, about the process of creating knowledge. In fact, I subconsciously wanted to express to them DIA my impressions of it, a concept, that is, a very mysterious dialectical process of transition, transformation, metamorphosis, from "nothing" [0 - for a subjectivist, and greater than a pore-spore for a dialectician] to an idea and thoughts [something = 1 for a subjectivist, and greater than zero (0) for a dialectician] and further towards (creating) knowledge DIA creativity [1 for a dialectician] and its materialization (embodiment) [something = 1 for a materialist / rationalist / objectivist, and greater than 1 for the dialectician].
The Background Simulative Methodological Assumptions of the Dialectic Interactive Approach
DIA
The Ultimate DIA Probable Methodological Presumptions of the Dialectic Interactive Approach
If I had finished my art of (artistic) philosophizing at that moment and place, it would have been one of my typical conversations at that time DIA belonging space. "Unfortunately", emboldened to have such patient listeners, I proceeded to further explain the scholarly claim that every number divided by zero (0) equals infinity (∞). Since my grandfather and uncle were not trained (in my very subjective opinion) to think abstractly, that is, in terms of numbers, I tried to explain it in the practical meaning of this concept, telling them, if 1 or 2 or 3, ... ., apples were divided by zero, the result of this type of division would be infinity (∞) every time, that is, regardless of the number of apples that are divided. When I said that and repeated it arguing even further, my grandfather and uncle, who are normally very calm people, that is, they avoid discussing emotionally, said to me something along these lines: "You want to convince us that three apples divided by 'their ' zero would multiply to such an extent as to fill this table. Nonsense! Is 'their' zero some magician or something like that?" After these and similar sentences dedicated to apples, my uncle added a new thought: "I saw a lot of mushrooms in the forest this morning, and I know very well that if no one (0) picks them in the meantime, I (1) will do it today on my way home." I was speechless after these and similar arguments of my grandfather and uncle. I tried to explain to them that this thesis, that is, this type of zero, is not mine, but the scholars'. "What they are teaching the children is meaningless," my uncle said quietly.
Unfortunately, encouraged by my uncle's words, at that moment I had got a new 'big' idea! I told them that three apples divided by zero might also be zero. It is very strange how this thought was born in my head, but I probably wanted to meet their own idea that 0 : 0 = 0, that is, to make a compromise, thus rewarding them for their support. Since they were staring at me, I explained it with the following statement: "If thou (1) have three (3) apples and wait long enough, provided no one (0) eats them, they (3) will rot, that is , will become nothing / zero (0): The apples are gone!" After this destructive thought of mine, but a very "scientific" one, my grandfather answered me very, very gently: "Why would thou (1) allow three (3) apples to rot (0), when them (3), thou can eat thyself (1), if thou (1) will not already divide (: share) them (3: gaps between the three of us) with thy uncle and me (+2 = 3)". After this argument of my grandfather, I was on the verge of crying. I was ashamed because I loved my grandfather and uncle very much. I tried to find a way to apologize for these very sinful thoughts of mine.
I admitted to them that mathematics was a very difficult subject for me, especially when I started attending elementary school. During those days 1 + 1 was very rarely equal to two (2), 2 + 2 = 4, 3 + 3 = 6, and so on. Moreover, at that time DIA the appropriate space, that is, during those "days of trouble" for me, no one except my grandfather found it necessary to explain to me that these rules apply only at school. I took this opportunity to remind my grandfather that he revealed to me the golden rule against the process of objectification: While you are at school, say what they want to hear there. But school doesn't last all day. After school (at home) thou can say and think what thou want". When they realized what they did to me, they both tried to find some way to comfort me. Of course, in such a tripartite DIA two-way dialectical approach, there was no difficulty in meeting us again in an imaginative point of time DIA space, mediated by truth, trust and love of His, which is so characteristic of warm family and kinship relations.
Certainly, I have never forgotten these wonderful lessons taught by my grandfather and uncle. In fact, my grandfather used to tell me, when thou art in the company of wolves, don't forget to howl with them. Yes, wow, wow, wow.... To this day, after so many years, I remember his advice. This elaboration shows that it is very easy to be an intellectual (genius) among intellectuals (geniuses), who share the same view of the world, because they studied in related (educational) institutions for objectification and objectisation, that is, they were trained (tamed) to think in a similar way. Or to put this from a computer point of view, they all run and function on related operating systems, equipped with similar (embedded) BIOS, chip, and similar utility programs during their (creative) orientation in (recti) linear TIME AND SPACE. But try to gain the status of a genius (intellectual) among ordinary people. I mean, to achieve this without using various forms of force. This story also shows the power of healthy common sense, especially, the power of (highly) developed spiritual abilities and capabilities, the cultivation of which is almost completely neglected in this MODERN TIME AND SPACE. In other words, the importance of UPBRINGING AND EDIFICATION of future generations has been neglected in the sense of overemphasizing the role of education.
Going methodologically behind this dialectical content, it is clear that the ideologues of this last established natiocratic order, in fact, continue to implement their modern pagan ideas. In other words, to replace the role of the priest DIA the Holy Books, as an integral part of their trendy neo-secular policy, the role of the parents, grandparents of the traditional family, [they also had the opportunity to hear something from the Holy Books and Scriptures from their own parents, grandparents], with highly INDOCTRINATED and educated staff [(pre)educational staff, social workers, .... various "guardians and take carers"]. Or said it in another way, apart from being drilled "to do the right thing", these professional staff being paid, either by the tax-payers' money or by the (semi)private sources, HAS TO DO WHATEVER their supervisors think it is right for the new generations: There is not enough space for love here, except of the well-known phrase, "I love my JOB, .... (money)". Apart from the ideological incentives, it should not be neglected the various economical and political incentives. For example, they are in position to recruit more people DIA the forming new (and newer) kind of clients "for the milking money", directly or indirectly (by increasing the tax rates in these purposes). In either case, the result of this is the need for additional financial resources, that for the most people means longer overtime work (more crime too, if you so will) to be covered these new requirements, but at the expense of spending even less time DIA the suitable space (spirit, mind dia reason, matter) with their children. Thus, for the most children of the latest generations, may sound strange or old-fashioned, if you so will, my relation with the grandfather, uncle, aunts, .... because many of them never succeeded to develop so close relation to their (own) parents. All this previously said significantly contributes to further, accelerated vulgarisation of the simple(st) mind. READ, "Dialectic Triad of the Bringing Up, Edification and Education of New Generations"
In either case, the described scene regarding the "waiting for the apples to rot out (0)" has been getting in the importance in the modern economy, in a global one particularly. Although I, as a puber(-adolescent), had more years of the school than my grandfather and uncle had together (if any), as well as, there were already developed my dialectical (mathematical) views, related to the "waiting" for the appearance [various stages of the dialectical development in terms of transition DIA transformation] of a star [or of an "apple" to be ripe --> both are the positive way of thinking], for the apples to be rotten [negative way of thought, but immediately corrected by my master-teachers], it was not enough. In other words, the depth of their HEALTHY COMMONSENSE and the spiritual insight in the (coming) time DIA the corresponding space, significantly surpassed my educational capabilities and the dialectical ones as well, if you so will. Or said it in another way, although in those time DIA the belonging space, I was perhaps a GOOD mathematician (and a manager, businessman too, if you so will), I got a lecture of upbringing for the entire life from my grandfather and uncle. In other words, by following this wrong (evil) way, I will never become a GOOD person: Human(e) being.
Hope, you were able to understand even better the previously described efforts of the modern natiocratic ideologists, to separate the new generations from their (grand)parents [by neglecting role of the (broader) family]. As an example, just imagine, seen from an economical perspective, how the simple "rotting of the unsold apples" (99999... : 0 = 0), in a global economy, SIGNIFICANTLY contributes to the increasing world prices, because of the reduced supply by means of the artificially made short delivery on the world market. However, the latest trend of various ways of the selling apples, just in purpose of their rotting out, is even more profitable (99999... : 0 > 0), because this latest kind of the "useful and ideal" (vulgar) clients is perhaps ready to buy again a new contingent of the "apples", and so on. Especially, this trend is visible during various (public) celebrations. For example, just watch the table full of the bought "apples" in front of the members of natiocratic elite, but most of them do not eat it. And so on, this kind of the negative dialectical math continues from a "party" to the another one.
Hope, you've got also a glimpse of this very complex topic of the dialectical (qualitative) math, as well as of a DIFFERENT APPROACH to the solving various challenges and problems in the living reality, compared to the static DIA dynamic (quantitative) math. For example, in the area of economics, where the static DIA dynamic math considers the topic of the demand and supply in quantitative sense (mob DIA group way of thinking), in terms of THE GENERALISATION AND UNIFORMISATION of this (dialectical) content under consideration, the dialectical math reconsiders it from the viewpoint of the qualitative (individual and SUBJECTIVE AS WELL) decision making. Here it is important to be emphasised, as it the previously described case of mine shows and proves, seen from a perspective of THE DISTINGUISHING GOOD from evil, the (very subjective) meaning of the notion-"qualitative" will not to be mathematically expressed each time (DIA the belonging space) in terms of the true DIA the authentic meaning of the notion - good: Various implementations of the dialectical math in negative (wrong and evil) terms, or simply it was manifested in (very) subjective terms of the meaning this notion.
Dialectical Creative Framework for Orientation in the Eternity of Times DIA Infinity of Spaces
As an example, although the logic of the mathematical (quantitative) interrelation between the demand and supply speaks in terms of a waiting for the right (appropriate) time DIA the right space in order to be bought something, it is not always (easily, cheaply, .... gratis) feasible (achievable) in the living reality. For example, during the winter [captured within a concrete space in time], a WAITING for season of the riping "apples" [time in space], is not always realisable. In particular in the case, if from this kind of the "apples" is produced bread: to hunger, to die or what? Or simply, someone of you is "dying" from the longing for having (POSSESSING) a particular piece of the fashionable clothing, shoes, handbags, and the like. As a consequence of this particular and very strong desire to be satisfied both her / his inner and external wants and needs, the logic of the demand and supply is of the second, third, .... level of importance. Or it is not of any significance at all for her / him during these very inner and external moments and places. The similar is valid for an alternative scenario in time DIA situation in the space, that is, for the MOVING THY PHYSICAL PRESENCE there, where the "apples" are ripe (right) now by (INTER)CHANGING the current space in time DIA the suitable time in space.
The author of this project study received the master degree in (international) business economics (and management and IT, as well), studying at different institutions for objectisation, as well as in different political and cultural systems (Ex-Yugoslavia and Denmark). READ the core of my master's thesis: "Netmodal Management Process" Thereby, it was followed the minimum of the prior outlined "golden" NATIOCRATIC rule. Regardless of this, the lectures of upbringing taught by the members of my (broad) family, being deeply imprinted DIA impressions of this and alike scenes in my inner DIA inmost being, have always played a very important role during the period of acting as the creator of knowledge. In other words, I had much better complementary teachers. Just reconsider the complexity of the previously narrated dialectical (school) content. At which university could be learnt something like it? Or uttered it in another way, in front of your eyes, by attempting to re-enlighten your minds, were brought out on the light of day the various modern (actual) manifestations of 'the waiting in secret of darkness for the victims to be caught in the devised obscured schemes': David - Psalm-10:2-11. In other words, it was drawn your attention on the implementation of this most simple dialectical (dynamical) math in negative purposes, seen from the standpoint of the society (world) as a whole. Where they (managers DIA politicians, ....) had learnt these (obscured) capabilities? In either case, neither the 'stepmother' (state), nor the 'owners' of various group's entities [large companies - stepmother's (secret?) 'lovers', universities - stepmother's advisers, .....], nor their (grand)parents wanted to invest any efforts, neither PREVENTIVELY "TO CORRECT" their evil-minded '(grand)children' nor to punish them. On the contrary, they do all to make silent and "dumb" each rebellious and disobedient voice, as well as they by rule also REWARD each other for their evil-minded behaviour. READ, "The Concept of the (Recti)linear Universe: Happenings in the (Recti)linear Space and Time"
In the natiocratic educational systems, in which I had opportunity to study DIA the living, acting and creating there, in the field of creating knowledge there is no big (visible) difference. In other words, this most important area of human creative activity, is strictly controlled by various government agencies, that is, it is strictly “supervised”, what is knowledge, which kind of knowledge should be created, as well as about what the created knowledge is. Instead of the growing knowledge creation, respectively its creators, they are still trying to find a way, either to destroy, to misuse, to control, to kill creativeness, creators of knowledge, the knowledge self, or to steal it from each other, by using the newest knowledge and results of technological development. An important contribution to this (unwelcome?) tendency gives also the modern approach to the education and formation of new generations, which not only destroys the (inborn) spiritual possibilities but the sharpness of the (healthy) common sense too. This is one of the many reasons, why the pace of creating knowledge and technological progress so slow is. A proof of this thesis is this project study itself. From this reason, as well as from many years of experience DIA CREATIVE STRUGGLE, I still think that a human being as the humane being / (wo)man should not become a wolf. There is a big difference and a gap placed between them. Unfortunately, many (monkey) creatures did not even manage to retain the proud status of a wolf but instead of that they chose the life of “worms”, or even worse, the life of vultures, of leeches, of parasites, of usurers and the similar species.
or
|
|
|
|