 
### On The Human Species

A Philosophy on Reason and the Emergence of Civilized Humanity

Copyright 2017 Anthony Pellegrino

Published by Androgynous Papers

This eBook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This eBook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. If you are reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your enjoyment only, then please return to Smashwords.com or your favorite retailer and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.

I shall ever curse the gods for bestowing upon me the gift of reason

Table of Contents

Preface

Sense Experiencing Thinking Entities

A Spiritual Species

A Social Creature

Divisions, Enmity, and Destiny

Preface

As one gazes back through antiquity, they should realize every form of government has proven its ability to fail. The reason being is that a form of governance is only as stable as the individuals who are ruling it. In addition, regardless of the abilities, beliefs, opinions, and desires of those heading a form of governance, the success or failure of the governing body is still largely affected by, and thus in part due to the following:

1. Various natural phenomena that bring upon factors uncontrollable by man, including pestilence, weather, geographical attributes of dominions or aspired land, and untimely natural deaths within the populace or governing body.

2. The abilities, beliefs, and desires of the governed populace.

3. The abilities, beliefs, and desires of the governing body and populace of neighboring states or societies.

It has been often stated, _the best thing about the American Republic is anyone can be president, sadly, this is also the most detrimental_. The rule of a governing body, regardless if it is constituted of one, few, or many, will only be as capable as the capabilities of the individuals themselves, only as wise as the wisdom they possess. Thus again, the seeking mind is inclined to search further and ask what measures the success of a governing body. Let me propose the following:

1. Power, wealth, and/or economic prosperity

2. Security from neighboring peoples.

3. Dominion over peoples and lands.

4. The contentedness and prosperity of the populace.

5. The contentedness and prosperity of the governing body.

Alternatively, should one judge the success of a governing body on the mere propagation of the species it governs?

Since the success of a governing body is contingent upon many variables and does not always depend on the perspicacity of the ruler or system, but the ability, beliefs, and desires of the governmental constituents, as well as the aforementioned postulates, one should necessarily amble beyond the governing body to find a way to limit the variables and increase the probability of finding the paramount ruling system. The next logical step is to progress within the society in order to increase a knowledge of the relation between the populace and the governing body. However, can society form the government or does government form the society? The subtleties within this question are of the utmost importance, because they beckon other questions. To what extent can a government affect the beliefs and actions of the populace? To what extent can the populace affect the beliefs and actions of the governing body? Would honesty or deception be the most effective means to move the beliefs and actions of the populace? To what extent can the governing body mold the society? To what extent can the society mold the individual? What causes and moves an individual's beliefs and desires?

In an attempt to answer these questions, I have endeavored to come to an understanding of the individual members of our species. Therefore, this paper attempts to determine if the happiness of the individual is relevant in attaining a thriving social entity that will propagate through posterity. Moreover, if the happiness of the individual is important, it is crucial to discern what happiness truly is, and then discover the best means to achieve it. For a realization of the aforementioned, I endeavored to attain a complete knowledge of our species' attributes. Furthermore, it was imperative that I uncover the path that our species has traveled to this point, as well as hypothesize our perceived destination. In addition, I found it most important to uncover the true desires of the individual entities of our species, as well as the origin of the desires.

In an attempt to achieve a realization of the above goals, it was my intent to refrain from using subjective dogma and maintain an objective approach to this inquiry that one can comprehend without relying on contradictions or unexplainable phenomena.

Table of Contents

Sense Experiencing Thinking Entities

We are animals whose earliest ancestors merely possessed crude reason, which left them predominantly instinctive with their thoughts existing primarily as the present moment dictated. Peering within the animal kingdom in an investigative nature, an inquiry that for now excludes our species, I fail to perceive manifestations of good and evil. In viewing the preservation, propagation, and inevitable death within the daily interactions of living entities, one would not state they observed an immoral animal taking the life of one that was ethical, most sensible people would not consider a mother animal that ate her offspring as deranged or evil, and the taking of a life within a species would hardly be murder or a crime. If few would ever question this view on the world, then why is the _murderer_ designation reserved for the human species? At this juncture, the naive or ignorant mind may simply believe that an omniscient and omnipotent deity gave humankind a soul and the ability, regardless of whether one chooses, to make sound mental choices in order to emulate the greatness that is the Deity, the Being who created humankind in _His_ image. However, this undertaking is a true study of the human species, as opposed to an idealist mission that conspicuously relies on an ethereal guise of faith. This paper, for better or worse, is based on empirically deduced truths. Hence, to find the true disparity in the complicated and seemingly contradictory aspects of our species and the remainder of the animal kingdom, one must travel back to a time long before Homo Sapiens. One peering within the workings of Mother Nature at a time millions of years before the present would also observe living entities that were a product of evolution working in harmony with their environment. However, they would not perceive an entity as the human species, which today, in our eyes, is governed by different natural laws than all other living entities. Therefore, this paper ventures to explain the apparent disparity intimated, which is that of the illusory morality that manifests accountability in regards to the actions of our species. Hence, the enquiry truly begins at an undefined time in our past when a new line of species moved causes that inevitably spawned our species. This genesis, this directional move of causes and effects, would bring forth an entity with a discernible advantage over all other living beings.

If one briefly ponders the period before our ancestors evolved into a sense experiencing thinking entity, a period before Australopithecus, they would realize our hominid ancestors were instinctual creatures with crude reason and an existence based solely on experience. Their offspring were born predominantly singular with a rather long gestation and maturation period, which obviously mandates extreme attention and care. This needed care and attention was difficult to come by, as the species was entering and struggling in a new ecological niche. At that point, our ancestors instinctively pursued pleasurable states of consciousness that were caused by stimuli interacting with their senses, i.e., caused by events or experiences. The pursued stimuli affected their physiology with a feeling of pleasure, which intrinsically propagated survival. They needed to avert stimuli that brought about non-pleasurable states of consciousness that could precipitate the inevitable ceasing of their existence. The evasive actions would delay their inevitable desistence long enough to reproduce, hopefully their offspring would be able to accomplish the same, and theoretically, barring extinction, this would continue through posterity. This machination is the force behind the propagation of living entities within the universe, or actually, a more complex version of cause and effect, though inherently no different. However, considering these causes and effects that bring about actions that are instinctive, or at times in our species considered as volitional, should these be viewed on a separate scale or within a different light than the forces that propagate matter through the universe? Albeit before one began this inquiry, they obviously would have understood the two phenomena to be completely unrelated, at this juncture, from the mere statements pondered, one should view the interactions in the same manner. I am referring to forces or causes that move effects, or with the living entity, that move experiences. These actions are essentially the movement of matter, which is an equivalent of energy (to be discussed forthcoming) and excluding the two, one will fail to find another existence within the continuum we refer to as space. These forces/causes and effects/experiences move matter or energy, or energy-matter within an entity (within the body), in motion. Moreover, the energy within a living entity that is moved by these forces or causes can move the being from within, or move the internal energy, which incorporated with the storing of past experiences via the memory, can affect the directional motion of the internal energy as well as the entity as a whole. Hence, the complexity that makes the correlation impossible for the traditional intellect.

During every instance of our existence, our nervous system is continuously bombarded with an indefinite number of forces or causes, internal and external, that create an immeasurable number of effects or experiences, each of which in turn becomes a force or cause, which in turn yields an effect or experience, and so on infinitum. The moment this process terminates, our life ceases to exist because this is the one and only medium that accounts for the preservation and propagation of living entities. Moreover, if one possessed the most powerful computer known to humankind and increased its capacity a hundred thousand fold, they could not even begin to record the myriad of experiences that occur on the macro and sub-atomic level. Although experiences on the sub-atomic level affect our existence immensely, I concentrated on the macro in this work, with the understanding that no branch of knowledge is an island unto itself.

Pondering our hominid ancestors and their instinctual pursuance of pleasurable states of being, and hence the avoidance of the antithesis, one must realize that feelings of pleasure and pain evolved for the sole purpose of attracting entities to experiences that would enhance their existence, while repelling them from experiences that would move them toward injury or death. These processes are ubiquitously and constantly at work throughout the animal kingdom. When a living entity experiences a sensation of pain, of course by degrees, the feeling is directly related to a possible threat to its existence. If living entities failed to experience the sensation of hunger, they would not have the instinctual reflexive reaction to pursue sustenance. On the other side of the spectrum, if certain entities did not experience pleasure from sexual intercourse, they would not pursue the sensation, which would obviously lead to the extinction of the species. One must perceive every instance of pleasure and pain experienced by living entities in this manner. Moreover, when I move within the next chapter and begin to study complex human experiences as emotions, one will find they stem from the same mechanism. As a reasoning entity, I perceive and understand this medium of survival, although, pleasure and pain are adjectives created by humankind. Moving by degrees to animals with less reasoning capabilities, they instinctively follow this medium, which not only facilitates life, it is a malleable system that is flawlessly suited for learning by trial and error. An omnipotent deity did not place life upon our planet and endow the creatures with all the attributes necessary to survive the elements and environments of the earth, life evolved from a simple state to the complexity of humankind, but who we are was dictated by how earlier animals evolved to the earth's environment. A species that has moved into a new environmental niche may not have experienced many of the attributes of the new environment. Hence, via this pursuance of pleasurable states of being through instincts, in conjunction with trial and error, a species may someday be able to change the instinctual blueprint of its descendants.

Our species, through advanced reason, has distanced itself from the remainder of the animal kingdom, thus we must ask ourselves what brought about the change. In this discourse, I shall not attempt to be an archaeologist or an anthropologist; therefore, one must accept the fact that there were forces within our ancestor's environment that brought about certain effects that physically altered a line of species that led to our species. This is nothing more than evolution at work, which in essence not only propagates life, it moves to avert life, in totality, from extinction. Hence, time brought forth a creature that through evolution developed a tremendous cranial capacity and a highly developed nervous system. This being moves this paper unto the realm of the Homo Sapiens and our seemingly ethereal attributes.

In essence, humans are sense experiencing thinking entities that sensually interact with the external world through stimuli induced experience, and we react to these experiences with instinctual reflexive and reasoned volitional actions, by these means, we subsist. This statement still describes the forces that propagate life, but now it is crucial that I delve within the differences, if only by degrees, between instinctual reflexive and reasoned volitional actions; the latter moved to a consummate degree differentiates the human species from the remainder of the animal kingdom. The high degree of reasoned volitional actions are created from reason, of course, but it is of necessity that one discerns what creates this perceived as _ethereal reason_ , and more importantly, learn if volitional actions are anything more than illusion. Thus, if the volitional aspects of our reasoned actions are more than an illusion, by necessity there must be a change in the force or cause from that which moves our instinctual actions, and not merely by degrees, but in the kind of force itself. What I am actually intimating is the possibility and probability of the existence and/or the extent of freewill. The majority of people do not believe that other animals possess freewill, and if they do, they seldom hold them morally accountable for their actions. There is an inexorable connection between freewill and moral accountability. There would not be a plausible reason to question the freewill of an entity if the one pondering the actions were not equally analyzing them for what humanity deems moral. There is also an inexorable connection between freewill and reason. If humanity does not believe that an entity possesses adequate reasoning capabilities, i.e., the ability to judge between what people deem as right and wrong, then in essence, the being did not act with an adequate understanding of their state of affairs, hence, their will or volition was tethered by a lack of reason. Therefore, one would not hold them morally accountable for their actions. With this understanding, it follows that animals do not possess freewill.

Instinctive actions are genetically programmed reflexive reactions to experiences, regardless if these experiences are internal or external. These programs continually evolve in all creatures to meet their specific needs for survival within a constantly changing external environment. The mere word _instinct_ implies a lack of reason, which manifests different degrees of instinctual actions. Few individuals would argue that the repetitive movement of your eyelashes is not an instinctive movement, nor would we find an argument over the internal workings of the human body. These two events are mere examples of genetic mandated reactions to events over time, regardless if the time span is fractions of a second or hours. Reasoning is not required for the body to carry out these functions, nor do we even observe or ponder their exactness in performing their duty.

Moving away from the realm of the nearly unnoticeable, I can ponder an event where an entity is progressing through a forest and another entity approaches from behind. If the approaching entity is perceived from a series of events, as detected sounds, the first being might reason that something is following them and thus ponder an action to take. The human reaction would differ from that of other animals. One of our species may ponder a trip through the forest a few weeks previous during which they encountered a kind man who stated he always set off on his journey at about the same time. Hence, the person would still be circumspect, but possibly not as physically aroused by fear or mere life-saving attentiveness. Moreover, the person could even experience a slight feeling of joy at the prospect of encountering a past friend. However, another animal (imagine a deer) would instantly focus on the sounds and attempt to discern a familiarity, thus if necessary being ready to flee at a moment's notice. Both of these responses were children of early detection, but the human response is guided by a greater period of past experiences and future possibility. It is this greater _window of experience_ and thus realization of future possibilities that I shall focus on as this paper continues. However, returning to the trip through the forest, if the approaching entity is detected from a sole event or phenomenon, as visually perceiving or hearing the entity only when it is directly upon a being, there would not be time to reason or attempt to more accurately discern the phenomenon, as the both the deer and the person attempted in the previous examples. Therefore, both entities would react instantaneously and instinctively to the phenomenon. This conjectured event is a perfect example of what can manifest itself as the tenuous line between instinct and reason. I hope one has perceived that time is the variable in this most intricate equation.

_Time_ is not an entity, but a measurement. Time is the measurement of every moment that ever was or ever will be. Moments are instances of change within our universe; the subtlety of every movement as measured in reference to the cyclical movement of celestial bodies. Therefore, _time_ is the measurement of change, which we measure in order to predict change in the future. _Change_ is nothing more than motion, thus without motion (macro and subatomic micro), time stands still. Moreover, considering time is not an entity, but a measurement, the mutability of time is no longer difficult to comprehend, for it is now the mutability of change, i.e., the existence of variables in the rate of measured change when we move beyond our terrestrial existence. As one may ponder the past its manifestations become relevant in predicting the future. Hence, before the conscious being as pondered by, time exists as the measuring of past change through motion.

Through time or change, one can perceive instinctual reactions to events or experiences throughout the animal kingdom. We, as Home Sapiens, refer to these reactions as instinctual to differentiate them from our reactions that we believe are volitional. However, regardless if one considers an action instinctive or reasoned, it is still a reaction to past events or experiences. Every movement, thought, or daydream is a child of experience. In addition, if one is to imagine looking forward with no reference to experience or the past, the forward progression would be as a life upon conception, thus purely blueprinted by those who trod before. As one progressed through the world not a sight or sound would be familiar and the person would not only lack thought, they would lack a mental awareness of their existence. This blind journey would have one merely reacting instinctively to all phenomena as spider does when it reacts with its environment. Yes, the illustration is unfathomable. Hence, even within the most intricate depths of the philosophical mind, we remain children of cause and effect.

The movement or force of stimuli create an event or experience each time they interact with the senses. _Memory_ is the product of our physical brain storing impressionable experiences, which are physically evoked to the present moment upon having a similar experience or through symbolism (covered hereafter). However, these statements engender an extremely profound question. At what point does one make a distinction between an entity relying on instinct and an entity using their memory? However, one can also phrase this question in another manner. What and/or is there a distinction between the manner in which events imprint on the genetic blueprint of instincts and how they imprint on the memory? Ah, instincts and the memory may merely exist as two aspects of the same underlying phenomenon. Imagine that a person engenders the company of less intelligent animal. As they are now sharing living quarters, the person believes it fitting to devise means of communication and thus proceeds to label the animal with a name. The person pronounces the name repetitively, and assuming the animal has a large enough cranial capacity to store a sufficient amount of data without it becoming too faint to recall, the animal learns to respond to the sound. Moreover, there is usually a reward offered, i.e., food, affection, or some other _gift_ that will bring the animal pleasure. If the animal responds, it has merely pursued its instinctual attraction to pleasurable states of being, i.e., it incorporated the sound of its name with a positive event. At this point, if the person pronounces the name, the animal's senses trigger awareness, but it will not always respond immediately, as anyone with a stubborn pet understands. Hence, it is time that again enters the equation. When an animal reacts to an event over time, it is using its memory, but if one ponders a creature that exists purely on instinct, there are a multifarious number of internal and external events that constantly evoke past events that mandate instinctual reactions. If at some juncture an entity's environment and thus common experiences are gradually but permanently changed over time, the surviving species (if fate determines) will evolve and its instincts will merely bare a new storage of blueprints, which will evoke instantaneous reactions. Then one must view the life of an animal that exists solely on instincts as an infinite (non-comprehendible) number of distinct instantaneous reactions. With conception, the algorithm of the entity's life is sprung into motion and from its first infinitesimal event, it reacts in a predetermined manner as blueprinted by its ancestors. Hence, an instinct is a predetermined and instantaneous reaction to a given event. Through an infinite number of events and reactions with favorable consequences to them, an entity's ancestors unknowingly created these blueprints throughout the ages. With an entity that acts solely on instincts, a first cause evokes a code created by a past event, which mandates an action, which creates another event, which mandates an action, and so on infinitum. Our internal instinctive actions function in the same manner, albeit on a much simpler scale, which makes the mechanism much more fathomable.

A memory is an instantaneous reaction to an event or experience. If one wants to remember a past event, they scroll through symbols in their mind until they evoke the memory into the present moment consciousness. However, unlike instinctive reactions, the memory does not evoke what we perceive as a physical reaction, but a mental one that is larger in space and time. As one proceeds through an everyday routine, an event will occur that will instantly evoke a memory unto the present moment consciousness, at which point a person can act upon the memory or event over time. Thus, instincts evoke an instant physical reaction, but a memory evokes and instant thought or replay of a past event that slowly fades. In addition, if the reaction of a memory is instant, but creates an event of a longer duration, it would follow that a memory would require more storage space than an instinctive reaction or blueprint, which explains why instincts are inheritable but memories are not. One can observe many animals using their memory throughout the animal kingdom. Moreover, an entity, as has thus far evolved within the known universe, could never remember every force or experience that it encounters. We understand from modern quantum physics that nature is quantitative, i.e., that elements of nature are comprised of, and progress or digress, in distinct quantitative amounts, and our memories are not any different. Each species, and/or entity within each species, has an evolved memory capability that begins to store and evoke experiences at an equation that is comprised of the amount of force of the initial event or experience, the number of times experiencing a similar event or experience, and the force of the event or experience that has moved the entity to evoke the memory. This process is dependent on many variables, including the physical attributes of the entity, not just the species, but of the individual entity within a given species.

Via the external experiences mediated by our senses and brought unto our brain, our world is comprised of memories and the association of simple ideas (created from memories, i.e., associated experiences) that become ever more complex. Hence, an entity evolves from one that interacts with its environment purely on instinct, to one that has developed enough storage capacity to start storing experiences. At this juncture, forces and events not only evoke an instinctive reaction, but a brief mental state of awareness, thus a realization or association of the present moment with one of the past. The phenomenon that we refer to as a _memory_ has produced an effect of _consciousness_. Moreover, as events are continuously interacting with an entity through every moment of time, the evolved entity will realize a continuous state of awareness. In addition, when an entity perceives this state of awareness via its memory, as it uses this awareness to make decisions, it performs the function of _thought_. However, animals with a limited storage capacity and transfer network, i.e. nervous system, would have a very limited window of experience. The _window of experience_ of a given entity is the extent the being can look into the past via memory and into the future via thought, this precipitated by any given series of events. Hence, the physical attributes of an entity may render it only capable of looking five seconds into the past via memory and five seconds into the future via thought. This entity has an extremely limited window of experience, where as humans are able to look deep into their past and far into the possible future.

_Consciousness_ is the product of neurological processes working concomitantly: experience, reaction, reflection (memory), association, reason, and volition. _Thought_ is the product of consciousness. To recapitulate, events can evoke both instincts and memories. If an event evokes an instinct, there is an instantaneous reaction. If an event evokes a memory, depending on physical capabilities, an entity can then reflect on the present situation and associate it with the memory of a similar situation from the past, which assists in deciding appropriate action.

At what point does thought become reason? Thought and reason are definitely one and the same creature, but gradations of time manifest an illusion of difference. _Reason_ is that in which a sense experiencing thinking entity can in the present moment deliberate past experience in an attempt to try to explain the causes of perceived events. In this, the entity hopes to predict the outcome of future events and possibly affect and direct, prepare for, or prepare to react favorably toward these events with volitional action in reference to beliefs and desires. Therefore, the deer in the forest was a sense experiencing thinking entity that used _crude reason_ (if we do not live in a clockwork- deterministic universe). A series of events, sounds, created a present moment realization, which precipitated an action to determine what may have created the noise. With the evoked awareness, the deer may feel the sounds are either safe or threatening, thus it can act favorably to the events in reference to future pursuits, which may merely be to avoid predators and consume vegetation.

At some point in time, an entity evolved a cranial capacity to the point where it could store a memory, which is of a greater magnitude than an instinct. However, one must perceive both instincts and memories as imprints of past events. As the first creatures evolved in the direction of memory capability, the imprinted events slowly increased in size as the capacities of the creatures expanded over time. These increases would have progressed in distinct quantitative amounts. Moreover, if one could mystically enter the bodies of the myriad creatures throughout the animal kingdom, they would currently find existing creatures with varying gradations of memory, from one with an infinitesimal window of experience to that of the human species, all continually evolving and differing in degree, but not kind.

_Cogitation_ is the intentional evoking of memories in order to solve a problem. I intimated this procedure when speaking of reasoned volitional actions. _Volition_ is not the instinctual or reactionary, but the deliberate pursuance of desire. However, the entity pursuing desire must realize a temporal chain of causes and effects, or experiences (in degrees allowed by mental capabilities), that created its present window of experience. Moreover, with this realization, the entity must believe that it can interact with its physical environment independent of the perceived, or not perceived, pre-ordained causes, effects, and instinctual reactions to them, regardless of the veracity of the belief, when it is indeed held and understood. However, one must not confuse instinct and desire. _Desire_ is the realization of, thus a yearning for pleasurable states of consciousness. Moreover, for the feeling to be desire, the realization and yearning must be a child of memory and the association of similar experiences with an understood present state of awareness. As stated, our species designates the _seemingly_ flowing moments of change as _time_. _Time_ is the medium in which we attempt to fulfill our desires. There is time as I desire something to happen in the future and through change, hence, in time. Nevertheless, pondering the past is the medium that creates desire. Without experience, there is no desire, and without desire, there would not be volition to measure change.

_Emotions_ are arousal states created by consciousness; a combined reaction of sense experiencing and the memory of corresponding experiences, as well as the often distant pondering of these memories in reference to future desire. _Arousal_ is a source of energy that is evoked by experiences, as well as reflecting upon the experinces in reference to desire.

Nature in its essence is comprised of distinct quantified bundles of matter, and stimuli interact with a sense experiencing entity in quantitative amounts. Moving from a state of non-detection, there is a threshold where the senses will first detect stimuli. Here the continuum begins and progresses in distinct amounts to the second differentiable threshold, then to the third, etc. Again, humans perceive these arousal states in degrees of pleasurable and non-pleasurable feelings, depending on a multitude of mental and physical conditions.

After all this elocution and acute attention dedicated to experience, not to mention the rhetoric of ignorant philosophers past, one may be inclined to ask what the mind is without experience. First, let me place forth a proper definition of _mind_. As it has been so aptly stated, the mind is the product of physical processes (energy has a mass equivalence), as water is the product of hydrogen and oxygen. Via scientific reduction, one can understand the elements of water, but this understanding by no means divests water of liquidity. _Mind_ is the product of stimuli induced experience that is mediated and brought unto the brain, processed through genetically evolved instinctive programs, and correlated with similar experiences, which creates volitional possibility. The mind without experience is merely the physical entity the brain. Nevertheless, as there is always life within the elements of the creative process, as soon as an evolving entity exists, there is uteral experience because with life, the senses are functioning. As soon as there is being, an entity will have experience. Thus, it follows that a pure reason or pure intuition could never exist prior to experience. Moreover, upon the instance of life, there are the genetic instincts that the experiences of ancestors created throughout the ages. The aforementioned may have manifested itself as a pure knowledge before the understanding of genetics.

By way of reason, a sense experiencing thinking entity can amplify or decrease, i.e., affect, a physically evoked external arousal via an internal arousal evoked by present beliefs and the memories of similar experiences (all beliefs are in essence created by experience). A soft kiss may bring about a pleasurable somewhat intense arousal if touched upon by a loved one or someone thought attractive. Through experience, one evolves a belief of what they deem physically attractive. If one incorporates this phenomenon with the fact that experience also renders people attracted to a certain demeanor and /or social status, one finds that our beliefs and experiences would immensely affect the feeling of a kiss with a complete stranger. Moreover, it is obvious that if there is a relationship, pleasurable or not, it would also considerably affect the physical act of kissing. Obviously, if one finds a person unattractive, socially unacceptable, or feels unfavorably toward their disposition, they might actually experience a sensation of disgust. Moreover, if one is not disposed toward the person favorably or unfavorably in attractiveness, social standing, or disposition, the arousal may be nothing more than a slight feeling brought about by the physical attributes of the human lips and the feeling caused by the surfaces touching. The initial noticeable feeling reacts with our senses in distinct quantitative amounts, and the perceived arousal is a reciprocal combination of the physical feature and a mental stimulation.

The external world never presents itself to the senses in the exact same manner on more than one occasion. Thus, the mind associates and correlates stimuli and events. With compiled experience, one becomes ever more discerning, i.e., the more one views or experiences similar phenomena, the more confident and adept one is at identification. At the first noticeable threshold of a phenomenon, humans have little or no ability to discern it. However, a sense experiencing entity may sense a minute movement within its peripheral vision that is negligibly discernible, but the senses achieved a purpose and the entity may now focus directly upon the movement. With the arousal of the now better-discerned phenomenon, and the mental arousal caused by the memory of similar experiences, the entity can make a judgment that is fit for proper action.

When aroused by a phenomenon and thus reflecting upon memories, a sense experiencing thinking entity can realize the situation may be detrimental or advantageous to its existence or present desire pursuance, thus enabling the being to act accordingly. However, this by no means implies that every sense experiencing thinking entity is sitting around pondering the past and looking into distant future possibility. The limited cranial capacity and comparatively undeveloped nervous systems, along with other decisive physical attributes, of nearly all species severely restricts the ability of an entity to react to enough stimuli, store enough memory, and realize efficient means of evoking and communicating the stored memory. Therefore, most entities lack the ability to associate their memories with experiences not directly related to a present event, as to be able to create a flowing stream of present recognition and vast past and/or distant correlation, thus the lack of abstract and/or remote foreshadowing. Furthermore, when interacting within an environment, the greater the degree of arousal and the more urgent the perceived situation, the more the reaction to the stimuli becomes instinctual reflexive and less reasoned volitional. When at a consummate level, this arousal enables an entity the instant energy and endurance to contend with detrimental or high priority situation. The degrees of arousal exist within a quantitative continuum, which ranges from arousal states brought upon by slightly felt or barely noticed experiences to extreme arousal states in which an entity would have access to limited duration high energy to contend with an urgent situation.

Symbols are the medium by which nature evokes memories into the short-term present moment consciousness. The matter and energy that interact with our senses are the symbols that evoke past events and we perceive them as sights, feelings, sounds, smells, tastes or combinations of these. _Symbolism_ is the realization of this medium and its implementation. A sense experiencing thinking entity is progressing within its environment and events interact with the senses, thus symbols constantly evoke memories and consequently states of awareness. The larger the cranial capacity of the entity, the more memories the entity can store. Through an extended period of time, an entity evolved into a species that was an upright walking ancestor of humans. These beings had developed an extensive window of experience, that is, they evoked memories from further in their past, hence, could ponder deeper into their future than their predecessors could. This evolution of entities in reference to their memory capacity was most likely a gradual and gradational progression for an immense period. As this directional evolution continued, an entity in the pursuance of pleasurable states of being at one time began to intentionally leave symbols within their environment to evoke a certain memory at a later time. This new undertaking may have simply begun as the placement of a rock within a shelter to evoke the memory, or to remind the entity to collect some stones at a later time. These early actions were the beginning of symbolism, which as stated is the volitional implementation of the natural medium in nature by which memories are evoked. Moreover, at some point our distant ancestors evolved into entities with opposable thumbs, which gave them the capability to implement this medium via artificial representation, i.e., what humanity would one day refer to as drawing and later writing. Of course, this aspect of symbolism did not begin as profound artistry, but possibly mere lines drawn through the dirt to communicate something. As time and our ancestors progressed, their artificial representations became reasonable facsimiles of the entities or events they were depicting. Hence, beings who were adept at this skill became very important to the success and thus survival of the group. Those who had this ability perfected it and passed it down through the generations. These early actions were the birth of art and brought about the later praise of the artist. Through this positive sensation of praise from one's group, spawned the pursuance of art long after its need for survival had diminished. I will discuss human interactions more in depth forthcoming, but for our species to strive after the praise of our peers is a trait we may never shed. Therefore, human endeavors of art and music that now seem superfluous to evolution were most assuredly born of necessity.

Another leg of the symbolism sequence was that of labeling and then categorizing aspects of one's environment with artificial representation and sounds; the latter evolved into what we refer to as words. Hence, after they labeled articles and aspects of their environment, they evoked a memory within their mind when they seen or heard one of their created symbols. Moreover, and more importantly, they could communicate this memory to another individual by showing a symbol or vocalizing a known and understood sound. The more entities our ancestors labeled via sight and sound, the more past events they could evoke into the present, and of consummate importance, the more memories, and hence ideas, they could communicate to one another. If sounds were used to symbolize events and they purposefully repeated the sounds to imprint them on the memory, they then could remember a large catalog of sounds and thus could scroll the catalog in order to remember something. The remembering of certain sounds and later words became a deliberate and consummate tool of symbolism that we now refer to as cogitation. In addition, remembering artificial representations worked in the same manner. Our ancestors came to possess a library of memory evoking information that they passed down throughout the ages.

As our ancestors developed means to remember and catalog their symbols, they tapped into the world of humanity and created the seemingly immeasurable difference between humans and the remainder of the animal kingdom. When one labels events or objects with categorical symbols, they can tap into a large amount of experience upon hearing or seeing the symbol. With a mere word, one can remember large categories of information. I think of the word _animal_ and it evokes waves of related words to the present, and within each wave are words that contain categories in themselves, and so on. This is a consummate display of the pure power of the memory when an entity uses symbolism to evoke memories; this is the essence of humanity: evoking, associating, and communicating. This is the distinguishing difference between our species and the remainder of the animal kingdom, albeit made possible by the physical evolution of our nervous system and brain size, opposable thumbs (for artificial representation), and vocal cords.

Any sense experiencing thinking entity is limited in its reasoning intelligence by the amount of experiences they can evoke and associate with the present moment. In this, all sense experiencing thinking entities have a reasoning capability that can be placed within a quantitative continuum. As previously intimated, this continuum ranges from the species with the most limited reasoning capability to that of the human species, and they differ in degree not kind.

Our early ancestors were sense experiencing thinking entities who created advanced communication capabilities. Moreover, they evolved to the point where they could construct a tool by a mentally conceived (not genetic instinct passed through birth) procedure of steps, which they could communicate to one another. First, there was the association of a present experience with a similar experience, which evoked the memory of an object's utility during the previous event. Even in a rather familiar ecological niche, one may consider this as crude reason, as the line between instinct and reason manifests itself in an extremely tenuous manner. However, albeit I consider the example as a form of crude reason, this belief is within an understanding that instinct and reason may exist as two aspects of a basic underlying mechanism that propagates life. Moving beyond simplicity, a further evolved entity when confronted with the same series of events remembered the utility aspects of a stone without one being in sight, instead, the need for its implementation evoked the memory of the past event. However, in another example, the mind of our ancestors had progressed further. The tribe had killed an animal and was again confronted with the same impasse, but this time the hunter did not merely scan the environment to find something sharp, he looked for a sharp edged stone similar to one that was useful previously. The hunter was within a greater state of awareness. When confronted with an event, the need to cut the prey, a more extensive series of past events entered his mind. Moreover, and more importantly, our ancestors were able to evoke memories from a distant period past, not merely minutes or hours before. This greater window of experience was predominantly a child of symbolism. As evolution wove its course, with sufficient experience, our ancestors came to realize that certain types and shapes of stones would be more efficient than others for performing a certain task. This may have simply been a stone with not only a sharp edge, but also one that contoured more closely to the hand, as well as a stone of a certain composition. Our early ancestors may have simply thought of the word or sound that denoted a stone, and then waves of memories of different stones entered their awareness, at which point, they mentally perceived the variety of stone that was most suitable for the job, as well as where they would most likely find one. Through time, evolution displayed its power and through a plethora of experiences and passed lore through symbolism and advanced communication, an intelligence emerged. Our ancestors not only understood the inherent value of a stone constituted in a certain manner, they understood this regardless of whether one was in sight. However, if they could not find an appropriate tool, or they had a concept of an efficient tool within the mechanism of their mind, they would construct one with what was at their disposal. I believe the symmetry found in our ancestors hand axes is the distinguishable event that moved a life form toward what people deem as humanity. In addition, one must realize they would have constructed tools out of wood before those of stone, but over time, Mother Nature is not as kind to wood as she is to stone. Nevertheless, I believe humanity made its gradational appearance on the earth when our ancestors not only constructed efficient tools, but also communicated this ability and art to the point where similar tools are found ubiquitous abound a communicated region, but more importantly, when they were constructing their tools at a time removed from when they needed to use them.

Our early ancestors possessed a state of awareness that was created by their memories. Moreover, they possessed the ability to communicate their states of awareness to other group members who were able to understand by means of simple idea association, which was created by the memory of similar experiences and comparable communicating capability. These simple statements explain the genesis of humanity. Every aspect of our species that I discuss forthcoming is merely a child of these phenomena. Over the ages, in this same manner, the simple ideas compounded and became ever-more complex. Furthermore, the birth of our advanced language and later writing facilitated the memory recall immensely. Therefore, humankind stepped into the past and into the future with the ability to remember, to evoke, to associate, to correlate, and to communicate their experiences and desires.

Since I have been exploring the conveyance of an art, it is a suitable point to discuss knowledge and the nature of human understanding. _Knowledge_ is the experiences that humans collectively possess- it is an understanding of a perceived cause and its approximate effect- it encompasses the collective and compounded experiences of our species that have been remembered, associated, and conveyed to one another, but often deciphered into degrees of probable reoccurrence when presented with the same or similar causes. This knowledge is comprised of absolute truths and those conclusions that we arrive at by rationalizing probabilities. As our ancestors began to label events and entities, they realized it would be beneficial to number articles that were a part of their environment. Hence, if there were four individuals and four objects, perhaps apples, if two of the individuals each took an apple, in every recorded, remembered, pondered, or analyzed instance, two apples remained. Therefore, the outcome is unchanging, i.e., an absolute truth. One can never fathom a physically perceivable event where one or three would remain when a person subtracts two objects from four. Moreover, if one ponders a magical or supernatural occurrence, they may be able to envisage three objects remaining, but they can never fathom the event in a physically perceivable manner. Hence, one could imagine an event as a supernatural occurrence, but still, with a break in the physical process, it falls into a different category than knowledge. A supernatural occurrence is an effect or event without a historical precedence or an approximate known or even plausible cause, which would occur quite often in antiquity (a notion for another time). In the initial perceived event with the apples, one can reduce cause and effect to a distinct and finite occurrence that does not leave room for variables. This reduction is nothing more than the realization of the symmetry of nature. The composition of nature is quantitative and our species has come to this realization by experience. Therefore, humankind realized the symmetry within the composition of nature and from this, they created numerical axioms. Mathematics is not intuitive, it is empirical. It is not something that exists intrinsically in nature, but is symbolic of nature's intrinsic symmetry.

Continuing within the realm of knowledge, there are occurrences that one cannot reduce to a finite event. The previous mathematical result lacked a necessity of motion to satisfy our inquiry. Albeit all events have an antecedent cause, the knowledge of the aforementioned cause, and hence the cause of that cause, and on infinitum, is not necessary to gain a complete understanding of the event pondered. The subtraction event merely denoted a quantitative sum regardless of cause. More importantly, if one wanted to view the event as non-mathematical, i.e., not reduced to a finite effect, and thus desire to obtain an exact understanding of what caused the motivation to physically subtract the two apples, they could never comprehend it with absolute certainty. Even beyond the motive to subtract two from four, and what caused the motive, and on infinitum, the ability to provoke the motion, not to mention the physical motion itself, contain a near infinite number of discreet events that are impossible for one to discern with one hundred percent accuracy. Moreover, with our modern day quantum physics, theoretically, if one could reduce the finite events down to the quantum level, in our comprehension, there are even probabilities at the most fundamental aspects of life, which physicists refer to as quantum uncertainty.

In another event, an individual perceives an apple under a tree. The first simple bit of knowledge obtained is a truth. However, it is not an absolute truth, but present knowledge, because the apple will not always be there; absolute knowledge is unchanging. However, if one is hungry, they can reduce this experience down to a finite event, the presence of an apple, and the lack of knowledge of the antecedent cause in no manner affects the inquiry (an individual is hungry and has found nourishment). However, is the fact the apple is nourishing absolute knowledge? Our early ancestors ascertained the fact the apple was beneficial, or merely edible, through instinct, trial, and error. Still, they did not understand the medium by which the apple was nourishing. Therefore, the phenomenon was not absolute knowledge, but a conclusion reached by reflecting on a similar experience, a probability based on sight and taste, and with an ability to imagine the lack of nourishment, though this would not be pondered if the taste and appearance were consistent with previous experiences. Moreover, even with modern science, I can imagine eating an apple that is not nourishing due to many factors. Hence, the nourishment is still a probability (albeit an extremely high one), unless one could understand and possess accurate knowledge of an incalculable number of finite events that would render the nourishment one-hundred percent certain. However, does the site of an apple under a certain tree mean the apple fell from that tree? One can ponder many events that would have brought the apple from elsewhere, but in this case and others, a judgment can be of such a high probability that the lack of absolute knowledge is unnecessary for one to understand the implications of a chain of events. Furthermore, a conclusion about a cause does not have to be correct for an individual to act upon the effect appropriately in reference to needs and desires. However, what should one assume if they perceived an apple detaching from a tree? If one reduced the event to the detachment, excluding the cause, they must ask if the apple will always land on the ground. Neither our ancestors, nor ourselves, have ever perceived an apple releasing from a branch and travelling in the direction perceived as infinitely upward. However, one can imagine the event, and one can even muse a physical travel upwards with no finite events missing in the perceived as fluid, albeit gradational motion. Then, one must inquire about the difference in the two branches of knowledge: why can I perceive an apple travelling upward when it leaves a branch in a physically intelligible manner, but not fathom two subtracted from four rendering three. To begin with, the truth is contained within the events that transpire after the apple initially releases from the branch. Not only could a force exist that is not perceivable to the eye, one can imagine many forces that appear to alter objects from moving in, as we perceive, a natural course. Then how does this differ from mathematics, of which there is only one perceivable outcome? The reason, albeit subtle, is rather simple. Albeit mathematics can predict motion, it symbolizes matter, the composition of nature, before, beyond, and separated from movement and change, hence time. Mathematics is representative of matter in a motionless state, unchanging, uncompromising, absolute, and forever. Motion and change breed variables, and considering the multiplicity of finite matter at the subatomic level, the ultimate connectivity of all matter through forces, and the infinite number of events that interact during each seemingly measureless moment of time, at this point in our mental evolution, there are no means by which an interacting individual may even theoretically attain absolute knowledge of our earthly system in motion. These statements outline the difference between absolute and probabilistic knowledge.

A pursued knowledge of a body in motion is confronted with a near infinite number of discrete events that are incomprehensible to our feeble perception. In addition, these events are quantitative in number and movement. Therefore, what if one could place all the necessary components of the world in an algorithm, would the destiny of humankind unfold before them? There exist arguments against this theory and they all sprout from quantum physics. Due to the quantitative nature of photons and the diminutive size of an electron, using the photon for light, i.e., to observe the electron, one cannot ascertain the velocity and the direction of an electron simultaneously, for the observation would alter the system. This fact (and the fact that one cannot precisely predict where in a light wave they will find a photon) is the basis of the principle of quantum uncertainty. The first implication is that if you do not know the simultaneous velocity and direction of an electron, then you cannot plug the numbers into Newton's equations; hence, cause and effect becomes an unknown. The second implication is somewhat subtler. Physicists state that since they cannot ascertain the electron's precise attributes, in a manner these qualities fail to exist. Hence, an electron does not have a simultaneous velocity and direction, merely obscure and hazy probabilities, thus all motion, hence life, is contingent. Quantum uncertainty is a device by which physicists attempt to account for human freewill. They spend countless hours, in their profound desperation, trying to prove a medium by which this quantum uncertainty can be our savior, but they would never think of admitting that even if we cannot ascertain them, the electron does indeed possess these simultaneous qualities. In essence, for there to be motion, it is necessary for an object to move in a gradational direction and the rate of this movement is its speed. Our species is not above nature looking down, nor on the outside looking in. Therefore, it should be imperative that as humans interact with nature, we affect it, as is true with every other species that exists. There is not a medium within physics, nor any other scientific field, that accounts for and thus guarantees freewill. Therefore, one should not discredit a deterministic universe with such haste.

It is now essential that I ponder the implications of this probabilistic understanding and discern how this relates to our species. If beyond mathematics, one can never ascertain absolute causes and effects in the environment with one hundred percent certainty, then looking forward, we live in a world of mere probabilities. However, probability in our species has existed since our beginning and certainly long before our understanding of quantum physics. Nevertheless, to truly understand this inquiry, one must understand the genesis of this nature of scrutiny. Phenomena as the refraction of light has for ages incited many a philosopher to doubt the absolute accuracy of the senses, or at least to doubt the understanding of the world around them. Soon to follow, as knowledge itself became a field of study, philosophers in turn began to raise doubts about human knowledge in general. Conceptual story problems, like that of Achilles and the Tortoise, began to challenge the realm of human understanding. However, one who doubts absolute knowledge, or believes that all knowledge is only a probabilistic inference, does not live their life any differently than they did before they came to this conclusion. In their daily trials of existence, they do not doubt their perceptions of which they have empirical knowledge; the rain is going to render them wet, the sun will bring them heat, and a fall from a considerable height will most likely inflict injury if not death. In addition, their interactions with people will still proceed in the same manner and their reactions to phenomena that is deemed uncertain will still be scrutinized by the same reasoning as before their doubts about knowledge arose. Moreover, physicists have not ceased their work and studies due to utter despair. This is because the implications are seldom a problem in our every day course of living, nor often pondered. Moreover, in instances of learning when one is delving into knowledge of the abstract nature, individuals may even be more prudent in coming to their conclusions. The mere propensity to question knowledge is inherent in our species for observable reasons and this would surely move into the realm of our own existence, but this alone would not dispose one to challenge their terrestrial knowledge. Albeit one in a somewhat philosophical and scientific method could question the origin of the world and our role within, it was also the existence, origin, and understanding of the deities and their social governance that early philosophers ultimately scrutinized (this when the analysis of knowledge was not for mere sport or the art of dialectic). Many astute philosophers harshly censured Homer and Hesiod for the manner in which they depicted the deities because they believed the immoral portrayal would influence the behavior of the populace. Moreover, because in antiquity religion and politics were virtually the same entity, priests and politicians could use the actions and decrees of the deities to control and manipulate the people. If religion controlled the state and one did not approve of the religious governance, they could then question the knowledge of the deities. Many of the Pre-Socratics dismissed the anthropomorphic spirits and their capricious qualities and postulated a nobler spiritual domain, which they divested of the need to praise, placate, and bestow wealth upon vainglorious deities. Moreover, if besides mathematics absolute knowledge failed to exist, how could one be sure that there was a deity, and if there was, how could one understand any of a deity's attributes or intentions? However, the collection of our lore was ever accumulating and albeit the senses may be imperfect and not answer all our questions, they are quite reliable, having supported humanity thus far. Nevertheless, as time proceeded, people attained more knowledge about the world around them. Consequently, there were fewer mysteries and thus less of a need to question knowledge. Then a time far removed from the great Greek Enlightenment, a later philosopher spoke to the world, but in their ignorance, the people failed to listen with an intelligent ear. This notable philosopher was inquiring about the nature of human understanding. However, the inquiry ultimately questioned the absolute knowledge of a certain religious institution, the proofs of that institution's _claims_ , and the credibility of the witnesses to the proofs, i.e., he was questioning miracles. If one could prove that the interactions of two billiard balls could only be understood by an inference, then he could easily question the absolute knowledge of something much further removed from our terrestrial world (he actually questioned a cult's absolute dependence on mystical speculation). Hence, the inquiry questioned the credibility and exclusivity of a governing religion that had overtaken the world. This ruling entity was an anthropomorphic religion that denounced its beginning and condemned the wisdom of institutions far greater. Through the years, philosophers in their ignorance have completely misunderstood the intentions of this man and they consequently wrote numerous works that compounded the unmitigated ignorance of modern philosophy. The direction they have taken this nature of inquiry borderlines on comical. Thus, one finds pseudo philosophers stating that philosophy is dead and that one can never truly gain a complete understanding of knowledge itself, let alone the world. How profound! Nevertheless, at the end of the day when they close their book of wisdom, it remains irrelevant in their very lives.

Albeit our knowledge is often based on mere probabilities, the fact is usually insignificant. Thus, returning to human understanding and our essential inquiry, our ancestors wanted to understand why the tree grew where it did, why it flowered and produced fruit, and why the fruit ripened. Albeit common knowledge to science today, it took our ancestors millennia to accumulate the knowledge that was essential to their existence. Through reason, early humans pursued desire and regardless of the absolute cause, the apple trees grew in certain places, produced fruit at a certain time, and the fruit ripened a time thereafter. These perceived events were embedded in the memories that were their collective knowledge. Yes, a chain of events that was often self-replicating, but not always. In addition, the exact causes for the cessation of the chain would be mystical, as would be the majority of their world for thousands of years. Nevertheless, knowledge amassed of all aspects of nature and their lore continually expanded through experience, memory, association, and the communication of this collective knowledge.

There is one universal truth: forces move matter, which interacts with other matter in space, and these events are instances of change, which we measure in time. As the matter in the universe interacts, it creates events, or effects, which in turn create events or effects, and so on infinitum.

With an understanding of the universal truth, it is imperative I discuss the difference between truth, knowledge, and belief. _Knowledge_ is the accumulation of human recorded events in totality, which are ascertained via the memory, along with symbolism and labeling. Lucidly stated, a _truth_ is the acceptance that an article of knowledge is accurate. In this, we hope to be able act upon our perceived truths when incorporated with currents events in reference to our future existence. Moreover, the mere search for truth would be an irrelevant and fruitless endeavor if we did not base the search on current knowledge in reference to future desire and more importantly, if we were not ultimately searching for a mechanism, i.e., instances of associated causes and effects, to corroborate its accuracy. To search for predictive, distant, or unknown truth is the search and association of apparent repetition, for the unchanging in experiment, and for the removal of variables in our pursuance of desire. Without these truths, humankind would have no axioms to build upon, nothing recorded as viable to learn from, and no cognitive evolution handed down through time as pondered by desire. However, our experiences will always be limited. Moreover, due to the ambiguity of language, not to mention the equivocal use of language due to beliefs and desires, our communication and association of events and ideas will always leave room for error. Thus, when human experience has attained new knowledge on a subject, collectively, we must not be afraid to objectively challenge our truths by deliberating and observing repetition and variables, thus action and reaction. In addition, our species also achieves subjective thought by means of experience. We conceive subjective thought, as imagination, from bits of experience reconstructed abstractly. Through symbolism and labeling, articles of our environment reside within categories imprinted upon our minds. Every thought, regardless of how conceptual, is merely a child of these categories of knowledge. I can conceive a beautiful lady whispering, for I have seen the beauty that is woman. I have a concept of beauty, categorized, and I most definitely have a concept of woman, as well as a concept of a whisper. Moreover, as I dream of her flowing black hair, I have a concept of hair, as well as color, black, and of white, as the beautiful rose that resides within, for I have a concept of flowers. However, as she has departed, if I reconstruct my thoughts and categories abstractly, I can conceive the beautiful rose in my hand whispering of her affection for me, for I most definitely have a concept of affection. Imagination and ingenuity were obviously of the utmost importance as our species entered the world of the future, thus nearly blindly attempting to mark its course. Subjective thought has so precipitated our mental evolution. However, when one has a subjective postulate, they need challenge it empirically before claiming it as a truth, for through communication they will convey it to others and possibly benefit, or not as the case may be, the life of the learning individual.

Absolute belief, as it pertains to knowledge, is the consummate acceptance that something is, or will be, a certainty or the truth. This acceptance may or may not be based on the logical deductions ascertained from the intelligence humans collectively developed through experience, association, and the sharing of our experiences and knowledge. Thus, there are truths based on the collective experiences of humankind, for instance, the lack of nourishment will lead to expiration. As the degree of possible human knowledge wanes, there is the emergence of speculation, faith, hope, and opinion. An opinion is a view that cannot be decisively proven by accepted axioms. Sometimes these opinions are held as just that, opinions, and often they are held as absolute truths, as the belief in an omnipotent deity. The degree of belief is directly related to the desired benefit one may receive when acting upon or reflecting on the belief in reference to desire. Therefore, there is belief based upon the knowledge that we as humans collectively posses. Then in degrees diminishing therefrom, there are absolute opinions, which are held with the same conviction, and these opinions permeate into speculation. The aforementioned may be either true or false with degrees of probability based upon the following five premises:

1. The collective human knowledge or experiences on the opined subject.

This statement refers to the collective human lore that our species has ascertained and labeled throughout the ages. Moreover, in this section on knowledge and experiences, I exclude human fabricated experiences that individuals or groups mendaciously place forth to manipulate the thoughts of others. At one time, humankind believed the earth was flat. This was deduced from the collective experiences of observing people, thus not a belief based on fanciful dreams. Ideas or beliefs that humankind creates via _subjective_ , _wishful_ , or _imaginary_ thoughts shall be viewed as the three words express (and often illusory). Our ancestors arrived at the belief the earth was flat via empirical means, but the collective human experiences in reference to the shape of our planet was quite limited, due to the relative sizes of humans and the earth. Therefore, it was not a methodological error, but the collective experiences or lack of any sufficient experience, which was the reason for the inaccurate belief. Hence, as human experience on any subject increases, the probability of accuracy in turn increases. If one individual measures the speed of light, the number arrived at may be believable. However, if a great number of scientists arrive at the same speed, the number is quite probable, and since every scientist in every instance arrives at the same number for the speed of light, we hold the speed as an absolute truth with absolute belief.

2. The number of similar experiences of the believing or opining individual and the individual/s who aided the opining individual in coming to their conclusion.

In this component, related but moving into a different realm, I incorporate the transfer of knowledge, i.e., the learned and the one aspiring to learn. In the instance of the measuring of the speed of light, I, as the opining individual, would not have any experience on measures of that magnitude, but I do understand the concept of velocity. Moreover, since the speed of light is the same for all observers, regardless of their frame of reference (speed of travel), when this constant speed was first conjectured, no one on earth would have a similar experience to draw from, i.e., in every other instance known to humankind, the speed of an object is in reference to some other entity, not a mere constant. This was exhausting to physicists, but inevitably, they all arrived at the same conclusion, that the speed of light is the same for all observers. Hence, albeit I have no experience of this nature, an instructing individual can thus explain their methodology and their knowledge gained from years of studying the field of physics. It is the learned, or those in the forefront of any field of knowledge, regardless of the veracity or wisdom of those beliefs they aspire to teach, that move the discussion to the next variable.

3. The degree of the rational capability of the believing or opining individual and the individual/s who aided the opining individual in coming to their conclusion.

This variable is of the utmost importance for our inquiry and moves unto the realms of the naive and the intellectual. Obviously, an intellectual individual, i.e., one adept at reasoning, is going to achieve a higher degree of correctness when attempting to discern the accuracy of knowledge. As the continuum journeys through intellectual capabilities, slowly unto naive, and then unto those of deficient mental capabilities, the ability to comprehend and correlate their degree of knowledge (of personal experiences and knowledge that has been collectively conveyed) with knowledge that one is conveying for learning wanes considerably. Moreover, if an individual on the lower end of the intellectual continuum is attempting to instruct another of a comparable intellectual level, the chance of this union producing any sort of wisdom is extremely negligible.

4. The beliefs, opinions, and desires of the believing or opining individual and the individual/s who aided the opining individual to come to their conclusion.

Regardless of intellectual capabilities, the beliefs, opinions, and desires of an individual can severely cloud their vision. Imagine an individual who as a child had it instilled within their mind that a deity created the world and placed humankind upon the earth. The individual matured and became quite the learned person, but when they read books on evolution, because their belief in the deity and their desire to reap the benefits of their religion, they dismissed the far more rational explanation for the origin of the human species. Moreover, if the teaching individual also believed in a theory in which a deity created the human species, the learning person does not have a prayer of attaining unobscured knowledge. In addition, in reference to the rational capabilities of the individuals opining and teaching, these qualities are by no means guaranteed in either position (often teachers and scholars are the people who want to be, not the intellectually gifted), but would forecast the chance of a purely intellectual and scientific methodology overcoming a belief in mythology.

5. What effect held beliefs or opinions may have on the life of the opining and teaching individuals.

Finally, and of great importance, is the implications of held beliefs on the life of the believing or opining individual. If an individual holds the belief that our species evolved from a genus that had origins in Asia and another individual was attempting to convince him that our origins were in Africa, the first individual's belief would not have a major impact on his life. Hence, the two could settle this inquiry with an exchange of factual data and except for the devious creature called pride, previous held beliefs and opinions could be malleable if an individual placed forth a cogent argument. However, the individual with the belief that a deity placed humankind upon earth would reside in quite a different condition. They have held this belief for their entire life and they believe their destiny, as well as the destiny of humankind, abides within the understanding of the deity's decree, i.e., the acceptance of the deity as a savior for the world. No, their position would not be as wavering, regardless of the cogency of the argument, the plausibility of the two beliefs, or the collective human experiences on the subject. Furthermore, one must understand that all of the aforementioned probabilities and variables exist in quantitative degrees within a continuum. However, I am sure there are those who will be inclined to ask if one can actually know the truth or anything else for that matter. Do not doubt the objectively factual for fear of implications. One should not always fear probabilities because correctness is often at a high percentage. We must pursue truth within the scope of human experiences collectively, but we can also theorize against by communicating and testing via means of an objective methodology. Newton's theory of gravity is not one hundred percent correct, but who is to doubt his results when a confrontation with the non-yielding ground is obviously going to propose a problem.

_Self awareness_ is the realization of consciousness, this by means of correlating past events and future possibilities to the present pondered experience, as well as realizing these experiences are created by phenomena reacting with the one's physical form, bound and inseparable, and within an innate and volitional desire for pleasurable states of consciousness and thus existence. Personal identity and individuality are directly related to self-awareness. Humans are not distinct individuals for the reasons often believed, albeit due to insecurity and illusions of self-importance, we cling to our individuality. However, entities within a given species are distinct due to a force of far greater magnitude. If species did not differ within themselves, without genetic mutation or variation, natural selection and reproduction could not have evolved further than the first simple life form. Our individuality is the consummate mechanism of evolution.

Humans were, are, and will always be self-acting creatures that interact with the external world through stimuli induced experience. Furthermore, we as living creatures have a known purpose of propagating survival and we have the instinctual, mental, and physical characteristics to aid in this purpose.

Humans lack knowledge of how the universe came to be, if some force created it, what it may have previously been a part of, or if it has merely always been. The universe we inhabit is all energy-matter and space. We experience space as judged between matter and matter as existing in space. Without space there would be no possibility of motion, without motion there is no possibility of change, without change life does not exist.

All is change, nothing ceases but merely changes; nothing spontaneously appears but simply evolves; all that is has been, and all that has been will be...

Table of Contents

A Spiritual Species

We have arrived at the point of the evolution of our species when symbolism and language had consummated the reasoning capabilities of our ancestors. With these tools, they could ponder deep into the past and future of their enigmatic world by remembering volumes of experience, which evolved into a body of knowledge about the world around them. At this juncture, our ancestors began to paint a picture of their new world, while they created new mental entities by means of a language developed and highly reasoned pursuance of desire.

As their collection of lore expanded, our ancestors not only reacted to the events within their environment, they attempted to understand and influence nature. The more they gazed into the past, the more they understood the variables in their future. In addition, the more they peered within the eyes of Mother Nature, the more her complex and equivocal guise left them in a mystical and often unexplainable world. This understood, it is time to move within the numerous observations of our earliest ancestors and discern how they used their advanced reason to come to conclusions about the world around them, which obviously had a tremendous impact on their existence.

Our primitive ancestors realized all things have a beginning and an end (actually, a change in form). The tree grows, flowers, and subsequently it bears fruit; then the fruit is consumed or it transforms into the ground. However, following the time of life, and subsequently the time of death, life giving water returns to the springs, which is followed by a period of warmth and birth. It was these observations, i.e., the cessation of something is followed by regeneration, that were the mother of cyclical time. Next, and of superseding importance, is the realization that all events or experiences should naturally have an antecedent cause (cause and effect). There is a two-fold importance lying within this realization. First, the understanding of cause and effect was of the utmost significance in accumulating and conveying a collection of lore that could continually expand and compound through posterity. Secondly, and of more subtlety, is that if the cause of any observation or event were unknown, this would obviously preclude a secure plan for attaining desire.

Imagine a time thousands upon thousands of years before the Common Era. It was a cold, late winter evening and once again, this invisible force without an apparent cause ravaged through the camp and brought an ailing chill and utter destruction to everything in its path. Ponder early man who perceived the effects of a flaming circle that arrived every morning and brought heat, but disappeared, as it arrived, without reason. What about the big mound of earth that spit fire out its top or the never-ending body of water that violently crashed upon the land and destroyed everything it encountered? Would not these mystical and unexplainable events, pondered by advanced reason, surely activate a feeling of insecurity within the minds of our ancestors? As stated, one of the consequences of possessing a greater window of experience is the remembering, and thus opining individual, or group when dealing with collective lore, begins to understand how labeling aspects of the environment aids the memory recall. Thus, they would begin to label or name entities and events. A hailstorm was an entity and when the hailstorm arrived, it was an event. Thus, imagine that an early tribe labeled a storm from the west that constantly ravaged their camp. Now, to be extremely anachronous, and not exactly etymologically correct (a zephyr is usually denotes as a gentle west wind), what if the word that denoted a wind from the west was _zephyr_? One need realize that a storm arriving and tearing into a camp would have been extremely distressing to the group. When our prehistoric ancestors perceived movement or change, i.e., experiences, if they did not perceive or know what moved the event, they would have to attempt to discern the cause. If a reasoning entity does not know the cause of an effect or experience, the unknown creates variables in the entity's life, which precludes a secure plan in the attaining of desire. After numerous associated and communicated experiences, many perceived events could inevitably be explained, i.e., even if individuals did not perceive a cause, they understood what kind of forces caused certain movements or instances of change. However, certain events, as a devastating windstorm, were not only of a great magnitude in the life of the people, they were temporally mystical and more difficult to explain. Thus, they would move this unknown entity, zephyr, into a different category. Individuals and animals appeared to create change or events on their own (a crude understanding of volition). Hence, if early clans could not perceive or understand the cause of an effect, it is understandable for them to believe the effect or event moved on its own accord or was the product of an unknown force, i.e., that the event was precipitated by an invisible mover. Thus, as the passing of lore continued throughout the generations and the people recorded events, _Zephyr returned last night and ravaged our camp_. Moreover, we as reasoning creatures, especially with events that could prove to be detrimental to our existence, have a propensity to limit variables and thus attempt to interact with our environment to render it more suitable to our needs. Then why did Zephyr ravage their camp? Well, animals and individuals appeared to bring destruction when they were angry, or hungry, or threatened, thus, they drew a correlation from known events caused by a motive, that is, events caused by a creature with volition. Therefore, how could they placate the invisible movers? They would appease them by the same means they wished to be placated. They would give to the unknown forces those possessions they perceived to be most valuable, in later times going as far as the sacrifice a firstborn male child. The invisible movers were not mere physical entities in their environment, but began to take on a life or spirit with their own will and they subsequently began to take on anthropomorphic qualities. The most important aspect of this realization is that our ancestors found a variable in their equation of life. Movement is a product of cause and effect. Thus, if one does not truly understand a cause, how can they attempt to change, transform, or temporally prepare for the effect? To early humans, phenomena that were unexplainable would have been products of an unknown or unseen forces or causes, i.e., products of spirits and deities. The ultimate unexplainable phenomenon, our existence, would obviously become a product of an ultimate spirit or Deity. If one ponders all the aspects of our environment that would exist as mere variables without the knowledge of modern science and correlate this with the fact the existence of our ancestors was contingent upon these variables, then the attribution of unknown events to spirits with volition that one could attempt to interact with becomes quite sensible.

Our earliest ancestors had fear of the unknown forces of nature, of life, and they began to not only label and categorize them, they gave some of them volitional and anthropomorphic qualities that would continually grow with the growth of humanity. Newly constituted, our ancestors could then placate the spirits and thus believe they had hope of changing their will, i.e., limit variables in their innate pursuance of desire. Eventually, deities were created in the image of animals and humankind with reason, desire, volition, beneficence, pride, empathy, jealousy, anger, omniscience, omnipotence; with all the qualities we had, could imagine, or incredible degrees of what we possess and/or often hope to find in ourselves and others. With modern day science, humankind has answered many of these unknown variables with facts instead of spirits, but there are still unanswered questions with unknown causes; there are variables that science has not yet, nor ever may be able to answer (the life support of popular divinity).

As our early ancestors began to label aspects of their environment, they also recorded the propitious and catastrophic events they thought were created by the spirits. Moreover, one need understand that when they labeled entities, the name for the sun was not as ours, which denotes a fiery gaseous object without thought or emotion; their label would denote a volitional entity that would interact with them as individuals interact within and throughout the group. Imagine that after a previous winter held on longer than usual, the cold spring and late arrival of summer nearly caused a famine, which devastated the tribe. However, the leaders could have conveyed the event in the following manner (another anachronous example):

Last harvest _Apollo_ was angered and almost failed to bring life, but after supplication, he arrived and saved the vegetation.

The leaders of the tribes told and retold these stories throughout the generations. However, as their collection of lore increased, they incorporated new techniques to remember their ever-growing volumes of stories. Moreover, these tales became pedagogical and they not only preserved aspects of history, they conveyed the procedures of their rituals. In time, their stories evolved into what we refer to as myth. Therefore, as time went by:

_Apollo_ was angered a season long past by actions of impiety and he declined to return and rescue his son. However, after seven days and nights of contrition and the sacrifice of seven unblemished lambs, he arrived unto his son and brought life unto him and his children.

As far as the acts of impiety, if one merely gazes upon humanity, they will always be capable of observing some action that could explain the anger of the deity. The son of the deity could have simply been a tribal leader, as we find ages of half immortal heroes in most religions of antiquity, including the biblical era:

4. The Nephilim were on the earth in days those, and even afterward when came in the sons of God to the daughters of men and they gave birth to them. They were heroes who {existed} from ancient times, the men of reputation (Genesis 6:4).

Thus, a clan leader could have been thought of as the son of a deity and his children would represent the tribe or even humankind in general. Moreover, at some unknown juncture, they also began to incorporate metered verse into their myths, which is an incomparable mnemonic tool, as well as the utility that in part gave birth to music.

Throughout the ages, our ancestors continually recorded their history and as their myths evolved, the attributes and escapades of the invisible movers, i.e., gods, expanded to assume the voluminous history, lore, and rituals of our amalgamating species. As they attempted to interact with and explain more of the omnipresent enigmas of their environment, not only did the invisible movers take on more attributes, new spirits continually spawned from the mental womb of our ancestors. Moreover, the birth of these spirits was not merely conceived from the capricious children of Mother Nature, but they were also offspring created from the mechanisms of our ancestor's perceived and pondered destiny. Thus, over the ages one can find the conception of gods of war, wisdom, justice, fate, and love. Albeit today we feel rather removed from their crowded pantheon of deities, justice is often still perceived as an ethereal entity, we often entreat lady luck in our endeavors, and during the holidays, _we all will be together, if the Fates allow_. Attributing dispositions to variables in life somehow eases our burdens and gives vigor to our hopes. If I desire something and the likeliness of the yearning coming to fruition is merely a chance event, I entreat lady luck as not merely a representation of probabilities, but an entity that if she is on my side, there is a better chance my desire will be fulfilled. If in our modern scientific world an ethereal entity can still affect the interactions with one and their environment, imagine how much more profound the effect would have been in the world of our distant ancestors.

Early humans communicated their accumulated knowledge to subsequent generations by means as metered verse, artwork, and they probably incorporated song and dance (primitive theater). With this conveyed knowledge, early man in his world of causes and effects, known and of spirits, became the _mighty hunter before the lord_. When one reflects on the ceremonies of early humans, they find a consummate respect for the animals in their world, as well as a tremendous focus on rituals associated with hunting. Moreover, not only did our ancestors have to master the art, the animal life pervaded their environment in large numbers and they needed to be able to protect themselves from their predatory world. About thirty thousand years ago, in a creative revolution that overtook Europe, one begins to find evidence that magic, ritual, religion, and hierarchical structure were beginning to dominate the lives of our ancestors. Around that time, in the amazing cave paintings that everyone should become familiar with, one finds a culture that displayed a respect for the art of hunting, as well as the animal life that dominated the environment. The most intriguing aspect of these caves was not merely the seemingly sudden emergence of art, but that many of the galleries went on inside for miles where one could find hidden and mystical images, as those that were intended to be viewed with a certain angle of illumination. Numerous passages had to be traveled by crawling, climbing, and traversing through terrain that was near impossible to navigate, which would be incomprehensible if the paintings were merely for esthetics. On the contrary, the images were part of religious rituals, which in the past were always used to share knowledge and enhance the group's memories. If the head of the mysteries took a subject on hallucinogens for miles into a dark corridor while others were playing hypnotic music and chanting, and then after the group had danced themselves into a arousal state of frenzy, the room was illuminated, it would have been an awe-inspiring and possibly frightening experience not soon forgot. When one of the senses, in this example sight, is cut off from stimuli, the other senses desperately attempt to get a focus on what is transpiring within the environment and they become very receptive, i.e., impressionable. Moreover, as light is then introduced to the setting, the sense of sight instantly absorbs as much data as possible, which renders the subject extremely susceptible, as the sense is near desperate in hopes to resume its sole task, which is to create a mental facsimile of the external world. Furthermore, as individuals experienced loud music or chanting in their rituals, the sense of hearing was also diminished, which again rendered the other senses heightened in receptiveness. Our ancestors were often taken through miles of pitch-black corridors, having no idea who or what awaited them, and when they arrived at their destination, the senses frantically attempted to survey the environment. Then suddenly the cave was illuminated and who knows what all was unveiled before them, but we do know there was mystical artwork. Several paintings were drawn in a manner that when they were exposed to light, the figures would appear to move, but then disappear if one changed the angle of the light or the angle from which a person viewed the picture. These rituals certainly left a lifelong impression on their subjects, but could have very well determined their existence. The intention of these rituals was to supplicate and interact with the invisible forces, while at the same time, share critical information about the environment that was their life support system. I cannot spend the time here to do these rituals justice, but impressing the memory was of absolute necessity before the invention of the written word. Nevertheless, as stated, these rituals were not only aimed at creating a mystical and awe-inspiring experience, they were preserving and propagating knowledge. As a young man became of age to join his elders on the hunt, his initiation into the mysteries of the caves might have been his rights of passage, where he would learn the secrets and the skills that determined the success of his people. The tribe that could hunt and protect themselves successfully would survive, but the loss of the process would surely lead to their demise. Again, they were communicating knowledge that would determine their existence. Our ancestors were hunting animals that were often faster and larger than they were, not to mention very dangerous. Thus, they needed to understand the animal migrations, anatomy, tendencies, and the terrain and geography of the land, like watering holes (for the animals and hunters) and natural shelters. Besides the aforementioned, they needed to be able to protect their kill from other predators, while understanding the weather and the invisible forces of nature, along with the propitious forces that brought the migrations, i.e., that submitted the animals into their hands. The animals and the unknown forces were the givers of life and thus our ancestors respected them. However, it was not merely the knowledge of hunting, but the preservation of every skill our ancestors acquired that was of a consummate importance. With the birth of language, our ancestors were constantly accumulating and increasing the amount of information that was added to their ever-growing knowledge base. Therefore, the art of preservation became one of the most important aspects of their civilizations. If this perpetuation is one of the discernable traits that differentiates our species from the remainder of the animal kingdom, not to mention being a direct cause for our success, then the arduous efforts of the cave painters should by no means come as a surprise. One can understand why the use of special effects for the appearance of seemingly mystical images, not to mention the use of magic and suspense, were of the utmost importance. As I stated in chapter one:

Each species, and each entity within a species, has an evolved memory capability that begins to store and evoke experiences at an equation that is comprised of the amount of force of the initial event or experience, the number of times experiencing a similar event, and the force of the event or experience that moved the entity to evoke the past experience.

Accordingly, one can use high magnitude events of surprise, exaltation, and fear, which work well with the force of repetition and symmetry to impress the memory.

One can grasp a sledge hammer and with all their strength send a brick wall crumbling down, analogous to the surprise elements of the cave paintings, or they can strike the wall continuously with strategically placed shots and ultimately have the same effect, analogous to the force of repetition and symmetry. I have explained two different methods that bring upon the same effect. However, repetition can be merely the consequence of daily interactions with one's environment, or a planned tool used of mnemonics. As earlier stated, there were unexplainable phenomena in nature and our ancestors also conjured the unknown by magic. If unknown events were attributed to the volition of a deity, but then a priest or shaman also created mystical events, they could also be attributed to a deity. This obviously placed the performers of these mystic rituals in a position of extreme power and control. Moreover, they used their magic and rituals to create high magnitude states of being in their subjects and they incorporated these states with repetition and symmetry in an art of mind imprinting, mnemonics, and edification.

One should realize that at some point the art of impressing the memory by daily ritual, i.e., repetition, and the acts of supplicating unknown forces became religion. The transformation was of the utmost subtlety, since one could never draw the line, black or white, there is merely a world of gray. Moreover, the individual that is in charge of these awe-inspiring ceremonies was the fountain of lore and the keeper of mysteries. Individuals of our species when in a position of power and control have a propensity to use these means for self-success as opposed to group success. Religion began as mere directed daily ritual, which educated and instructed one in life-saving knowledge, but it eventually turned into a vehicle of control. Sacrifices and gifts that were once meant to supplicate the spirits became spoils for the priests and the religious institutions, which in a later day was actually a clever way to collect taxes (a discussion for another time). If one incorporates their religion and magic with the mind imprinting, they subtly stumble upon brainwashing, regardless if the intentions were sincere or self-serving.

Beyond the mere use of magic to impress the memory, I also referred to repetition and symmetry. Symmetry is nothing more than the use of verse in the passing of lore, which stems from harmony and the quantitative nature of the universe. The elders used this tool and incorporated it with the fact that the extraordinary impresses the human memory, which was of the utmost benefit before the written word. In their poetry (quantified) and myths, exaggerated numbers, riches, and supernatural feats also aided the remembering process. As with aboriginal tribes today, the priests or shaman passed along the pedagogical myths and lore on different levels, i.e., a need to know basis. The levels ranged from general knowledge of necessity to the ultimate secrets of a mystery cult. Again, this obviously maintained control, power, and influence to those of choice, which would maintain a hierarchical structure within their groups.

With an understanding of the malleability of myth, I thought it prudent to explore how the religious leaders used this to their advantage. The use of fear is a great means to impress the memories and thoughts of individuals, regardless if the desired end is education or control. Consequently, leaders could use a volcanic eruption to instill fear into the populace by blaming the event on the lack of obedience to a deity, i.e., the priests or religious institution, or the medium by which the deity communicated. The priests used propitious events to demonstrate what obedience could yield and blamed detrimental events on the lack of compliance. However, a move for conformity can be a means to control the populace and elevate the status and power of the individuals in control or a means to facilitate group harmony (or both).

Regarding the creation of local deities, our ancestors encountered invisible movers, which were unexplainable forces in their environment. Not only did these forces appear to move on their own, due to a limited understanding of their world, they naturally believed the forces or spirits traveled with them, which through daily ritual (which as stated grew into religion) eventually transformed into a personal relationship. In addition, as they placated and attempted to interact with these spirits, they were in essence striving to win over the dispositions of some of the most powerful forces known to humankind. As early man traveled the ancient world with their spirits, they encountered other tribes that had experienced the same unknown forces. Moreover, due to the magnitude of the effects of these forces on every tribe that existed, each tribe would obviously draw a correlation to the invisible movers of the other. Hence, if the tribes united, the spirits would take on the characteristics from the myths of both peoples. Therefore, understanding that all of our prehistoric ancestors experienced similar forces of nature, one can realize how religion grew as a symmetrical worldwide phenomenon. Since humankind is naturally inclined to the visual, for to see is to understand with more validity, our ancestors began to make representations of the spirits. Around thirty thousand years ago, humankind was making representations of a female goddess figure. Archaeologists have found these figurines throughout Europe and they are of a uniform appearance that depicts a voluptuous pregnant woman. They were most likely a representation of a mother goddess of a fertility cult. Since the figurines were found throughout Europe, they are a clear display of the related evolution of religion.

One of the greatest mysteries of life was surely regeneration. One can never know at what juncture our ancestors correlated pregnancy with intercourse, but before the connection was drawn, it must have been even more of a miracle than it is presently. Consequently, the invisible force incorporated with regeneration could have been a Mother Goddess who was represented by the Venus statuettes (the name given to the voluptuous female artifacts). However, one cannot be certain if this implies they lived in a matriarchal culture or a patriarchal culture that revered a Mother Goddess. Moreover, if the culture was male dominated, one is moved to ponder the absence of any depictions of male deities. This absence has me leaning toward the assumption that the Mother Goddess may have been the centerpiece of their religion. In later times, peoples worshipped divine couples, but if this was the case during the Venus era is unsure, and again, no evidence points toward this. However, once spirits began to take on anthropomorphic qualities, combined with at least a crude understanding of the reproductive process, a divine couple makes perfect sense, since all animal life that our ancestors perceived was a product of both sexes. Local gods and divine couples dominated religions until the Roman Empire's christianization of most of the world. There is obvious evidence, which one can ascertain in many places, that in the Jerusalem temple they worshipped Yahweh and Asherah as a divine couple. To believe that this worship ceased with the destruction of the temple is an audacious assumption. However, it was during the era of the second temple in Jerusalem that humanity began to sentence the goddess to death, for reasons far removed from monotheism. Nevertheless, clearly, well before the actual degradation and expulsion of female deities, there had already been a major move to a patriarchal- male dominating society. Therefore, one need ask what brought upon this move from the era of the Venus figurines to the cultures dominated by men and their male deities.

It is doubtful one could ever truly discern if there was a transformation from a culture that revered a female goddess to the civilizations dominated by the patriarchs and their male deities. However, another change did occur, which was a consummate transformation in their mode of living. This transition came about when our ancestors developed the ability to control a portion of their environment through the knowledge of agriculture and the domestication of animals. Foremost, one must realize that a new discipline was always learned and absorbed first and then subsequently, a social or environmental change dictated its prevalent implementation within a community and the manner of living. Moreover, these changes may have taken centuries and they did not encompass the entire human population, as there are still aboriginal tribes in Australia that are hunter-gatherers. Beyond the knowledge of agriculture and the domestication of animals, another capability that changed modes of living was that of fishing and boating. In either case, instead of roaming for food, communities became fixed or sewn upon the earth, which eventually moved them to build structures that were more permanent. In addition, with the domestication of animals, there was obviously an understanding of the regenerative process. Regeneration was still the gift of life, but it became less of a mystery. The goddess lived on for thousands of years, but these advances could have been part of the reason for her decline in stature. Moreover, a constantly accrued knowledge and not merely a basic understanding, but preparedness for nature made life less mystical. Our ancestors had the ability to build better shelters and be better prepared for the seasons and other variables that had made life extremely difficult. Moreover, they developed better weapons for fighting and hunting and in correlation with weapon building, they developed better tools. They transformed from a wandering species trying to survive into a species that attempted to dominate the world around them.

And they said, Come, let us build for ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and make for ourselves a reputation. (Genesis 11:3)

They entered a new era, an age of heroes. Once they began to live in fixed groups, or societies, there was a greater need for protection against foreign tribes. At this point, if a tribe were to flee from an invader, it would have meant to flee from their land and their structures that they had labored on, not to mention their animals and means of agriculture. Hence, the males of our species moved into a position of further importance and domination.

A person or group in control of a few people will naturally experience a sensation of heightened self-worth, thus it should be easy to understand that as our species began to amass in larger numbers, illusions of grandeur would certainly follow. Class stratification, the desire to have excessive possessions, and the desire to impose one's will on others are obviously elevated to an enormous extent when the number of constituents in a given group is radically increased. Moreover, within this illusory environment, the male dominating society pushed the matriarch further asunder, while conquering and ruling became fixed upon the minds of men. Not only were our ancestors the _mighty hunters before the lord_ , mankind grew wings. It was upon Pegasus (the winged horse) that Bellerophon was fixed when he performed his heroic feats. Did the ancient Greeks believe Pegasus aided Bellerophon in his travels before the winged horse inevitably threw his rider and left for the land of the immortals? For an answer to this, I turn to Plato. In The Republic, Plato wanted the children of his soldiers to march into battle with the army (for various reasons). However, when asked what they should do about impending dangers, Plato, a former poet, wanted to give the children wings so they could escape by flying. Plato stated he was referring to horses. When I stated _mankind grew wings_ , I meant our ancestors had learned to train horses and they used them in battle. This capability enabled men to traverse and attempt to conquer vast areas of land. Most assuredly, illusions of worldwide domination were soon to follow.

Approximately sixty thousand years ago, the Neanderthals were the first of our cousins to display a belief in immortality, though not a universal. One may only guess what first brought this belief to conception. An obvious hypothesis would be hope. Realizing you inevitably will and at any time could perish is overwhelming. Ignoring or not accepting this fact would have been and is of the utmost utility. Maybe this belief was incited by the seasons and the cyclical aspects of nature, the daily trip of the sun, or the waxing and waning of the moon? In Egypt, there were bodies mummified by the desert, embalmed by the intemperate sand, and uncovered by the wind; if these were not the cause for a faith in immortality, they definitely became a proof. What about unexplainable phenomena and the _spirit world_ , could the spirits have been their deceased ancestors not at rest? I have always pondered that if our ancestors honored the wisdom of a tribal elder and with his death, they continued to honor and pass along his wisdom, would the person not appear to live through the knowledge (a muse of possible ancestor deification)? Many a mind merely believes, feels, thinks there must be a higher reason than our feeble and ephemeral existence here on earth. Nevertheless, humans have evolved into rational creatures and thus it was inevitable that we would wonder why we are here. Through logical observation, if one would lose the prejudice that we are above and beyond the rest of nature, all that one could state for sure is that humans are here to subsist and reproduce while we evolve physically and mentally through time, our offspring then in turn shall repeat our feat, and this shall be replicated for ages to come, if so be our fate and not that of the dinosaur. Is this scenario then sufficient- live, struggle, and die? On this journey, I shall not wander into the realm of a subjective opinion, but for the mere question, I can recollect many a sigh, hope, and tear, but still a variable. Then I say one is to search and ponder many unanswered variables, but in the absence of fact this must be left to hope and not faith, the unknown not the all known, a question not an answer.

Within religion and its stories and poems abide didactic necessity, history, politics, metaphysics, and morality. Regardless of the origin of the religious lore of ancient literature, within the stories one can find hope and reason, promise and security, and thus even with our modern day science, people cling unto their dying myths like a suckling child to its mother's bosom.

Table of Contents

A Social Creature

Insecurity, the womb of human vice, spawned as humankind began to reflect upon the following _four causes_ (which are also the mother of many other human inclinations). These _four causes_ are all related and the means to control the uncertainty they create have compounded over time, which fostered an illusion that lives among us today.

_1. Through our advanced reason, understanding that we cannot always obtain what we desire, but equated with our genetically evolved attraction and thus irreversible reflexive, and though sometimes pursued ignorantly, reasoned volitional pursuance of pleasure and aversion to painful states of being, which intrinsically maintains our survival._

2. Our understanding that it is rather easy to come to failure in our pursuance of desire.

3. The realization that one inevitably will, and at any time could perish.

4. An understanding of the competitive struggle for survival amongst others in the same ecological niche- others who require the same needs for sustenance and have the same desire for pleasure- who have approximately the same means of achieving the needs and desires- who have unknown beliefs of what beyond necessary means of sustenance will bring them happiness- and who have the same realizations about ourselves, thus presenting a threat to one's intrinsic will to pleasurable states of being and thus survival.

The means by which humanity deals with the _four causes_ , and every other pondered variable concerning our existence, is reasoning, which abides via our accumulative experiences and the associating, correlating, and reflecting upon these experiences in reference to our future existence. Hence, through a constant state of awareness via the memory, and subsequently self-awareness, at some point our ancestors began to ponder not only the daily trials of existence, but also ultimately their existence itself. As their symbolism and language achieved its consummate level, states of awareness encompassed a plethora of ideas by means of reflecting upon different categories of data concomitantly, and often reconstructing them abstractly. As they interacted with their environment, natural symbols evoked instincts and the memory of past events and they purposefully correlated these memories with ideas or thoughts by using symbolism to contemplate future possibilities in an ever-widening window of experience. In essence, they began to entertain ideas of distant needs and desires, i.e., those beyond the present needs for sustenance and survival. As early humans pondered future states of existence, the _four causes_ came into being. When our earliest ancestors achieved self-awareness, they began to not only perceive other bands as a present moment threat that they realized upon sight, but they would continue to realize the threat at a time further and further removed from an encounter. In addition, as it was with foreign bands, it would also evolve within the group itself. The more their window of experience widened, the more they viewed fellow members of our species as not merely an entity that in times of want could propose a danger, but a creature as oneself with the same needs, desires, thoughts of betrayal, and thoughts of domination; for even if we do not act upon them, these thoughts often dance within our minds. Moreover, it is quite probable that they viewed many animals in a similar manner, because they also appeared to have volition.

Imagine a time of extreme want and scarcity of food. If a group of hunters encountered a foreign band, they would not merely have an instinctive drive to protect their territory and spoils of the hunt, they would ponder the needs and desires of the foreign band in correlation with their own. They would also reflect upon their weapons and tools, their number and size, but after the foreign band was no longer in their detection, the _four causes_ would render them still reflecting on the experience. Food was scarce, thus they would deliberate on who was better equipped to attain means of sustenance. Moreover, and more importantly, they would also contemplate the motives and intentions of the other band, this as they contemplated their own. As the two groups reflected on one another in reference to their desires and instinctive drive for pleasurable states of being, they would originate beliefs about the other, as well as the best means to achieve security. As an example, they may have come to believe or realize that better weapons and pre-determined strategies, not to mention surreptitious and devious tactics, would be of the utmost importance in emerging victorious in an altercation. Moreover, displays of ostentatious weapons, of combative prowess, and unwavering cruelty aid a group in appearing intimidating to others, thus deterring aggression. On the antithesis, they may have come to believe that cooperation would suit them better in protecting them from yet other bands and predators, in hunting, and in building structures. It was the unification and expansion of bands and tribes that ultimately evolved into civilizations and moved humanity to appear and believe that Mother Nature governed our species and the remainder of the animal kingdom by a different set of natural laws. This moves the discourse to the beginning of civilizations and the birth of a new standard by which one can judge the human species.

Since in the last chapter, I laid the mystical aspects of the spirit world and its deities to rest, what are the implications in the life of the individual? First, and of the utmost importance, what have I done to morality? Moreover, how shall one fight the evil in the world? Finally, in a world of competitive struggle for survival, does justice seem to fade unto irrelevancy? Ah, the true philosopher challenges his own views tenfold as those of others, and thus it seems as if I have built myself a rather large sepulcher and created a world of total chaos.

To begin an arduous task, what power does one have in the age-long battle of good against evil without the aid of our omnipotent benefactor? _Good_ is nothing more than positive or pleasurable experiences perceived through sense experiencing and the physical and mental states created therefrom. This statement is an elementary, though completely accurate definition of _good_. If one were to peer into the animal kingdom, excluding our species, they would have no problem understanding this definition as it pertains to animals moving through their daily trials of existence. Moreover, the main attribute that differentiates humans from other animals is an expanded window of experience. Therefore, how does our window of experience affect this innate concept of good? To begin with, _bad_ is the mere antithesis of good, and people use _evil_ to represent bad, especially when the user believes there is a beneficent- supernatural force fighting a malignant force in the universe. In addition, one should also understand certain causes or pondered events could render different degrees of good and bad, and certain causes will have advantageous and detrimental effects, which will permeate together at some point. This has me pondering the universal validity of the existence of anything thus constituted. Therefore, these perceived states of being, or pondered events, or judgments of the two, reside within a larger continuum that encompasses all the effects of sense experiencing, of which every aspect of our life is a product. At one end of the continuum, a person can imagine one cause creating an event that evokes a single first threshold detection, and at the other end total bombardment, but neither instance is capable of sustaining life. In the middle, there abide an incalculable number of events that move our states of being and ultimately our survival.

It is now time to explore how humans' expanded window of experience ultimately fashioned complex concepts of good and bad. The _four causes_ nurtured these concepts as early man began to congregate in larger groups. Our species, as other animals, is by nature gregarious. However, as our window of experience continually expanded our ability to look into the past and the future, we became the only animal that reflects on this fact. Humans are the only creature that ponders the implications of social tendencies and through reason, we deliberate upon the actions of others and the possible beliefs, opinions, and desires that move them. In this, we attempt to predict their future actions and thus discern how our actions may affect and/or relate to theirs, thus correlating the possible outcome with our own needs, beliefs, and desires. Simply stated, if humans are to congregate and live in social entities, with our mental capabilities, we will naturally reflect on how our actions will affect one another and ultimately ourselves as individuals. Moreover, since human actions will always have positive intentions for the acting individual, correlated with the fact our innate desire to pursue pleasurable states of consciousness evolved for survival propagating purposes, it follows that good and evil lack a true existence, but are merely judgments of events governed within the laws of physics that could affect existence favorably or adversely. However, one will always perceive _certain_ events and articles of our environment as good or bad. Invariably, nourishment and well-being are perceived as universal goods, but breeding may be considered bad in a region of overpopulation and famine. Love is often believed to be a universal good, but one in love often fails to make sound choices, which could be detrimental to their existence and depending upon their position in the society, detrimental to the group as a whole. Killing is most often viewed as bad, but when two leaders fail to come to terms on a disagreement, it is considered heroic for individuals to kill people from another group. Progressing unto entities explored further forthcoming, one always considers justice, virtue, and morality as good, but what one deems just or moral often fails to meet another's discriminating standards. Of more subtlety though, morality, justice and virtue only exist within a civilized group, i.e., humankind created them. However, it was not merely the fact that our ancestors began reflecting, but that this pondering led to an enlightened realization of the advantages and thus necessity of group harmony. The human species, with our superior intellectual advances, has changed the mode of a line of evolution. Our mental capabilities had moved beyond the remainder of the animal kingdom, thus these same capabilities determined the success of bands, i.e., the survival of the fittest, as it pertains to a species' environment. However, since our mental evolution became sufficiently acute, it diminished the physical advantages our earliest ancestors once relied on for survival among others of our species. Simply stated, with our expanded window of experience, and hence forethought, one of the weakest of our species could easily take the life of the strongest if done using stealth or a superior weapon. Therefore, as our early ancestors began to coalesce into larger bands, the _four causes_ rendered them constantly pondering the fact they could easily come to failure in their pursuance of desire. In addition, they also realized the ease with which they could be exterminated, especially in times of want and necessary competition. Without codes of conduct, during times of need and desperation, when there was hunger and scarcity of shelter, advanced reason and thoughts of the future would have rendered our distant ancestors a very insecure and at times savage creature that was always prepared to do what it took to survive, to use forethought to succeed, to kill or be killed. Moreover, with our mental acumen, the planning and plotting, or simply put, the extinguishing of others would have been rather simple. Hence, during difficult times, killing might have been omnipresent for an extended period as our window of experience widened. However, as our mental evolution wove its course, humankind became enlightened, thus codes of conduct were developed, which propagated desired conduct and brought upon civilized humanity. Without the civilizing of our species, humankind could have fell to extinction, thereby it follows that a universal good is something that is necessary to maintain the health and vigor of not the select few, but the species as a whole. Mass killing, thievery, and widespread deceit are by no means good for society, hence immoral. One delivers justice when they punish those who partake in actions that are damaging to the society or its constituents; it is a healing of the societal wound. However, is a universal good for humanity good for all individuals? One need remember that universal goods are perceptions without implementation, once implemented, the conceptions become experiences or events of which one can render a judgment. Hence, one moves upon profound questions as:

If saving lives is a universal good, and one can save the life of every individual of our society by relinquishing one innocent individual to death by the hand of an enemy, is saving lives still a universal good?

As one ponders deep philosophical problems or contradictions, the line of reasoning abides amidst questions on the substance of morality.

When one studies different eras and cultures, it becomes obvious that morality is not a universal entity, albeit certain aspects of morality are common. Polygamy (or merely having many affairs or concubines) in certain cultures and at certain times in history was deemed immoral, along with homosexuality. However, in different cultures, these and other immoral actions may have been completely acceptable. Then if morals are not a universal entity, what are they? Morals are malleable, they can be bent, they move as the ocean with time, and they create and form as they change. However, morality is a universal tool of civilized humanity that goes beyond the legal codes that are used to promote proper conduct within the society. _Morality_ , or _Ethics_ , is culture created and evolved views on proper thought and conduct. These views are passed down through posterity and instilled into the minds of the populace, as the views aid in the subsistence of the society and thus protect the individual. Morality is societal utility when individuals are interacting. Again, although _morality_ is, _morals_ are not a universal entity, but depend on the aim and the perspicacity of the culture and/or governing body, as well as why and how they wish to influence, mold, and/or control the populace, because civilized humanity gave birth to morality. One does not perceive morality elsewhere in the animal kingdom, nor on the human battlefield, which is outside the realm of society. Nevertheless, through religion and the use of invisible movers, i.e., spirits, to advocate proper conduct, certain actions became spiritually immoral, and morality eventually evolved into an ethereal entity with mystical repercussions for those of iniquity.

In antiquity (and even in the present), people believed that without divine retribution, morality or proper conduct would cease to exist. With the death of popular divinity, I need to question autonomy, not of the political nature, but in the sense where one can be held accountable for their actions (a vehicle for moral judgment). As one who studies modern day physics, albeit I have read many superfluous attempts, I find it objectively obvious that the question of freewill has not been sufficiently answered. Thus, I am not in a position to decisively direct therefrom, but _even determinists looks before they cross the street_. Therefore, because everyone acts with the belief they have freewill, for this paper, I will assume it exists. Then excluding the possible limitations from the laws of physics, how free are our actions due to illusions of culture and religion, set agendas, human intervention, etc.? If one studies different groups, they will find that culture and society severely affect and restrict our beliefs, desires, and actions. I lightly touched upon this when speaking of morality and this is because freewill and morality are inexorably connected. In addition, as covered in chapter one, all effects, experiences, actions, and thoughts are the product of antecedent causes, which were also created by antecedent causes, and so on infinitum. Certain effects exist on the macro level through culture, collective lore, and associations and reactions to these, as well as on a micro level via personal judgments that are in part dictated by history, culture, and education. Finally, our thoughts are further dictated and constrained by our peers, perspicacity, and the _four causes_. However, what about one's actions inside the scope of the parameters our education and culture has dictated? This is a rather difficult question to ponder because it is truly impossible to discern at what point our cultural education yields to personal judgment within the scope of self-placed parameters. Moreover, this constituted method of judgment can only be based upon the association of experiences, which are comprised of volitional and chance causes and effects, if one can ever validate the former on a more profound level. When I state volitional and chance (in our minds) causes and effects, I am conveying that some of our experiences are created by reasoning, but still, reason is a child of previous experience, and so on infinitum. Hence, although there are experiences that are beyond our control, as a chance encounter with a future love, in our eyes, there are also experiences that are dictated by prior planning, i.e., reason, thus one would be prepared when a chance encounter occurs. Our pride often dictates the latter acceptable, and out of necessity people take credit for almost every instance of their success, but it is mere illusion. Therefore, there is a delicate relationship between reason affected and chance experiences (both as understood within in our mind), which will always keep one of wisdom somewhat humble. In essence, the ultimate question is if an action can exist that was not in some form a reaction to past events. After travelling thus far, I hope one realizes this is impossible, for our actions are either instinctive or reasoned, and again:

Reason is that in which a sense experiencing thinking entity can in the present moment deliberate past experience in an attempt to try to explain the causes of events perceived. In this, the entity hopes to predict the outcome of futures event and possibly affect and direct, prepare for, or prepare to react favorably toward these events with volitional action in reference to our own beliefs and desires.

Then at what point does an individual achieve the ability to reflect on their compounded experiences in reference to their cultural education and societal structure and make decisions within those parameters? Moreover, one must realize their decisions remain contingent upon their collective experiences and the understanding of their education. Thus, they would not possess an ultimate freewill, but could be held accountable for freely acting upon the education they received, the parameters society decreed, but still only based upon their mental capabilities and their collective experiences. Therefore, as touched upon in the first chapter, at what point is one's ability to reason sufficient to where they can be expected to understand their education and cultural parameters, but also be able to associate them with their present state of awareness and short-term desire pursuance? These questions are impossible to answer and they do not even consider the assumed perspicacity of the education system and cultural body of knowledge. In addition, as stated, our upbringing and personal relationships also affect one in a great magnitude. Humans by nature are also learning creatures. From the time of our birth, we are molded as survival, social entities, and from early a period, we attempt to mold and influence those around us. This fact severely restricts and drives the choices one makes. People continue throughout their lives to attempt to mold, influence, and conform with those they associate with, as they and our culture attempt and indeed do achieve the same immeasurably. Again, at what point if at any does one truly possess freewill, even within the scope of our culture, education, and social parameters in conjunction with our collective experiences? Again, this is an impossible question to answer, and humans shall remain creatures of habit and emulation that are teeming with insecurity and desires. Confronted with this quandary, idealists may state that one should never use another individual as a means to your own end, as well as to refrain from communicating mendacious utterances. Hence, they believe that there is less negative influence upon an individual and thus they can act with a free and untainted will. This is such a feeble, desperate argument, all in naïve hope to achieve the possibility of total moral autonomy and thus accountability. Every action one makes is a means of self-fulfillment. Even if I give a woman a flower, merely to see her smile, I am experiencing joy in her pleasure and thus finding utility in creating it. Using a person for more selfish, ignorant, or less virtuous means only differs from the giving of a flower by degrees, which exist within the utility continuum. Therefore, the best means to create a flourishing and amiable society is not through complete and accountable freewill, but through the molding of individuals to evolve them in a manner that society deems acceptable. However, if one finds failure in their subjects, there is not a complete moral accountability, but a percentage based on collective experiences, reasoning capabilities, societal ignorance and failure, and personal selfishness. How can one judge two individuals of comparable intellect and public education on the same scale if one was raised in a stable virtuous household and the other was surrounded by vice their entire life? Considering past experience, are both individuals interacting in society with an equal understanding of being? Education of a private and philosophical nature is ten-fold more important than public education in a magnanimous sense, as opposed to a career, business, or economic sense, but the latter is promulgated and praised, the former scarce and at the mercy of young whimsical parents who were also denied their enlightened nurturing. However, as humans are learning creatures, we must have a medium by which we judge our progress. As a social entity, it is imperative that we have a medium by which we may maintain justice. Our accountability resides within our selfishness and decisions that place our own good over the well-being of others, especially if the pursuit of desire infringes upon another's rights as a societal constituent (rights covered hereafter). Regardless of the educational impediments and our collective experiences, one still makes a choice either to respect the rights of others or to deem our own desires as beyond principle, but often still wishing our rights within the group to be respected. We should judge ourselves as who we are, learning creatures on the ignorant to wise scale, which renders immoral and moral action.

Again, it is time to pause and re-group. Thus far, I have stated that we are individuals of a social species that ponders its success among other individuals of the same species who are competing for the same ultimate goals. Moreover, I stated there was not a supernatural good that one could pursue to battle the negative events that they encounter, and individuals are not entirely accountable for their actions within the group. Ah, albeit there may not be a supernatural good, I now realize there is a universal good that we can and do pursue, it is just not dressed in the guise of ethereal divinity. Moreover, the erroneous and illusory pursuit of this universal good, compounded over time, is in part responsible for our ignorant or immoral (by the popular term) actions. This _universal good_ is proper education in a passionate search for truth and knowledge. This should not be confused with an education for illusory status, for ostentatious utterances, for monetary gain, or to prove one's preordained beliefs. As with the present undertaking, one must pursue the truth regardless of the apparent implications to themselves and humanity as a whole.

With an expanded window of experience, our ancient ancestors understood that within their group there had to be proper conduct to eliminate chaos and thus detrimental events that could cause pain, devastation, or possibly death. As early humans began to ponder their existence, they came to a profound realization that went beyond instinctive social tendencies; they realized the competition within their own groups. Therefore, not only did they build effective tools and weapons, they certainly adorned them with articles from their environment. These adornments may have been rare stones or other unique and uncommon things, as body parts of animals or enemies that they had killed, and the decorations would display their prowess as a warrior. The importance abides in the fact they began to conceive means of achieving a sense of betterment in reference to their peers. Equality is not perceived as a means to self-assurance, thus they would pursue anything that could make them feel distinctive or extraordinary to ameliorate their insecurity. One can perceive the same phenomenon today, as when people seek out that article of clothing that no one else possesses, or when we adorn ourselves with rare and exotic jewels. In the same vein, one should inquire why members of our species tend to congregate in groups that alienate others, often deeming outsiders unworthy. For what possible reason could people become obsessed over physical possessions that far exceed their needs for sustenance, not to mention giving them more than a comfortable existence. From where did we acquire our pre-ordained right to socially humiliate our equals, to harm our fellow humans, to steal, and to kill? Ah, this entitlement was bequeathed with the mechanisms of evolution. This competition for survival has existed throughout all orders of life, within one's own and among other species. However, with the birth of our species, a subtle change entered the scene. With Humanity's expanded window of experience, evolution transformed from a shortsighted mechanism to dreams of the future. Humans began to interact in a manner that appeared to be counterproductive to their needs for survival. Albeit the actions of our budding species may appear to have been unevolutionary, this surely was and is not the case. Reflecting on the _fourth cause_ , any attained edge when competing with a near equal, whether physical or mental, could mean the difference between life and death. Moreover, this competition within our species is not only for means of sustenance, but also for friends, allies, mates, for acceptance within the group, and for the backing and trust of the group members. Before codes of conduct, this competitive edge may have gone to one of physical prowess or mental acuity (the Odysseus type), but as intimated previously, this would have been an unsettling and restless existence, for one never knew when they might have been attacked, or if they were the strongest, when others would ally against them to acquire their mate or goods. Hence, some ancient tribes may have discerned that equality in tribe members was the path to success, whereby ostentatious possessions were something to avoid because they could evoke jealousy and inevitably bring harm.

If our species was going to congregate and exist as social entities, there had to be a manner in which to instill security within the group. Thus, our ancestors created codes of conduct that predominantly transformed the competition from violent tenacity into something subtler. If group members were going to reduce the use of violence in competing for that which they aspired, if they were no longer going to use cunningness or thievery to attain their wants and desires, this due to an implicit or direct set of necessary codes conducive to group living, would their insecurities simply fade? Nay, the human mind is a dangerous tool. Moreover, competition shall ever flow within our evolutionary blood. The human species still competed in civilized group living, but not always with overt violence. Our ancestors continued to ponder the variables that create insecurities, but the manner in which they dealt with them began to evolve. The best hunter would obviously be indispensible to the group, thus the praise he received from other group members obviously yielded a feeling of pleasure and security. The women with fruitful loins and many offspring would also be indispensible and definitely praised. In addition, if an individual found a rare or unknown stone or jewel, it would not only inspire awe in the fellow group members, it would also move a positive disposition toward the individual. In the unexplainable world of our distant ancestors, discovery could often bring invaluable knowledge with it. Hence, to have discovered, or merely possess many unique entities, could have signified an individual who possessed knowledge about the world around them, which would bring invaluable praise from their peers. Therefore, within a conduct system, many avenues still exist that alleviate insecurity and yield pleasure, i.e., help one achieve a sense of betterment in reference to their peers. Praise and acceptance are incalculable tools of great magnitude in human interactions. Moreover, the praise and accolades one achieves can obviously create envy in others, which breeds a different species of contempt. When one desires acceptance, or to stand out as different among those who are basically their equal, they will go to extremes to achieve the realization, even when the qualities are non-existent. Hence, if you are not the best hunter or the most knowledgeable being, appearing so would achieve the same means to an end. Being thought of as a _certain kind of person_ can be as useful as being that person, which is a guise ubiquitously found today. Moreover, when the struggle for survival was rendered not as arduous, competition for praise became more intense and mere physical possessions, beginning in the realm of the necessary, then the unique, and finally the large or ostentatious, became a measure of worth itself (the manner in which it still exists today). This phenomenon evolved out of practiced conduct conducive to group living.

Regarding codes of conducts, there had to be a means to convince individuals to obey them, i.e., there had to be pondered repercussions that created a negative arousal state. Moreover, to be truly efficacious, there had to be an ever seeing eye. _Guilt_ is a negative arousal state evoked upon the individual. When one is a child, their elders teach proper conduct and constantly remind the child of the repercussions for disobedient actions, including those of a chimerical nature. Not only were there repercussions, one who does not obey the codes of conduct becomes immoral or a contemptible person, and during childhood acceptance is everything. This compounds through one's life and helps mold the actions of an individual within the desired parameters. The individual must feel vulnerable to those who impose or to a repercussion of which they preach. Your _conscience_ is the arousal state of guilt, which can be evoked by others or turned upon oneself.

_Virtue_ is the acceptance of morality in belief and/or propagating it in action. Moreover, a virtuous state exists that transcends mere societal utility or accepted conduct. Instead, it buds when an individual perceives their actions as more than a means for group success or self-morality, but when they are seeking true harmony in human interaction. A virtuous state may come to be through wisdom, from the fear of repercussions, out of the knowledge of necessity, or for the utility of societal perception. _Vice_ is discordance, or the ignorant pursuit of desire.

By analogy, one realizes through oneself what action or cause could make another respond in a certain manner, thus with proper action making them more amiable in the intercourse with them. This ameliorates the _four causes_ and facilitates pleasure pursuance. However, this can and does go further, beyond analogy of action and reaction, to action, reaction, and actual feeling, i.e. _empathy_. A reasoning social animal evokes an arousal state via the physical process of discerning another individual in a certain situation and the understanding, beliefs, and desires in reference to the situation. These arousal states reside within a quantitative continuum beginning with a negligible situation, as perceiving an individual in an everyday life routine who is unknown and harbors no present or future possibility of utility. The contrast would be noticing a loved individual suffering excruciating pain or death. On the extreme opposite side of the continuum, there is a positive feeling moved by noticing a loved one experiencing bliss.

_Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee_. When I look at another living entity, especially another human being, a person- a life- an eating- breathing- sense experiencing- emotion feeling- thinking entity- Ah! I know this by analogy to myself. When I see a person, even a complete stranger, suffer from a cause of which I have or could suffer- their face strained in rage- anguish- fear- lifeblood spilling- a discordant scream, cry, or plea, I see and realize the same life force that I experience myself, the same innate desire for pleasurable states of consciousness and life. I have felt pain and now as I look into this person, I feel emotion, for whatever happens to them can as easily be inflicted upon my being. From this empathetic realization, there should be an educative effect that spawns a realization of human frailty and the necessity of amicable cooperation, because regardless of my strength or power, I will always be human.

Through reason, I learn to understand life, to realize I share life with all, to understand why a living- sense experiencing- thinking entity is moved to suffering. I realize why they feel love, happiness, anger, jealousy, hatred, grief, etc., and I realize I can easily be moved to feel the same. As I ponder still deeper, I realize every living creature shares the same ultimate goal. I see this in action and reaction, cause and effect, of movement and emotion. We are all a part of a system that yearns for growth and life, thus everything is a part of us and we are a part of everything. We have the ability to realize this connection and thus appreciate the wonder we are a part of and to try to ameliorate suffering, for as long as it exists, we shall feel the pangs through competition and intervention, empathy, and in striving for the avoidance of painful states of being. The most efficacious way to eliminate self-suffering is through harmonious conduct. Thus, humankind has a two-fold endeavor. It is of necessity that we educate, but more importantly, we must hold people accountable for their ignorance, not their evil, but their ignorance. Punishment is necessary because if people are not held accountable for their actions, they will never be moved to educate themselves further.

Interactions with individuals in our environment produce degrees of pleasurable and non-pleasurable effects. Again, these feelings permeate together and create a flowing but quantitative stream of arousal states. Human intercourse produces feelings that range from extreme antipathy to a state of apathy, but also another extreme state of consummate appreciation or love. Moving beyond mere human interactions and the judgments of the states they move, with humans' expanded window of experience, we attempt to predict future interactions (the pondering itself is an arousal state caused by the recollection of past interactions). This contemplation of our relations can obviously yield _distrust_ , which is the realization that humans can never be counted on to act in a certain manner unless they believe the action will bring them some degree of pleasure or satisfaction at some time. Unless you know what an individual believes and desires, what created their beliefs and desires, or what they believe is the best means to attain their desires, one can never predict their future actions.

_Faith_ is the trust or belief in the unknown for the benefits the trust may yield. It is hope in denial or existing as fact by specious directed reasoning to a desired end. _Trust_ is hope, a well-chosen probability by experience and observation, or naive belief. Again, to our feeble perception, nothing pondered is ever a one hundred certainty, but merely a hazy possibility.

In reference to the degrees of emotions and actions toward individuals as opposed to humanity, one first need ponder these consequential _three points_. Human vice may stem from the all-important _four causes_ , the creations of their womb, and the needs they deal with, but:

1. Not every person can or does actually grasp the significance of life's variables due to combinations of the lack of intellect, differing mental states, and immersion in illusion.

As no two people are the same, thus will be the differences in their physical and intellectual capabilities. Further affecting these properties would be the number of pertinent experiences associated with a subject, the capability to remember the experiences, and the capability to correlate these experiences with those conveyed or taught by others. The degree of intellect relates to an individual's ability to discern proper action in their present window of experience, of course this is accomplished by pondering their past experiences in reference to future possibility (the degree of intellect also encompasses problem solving). However, as one may have sufficient capabilities, they often search with their eyes closed and in this medium, there is a refusal of realization. Individuals may scoff at the _four causes_ and believe they are not the least bit insecure, thus they are in no manner affected by them. However, they are consumed with creating a greater wealth than truly needed, they are more than ready to display their ostentatious possessions, and are in constant verbal and social competition, ever the ready to exhibit their self-confidence. What causes the individual to manifest their billowing sense of self-worth among other creatures that are basically their equivalent? It is the _four causes_ ; for countless centuries our cultures have fostered illusions to ameliorate them and we have chased these illusions as the aboriginal hunter chases his life-saving meal. Our first point encompasses individuals with mental states that are part of a quantified continuum, which ranges from the very few, childlike, who live with a very limited ability for rational thought, to the consummate logician.

2. Not every person uses ignorance to ameliorate the insecurity created by the variables of life.

This favorable conduct may be a product of immersion in illusion, rational thought and action, and/or a belief that one lacks the abilities needed to oppress or surmount others.

3. Amelioration of suffering, as well as pleasure pursuance, creates different emotional and volitional responses due to the intellectual and physical properties of the individual.

Humans possess mental characteristics that differ in degrees of neurological functioning from the non-receptive and the minor signaling to the over receptive and the overactive, i.e., the placid to the anxious. Certain mental faculties and responses are dependent upon the degree of arousal achieved when reacting with a phenomenon, which affects the following emotion and the instinctual reflexive and reasoned volitional reaction. However, in reciprocating fashion, mental beliefs begot through experience and culture taught customs have a direct effect on the degree of arousal caused by phenomena. The reasoned volitional reactions to arousal states caused by human intercourse whether physically or mentally inspired are directly related to various physical and mental characteristics, including the opinions of the beauty of others and oneself, beliefs and opinions of the opinions and beliefs of others- as those of their desires and what actions they believe will aid in fulfilling them, and the beliefs and opinions of the mental and physical capabilities of others and oneself.

With communication, one aims at coming to an understanding of the desires of those they may be associated with and if the people think they can fulfill their desires concomitantly, they partake in a verbal or tacit commitment, i.e., an individual believes they have found utility in another and the risk of being betrayed is worth the means to the end. The inhabitants of a given society have a mutual agreement, verbal, tacit, or within a legal code, with one another for the freedoms they relinquish for the cooperation and yielded benefits of group living. This agreement requires aspects of the aforementioned definitions of trust, which are helpful if not necessary for an amiable and fruitful co-existence. Beyond legal ramifications, to betray an individual within the community is to cause the person to distrust fellow constituents. This betrayal will breed insecurity, which will create contention within the society. The discord is sure to ripple throughout the group and it could someday turn on the initial perpetrator. As time and human intervention spin their yarn, this dissension continues to ripple and increases in its magnitude bringing waves of discord within the social order.

As humans realized the need for amicable relations, we also realized the obvious advantages of group living. I have divided society into three different categories that in degrees permeate in and out of one another.

1. A group of cooperating individuals that relinquish certain freedoms for the needed security of group living.

2. A group of constituents controlled by a governing body or a portion of the populace and forcibly moved to surrender their freedom to increase the power and prosperity of the governing body, the select of the populace, or the society as a whole.

3. A group of individuals cooperating in community living, but controlled mentally (with promises of future prosperity) by means as spurious locution and religion, which aids the rulers in persuading the citizenry to voluntarily relinquish their freedoms, regardless if this for the prosperity of those in control or the society as a whole.

_Freedom_ is the ability to take any action desired in the pursuance of pleasure, happiness, and survival. The only innate _right_ of humankind is that of the competition for survival, which cannot be taken away, only moved upon unsuccessfully. However, when congregating in groups, as well as in the modern world of humanity, the rights of humankind include:

1. An agreement by the constituents of a group stating which freedoms the individual will not have to concede when one is cooperating in group living.

2. The individual's belief of what freedoms they should not have to concede when cooperating in group living.

3. The moral beliefs of individuals within the group of what freedoms the societal constituents should not have to concede, most often formed by religion and culture, but not completely covered or upheld in the societal agreement or laws.

Individuals may or may not have equal rights in mind, depending upon whether they are in a ruling or ruled position, prosperous or not so, fortunately favored or sadly said inadequate, as well as various other factors in reference to the _three points_ and the _four causes_. The freedoms mentioned above in definition 2 include:

A. The right to life and the necessary action to secure one's existence, and the protecting of one's life and the pursuit of the necessary actions from injustice.

The necessary action _to secure one's existence_ denotes pursuing means of sustenance and of course self-defense.

B. The right of equality.

If one is to relinquish freedoms for societal benefits, they would expect all constituents to concede the same freedoms and this sacrifice should yield the same societal benefit. If this is not the case, one cannot feel secure in their society, which obviously causes insecurity, the womb of human vice. This right is usually only demanded by those who feel they have, are, or understand that in the future they may be treated as less than equal in their society.

C. The pursuit of happiness.

In society definitions 1 & 3, this is only a right if the pursuit does not infringe upon the agreed on and/or believed rights of another. There are various beliefs that fall into this category, which lends itself to endless debate.

D. The right of free speech and expression.

When an individual is allowed to speak their beliefs without interference from the governing body and/or members of the populace itself, it is called _liberty_. When the ruling body or any other portion of the populace has enough power (religious- political- or a permeating of the two), they will often use force or some other medium to silence opinions that could lead to a decrease in their control, power, and influence, regardless if it is desired for greed and power, to feed illusions of grandeur, or for societal security and prosperity, often with the belief that the populace is too ignorant to discern truths and/or realize what is best for the community. Society has failed to educate the populace properly and one should fear those educated in ignorance.

Humankind has no innate obligations. However, when individuals are involved in group living, they expect one another to live within the governmental codes and respect the group definitions of human rights. These are not obligations, but necessary implementations for social harmony. Moreover, the governing body and/or the governed populace create the laws to maintain social justice. _Justice_ is the eliminating of discordance, within the mind for the individual, within the individual for the group, within the group for the governing body.

Fear and education are two means that can be used to achieve a proper conduct within a given group. Since fear is the most prevalent, I shall delve within the aspects it encompasses by beginning with the creation of legal codes. Created laws aim to protect against certain wrongdoings, though seldom personal immorality, unless an act involves physical harm or material injustice. If an act falls within the jurisdiction of the law, there are certain penalties, but the punishments will not always eliminate the discordance within the community. If an individual has taken another's life, in some societies they may be imprisoned for life, exiled, sentenced to death, or other harsh punishments. If the punishment is not death, the family and/or friends of the victim may want to take the life of the individual who perpetrated the crime, which would prevent the individual from taking another life and possibly restore equality in the societal relationship. Moreover, the set punishments within the legal codes are not only a deterrent, but they can be restitutory. This is not the time to move within specific laws or codes, but to question how legal codes as an entity promote proper or desired conduct. First, one must understand that the legal codes only encompass material and physical injustice, with minor exceptions. Secondly, if the repercussion is soft, it will not be much of a deterrent. Furthermore, those in charge of justice have to perceive, capture, and prove the individual is guilty. However, albeit one may be able to escape the eye of the law, they cannot escape the awareness of the invisible movers, i.e., the divine spirits. These powerful, mystical, and fear-inspiring forces were easy to anger. Moreover, the keepers of mysteries implanted their vengeful natures into the minds of the group. Thus, not only were the group members to supplicate the local deities, they had to act in accordance with their demands of conduct. All kinds of atrocities were attributed to the anger of the gods, which instilled fear within the populace.

Individuals in their plight for security feel a state of arousal when their security may be threatened. These states are within a quantitative continuum that range from a slight uneasy feeling about an event or situation to complete and absolute fear. Moreover, individuals have arousal states of being that are caused by their window of experience, which is constituted of present needs and desires, the memory of past events, and thoughts of how past and present events may affect future pursuits. For example, if an individual desires someone of the opposite sex, but is betrothed to another, before any physical act transpires, the individual experiences various states of being that are incorporated with the desire. As the individual ponders the act, their feelings will determine whether they will act upon their thoughts. There are no laws or penalties involved with the event, consequently, the negative feeling associated with the desire is created by a sense of morality or honesty. The dissenting arousal abides in varying and intertwining degrees that encompass a perceived ethereal or religious aspect of right and wrong (implanted within the individual in the form of guilt/conscience), an understanding of the consummate importance of human fidelity, or the aspect of being caught and thus the fear of losing one's partner and thus future happiness, not to mention public opinion. As far as the religious aspects, repent and all is forgiven, which extremely limits the efficacy of modern religion in its ability to promote proper conduct. On the other end of the retribution continuum, if an individual committed murder, it could render the loss of life or some other detrimental punishment, whether this resides within the legal code, in another person's revenge, or via a chimerical punishment. When a criminal commits an atrocity, their fear could be intense. Knowing the repercussions of specific action evokes a defensive preparatory arousal from the realization. In the certain cases, an individual becomes addicted to these arousal states (from the kleptomaniac to the serial killer).

In special cases, there are individuals with deficient reasoning capabilities. However, genetic variation is constantly at work over time, which means births will constantly yield individuals with different degrees of mental competence. Moreover, genetics will never account for moral or immoral, or right or wrong actions, merely actions moved by either adept or deficient reasoning capabilities, along with actions moved by hyperactivity, of an addictive nature, by a passive or aggressive nature, and various degrees of these concurrently. Albeit genetics may yield individuals that are highly sensitive, hyperactive, deficient at reasoning, teeming with insecurity, prone to become addicted, aggressive or passive, etc., how these attributes affect the actions of the individual depends on upbringing, culture, education, and human intervention.

If an individual has an overactive mind that is adept at association, an attribute caused by physical processes of neurons, receptors, etc., beyond rendering the individual an overactive thinker, will this genetic variance in itself cause any specific action of a good or bad nature? No, because the variance creates a quality, but within our species, the manner in which a quality manifests itself depends on our education and experiences. It is a delicate balance of genetics, experiences, memories, and associations. If an individual was raised in an unstable home, was surrounded by deceit, and lacked people to trust, this could have rendered a tough and self-serving individual, as their overactive mind teemed with insecure thoughts and a will to control others to veil their insecurity. Their inability to relax could yield endless thoughts that create anxiety and a lack of affection toward the people they are associated with, because the ones you care about the most can hurt you the worst. Does this then imply that a genetic variance that yields an overactive mind will render an insensitive, deceitful, and unaffectionate person? No, the variance creates the quality, as opposed to how the quality affects the nature of actions. Genetics may yield an individual that is easily aroused, but how the individual interacts with others depends on their education and experiences.

In pathological cases, one finds individuals that become addicted to certain arousal states. This genetic variance in itself will not produce a kleptomaniac, serial killer, a rapist, or various diseased cases within the continuum. Many like individuals use various acceptable activities to appease the yearning, as the activity of skydiving for those addicted to intense arousal states. Thus, looking beyond the mere propensity to pursue high arousal states of being, in certain pathological cases, in reference to certain actions, individuals become addicted to the arousal evoked by their conscience and the possibility of facing repercussions. However, in actuality, they are addicted to the arousal caused by a sense of danger. This arousal can be extremely intense, as it should be for obvious reasons. If an entity within a given species is confronted with danger, the intense arousal is used to contend with the detrimental situation. However, this arousal force is more ubiquitous than the average person perceives. In both literature and on the stage, people usually find it easier to bring an evil character to life as opposed to a good one. The audience can realize an empathetic feeling of danger, without having to experience the danger first hand. Often the evil characters possess attributes that many people desire. In our endless pursuit of illusory self-importance, which stems from the _four causes_ , we often wish to ascend above the monotony of equal co-existence with fellow humans. Thoughts of grandeur, control, and power often creep into the minds of people, thus, evil characters often possess attributes that we dream ourselves to have, i.e., the ability and brevity to step outside the norm and pursue desire with the ferocity of the mother lion. In our terrestrial world, we often glorify those who are portrayed or labeled as bad. Being bad gets you attention as a child and a bad action evokes a pleasant arousal within the child when they attempt to exact revenge on a disciplining parent. The bad person renders less confident individuals passive and thus aids in creating an illusory sense of stratification. However, what one does not perceive and that which is not portrayed is that these individuals who are attempting rise above, control, and oppress others in a group, still desire the rights and benefits of group living.

Moving forward, one should remember that the only innate right of humankind is that of the competition for survival, which cannot be taken away, only moved upon unsuccessfully. Humans have evolved into a species that has distanced itself from the remainder of the animal kingdom. Moreover, the majority of people live within the illusion that an invisible mover placed our species on this planet with pre-ordained rights. Nevertheless, if one forgets about these ethereal illusions, they can instead focus on the cogent notion of harmonious conduct and the agreed upon rights of group living. The foremost of these social rights is the right to life itself. Hence, if an individual of the group takes the life of another, in essence, the individual relinquished their rights because their civil rights only exist within the group code. Therefore, the perpetrator should lose their benefits and protection of the group, which could ultimately include their life. In addition, there should not be a question of whether this punishment is right or wrong. To preclude this possibility, when one educates their offspring, one of the first truths children need to realize is they only have rights as they maintain the harmonious conduct as directed in the codes of living. Therefore, it must be ultimately understood that if they take the life of a group member, it is incumbent they lose their own. In addition, individuals with a propensity for violence should not be understood as evil or bad, they should be portrayed to our culture as the ignorant ones who are trying to elevate their self-importance out of desperate insecurity. They do not respect the rights of group living and thus they have no rights themselves. Hence, it is no longer cool to be bad, but ignominious to be ignorant.

Moving beyond the right to life and the necessary actions to maintain it, in a society one should have the right to protection from physical harm. From the time of their early childhood, one can perceive men constantly walking around with their chest puffed out in attempts to intimidate those around them, but in their ignorance, they fail to realize there are probably billions of people tougher than they are. Moreover, even the weakest of our species can use a weapon to bring them to their demise. If an unprovoked individual physically harms another, they have surrendered their rights within the group, as they are a detriment to societal harmony. However, what events would leave room for physical action? I propose that if the life of an individual is threatened, if someone's physical safety is at risk, or if one's property and/or possessions are threatened.

Betraying the codes agreed upon in group living breeds disease within and throughout society. However, how should society feel about supposed crimes of intense arousal and emotional states of being? A true blameless _crime of passion_ would stem from an event that was so urgent or sudden that it would evoke a greater degree of instinctual reflexive and less reasoned volitional action. Therefore, between a pathological case of one who is unable to reason adeptly and an incident of mostly a reflexive nature, abides the detrimental action continuum.

The _four causes_ , in dealing with possible detrimental human interactions, create discordance within the mind of the individual and may yield aggression, hatred, and anger. When an individual feels another has acted unjustly against them, in reference to the agreed upon or believed should be rights of humankind, they expect some action to be taken against the perpetrator. With this action, they hope to prevent the incident from happening again, while attempting to re-establish the lost equality within the group, whether material and always to some degree, but sometimes only mental. Moreover, thought is energy-matter and an overactive mind produces an abundance of it, which evokes continued intense arousal. In the overactive mind, there are greater degrees of thought that produce positive and negative arousals, which present themselves as hyperactivity, anxiety, aggression, frustration, desperation, joviality, and various as mentioned. How this energy and thus arousal is released, understanding the _conservation of energy_ , is of course in reference to the _three points_ and due to so much of our molded youth through education, emulation, and cultural influence. Packing away negative arousal will produce a build-up of this injurious energy-matter and yes, merely discussing emotions with another is a physical form of release, which is why individuals often feel good when they go to counseling. However, more often than not, counselors are basically ignorant and thus I would find an intelligent and compassionate friend rather than a high priced interlocutor educated in ignorance.

_Hatred_ is a harmful emotion with degrees of arousal depending upon how an individual has or could adversely affect one's pursuit of happiness, i.e., what they believe will make them happy and what actions or events they believe will achieve a realization of pleasure or contentedness. Hatred is obviously a child of the _four causes_ and is formed by experience and reflection, and though the intense arousal may pass, it may be evoked again into the present term consciousness where it is pondered in degrees of _anger_ or disdain.

_Jealousy_ , rooting directly from the _four causes_ , may bring upon anger and thus inspire hatred, but not always. I may be jealous of an individual's qualities, but the emotional response would depend on various mental and physical properties covered in the _three points_. Therefore, one might attempt to emulate or exceed the qualities of an individual or harbor an aversion toward them, which could lead to ignorant action. Jealousy can also cause one to treat engendered individuals with a sense of exclusivity, which implies a desire to be selfish with the admirable qualities of a lover or friend. When one is in a relationship (and sometimes when they are not) that has a tacit or verbal expectation of fidelity, the jealousy sprouts from the belief that a mate may be unfaithful and one may have to share the incredible experience of love and intimate relations.

_Revenge_ , which is created by hatred, anger, jealousy, fear, and wounded pride, is a dangerous child of the _four causes_. However, the desire for revenge, as hatred, is a pusillanimous emotion. One must understand that every individual of our species is treading the same water as oneself. We are all dealing with the unknown variables of life, feeling the teeming emotions that yield confounding states of arousal, and we are all pursuing happiness, peace of mind, and success to the best of our ability. Humans are children of ritual, culture, illusion, and ignorance, and as the spoiled child that has one pulling out their hair, some of the blame should be placed on the parent, i.e. culture and improper education, not all of it on the child. Wishing harm on another is not the true road to group success and harmony. If an individual has moved against the unequivocal rights of another, they are a failed child of humanity and they have relinquished their rights, but the penalty is not to be rejoiced. As when cutting off a cancerous leg, one must understand certain punishments as an unfortunate necessity. Sometimes within our trials of existence, we anger one another or become jealous, competitive, and hurtful, but all we can ask is for one to respect our space and to be true of mind. Ah, the gift of giving, a gift for the benign, and a gift for our adversary, ill will unto kind...

A harmonious group facilitates accord within the mind of the individual. Thus, the group as a whole wants the discordance of the constituents eliminated. The governing body wants harmony within the group to insure their own security as governmental constituents and to facilitate group control, which maintains the unity and thus the stability and prosperity and hopefully the power of the unit as a whole, for whatever means it is desired.

When one infringes upon another by acting unjustly against the law, they risk facing certain penalties. When they act discordantly in reference to amicable relations not covered in the laws, they breed discordant insecurity within that social relationship. With each of these, they in actuality risk more than the outcome of the incident with the insecurity, distrust, and thus vice they breed within their own society.

Personal relationships are based strictly on utility, i.e., a means to an end. Humans are self-acting creatures with an innate desire for pleasure and an aversion to painful states of being, which intrinsically maintains our survival. Therefore, utility is a means to a pleasurable existence. If I may intimate that a lack of inauspicious states of being and peace of mind (not overindulgent pleasure) is the road to happiness, one can also think of utility as a means to happiness, or for a word of better clarity, contentedness. In this, I am stating that contentedness or peace of mind is the ultimate utility for human life. A happy or content life is the preferred life. However, what will make an individual content or happy? In the reasoned actions of our daily existence, people are in the pursuit of happiness. Understanding the role our beliefs and desires play in determining degrees and kinds of arousal states, if thought can affect and cause arousal, than thought, or more appropriately stated, the quantitative correlating of the present state ongoing continuum of sense perceptions with the memory of past perceptions, these associations are not merely an epiphenomenal product of the physical processes of the brain, they are a physical entity, energy- matter, which reacts with the brain in the same manner as the external stimuli that create states of arousal. Thus are question aptly presented is what brings upon the belief our present pursuits will render happiness? Hence, what we are concerned with is what one believes will make them happy; our beliefs and thoughts themselves creating degrees of pleasurable and non-pleasurable arousal states. If I believe incomparable wealth and social status will bring happiness, I would find utility in a wealthy influential person. If I find pleasure in bringing a smile to the face of a sensitive and simple person, my utility will be thus pursued. One must not always perceive utility as cold and brash.

Before moving into the realm of human relationships, I need to discuss first encounters. The arousal state caused by general first encounters moves one to be circumspect when dealing with the unknown and is definitely intense, for it could save a life in a precarious situation. If one incorporates this necessary force with the intense arousal caused by the act or thought of sexual intercourse, combined with the mental arousal created when a person ponders love, not to mention the personable qualities an encounter can evoke into the consciousness, the attraction to strangers begins to manifest itself. _Strangers_ are people who with one has no existing relationship or prior knowledge. However, I shall not be so vague or misleading, for once one comes into situational contact with another, there is analogous empirical knowledge of the individual. Even with slight experience, sight or hearsay, or merely having a familiarity with the culture and surroundings, one has a good idea of what possessions or abilities an individual might possess. Thus, with this knowledge, an individual can ponder the possible utility within the stranger before there is any decisive and direct empirical knowledge of them. Therefore, many people can be of utility in a given situation, regardless if this is accomplished by means of amiable cooperation, trickery and deceit, or brute force. The degree of possible benefit in a situation involving strangers is directly responsible for the degree of arousal in the reasoned volitional reaction to the intercourse, i.e., the passion with pursued if pursued at all.

A _relationship_ is a concomitant pursuance of desire by at least two entities. As over time people proceed through their daily routines, they generate, consciously and unconsciously, countless relationships. Some of these relationships will obviously turn fruitful and some will not be as beneficial. When a relationship becomes less than expected, one can often perceive the phenomenon referred to as _slander_. Individuals always have and most likely always will speak disparagingly about others, which obviously germinates from the _four causes_. However, when these utterances move into the realm of untruths, they become very harmful. Although competition is necessary for the evolution of species, in our species it often moves fabrication. However, as it becomes known that individuals often fabricate the truth, who is one to trust? Again, people often breed disease within their own groups.

Moving within the degrees of relationships, individuals partake in a verbal or tacit alliance. If either or both betray their acquaintance or significant mate, not only does the betrayal engender vice unto the group, if our rights and obligations within relationships are nothing more than an arbitrary agreement and one fails to heed a verbal or tacit commitment, they are fracturing the only means to harmonious interactions. Moreover, if an individual does beguile a bond, they are in essence stating harmonious actions are not necessary and thus they should not expect another individual to be true to them. This yields a community that must perfect the art of deception while the individuals constantly look over their shoulders. Those of our society who thrive on deception and mendacious control usually expect others to be honest and of aid to them. No one wants to live in a society teeming with deceit; hence, we often live a dichotomous existence. However, to account for the realization that one's actions are foolish, the mind moves unto self-justification. Excuses and self-justification are married to ignorant action and _the desperate mind can justify nearly any act_.

Relationships exist in degrees of importance, i.e., degrees of possible utility. At the lower end of the continuum, there is usually no aversion, but the happiness of the other person is not of considerable daily concern because the need for the person is not of great magnitude or enduring length. These relationships are based on the belief that if one sustains an association with an individual, the relationship will be of some short-term benefit. The relationship in some aspect should be reciprocal, but there are subtleties I need to address. As with all aspects of feelings, emotions, and actions upon, there is a flowing quantitative continuum. Then the reciprocity will seldom be on the same level. Nevertheless, as there is a working relationship, there is a certain conduct or a certain reciprocal action, sincere or specious, that has to be maintained for the relation to continue. These subordinate relationships are of lesser importance to the individual, thus one would not feel the need to justify actions that could jeopardize the union. Moreover, within these relationships, the individuals do not expect a great deal from one another, which means there is not an immense need for trust beyond the limited scope of sought utility. In addition, since these are usually recently budded relationships, less of a tacit agreement is assumed and deceit would not be that surprising.

As the degrees of utility, happiness, and/or possible benefit increase, relationships move in the direction of friendship. The friend is thought of as a longer term companion and the befriended person is believed to possess less disadvantageous attributes and a certain degree of admirable or respectable qualities. Acquaintances possess utility aspects of a more specific nature and of a shorter duration. Depending on the empathetic effects, physical and mental reciprocating, in reference to their beliefs and knowledge concerning human intercourse, the happiness of the other begins to be of more concern when dealing with friendship. The acquaintance permeates between the stranger and the friend. Again, there is the possibility of any interrelated action being somewhat specious.

Consummate personal relationships permeate within deep friendship, affection, working or social gain, biological, and intimate love. Regarding those of blood, i.e., the immediate biological family, through years of tradition and ritual, our species has placed a social obligation on maintaining relationships with biological family members. Moreover, an inherent or instinctive arousal moves a parent to nurture their children and the child to cling to their parent, which one should not have to examine further. Nevertheless, family relations are ultimately connected to four distinct phenomena. The first, as mentioned, is from millennia of culture dispensed ritual and tradition. The traditions arose from the need to protect the elderly, pass down inheritances, share knowledge and mysteries, and pass control. In addition, there was a greater need for group cooperation because early humans relied more heavily on fellow band members for a unified subsistence. Secondly, there is the propensity for our species to segregate itself into alienating groups, which gives the members of these groupings an elevated sense of importance. In a world teeming with equals who one may be in competition with, exclusivity and an elevated sense of self-worth tend to ease the wandering eye. Thus, one is of an immediate family, club, town, city, state, country, bloodline, religion, and many a number of other isolated groups. The segregation goes on infinitum and in each case, one elevates their self over those not included in the group. This is a common phenomenon, but it can often move into serious ignorance when it seethes into racial and religious conflicts, violence, slander, and jingoist wars between countries. We as humans use our dissociated differences as an excuse to disdain others and thus ameliorate our own insecurity. The third phenomenon that binds family ties is that of a relationship of obligation. However, when a relationship is a social or cultural commitment, the effort placed forth to keep it in good order tends to wane. Hence, people can get by with actions within a family relationship that would surely send most others asunder. Not unlike the spoiled child that constantly gets whatever they want, a relationship that is expected, assumed, and thus taken for granted is not always appreciated and many obligatory relationships yield more pain than actual pleasure. The fourth and rather simple is the feeling of security one experiences when they are around familiar and somewhat understood people.

In reference to the obligatory and familiarity aspects of family relations, one can often perceive similar actions in people who take the bond of marriage for granted. The marital institution evolved out of utility, as it began as an inheritance contract. However, through religion, ritual, and culture, it has transformed into quite the dishonorable institution. The true innate beauty of a harmonious relationship that is built on honesty and respect can be tainted by a contractual signing, for as with treaties, one only needs a contract when there is a decent probability of the trust being severed. Today one can often perceive that the pageantry displayed at these celebrations of love (ostentatious celebrations of pretentiousness) becomes far more important than a budding relationship between two people that actually conduct themselves as mature adults. Presently, the desire to be married becomes more important than the yearning to have a healthy relationship. This symbolic inclination is fostered by the assumed security of the institution, not to mention the expectations of our culture, peer pressure, and social perception, for a maturing woman not married is often perceived as a woman unsuitable.

Moving beyond obligatory relationships, one finds consummate personal relations. Hence, what I am intimating is that a biological or family relation may not be of the portrait to follow and if this _is_ the case, it may be merely an obligatory association and the attributes of the union would not normally sustain a healthy relationship. The next associations to discuss are those for employment, a working partnership, or social gain. Moreover, it is critical that one realizes that all relations, especially those of the sphere I am now discussing, permeate in and out of one another. Moreover, the reason why I consider certain working and social gain relations as consummate is that many people place more time, effort, and worth into these relationships than those to come, which are predominantly rooted in affection. In addition, many individuals feel monetary worth, social gain, overall acceptance, and a person's stature should be the main focus when choosing a mate. Working or social gain relationships would include a marriage or intimate relationship that is primarily based on and pursued for money and social stature.

Finally, it is time to move within true affection and intimate love. Previously, I tacitly covered the fact that physical or sexual relations are a reciprocating combination of physical feelings and a mental stimulation. In addition, one must realize that instincts also plays a tremendous role within this continuum, for without the intense pleasurable arousal that moves an entity to have intercourse, a species would not breed and be destined for failure. When one combines this intense physical drive with our advanced reason and how reason interacts with our instinctive pursuit of pleasurable arousal states, it renders a fascinating world of interactive states of being and the perceptions and reactions to them. Furthermore, an individual experiences feelings when they merely ponder intercourse with another. Present needs and desires, the memory of past events, and thoughts of future pursuits move these states of being. However, with the consummate arousal incited by sexual desire and/or the thought of falling in love, the present arousal is incredibly intense and often dominates the continuum. Albeit this is not a paper on sexual relations, one must realize that certain relations are driven by the incredible passion that abides within, others will experience the intense arousal and thus desire, but it will soon fade, and for others yet, passion is a negligible factor in determining relationships.

What moves an individual to find another non-expendable or irreplaceable as a companion? In pondering this question, I do not think it necessary to separate marital relations from those of intimate love, for a bond of love, respect, and trust should not be separated from the acceptable or preferred by a piece of paper. Moreover, in discussing personal relationships that are rooted in deep friendship, social gain, and affection, often physical stimulation is a factor (including with deep friendship), even if it is not acted upon. In addition, I consider the aforementioned relations as one phenomenon, but existing as steps or degrees approaching a summit. When one approaches the peak of harmonious intercourse and does act selfishly, they can experience bliss, as the reciprocity of the relationship is of the utmost importance and brings joy when pleasure is conveyed, not merely received. Having traveled thus far, the critical importance of amicable human intercourse has become apparent and when this is achieved with reciprocity, there is a greater desire fulfillment potential for both parties. With the security a harmonious relationship buds, the competitive aspects of human intercourse become less important and cooperation and empathetic ameliorating of a desire fulfillment nature nurture happiness and respect. The enchanted attempts to come to a realization of what moves the beliefs and desires of their companion, hence, what actions will help them achieve happiness. At this point, if a person believes amiable human relations are the ultimate vehicle for human happiness, the workings of the attaining and once attained, the maintaining of the fidelity and integrity of the relationship becomes the focus of the majority of their efforts. If two mature individuals reciprocate this, the illusory goals of today's culture lose their importance. However, once this harmony is achieved and maintained for a reasonable amount of time, one often turns their attention toward other selfish endeavors, not remembering the importance of that which has begun to fade. Once a dream is secure within the mind, the mind often begins to dream again. Nevertheless, to answer my initial question, one believes an individual would be non-expendable or irreplaceable as a companion when the relationship has the potential of moving significant amounts of happiness. This belief and the belief of any other degree of utility in a relationship is moved by the possible yield of different mental and emotional qualities. In certain instances, due to possible benefits and culture's instilled views of them, these qualities may bring pleasure with the mere thought of them, which people at times mentally instill into another in whom they actually are dormant, hence, they fall for a concept. However, I cannot bypass one of nature's most alluring qualities, i.e., physical attraction, and one must be inclined to inquire of the substance of beauty. There is a genetic arousal and attraction to certain optical phenomena. These attractions evolved for utility purposes in earlier species within the evolutionary story. This phenomenon is simply the attraction to certain colors and shapes that aid in the pursuance of pleasurable states of being and thus survival. If one associates this instinctive attraction with each individual's genetic peculiarity, past experiences with members of the opposite sex, culture's accepted and directed views of what beauty is or should be, and the individual's desire fulfillment potential in reference to certain dispositions, qualities, and abilities, they arrive at _attraction_.

Regardless of how harmonious they may be, relationships of a deep personal nature and those of a business nature are equally contractual, not to mention rather similar. As previously stated, an individual is nothing more than the truth of their word. Thus, one should understand relationships as tacit contractual agreements, especially when fidelity is assumed or expressed. This understood, there is not a specific conduct that one must abide by when in a relationship, except that of faithfulness in action and word. In essence, a suitable mate would have no other obligations than the devotion and loyalty to act in accord with the expectations of their partner. Hence, individuals enter a relationship with certain expectations and more importantly, there is not a universal good or specific expectations that are more appropriate than others, besides that of honesty. Nevertheless, I constantly perceive couples denigrating the actions of their mate and condemning the parameters set in their relationship. The only reason a person would want to place a bad light upon his or her chosen partner is to elevate oneself as the superior companion. We already feel this elevated sense of betterment, but this is not enough and our pride demands our peers perceive this also. If two individuals who have entered a bond cannot meet the others expectations, should they not sever the ties of the bond instead of turning to infidelity, deception, disrespect, dishonesty, and all the other offensive actions that are pervasive in many relationships? A relationship is nothing more than a verbal or tacit commitment. There are no ethereal or unalienable rights harbored within the bond, but if one cannot be loyal, can they expect or do they even deserve to have one be loyal to them? I would rather painfully divide a bond respectfully with love and pleasant memories than shamefully belittle a loved one, utter words that hurt, and behave in a manner so inharmonious as to defame the beauty of a social covenant affixed in the hopes and dreams of two.

Table of Contents

Divisions, Enmity, and Destiny

Moving within human interactions on a larger scale, mindful of the inherent distrust that is always present within a group, an obvious child of human intercourse is the emotion designated as pride. _Pride_ is the state of an individual believing they have abilities and/or attributes comparable to, if not better than others, thus fit for the competitive struggle for desire. Obviously, excessive pride transforms into _conceit_. Another observable child of this critiqued intervention is _greed_ , which is an insecurity transformed by illusion and implanted and fostered within the mind when one is a child. Greed clouds the truth of human equality and moves individuals to work against one another instead of collectively. When this disease takes over the root system of the mind, there is an extreme concern in a social stature, monetary worth, and ostentatious possessions. Our early ancestors felt the significance of the _four causes_ because a realization of the variables of life was an obvious and necessary consequence in the competitive struggle for survival. However, as evolving human reason became sewn upon the earth, the burden of survival was eased and the subtlety of change soon appeared. As a mind becomes secure in necessity, necessity changes within the mind.

Humankind, in our innate desire to pursue pleasurable states of being and thus existence, has a propensity to seek security and happiness by limiting the variables of life. Within this pursuance, regarding human intercourse, there is the desire for power and a will to lead, teach, or follow (and various degrees of each that reside within the greater continuum).

Volition for power spawns from the _four causes_ and the pursuance of the illusions of their womb. We set goals, short and long term, from the infant with a desire to walk to the physicist postulating the quantum theory. Moreover, with our earliest accomplishments, we begin to experience a sense of self-worth, as pride makes its debut. As we continue to accomplish new tasks, our elders and peers continually praise our actions. Depending on our education and cultural surroundings, the continual praise can elevate the individual to the point where they begin to feel a sense of superiority; within the appropriate conditions upon a global scene, this can easily evolve into illusions of grandeur. In addition, an insecure person who is immersed in ignorance, desperation, or is within a desperate situation, may experience a desire for power and control to ameliorate a negative sense of being. Within this will to power, an individual will often forget or close their mind toward human equality. When this denial is at a consummate level, one may contemplate domination over their peers and if in the right situation, a maniacal mind may want to rule humankind. _Power_ , as it pertains to human intervention, was conceived within the aspiration for a secure plan in the attaining of desire.

There is another desire for control or influence that is not a creature of ignorance or illusion, but arises with a realization of the human propensity toward ignorant action. Within this realization, one often feels their situation is desperate because they lack trust in humanity, which is often merited. The move for control or influence, in degrees within a continuum, is a desire for security and happiness by means of education, this in a world where security can never be guaranteed, but within an understanding that insecurity can be alleviated by harmonious interactions through the sharing of knowledge. When and if one obtains this power or influence, they may use it for the benevolence in which it was sought, or its marvel may arise within the mind and move the person toward ignorant action. However, when one desires the control for the betterment of society as a whole, they may have a will to lead, thus aspiring to ameliorate human and thus self-suffering. However, a volition to lead does not necessarily imply a will to enlighten and may be desired for different reasons, i.e., honor, respect, power, wealth, illusions of grandeur, etc. The intricacies here are subtle and so closely tied that they often reciprocate and cause one from another.

A will to follow may arise from fear of decisions due to the implications of the choices one makes and/or a realization of the variables in life that leave one powerless. Moreover, it may also stem from a realization of the strength in numbers without a will or belief in one's ability to lead the masses. Other factors that may render one a follower are a realization of the advantages of cooperation, respecting- honoring- and believing in the abilities of a proposed leader/s, a feeling of complacency- indifference- or apathy in reference to the political system, or a fear of repercussions if caught in defiance against the current rule. In addition, there are those who either feel one cannot make a difference or believe the ignorance of the masses will prevent them from enacting change. These beliefs, realizations, and inclinations are ubiquitously at work on a much smaller scale in our everyday chosen relationships.

Humans are sense experiencing thinking entities that socially interact in order to collectively combat the daily trials of existence. Moreover, not only does one find harmonious and discordant interactions, the social groups tend to progress into judicial and hierarchical structures. In addition, these groups inevitably interact with other groups of our species. As there is the possibility of utility or enmity in our personal human relations, the same also applies in relations between distinct groups or societies. The views of a populace or a governing body toward another entity or its governing body are based on the beliefs and opinions of the abilities, beliefs, opinions, and desires of the foreign entity. Moreover, the manner by which one collects the information about a foreign culture or government affects their views immensely. Pertaining to views of a natural nature, there are those views created by observations, assumptions, research, and the opining of the yield of these three modes in reference to one's own beliefs, needs, and desires. Beyond the natural view just referenced, there are those of political nature, i.e., views placed forth by either government that tend to place a group in a certain light that is self-serving for the governing objectives. Leaders of a society may believe that a foreign people possess heretic views that could infest the beliefs of the people at home. Hence, in a desperate attempt to control their populace, they hastily disdain every aspect of the foreign people, as well as their religion and culture.

Beyond groups with formed opinions (regardless of veracity) of the attributes and objectives of each other, in antiquity, tribes would have encounters with peoples of whom they lacked empirical knowledge. Therefore, they would have to act on knowledge attained by analogy. In our distant past, peoples often labeled foreign tribes and cultures as barbarians, inferior, and even as non-human. This prejudice grew out of the fear of the unknown, not to mention excessive pride and an excuse for extermination. Therefore, in prehistoric antiquity, there were confrontations of a non-political nature due to sudden encounters, fear of each other's existence, and needs for sustenance, including the protecting of territory and the moving into a territory to find shelter and/or nourishment. Humans obviously lived in small groups from our earliest beginnings and our ancestors surely understood the possible dangers in confronting strangers. However, was this from a propensity of human violence? I would be more inclined to think that it was from an instinctive realization of the competitive struggle for survival. Nevertheless, early humans came to understand their lot and they used their reason to deliberate means of either communicating desires, cooperating or respecting the space of others, or if need be using their intellect to avoid being one of the less fortunate. In our undeveloped past, there were many reasons for war, as well as cultures that could not understand the concept of peace. In many tribes, war was such an important aspect of their existence that there were elaborate rites of passage to prepare young men for the institution. In these cases, war became the norm, but our species has evolved from cultures dictated by magic and the unknown to those of knowledge and reason. Hence, it is time to move beyond our ancestors and return to the present enmity, jingoism, and disrespect that exists between many nations.

Progressing into the realm of political warfare, hence, the reasons why groups declare war, one needs to realize that allies are formed of utility. Nevertheless, utility can be based on necessity, as opposed to congruent beliefs, or the alliance could be based on fear, to rather be with someone than against them. Moreover, I feel the need to draw the line between sincere and species objectives when waging war. Besides the early confrontations mentioned in the last paragraph, are there any non-political reasons for declaring war? First, there is a case of waging war in the name of self-defense. The key word in our inquiry is _defense_ , i.e., the act of defending your a state or dynasty from an aggressor. Moreover, within the term there is an implication that the aggressor has the potential to afflict casualties and/or bring destruction. However, it should be rather apparent that almost any entity could afflict casualties and bring destruction if the attack was surreptitious. In addition, it is impossible to believe every social entity will be your ally. Therefore, would war in the name of self-defense give an institution a legitimacy to attack any entity that is believed to harbor ill will toward them, regardless whether this belief is real or imaginary? Conversely, should it then imply that self-defense is just that, defense by preparing for and reacting to a planned or imminent attack? However, one of specious means can easily feel threatened. Nevertheless, does this then imply that a government need wait until it is near bleeding before it takes decisive action? First, when a government claims self-defense against an entity that is obviously not as powerful, the claim is nothing but specious rhetoric, for if the government believes another entity may be planning aggression, it should immediately convey that any action against its land or peoples would lead to immediate and utter destruction. Secondly, only the sleeping are caught by surprise. If a government believes an entity is planning an act of aggression, the constituents should have their attention focused at the enemy at all times; for the first object of government is to protect the people from foreign hostility. Moreover, intelligence shall win over aggression, hence, to know the actions of your enemy, their whereabouts, and most importantly, to conduct the governance in a manner that does not breed contempt and invite aggression. Therefore, the government that is holding off an attack until the war is brought to them is not resting idle and waiting to bleed. However, how should one view a situation of a possible war between countries of somewhat comparable military power, when the element of surprise could determine the outcome? Again, only the sleeping are caught by surprise, but still, equality is a great deterrent of war. Knowledge and vigil preparation eliminates the surprise element from the arsenal of a supposed aggressor. If the governing body is vigilant, their preparedness for an attack by an equal, through strategic military design and/or alliances, will preclude them from needing to wage an attack in the name of self-defense. Moreover, a government will never kill all their enemies or those who propose a danger, unless it plans on overtaking the entire world and then its enemies shall sprout from within its domain. Hence, a government must pursue another avenue if they truly wish to obtain peace and/or stability.

With a government that can provide its populace means of sustenance, whether by trade or being self-supportive, reasons for waging war are generally motivated by selfish means. Therefore, most of the current reasons to wage war are political, i.e., not necessary for the subsistence of a nation's inhabitants, but created by the aspirations of the government. This obviously excludes waging war in the true name of self-defense, because in such an instance one is not inciting a war, but has found they are already in one. A government may fear aspects of another nation, they may have aspirations for power and wealth, or they may merely harbor illusions of domination. Other excuses to justify hostile actions include the protection of and/or the rights to a territory, a conclusion that another nation has an oppressive government, or a desire to impose a superior government on a foreign people. As far as the latter, in honesty, I do not believe any government would ever sacrifice its own people for the welfare of a foreign populace. Moreover, if the foreign regime were overthrown, would the new form of government become what the populace of the nation desire, or that of the supposed liberator? To liberate a weaker nation is merely to enlarge one's own empire. Nevertheless, as discussed, these excuses breed conjured beliefs about a people that are self-serving for the governing objectives. Leaders use condemnations to instill fear in a populace and move a justification to eliminate the enemy. In fact, nations have gone as far as considering other peoples non-human, for if they did not possess a soul, like animals it would acceptable to massacre them. In the past, there were certainly bands or nations that were predisposed to enmity and thus could propose a danger to the safety of a group. There were primitive bands that perceived war as a way of life, others that would attack foreign tribes to obtain victims for human sacrifice, and those who would kill foreigners simply to gain their life force. In these and similar cases, any modern concept of politics or warfare would not apply.

Moving beyond reasons and justifications to wage war, how does warfare and governance affect the destination of our species? Once a nation is self-serving in the name of defense, either malignance breeds from within, another power aspires to rise unto the heavens, or greed and illusions of domination move a government toward self-serving actions taken at the expense of other peoples, as well as their own populace in the form of troops and foreign attacks. The _four causes_ predispose nations toward domination. As long as nations exist, they will find reasons to wage war, those real and those pretend. As long as there are governments, the governed will find cause to rebel, those oppressed and those motivated by greed, selfishness, and the will to power. However, so it has been, so will it ever be? Will humanity forever place the dice of destiny in the grasp of violence and illusion? Will peoples continue to segregate themselves into countries and races as opposed to considering themselves a part of a greater whole? Will we continue to use this segregation as a justification for mass murder? Will humanity continue to create weapons and forever cheer when we attack our fellow humans; those masked as enemies, their cities destroyed, and their blood spilled in the name of truth and justice? Thinking of mass murder and weapons of annihilation, could humankind even destroy our environment and deplete our natural resources? Is our species destined for greatness or extinction? I have searched for the answers to these questions, but unfortunately, they are beyond my grasp. Nevertheless, if our species ever does become extinct, I should hope that ignorance would not be the cause- no, not for the species endowed with unrivalled reason. Nevertheless, still I must ask if warfare is natural and inevitable. Some of humanity's greatest discoveries have been fashioned in the name of war. Competition and strife breed transformation, and change is the catalyst of life.

One thing is certain about life, it inevitably leads to death. If an entity is destined for death, is the means by which one arrives at their destiny relevant? The morning breaks, but night will always follow. Shall I be the one to postpone the darkness, to instruct Mother Nature on her seasons, or to command the Fates on the destiny of humanity? Humankind has ordained itself the ultimate purpose in our universe. Regardless of truth, we have appointed ourselves the children of divine providence. Nevertheless, moving beyond our idealistic and predisposed beliefs, if one gazes within the design of Mother Nature, they will realize that life, of plant and animal, is a creature of persistence. The earth is not only perfect for life, life has adapted to the earth. Plasticity, mutation, individuality, and life will continue to evolve as Mother Nature capriciously alters her moods. Life, genetically programmed to survive, collectively has a purpose of propagation. Genetics is a survival machine, by whence it is, not am I to speak, but of its persistence and excellence, I shall not disdain. Still, regardless of the importance of the individual on the larger scale, to which my heart cannot disclose an answer, as with the determinist, we cannot abide with our eyes closed. Thus, through our collective knowledge, humanity should gaze atop the animal kingdom, not a creature of power, but one of kindness and wisdom...

Table of Contents

Goodbye: morevodkamartinis@gmail.com
