Essay—Top Ten Arguments (Issue 34)

Summary—The Top Ten Arguments essay argues there are ten arguments that the government must answer.

There is a story of a man looking for his keys under a streetlamp at night.  A woman comes along and offers to help.  After looking for ten minutes she asks if he is sure where he lost the keys.  He replies—No, I lost them up the street.  She replies—Then why are we looking here?  He replies—Because the light is better.

One—Argument vs Authority.  The method of authority is a cornerstone of Western civilization.  Essentially it means that authority gets the last word and that government agents (eg. educators and doctors) are not responsible for answering to arguments.  Rene Descartes (1596-1650) formulated his famous Cartesian model for constructing arguments.  Sir James Jeans (1877-1946) said that God is a mathematician.  Mathematics and actuarial science are disciplines involved in the constructing of arguments.  My theory of one (2001) proves that the government does not answer arguments.  I am proposing that we use Philosophymagazine-style essays in making arguments.  I am asking government agents to write essays that respond to my arguments.

Two—My Theory of One.  The macrocosmos of relativity theory (1905) is the universal law of spacetime and reveals that spacetime dilates as a function of velocity relative to lightspeed in accordance with the Pythagorean Form—ie. h^2 + (v/c)^2 = 1^2,  h = height, v = velocity,  c = lightspeed.  According to relativity theory—if v = c then h = 0 (ie. the boundary of spacetime).  On the other hand, according to Newtonian physics, if v = c then h = 1.  In other words, h is unaffected by v.  The microcosmos of quantum theory (1925) is the universal law of matter and is based on Planck’s constant.  It states that causality breaks down at the spacetime boundary of Planck’s constant.  An absence of causality means an absence of spacetime indicating a boundary of spacetime.  My theory of one argues that lightspeed and Planck’s constant are the same boundary of the universe.

Three—The Unpardonable Sin.  The prudent man rule is the doctrine asserting that actions of authorities are held accountable to the standards of a prudent and reasonable man.  And it is certainly reasonable that Canadian government agents answer to the prudent man rule.  Posing important questions often takes us more than halfway to solving them—yet nowhere in the educational system are fundamentals like relativity theory, quantum theory and my theory of one simply presented—the absence of which clearly indicates the neglect of children.  The government agents are heretically representing themselves as looking out for the common good.  After exposing critical errors like behaviorism, the government has further refused to follow the argument when seen—thus committing the unpardonable sin. 

Four—My Bernoulli Model.  The Bernoulli model is a top-down argument for portfolio theory.  The essence of portfolio theory is forecasting, integrating and optimizing.  In 1952 Harry Markowitz produced a paper entitled Portfolio Selection.  His approach combines regression analysis (ie. forecasting) with matrix algebra (ie. integrating) and linear programming (ie. optimizing) in the engineering of portfolio theory.  My Bernoulli model builds on the Markowitz model by adding components like the Delphi and expert opinion programs along with utility theory and event risk modeling using decision trees—and by fortifying existing components with advanced regression models and metaheuristic algorithms such as Monte Carlo simulation, neural networks, genetic and hill-climbing algorithms and the four-moment Camus distribution that I developed.  The Bernoulli model is a stylish Excel-based, VBA-founded, totally-expandable, enterprise-wide, actuarial-valuation, decision-making system designed for use at the executive level.  I would like to give my Bernoulli model to students.  It would supply an excellent example for developing Microsoft Excel models and writing Microsoft VBA code.  (I write VBA code as well as I write essays.)

 Five—Existentialism vs Bad Behaviorism.  The Freudian cognitive model makes the ego or consciousness the decisionmaker who must choose between the internal values of the inward id, self or soul and the external authority of the superego or government.  Behaviorism chooses the superego while existentialism chooses the id.  Behaviorism is the psychological theory employed exclusively in Canada contending that all human activity can be known through externally visible behavior or appearances—thereby denying the existence of consciousness and the possibility for self-awareness.  Whereas the id exists in the eternal-now, the superego merely exists in the now and persists by mimicking the id thereby fooling the ego.  Behaviorism demands the ego submit to the baseless authority of the superego.  Existentialism uses the id as a sounding board that provides a moral basis for making decisions.  Psychosis is the mental disorder characterized by impaired contact with reality.  The very definition of behaviorism denies any reality beyond appearances—thereby making it a recipe for psychosis.

Six—Freewill vs Determinism.  To paraphrase TZ Lavine—The problem of determinism versus freewill has tormented philosophy ever since Saint Augustine (354-430)—Determinism is the worldview that every event occurs necessarily from the prior events that gives rise to them—It denies the possibility of freewill—Freewill is the worldview that refutes the notion that the will is completely determined—and claims that moral judgment is meaningless unless the will is free in its choice of actions—The doctrine of freewill rejects the idea that determinism applies to the actions of man—The debate between determinism and freewill is particularly important in the field of criminal psychiatry—The question arises—Is the criminal act the necessary result of a set of antecedent causes so that the criminal could not help doing what he did—or is the criminal free to do otherwise and therefore is responsible?  Determinism arises in a society when the government fails to draw a distinction between determinism and freewill.  In that Canada is strictly deterministic, it could be argued that criminals are not responsible for their criminal actions.

Seven—Ontology vs Organized Religion.  Ontologically speaking and according to EF Schumacher—From a base of matter, man has the power of life like plants, the power of consciousness like animals and the power of consciousness recoiling upon itself—This power of self-awareness opens up unlimited possibilities for learning, formulating and accumulating knowledge—Physicists tell us that we must not talk of a life-force because no such force has ever been found to exist—Yet the difference between alive and dead certainly exists—Our job is to see the universe whole.  Being splits into the four ontological elements of matter, life, consciousness and self-awareness.  Organized religion is based solely on faith whereas ontology is based on both faith and reason.  Faith leads us to reason and then reason leads us back to faith.

Eight—Philosophymagazine vs Newspapers.  The Canadian Marshall McLuhan said that the medium is the message.  To paraphrase William Barnett in his 1958 book Irrational Man—People read two or more newspapers and view the internet and television every day—Journalism has become the god of our epoch—These false gods have a way of recklessly taking over individuals—Journalism permits people to live their lives on a disconnected basis—True knowledge is replaced by being knowledgeable.  The newspapers provide coverage of the noise while covers the signal.  The complementary principle means that there are two perspectives of the same phenomena.  In this case and newspapers provide two perspectives of the same message.

Nine—The Illusion of Reality.  Mystics and Tantrics have argued for millennia that reality is nothing but an illusion.  George Berkeley (ie. Berkeley California) said it best—All the choir of heaven and furniture of earth—in a word all those bodies which compose the mighty frame of the world—have not any substance without the mind—So long as they are not perceived by me, or do not exist in my mind or in the mind of any spirit, they have no existence whatsoever.  Einstein asked the metaphysical question—Does the moon really exist when no one is looking at it?  The answer is no.  Some have argued that the moon exists all the time because God is always looking.  But God, being eternal, only sees the eternal—ie. Souls and Forms (eg. the Pythagorean Form).

Ten—Superman vs Everyman.  The Superman takes the road less traveled while the Everyman takes the road most traveled.  The Superman seeks truth and beauty in all things.  He has total freedom and total responsibility.  On the other hand, the Everyman has no freedom and no responsibility—other than to behave normally.  Jean Wahl defined the Everyman as follows—In order that we may truly exist, rather than remain in the sphere of the things-seen and things-used, we must quit the inauthentic sphere of existence—Ordinarily, due to our own laziness and the pressure of society, we remain in an everyday world, where we are not really in contact with ourselves—This everyday world is what Heidegger calls the domain of the Everyman—In this domain of the Everyman, we are not conscious of our existence—And an awareness of ourselves is only attainable by traversing certain experiences like that of anguish, which puts us in the presence of the background of nothingness—from which Being erupts.

Conclusion. Socrates (469-399 BC) said that we must follow the argument where ever it leads.  I have constructed ten arguments for which the government must respond.  In doing so I have solved all the world’s problems.  I ask the government to amend the Canadian Constitution with this essay.