Discussion:
— THE COUNTRIES MOST ANTICIPATED LEGAL ADVICE HAS ARRIVED
(zu alt für eine Antwort)
dolf
2018-08-24 03:48:21 UTC
Permalink
— THE COUNTRIES MOST ANTICIPATED LEGAL ADVICE HAS ARRIVED

Yes indeed my appraisal by Christoph HORN and Dieter SCHÖNECKER of Immanuel
KANT’s GROUNDWORK FOR METAPHYSICS OF MORALS (1785) has arrived at my
doorstep this morning courtesy of Australia Post.

It will be my task to read it this weekend in the hope that probity and
decorum will return to the governance of this Commonwealth given its
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:

DIEU ET MON DROIT

FROM THE PREFACE WE READ A NOTION RELEVANT TO PROPRIETY OF THE LEADERSHIP
SPILL: “In the Groundwork, however, Kant develops his own characteristic
position.

He now emphasizes that an adequate form of moral philosophy has to be
‘pure’, ie. both free from all empirical elements of interest, self-love,
and natural feelings as well as free from rational concepts of perfection.

MORE GENERALLY SPEAKING, ETHICS MUST NOT BE GROUNDED ON ANTHROPOLOGY, since
morality is a demand, as Kant contends, which is addressed towards all
rational beings as rational beings.

According to Kant, ethics has to be spelled out on the basis of a ‘moral
law’ that is valid for all finite rational beings. He believes that only
from this point of view can moral motivation and moral obligation be
formulated in an appropriate way.”

We still have more machinations and intrigues of politics to go until they
settle down in the roost.

Clearly the people need to be governed...

...rather than civil disintegration by toxicity of Social Media Networks
mobilisation becoming the democratic impetus and norm.

If not, we will have the criterial semantics and purely reasoned means to
constructively appraise it’s delinquency.

LET ME SPELL IT OUT TO YOU ATHEISTS AND ROMAN CATHOLICS THAT IF DIEU ET MON
DROIT is the motto of THE SOVEREIGN. Then you are by your impious conduct:

- Impugning as cursing the SOVEREIGN;
- Impugning our entitlement to fair Justice;
- As a battle cry then impugning our BOER / ANZAC tradition whom have
engaged within theatres of war;
- Impugning our right to religious belief in the exercise of voluntary will
without coercion;

Such a statement of opposition which you gleefully make is an antagonism to
our BOER / ANZAC tradition as TREASON since a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE is
implied...

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

- Impugning as cursing the SOVEREIGN;

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

- Impugning our entitlement to fair Justice;

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

- As a battle cry then impugning our BOER / ANZAC tradition whom have
engaged within theatres of war;

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

- Impugning our right to religious belief in the exercise of voluntary will
without coercion;

H27 + H9 + H3 + H2 = #41 as #CENTRE

H54 + H18 + H6 + H3 = #81 as #WAN WU {*LOGICAL* *FALLACY* *WITHIN*
*BINOMIAL* *PYTHAGOREAN* *HETEROS* *THEORY* *OF* *NUMBER* *DERIVED*
*BELIEF* *SYSTEMS* *AND* *ROMAN* *EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE*}

= TETRAGRAMMATON HIERARCHY VALUE AS HOMOIOS THEORY OF *NUMBER*.

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

#1 - Be socially beneficial (the Artificial Intelligence equivalent of 'Do
no evil'?); {*FORMULA* *FOR* *UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

#2 - Don't introduce biases; {*FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

#3 - Be safe; {*FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS* / *MEMBRUM*
*VIRILE*}

#4 - Respect privacy; {*FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION*}

#5 - Be accountable; {*HUMAN* *NATURE* *AS* *DISCRIMINATING* *NORM*}

#6 - Be scientific; {*IMPLEMENTATION* *AS* *BINDING* *NORM*}

#7 - Limit abuse. {*ENGENDERING* *AS* *MANIFESTING* *NORM*}

NECESSITY AND APRIORITY IN KANT’S MORAL PHILOSOPHY

Kant uses the terms necessary and necessity in quite disparate contexts and
with different meanings. He nowhere explicitly says what necessity in the
domain of morality can even mean.

For that reason, before I move onto the analysis of Kant‘s argument, I will
address more closely the logical structure of ethical principles.

One must first understand the logical form that such a principle exhibits
in order to be able to work out the basis of Kant’s central argument for a
pure moral philosophy. It will become evident that Kant‘s argument is
comprehensible if the decisive concept [of *ONTIC*] necessity is understood
as a modal operator in the sense of modern logic. The modal status
necessity, allows moral principles to guide our counter factual, practical
reflections. This aspect of logical form can be clearly distinguished from
epistemological connotations, on the one hand, and the prescriptive or
imperative character of [*OTOLOGICAL*] normative propositions on the other.
[page 3]

In consideration of Kant’s expression of the terms necessity and necessary
and conceiving of a working hypothetical premise we apply the principle
notion of *ONTIC* to the existential as necessity and it’s circumscribing
to the ontological experience of the necessary reality.

You are not entitled to my Grapple369 paradigm being a trinomial
mathematical theoretical noumenon as Intellectual Property which is
compliant with Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason published in 1781 /
1787.

- dolf

Initial Post: 24 August 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"



SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-24 04:37:28 UTC
Permalink
— THE COUNTRIES MOST ANTICIPATED LEGAL ADVICE HAS ARRIVED

Yes indeed my appraisal by Christoph HORN and Dieter SCHÖNECKER of Immanuel
KANT’s GROUNDWORK FOR METAPHYSICS OF MORALS (1785) has arrived at my
doorstep this morning courtesy of Australia Post.

It will be my task to read it this weekend in the hope that probity and
decorum will return to the governance of this Commonwealth given its
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:

DIEU ET MON DROIT

FROM THE PREFACE WE READ A NOTION RELEVANT TO PROPRIETY OF THE LEADERSHIP
SPILL: “In the Groundwork, however, Kant develops his own characteristic
position.

He now emphasizes that an adequate form of moral philosophy has to be
‘pure’, ie. both free from all empirical elements of interest, self-love,
and natural feelings as well as free from rational concepts of perfection.

MORE GENERALLY SPEAKING, ETHICS MUST NOT BE GROUNDED ON ANTHROPOLOGY, since
morality is a demand, as Kant contends, which is addressed towards all
rational beings as rational beings.

According to Kant, ethics has to be spelled out on the basis of a ‘moral
law’ that is valid for all finite rational beings. He believes that only
from this point of view can moral motivation and moral obligation be
formulated in an appropriate way.”

We still have more machinations and intrigues of politics to go until they
settle down in the roost.

Clearly the people need to be governed...

...rather than civil disintegration by toxicity of Social Media Networks
mobilisation becoming the democratic impetus and norm.

If not, we will have the criterial semantics and purely reasoned means to
constructively appraise it’s delinquency.

LET ME SPELL IT OUT TO YOU ATHEISTS AND ROMAN CATHOLICS THAT IF DIEU ET MON
DROIT is the motto of THE SOVEREIGN. Then you are by your impious conduct:

- Impugning as cursing the SOVEREIGN;
- Impugning our entitlement to fair Justice;
- As a battle cry then impugning our BOER / ANZAC tradition whom have
engaged within theatres of war;
- Impugning our right to religious belief in the exercise of voluntary will
without coercion;

Such a statement of opposition which you gleefully make is an antagonism to
our BOER / ANZAC tradition as TREASON since a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE is
implied...

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

- Impugning as cursing the SOVEREIGN;

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

- Impugning our entitlement to fair Justice;

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

- As a battle cry then impugning our BOER / ANZAC tradition whom have
engaged within theatres of war;

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

- Impugning our right to religious belief in the exercise of voluntary will
without coercion;

H27 + H9 + H3 + H2 = #41 as #CENTRE

H54 + H18 + H6 + H3 = #81 as #WAN WU {*LOGICAL* *FALLACY* *WITHIN*
*BINOMIAL* *PYTHAGOREAN* *HETEROS* *THEORY* *OF* *NUMBER* *DERIVED*
*BELIEF* *SYSTEMS* *AND* *ROMAN* *EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE*}

= TETRAGRAMMATON HIERARCHY VALUE AS HOMOIOS THEORY OF *NUMBER*.

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

#1 - Be socially beneficial (the Artificial Intelligence equivalent of 'Do
no evil'?); {*FORMULA* *FOR* *UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

#2 - Don't introduce biases; {*FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

#3 - Be safe; {*FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS* / *MEMBRUM*
*VIRILE*}

#4 - Respect privacy; {*FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION*}

#5 - Be accountable; {*HUMAN* *NATURE* *AS* *DISCRIMINATING* *NORM*}

#6 - Be scientific; {*IMPLEMENTATION* *AS* *BINDING* *NORM*}

#7 - Limit abuse. {*ENGENDERING* *AS* *MANIFESTING* *NORM*}

Kant uses the terms necessary and necessity in quite disparate contexts and
with different meanings. He nowhere explicitly says what necessity in the
domain of morality can even mean.

For that reason, before I move onto the analysis of Kant‘s argument, I will
address more closely the logical structure of ethical principles.

One must first understand the logical form that such a principle exhibits
in order to be able to work out the basis of Kant’s central argument for a
pure moral philosophy. It will become evident that Kant‘s argument is
comprehensible if the decisive concept [of *ONTIC*] necessity is understood
as a modal operator {ie. #41 x n of the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTUS}
in the sense of modern logic. The modal status necessity, allows moral
principles to guide our counter factual, practical reflections. This aspect
of logical form can be clearly distinguished from epistemological
connotations, on the one hand, and the prescriptive or imperative character
of [*OTOLOGICAL*] normative propositions on the other. [page 3]

In consideration of Kant’s expression of the terms necessity and necessary
as conceiving of a working hypothetical premise we apply the principle
notion of *ONTIC* to the existential as necessity and it’s circumscribing
to the ontological experience of the necessary reality.

You are not entitled to my Grapple369 paradigm being a trinomial
mathematical theoretical noumenon as Intellectual Property which is
compliant with Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason published in 1781 /
1787.

- dolf

Initial Post: 24 August 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-24 05:52:03 UTC
Permalink
— THE COUNTRIES MOST ANTICIPATED LEGAL ADVICE HAS ARRIVED

(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 24 August, 2018

Yes indeed my appraisal by Christoph HORN and Dieter SCHÖNECKER of Immanuel
KANT’s GROUNDWORK FOR METAPHYSICS OF MORALS (1785) has arrived at my
doorstep this morning courtesy of Australia Post.

It will be my task to read it this weekend in the hope that probity and
decorum will return to the governance of this Commonwealth given its
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE:

DIEU ET MON DROIT

FROM THE PREFACE WE READ A NOTION RELEVANT TO PROPRIETY OF THE LEADERSHIP
SPILL: “In the Groundwork, however, Kant develops his own characteristic
position.

He now emphasizes that an adequate form of moral philosophy has to be
‘pure’, ie. both free from all empirical elements of interest, self-love,
and natural feelings as well as free from rational concepts of perfection.

MORE GENERALLY SPEAKING, ETHICS MUST NOT BE GROUNDED ON ANTHROPOLOGY, since
morality is a demand, as Kant contends, which is addressed towards all
rational beings as rational beings.

According to Kant, ethics has to be spelled out on the basis of a ‘moral
law’ that is valid for all finite rational beings. He believes that only
from this point of view can moral motivation and moral obligation be
formulated in an appropriate way.”

We still have more machinations and intrigues of politics to go until they
settle down in the roost.

Clearly the people need to be governed...

...rather than civil disintegration by toxicity of Social Media Networks
mobilisation becoming the democratic impetus and norm.

If not, we will have the criterial semantics and purely reasoned means to
constructively appraise it’s delinquency.

LET ME SPELL IT OUT TO YOU ATHEISTS AND ROMAN CATHOLICS THAT IF DIEU ET MON
DROIT is the motto of THE SOVEREIGN. Then you are by your impious conduct:

- Impugning as cursing the SOVEREIGN;
- Impugning our entitlement to fair Justice;
- As a battle cry then impugning our BOER / ANZAC tradition whom have
engaged within theatres of war;
- Impugning our right to religious belief in the exercise of voluntary will
without coercion;

Such a statement of opposition which you gleefully make is an antagonism to
our BOER / ANZAC tradition as TREASON since a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE is
implied...

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

- Impugning as cursing the SOVEREIGN;

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

- Impugning our entitlement to fair Justice;

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

- As a battle cry then impugning our BOER / ANZAC tradition whom have
engaged within theatres of war;

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

- Impugning our right to religious belief in the exercise of voluntary will
without coercion;

H27 + H9 + H3 + H2 = #41 as #CENTRE

H54 + H18 + H6 + H3 = #81 as #WAN WU {*LOGICAL* *FALLACY* *WITHIN*
*BINOMIAL* *PYTHAGOREAN* *HETEROS* *THEORY* *OF* *NUMBER* *DERIVED*
*BELIEF* *SYSTEMS* *AND* *ROMAN* *EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE*}

= TETRAGRAMMATON HIERARCHY VALUE AS HOMOIOS THEORY OF *NUMBER*.

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

#1 - Be socially beneficial (the Artificial Intelligence equivalent of 'Do
no evil'?); {*FORMULA* *FOR* *UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

#2 - Don't introduce biases; {*FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

#3 - Be safe; {*FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS* / *MEMBRUM*
*VIRILE*}

#4 - Respect privacy; {*FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION*}

#5 - Be accountable; {*HUMAN* *NATURE* *AS* *DISCRIMINATING* *NORM*}

#6 - Be scientific; {*IMPLEMENTATION* *AS* *BINDING* *NORM*}

#7 - Limit abuse. {*ENGENDERING* *AS* *MANIFESTING* *NORM*}

NECESSITY AND APRIORITY IN KANT’S MORAL PHILOSOPHY

Kant uses the terms necessary and necessity in quite disparate contexts and
with different meanings. He nowhere explicitly says what necessity in the
domain of morality can even mean.

For that reason, before I move onto the analysis of Kant‘s argument, I will
address more closely the logical structure of ethical principles.

One must first understand the logical form that such a principle exhibits
in order to be able to work out the basis of Kant’s central argument for a
pure moral philosophy. It will become evident that Kant‘s argument is
comprehensible if the decisive concept [of *ONTIC*] necessity is understood
as a modal operator {ie. #41 x n of the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTUS}
in the sense of modern logic. The modal status necessity, allows moral
principles to guide our counter factual, practical reflections. This aspect
of logical form can be clearly distinguished from epistemological
connotations, on the one hand, and the prescriptive or imperative character
of [*OTOLOGICAL*] normative propositions on the other. [page 3]

In consideration of Kant’s expression of the terms necessity and necessary
as conceiving of a working hypothetical premise we apply the principle
notion of *ONTIC* to the existential as necessity and it’s circumscribing
to the ontological experience of the necessary reality.

Factual necessity (existential necessity) is by definition a factually
necessary being which is not causally dependent on any other being, while
any other being is causally dependent on it.

SEE ALSO WIKIPEDIA: “Metaphysical necessity”

<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysical_necessity>

Our informal research task into determining the epistemological principles
and properties of metaphysical necessity has been completed and we
substantially convey as factual the hypothetical postulate that the *ONTIC*
premises as meta-descriptor prototypes conveying NATURAL LAW of NORMA
OBLIGANS by a circumscribing ethical construct of being / ousia are carried
by the ONTOLOGICAL experience of language as HEBREW / GREEK lexicon being
CATEGORIES OF UNDERSTANDING defined by a trinomial mathematical theoretical
noumenon:

45: [1]
68: [42]
84: [2]
86: [10]
102: [4]
104: [7]
115: [5]
130: [3]
139: [13]
140: [14, 16] // #14 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY; #16 - I AM NOT AN
EAVES-DROPPER
146: [15]
148: [12]
150: [28]
156: [21]
157: [17, 41] // #17 - I AM NOT ONE OF PRATING TONGUE; #41 - I HAVE NO
STRONG DESIRE EXCEPT FOR MY OWN PROPERTY
158: [23]
161: [9]
166: [11]
168: [26]
169: [18]
171: [20]
173: [27]
175: [22]
177: [29]
180: [19]
181: [24, 35] // #24 - I LEND NOT A DEAF EAR TO THE WORDS OF
RIGHTEOUSNESS; #35 - I AM NOT ONE WHO CURSETH THE KING
182: [6]
184: [36]
185: [25]
186: [31]
191: [32]
192: [39]
196: [37]
197: [33]
200: [8]
210: [30]
215: [34]
220: [38]
228: [40]

<Loading Image...>

[IMAGE: THOTH MEASURES OF HYPERSPACE AND ‘OTH {24x7x13 = #2184 as 6D / #0 -
21 MARCH 1996} CYCLE OF THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS HAS IT ANY PERENNIAL
SIGNIFICANCE OVER PYTHAGOREAN REDACTION: 1-5-6-7-2-3-4-8-9 METHODOLOGY FOR
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE?]

Whilst we publish our findings so that a peer review may be undertaken and
the core definitions can be utilised for political agreements without the
need to provide any substantial narrative of concise consensus agreement.

You are not entitled without written agreement to commercially deploy this
technological approach to Queen Victoria’s Letters Patent to the Federation
of the Australian Commonwealth of 1901 being my Grapple369 paradigm as a
trinomial mathematical theoretical noumenon as Intellectual Property which
is compliant with Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason published in 1781
/ 1787.

- dolf

Initial Post: 24 August 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-24 15:00:44 UTC
Permalink
— (SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF MORALS: #56 -
TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT AND SLANDER
AS MISNOMERED PIETY BY SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE AS BOER / ANZAC
DEFAMATION?

Nous: #56
Time: 10:10 hrs
Date: 2018.8.25
Torah: [#40, #30, #5]@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 70 (#110); Ego: 30 (#70),
@3: Sup: 75 (#185 - I AM NOT BOISTEROUS IN BEHAVIOUR {%25}); Ego: 5
(#75),
Male: #185; Feme: #75
} // #75

Dao: Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity
Tetra: #46 - Enlargement
I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding, Fullness

Latin: Multus {God who delivers from the evil} Alt: Hyaiel {God and Man
Exist} {

1. PROTECTS AGAINST WEAPONS & PERILS OF TRAVEL
2. MEDICINAL HERBS
3. WATER
4. Chumis
}

Solar Eclipse: 1 August 2008 (AEST)

Judah {Praise of the Lord; confession}

Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#434 / #383} / HETEROS {#449 / #350} / TORAH {#474 /
#403}

<http://www.grapple369.com?zen:3,row:4,col:9,nous:56&idea:{m,143}&idea:{f,132}&idea:{m,434}&idea:{f,383}&PROTOTYPE:HOMOIOS>

***@zen: 3, row: 4, col: 9, nous: 56 [Date: 2018.8.25, Super: #434 /
#51 - Natural Guides and Nursing Virtuosity; I-Ching: H47 - Oppression
(exhaustion), Confining, Entangled; Tetra: 69 - Exhaustion, Ego: #383 / #56
- Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity; I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding,
Fullness; Tetra: 46 - Enlargement]

Kant does not introduce the Preface of the Groundwork with a
characterization of the work’s content; rather he attempts first of all to
define the place of a metaphysics of morals within philosophy. For this
task, he makes use of three criteria. Kant first differentiates
philosophical theories by whether they are “formal” or “material.” Formal
philosophy, according to Kant, is equated with logic. It possesses no
specific object; rather it concerns itself, “without distinction among
Objects,” with “the universal rules of thinking in general”. In contrast,
every material philosophy “has to do with determinate objects and the laws
to which they are subjected”.

KANT: “Logic can have no empirical part, i.e., a part such that the
universal and necessary laws of thinking rest on grounds that are taken
from experience; for otherwise it would not be logic, i.e., a canon for the
understanding or reason which is valid for all thinking and must be
demonstrated. By contrast, natural and moral philosophy can each have their
empirical part, because the former must determine its laws of nature as an
object of experience, the latter must determine the laws for the will of
the human being insofar as he is affected by nature—the first as laws in
accordance with which everything happens, the second as those in accordance
with which everything ought to happen, but also reckoning with the
conditions under which it often does not happen.

One can call all philosophy, insofar as it is based on grounds of
experience, empirical, but that which puts forth its doctrines solely from
principles a priori, pure philosophy. The latter, when it is merely formal,
is called logic; but if it is limited to determinate objects of the
understanding, then it is called metaphysics.

This formulation already offers an indication of the second criterion. Kant
subdivides material theories, in turn, into two Classes. Kant distinguishes
them by with reference to the laws to which the objects that the theories
deal are subjected. He seems to assume that there are exactly two kinds of
laws. And, correspondingly, he differentiates between two types of material
philosophy: on the one hand, “physics,” or “doctrine of nature,” or,
alternatively, “natural wisdom;” and, on the other hand, “ethics,” or
“doctrine of morals,” or, alternative. “moral wisdom.” It is a matter of
the “laws of nature,” in the one case, and of the “laws of freedom,” in the
other, that each theory is respectively concerned. What can Kant mean by
this? The expression “laws of nature” seems to be relatively unproblematic.
But what is to be understood by the expression “laws of freedom” [which are
implicit to the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. exercise of
voluntary will)]?

From Kant’s elucidation one can infer a more exact interpretatlon: Laws of
nature are therefore laws “in accordance with which everything happens,”
while the laws of freedom are those “in accordance with which everything
ought to happen”. Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern
terminological distinction between descriptive statements which present an
account of how the world is as analogous to the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION
CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON
GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} an the normative statements present an
evaluative account, or an account of how the syncretic world should be as
existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} as optimally
something that should be lived up to; or that should be pursued.

At the center of a philosophical doctrine of nature, there would then stand
general descriptive judgments; that means, more precisely, statements of
law that describe how objects of nature act. And at the center of a
doctrine of morals there would stand normative judgments that exhibit a
comparable degree of generality and modal status. I will later address more
thoroughly what it could mean that some normative judgments exhibit a
comparable modal status to statements of law in the natural sciences. Such
a parallel is far from trivial. On the contrary, it is one of the critical
challenges for the interpretation of Kant’s ethical writings. The first
step toward a unified interpretation of the two kinds of laws consists in
seeing both kinds equally as propositionally structured entities that
demonstrate a clearly identifiable logical form.

Next to formality versus materiality and the two types of laws, Kant
introduces a third distinctive Characteristic of theories. He seems to
understand material theories as complex systems that can be split in
individual parts. Every material philosophical theory accordingly contains
one part that he characterizes as “pure,” “rational,” or as “a priori”, and
it may contain a second, “empirical” part. Kant presupposes that in both
the doctrine of nature and the doctrine of morals the two parts can be
isolated from each other. It follows, therefore, that there are two a
priori types of theory: on the one hand, a “metaphysics of nature,” and, on
the other, the sought after “metaphysics of morals”

Thus, a metaphysics of morals would be the following type of theory:

(a) It is not purely formal, but rather deals with definite objects.
(b) It deals with objects in so far as these are subsumed under “laws of
freedom.”
(c) It contains no empirical elements.

At this juncture Kant does not yet presuppose that such a theory actually
exists or that it would be possible for a philosophy to work out
convincingly such a theory. He has not even argued yet that it is
advantageous or even necessary for philosophy to treat the a priori part
separately from the empirical part. Kant pursues these lines of questions
in the subsequent passages. [page 4, 5]

Accordingly, we may as an ANTHROPOCENTRIC {

- regarding the human being as the central fact of the universe.
- assuming human beings to be the final aim and end of the universe.
- viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and
values.

} syncretism, consider an unified paradigmatic perspective of Kant’s idea
of an otherwise twofold metaphysics, the idea of a METAPHYSICS OF NATURE
{ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based seven number) = #294
x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS = 365.242321 days} and of a
METAPHYSICS OF MORALS {

TETRAGRAMMATON {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA: #1 + #2 + #3 +#4 = #10 } HIERARCHY
VALUE AS THE METAPHYSICAL CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE TO THE HOMOIOS THEORY OF
*NUMBER*

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

}. Physics will thus have its empirical but also a rational part; and
ethics likewise; although here the empirical part in particular could be
called practical anthropology, but the rational part could properly be
called morals.

Syncretism or the Mixed School within Chinese philosophy is an eclectic
school of thought that combined elements of Confucianism, Taoism, Mohism,
and Legalism. The Syncretist texts include the Huainanzi, Lüshi Chunqiu,
and the Shizi. The (c. 330 BCE) Shizi is the earliest of the Syncretist
texts.

And Michael Nylan's exceptional work conveys the notion that HAN DYNASTY
(206 BCE to 220 CE) sage YANG HSIUNG's two published works: Canon of
Supreme Mystery (T'AI HSÜAN CHING) within 4 BCE and the Elemental Changes
within 2 BCE are called the Mystery by its devotees as a true guide for
those seeking the Way of the sages. Today, in the West, readers will find
the Mystery an essential tool for understanding the Tao as it operates in
the cosmos, in the psyche, or in sacred texts like the l CHING. Written in
2 BCE., the Mystery represents the first grand synthesis of the dominant
strands of Chinese thought. As it weaves together elements of Confucianism,
Taoism, Yin/Yang Five Phases theory, alchemy, and astrology into a
systematic, organic whole, all the fundamental components of early Chinese
belief appear within its pages which formed the basis to the STATE ideology
of China from 134 BCE two 1911 CE, an ideology that in turn provided the
intellectual foundations for the Japanese and Korean STATES, therefore the
importance of this book can hardly be overestimated.

As a book of divination, the Mystery provides a method for weighing
alternative courses of action. As a book of philosophy, it conveys a sense
of the elemental changes in life. Intricately structured in eighty-one
tetragrams (four-line graphs), the Mystery accounts for the movements of
the sun, moon, and stars, the shifting rhythms of the seasons, the
alternations of night and day, and the ebb and flow of cosmic energy—in
short, all the dynamic relations of the realms of Heaven, Earth, and Man.

It addresses questions of Fate, assessing the degree of control that
individuals have over their destinies. It suggests the fabric that binds
families, communities, and states together. As a book of poetry, the
Mystery unfolds a literary vision of seeming simplicity but surpassing
depth. The long poem divides into short sections of rhyming couplets that
focus upon a single mundane event or familiar phenomenon.

The Roman writer Censorinus, who in his 238 CE publication DE DEI NATALI
(THE NATAL DAY), claims that the Pythagorean advocate Philolaus (470-385
BCE) as preceeding Plato (c. 429–347 BCE), being the principle proponent of
the Pythagorean doctrines on “the world’s nature is a harmonious compound
of the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF
VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the
UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} elements which is similar to
the totality of the WORLD-KOSMOS in itself and all it contains:

“JESUS {he is saved / a saviour; a deliverer} OF NAZARETH {SOVEREIGN; one
chosen or set apart; separated; crowned; sanctified} ANSWERED, *ARE*
*THERE* *NOT* *TWELVE* *HOURS* *IN* *THE* *DAY* {ie. 24 x 60 minutes =
#1440 / #72 = 20 minutes allocations}? *IF* *ANY* *MAN* *WALK* *IN* *THE*
*DAY*, *HE* *STUMBLETH* *NOT*, *BECAUSE* *HE* *SEETH* *THE* *LIGHT* {ie.

#41 x #9 = #369 as similarly Philolaus located the fire at #CENTRE and
calls it HESTIA of the ALL, the GUARDPOST OF ZEUS, the MOTHER OF THE GODS,
the ALTAR, the LINK and the MEASURE OF NATURE-GENESIS

} *OF* *THIS* *WORLD*-*KOSMOS*.

BUT IF A MAN WALK IN THE NIGHT, HE STUMBLETH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO LIGHT IN
HIM.” [John 11:9-10 (KJV)]

HESTIA AND THE PYTHAGOREANS: THE FIRE IN THE MIDDLE
“The Pythagoreans offered significant cosmological observations . . . It is
also noteworthy that the early Pythagoreans denied the geocentric and
geostatic model of the universe. According to the testimony of Aristotle
(De caelo 293.18), they placed *fire* and not earth at the centre of the
universe. The earth became a celestial body, which creates day and night by
its circular motion around Hestia (hestia meaning ‘hearth’). Ten divine
celestial bodies – ten being the perfect number, which encompasses the
whole nature of numbers – rotate rhythmically around Hestia in the
following order: the dark counter-earth (antichthon), the earth, the moon,
the sun, the five planets (Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury) and the
sphere of the fixed stars (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986). This new
cosmological model is usually attributed to Philolaus and explained through
the importance of the Monad in Pythagorean metaphysics. Since the Monad is
the divine source of all numbers and is identified with, or represented by,
the purity of the fire, the source of the celestial bodies should be a
divine fire in the centre of the cosmos (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986).” [p.
38-39, Introduction to Presocratics: A Thematic Approach to Early Greek
Philosophy with Key Readings by Giannis Stamatellos]

<https://paganreveries.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/hestia-the-queen-of-fire-part-three/>

Which the Pythagoreans had defined by a BINOMIAL notion of the THEORY OF
NUMBER which they SOVEREIGN and AUTOGENIC {ie. coming from within as
self-generated} DAEMONIC FORCE which maintains the eternal permanence of
cosmic things. Whilst Philolaus considered the natural year as comprising
of 364 and a half days in being consistent with the Chinese HAN Dynasty
(206 BCE-220CE) MYSTERIES understanding (#81 x 4.5 days = 364.5 days) of
them. [Pythagorean Sourcebook p 168, 171]

According to the 4.5 day designations of this natural year cycle into #81
sections, this would then equate the #CENTRE as 13 to 17 September;

However the Chinese DAOist cosmic perspective of the DAO-ZIRAN of NATURE by
its GRAND INCEPTION upon the midnight new moon solstice of 21 December 103
BCE as articulation of the natural year (as equivalent to the New Testament
notion as TROCHOS-course of NATURE-genesis [James 3:6]) associated to YANG
HSIUNG’s treatise that was published within 4 BCE and known as the "Canon
of Supreme Mystery", reconciled it's unified arrangement of the DAO TE
CHING's #81 sections as specifically the TRINOMIAL (tetragrammaton) notion
of the THEORY OF NUMBER as HOMOIOS paradigm value: TETRA: 60 -
ACCUMULATION, which is mapped to the PYTHAGOREAN / I CHING's H64
designations (of necessity some are repeated) as the binary paradigm value:
H26 - GREAT DOMESTICATION, RESTRAINING FORCE, GREAT ACCUMULATING, THE
TAMING POWER OF THE GREAT, GREAT STORAGE, POTENTIAL ENERGY;
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-24 15:46:45 UTC
Permalink
— (SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF MORALS: #56 -
TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT AND SLANDER
BU MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE AS BOER / ANZAC
DEFAMATION?

Nous: #56
Time: 10:10 hrs
Date: 2018.8.25
Torah: [#40, #30, #5]@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 70 (#110); Ego: 30 (#70),
@3: Sup: 75 (#185 - I AM NOT BOISTEROUS IN BEHAVIOUR {%25}); Ego: 5
(#75),
Male: #185; Feme: #75
} // #75

Dao: Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity
Tetra: #46 - Enlargement
I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding, Fullness

Latin: Multus {God who delivers from the evil} Alt: Hyaiel {God and Man
Exist} {

1. PROTECTS AGAINST WEAPONS & PERILS OF TRAVEL
2. MEDICINAL HERBS
3. WATER
4. Chumis
}

Solar Eclipse: 1 August 2008 (AEST)

Judah {Praise of the Lord; confession}

Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#434 / #383} / HETEROS {#449 / #350} / TORAH {#474 /
#403}

<http://www.grapple369.com?zen:3,row:4,col:9,nous:56&idea:{m,143}&idea:{f,132}&idea:{m,434}&idea:{f,383}&PROTOTYPE:HOMOIOS>

***@zen: 3, row: 4, col: 9, nous: 56 [Date: 2018.8.25, Super: #434 /
#51 - Natural Guides and Nursing Virtuosity; I-Ching: H47 - Oppression
(exhaustion), Confining, Entangled; Tetra: 69 - Exhaustion, Ego: #383 / #56
- Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity; I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding,
Fullness; Tetra: 46 - Enlargement]

Kant does not introduce the Preface of the Groundwork with a
characterization of the work’s content; rather he attempts first of all to
define the place of a metaphysics of morals within philosophy. For this
task, he makes use of three criteria. Kant first differentiates
philosophical theories by whether they are “formal” or “material.” Formal
philosophy, according to Kant, is equated with logic. It possesses no
specific object; rather it concerns itself, “without distinction among
Objects,” with “the universal rules of thinking in general”. In contrast,
every material philosophy “has to do with determinate objects and the laws
to which they are subjected”.

KANT: “Logic can have no empirical part, i.e., a part such that the
universal and necessary laws of thinking rest on grounds that are taken
from experience; for otherwise it would not be logic, i.e., a canon for the
understanding or reason which is valid for all thinking and must be
demonstrated. By contrast, natural and moral philosophy can each have their
empirical part, because the former must determine its laws of nature as an
object of experience, the latter must determine the laws for the will of
the human being insofar as he is affected by nature—the first as laws in
accordance with which everything happens, the second as those in accordance
with which everything ought to happen, but also reckoning with the
conditions under which it often does not happen.

One can call all philosophy, insofar as it is based on grounds of
experience, empirical, but that which puts forth its doctrines solely from
principles a priori, pure philosophy. The latter, when it is merely formal,
is called logic; but if it is limited to determinate objects of the
understanding, then it is called metaphysics.

This formulation already offers an indication of the second criterion. Kant
subdivides material theories, in turn, into two Classes. Kant distinguishes
them by with reference to the laws to which the objects that the theories
deal are subjected. He seems to assume that there are exactly two kinds of
laws. And, correspondingly, he differentiates between two types of material
philosophy: on the one hand, “physics,” or “doctrine of nature,” or,
alternatively, “natural wisdom;” and, on the other hand, “ethics,” or
“doctrine of morals,” or, alternative. “moral wisdom.” It is a matter of
the “laws of nature,” in the one case, and of the “laws of freedom,” in the
other, that each theory is respectively concerned. What can Kant mean by
this? The expression “laws of nature” seems to be relatively unproblematic.
But what is to be understood by the expression “laws of freedom” [which are
implicit to the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. exercise of
voluntary will)]?

From Kant’s elucidation one can infer a more exact interpretatlon: Laws of
nature are therefore laws “in accordance with which everything happens,”
while the laws of freedom are those “in accordance with which everything
ought to happen”. Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern
terminological distinction between descriptive statements which present an
account of how the world is being analogous to the LIMITED {#9 -
JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS /
SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the normative
statements presenting an evaluative account, or an account of how the
syncretic world should be as existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 -
ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} in being optimally something that should be
lived up to; or that should be pursued.

At the center of a philosophical doctrine of nature, there would then stand
general descriptive judgments; that means, more precisely, statements of
law that describe how objects of nature act. And at the center of a
doctrine of morals there would stand normative judgments that exhibit a
comparable degree of generality and modal status. I will later address more
thoroughly what it could mean that some normative judgments exhibit a
comparable modal status to statements of law in the natural sciences. Such
a parallel is far from trivial. On the contrary, it is one of the critical
challenges for the interpretation of Kant’s ethical writings. The first
step toward a unified interpretation of the two kinds of laws consists in
seeing both kinds equally as propositionally structured entities that
demonstrate a clearly identifiable logical form.

Next to formality versus materiality and the two types of laws, Kant
introduces a third distinctive Characteristic of theories. He seems to
understand material theories as complex systems that can be split in
individual parts. Every material philosophical theory accordingly contains
one part that he characterizes as “pure,” “rational,” or as “a priori”, and
it may contain a second, “empirical” part. Kant presupposes that in both
the doctrine of nature and the doctrine of morals the two parts can be
isolated from each other. It follows, therefore, that there are two a
priori types of theory: on the one hand, a “metaphysics of nature,” and, on
the other, the sought after “metaphysics of morals”

Thus, a metaphysics of morals would be the following type of theory:

(a) It is not purely formal, but rather deals with definite objects.
(b) It deals with objects in so far as these are subsumed under “laws of
freedom.”
(c) It contains no empirical elements.

At this juncture Kant does not yet presuppose that such a theory actually
exists or that it would be possible for a philosophy to work out
convincingly such a theory. He has not even argued yet that it is
advantageous or even necessary for philosophy to treat the a priori part
separately from the empirical part. Kant pursues these lines of questions
in the subsequent passages. [page 4, 5]

Accordingly, we may as an ANTHROPOCENTRIC {

- regarding the human being as the central fact of the universe.
- assuming human beings to be the final aim and end of the universe.
- viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and
values.

} syncretism, consider an unified paradigmatic perspective of Kant’s idea
of an otherwise twofold metaphysics, the idea of a METAPHYSICS OF NATURE
{ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based seven number) = #294
x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS = 365.242321 days} and of a
METAPHYSICS OF MORALS {

TETRAGRAMMATON {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA: #1 + #2 + #3 +#4 = #10 } HIERARCHY
VALUE AS THE METAPHYSICAL CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE TO THE HOMOIOS THEORY OF
*NUMBER*

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

}. Physics will thus have its empirical but also a rational part; and
ethics likewise; although here the empirical part in particular could be
called practical anthropology, but the rational part could properly be
called morals.

Syncretism or the Mixed School within Chinese philosophy is an eclectic
school of thought that combined elements of Confucianism, Taoism, Mohism,
and Legalism. The Syncretist texts include the Huainanzi, Lüshi Chunqiu,
and the Shizi. The (c. 330 BCE) Shizi is the earliest of the Syncretist
texts.

And Michael Nylan's exceptional work conveys the notion that HAN DYNASTY
(206 BCE to 220 CE) sage YANG HSIUNG's two published works: Canon of
Supreme Mystery (T'AI HSÜAN CHING) within 4 BCE and the Elemental Changes
within 2 BCE are called the Mystery by its devotees as a true guide for
those seeking the Way of the sages. Today, in the West, readers will find
the Mystery an essential tool for understanding the Tao as it operates in
the cosmos, in the psyche, or in sacred texts like the l CHING. Written in
2 BCE., the Mystery represents the first grand synthesis of the dominant
strands of Chinese thought. As it weaves together elements of Confucianism,
Taoism, Yin/Yang Five Phases theory, alchemy, and astrology into a
systematic, organic whole, all the fundamental components of early Chinese
belief appear within its pages which formed the basis to the STATE ideology
of China from 134 BCE two 1911 CE, an ideology that in turn provided the
intellectual foundations for the Japanese and Korean STATES, therefore the
importance of this book can hardly be overestimated.

As a book of divination, the Mystery provides a method for weighing
alternative courses of action. As a book of philosophy, it conveys a sense
of the elemental changes in life. Intricately structured in eighty-one
tetragrams (four-line graphs), the Mystery accounts for the movements of
the sun, moon, and stars, the shifting rhythms of the seasons, the
alternations of night and day, and the ebb and flow of cosmic energy—in
short, all the dynamic relations of the realms of Heaven, Earth, and Man.

It addresses questions of Fate, assessing the degree of control that
individuals have over their destinies. It suggests the fabric that binds
families, communities, and states together. As a book of poetry, the
Mystery unfolds a literary vision of seeming simplicity but surpassing
depth. The long poem divides into short sections of rhyming couplets that
focus upon a single mundane event or familiar phenomenon.

The Roman writer Censorinus, who in his 238 CE publication DE DEI NATALI
(THE NATAL DAY), claims that the Pythagorean advocate Philolaus (470-385
BCE) as preceeding Plato (c. 429–347 BCE), being the principle proponent of
the Pythagorean doctrines on “the world’s nature is a harmonious compound
of the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF
VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the
UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} elements which is similar to
the totality of the WORLD-KOSMOS in itself and all it contains:

“JESUS {he is saved / a saviour; a deliverer} OF NAZARETH {SOVEREIGN; one
chosen or set apart; separated; crowned; sanctified} ANSWERED, *ARE*
*THERE* *NOT* *TWELVE* *HOURS* *IN* *THE* *DAY* {ie. 24 x 60 minutes =
#1440 / #72 = 20 minutes allocations}? *IF* *ANY* *MAN* *WALK* *IN* *THE*
*DAY*, *HE* *STUMBLETH* *NOT*, *BECAUSE* *HE* *SEETH* *THE* *LIGHT* {ie.

#41 x #9 = #369 as similarly Philolaus located the fire at #CENTRE and
calls it HESTIA of the ALL, the GUARDPOST OF ZEUS, the MOTHER OF THE GODS,
the ALTAR, the LINK and the MEASURE OF NATURE-GENESIS

} *OF* *THIS* *WORLD*-*KOSMOS*.

BUT IF A MAN WALK IN THE NIGHT, HE STUMBLETH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO LIGHT IN
HIM.” [John 11:9-10 (KJV)]

HESTIA AND THE PYTHAGOREANS: THE FIRE IN THE MIDDLE
“The Pythagoreans offered significant cosmological observations . . . It is
also noteworthy that the early Pythagoreans denied the geocentric and
geostatic model of the universe. According to the testimony of Aristotle
(De caelo 293.18), they placed *fire* and not earth at the centre of the
universe. The earth became a celestial body, which creates day and night by
its circular motion around Hestia (hestia meaning ‘hearth’). Ten divine
celestial bodies – ten being the perfect number, which encompasses the
whole nature of numbers – rotate rhythmically around Hestia in the
following order: the dark counter-earth (antichthon), the earth, the moon,
the sun, the five planets (Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury) and the
sphere of the fixed stars (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986). This new
cosmological model is usually attributed to Philolaus and explained through
the importance of the Monad in Pythagorean metaphysics. Since the Monad is
the divine source of all numbers and is identified with, or represented by,
the purity of the fire, the source of the celestial bodies should be a
divine fire in the centre of the cosmos (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986).” [p.
38-39, Introduction to Presocratics: A Thematic Approach to Early Greek
Philosophy with Key Readings by Giannis Stamatellos]

<https://paganreveries.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/hestia-the-queen-of-fire-part-three/>

Wherefore the Pythagoreans had defined by a BINOMIAL notion of the THEORY
OF NUMBER which they regarded as SOVEREIGN and the AUTOGENIC {ie. coming
from within as self-generated} DAEMONIC FORCE which maintains the eternal
permanence of cosmic things. Whilst Philolaus considered the natural year
as comprising of 364 and a half days in being consistent with the Chinese
HAN Dynasty (206 BCE-220CE) MYSTERIES understanding (#81 x 4.5 days = 364.5
days) of them. [Pythagorean Sourcebook p 168, 171]

According to the 4.5 day designations of this natural year cycle into #81
sections, this would then equate the #CENTRE as occurring upon 13 to 17
September;

However the Chinese DAOist cosmic understanding of the DAO-ZIRAN of NATURE
with its GRAND INCEPTION upon the midnight new moon solstice of 21 December
103 BCE as an schematic articulation of the natural year (as equivalent to
the New Testament notion as TROCHOS-course of NATURE-genesis [James 3:6])
articulated as YANG HSIUNG’s treatise that was published within 4 BCE and
known as the "Canon of Supreme Mystery", reconciled it's unified
arrangement of the DAO TE CHING's #81 sections as specifically the
TRINOMIAL (tetragrammaton) notion od the HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER where the
REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE INHIBITOR perspective which is then mapped to the
ROMAN JULIAN 365.25 day notion as the basis to its EMPIRE GOVERNANCE as
then the common understanding given to the PYTHAGOREAN HETEROS THEORY OF
NUMBER and its CHINESE I CHING's H64 designations (of necessity some are
repeated) as being a common perennialist paradigmatic perspective. Whereby
the trinomial value: TETRA: 60 - ACCUMULATION is mapped to binary value:
H26 - GREAT DOMESTICATION, RESTRAINING FORCE, GREAT ACCUMULATING, THE
TAMING POWER OF THE GREAT, GREAT STORAGE, POTENTIAL ENERGY;
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-24 15:48:47 UTC
Permalink
— (SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF MORALS: #56 -
TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT AND SLANDER
BU MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE AS BOER / ANZAC
DEFAMATION?

Nous: #56
Time: 10:10 hrs
Date: 2018.8.25
Torah: [#40, #30, #5]@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 70 (#110); Ego: 30 (#70),
@3: Sup: 75 (#185 - I AM NOT BOISTEROUS IN BEHAVIOUR {%25}); Ego: 5
(#75),
Male: #185; Feme: #75
} // #75

Dao: Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity
Tetra: #46 - Enlargement
I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding, Fullness

Latin: Multus {God who delivers from the evil} Alt: Hyaiel {God and Man
Exist} {

1. PROTECTS AGAINST WEAPONS & PERILS OF TRAVEL
2. MEDICINAL HERBS
3. WATER
4. Chumis
}

Solar Eclipse: 1 August 2008 (AEST)

Judah {Praise of the Lord; confession}

Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#434 / #383} / HETEROS {#449 / #350} / TORAH {#474 /
#403}

<http://www.grapple369.com?zen:3,row:4,col:9,nous:56&idea:{m,143}&idea:{f,132}&idea:{m,434}&idea:{f,383}&PROTOTYPE:HOMOIOS>

***@zen: 3, row: 4, col: 9, nous: 56 [Date: 2018.8.25, Super: #434 /
#51 - Natural Guides and Nursing Virtuosity; I-Ching: H47 - Oppression
(exhaustion), Confining, Entangled; Tetra: 69 - Exhaustion, Ego: #383 / #56
- Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity; I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding,
Fullness; Tetra: 46 - Enlargement]

Kant does not introduce the Preface of the Groundwork with a
characterization of the work’s content; rather he attempts first of all to
define the place of a metaphysics of morals within philosophy. For this
task, he makes use of three criteria. Kant first differentiates
philosophical theories by whether they are “formal” or “material.” Formal
philosophy, according to Kant, is equated with logic. It possesses no
specific object; rather it concerns itself, “without distinction among
Objects,” with “the universal rules of thinking in general”. In contrast,
every material philosophy “has to do with determinate objects and the laws
to which they are subjected”.

KANT: “Logic can have no empirical part, i.e., a part such that the
universal and necessary laws of thinking rest on grounds that are taken
from experience; for otherwise it would not be logic, i.e., a canon for the
understanding or reason which is valid for all thinking and must be
demonstrated. By contrast, natural and moral philosophy can each have their
empirical part, because the former must determine its laws of nature as an
object of experience, the latter must determine the laws for the will of
the human being insofar as he is affected by nature—the first as laws in
accordance with which everything happens, the second as those in accordance
with which everything ought to happen, but also reckoning with the
conditions under which it often does not happen.

One can call all philosophy, insofar as it is based on grounds of
experience, empirical, but that which puts forth its doctrines solely from
principles a priori, pure philosophy. The latter, when it is merely formal,
is called logic; but if it is limited to determinate objects of the
understanding, then it is called metaphysics.

This formulation already offers an indication of the second criterion. Kant
subdivides material theories, in turn, into two Classes. Kant distinguishes
them by with reference to the laws to which the objects that the theories
deal are subjected. He seems to assume that there are exactly two kinds of
laws. And, correspondingly, he differentiates between two types of material
philosophy: on the one hand, “physics,” or “doctrine of nature,” or,
alternatively, “natural wisdom;” and, on the other hand, “ethics,” or
“doctrine of morals,” or, alternative. “moral wisdom.” It is a matter of
the “laws of nature,” in the one case, and of the “laws of freedom,” in the
other, that each theory is respectively concerned. What can Kant mean by
this? The expression “laws of nature” seems to be relatively unproblematic.
But what is to be understood by the expression “laws of freedom” [which are
implicit to the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. exercise of
voluntary will)]?

From Kant’s elucidation one can infer a more exact interpretatlon: Laws of
nature are therefore laws “in accordance with which everything happens,”
while the laws of freedom are those “in accordance with which everything
ought to happen”. Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern
terminological distinction between descriptive statements which present an
account of how the world is being analogous to the LIMITED {#9 -
JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS /
SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the normative
statements presenting an evaluative account, or an account of how the
syncretic world should be as existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 -
ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} in being optimally something that should be
lived up to; or that should be pursued.

At the center of a philosophical doctrine of nature, there would then stand
general descriptive judgments; that means, more precisely, statements of
law that describe how objects of nature act. And at the center of a
doctrine of morals there would stand normative judgments that exhibit a
comparable degree of generality and modal status. I will later address more
thoroughly what it could mean that some normative judgments exhibit a
comparable modal status to statements of law in the natural sciences. Such
a parallel is far from trivial. On the contrary, it is one of the critical
challenges for the interpretation of Kant’s ethical writings. The first
step toward a unified interpretation of the two kinds of laws consists in
seeing both kinds equally as propositionally structured entities that
demonstrate a clearly identifiable logical form.

Next to formality versus materiality and the two types of laws, Kant
introduces a third distinctive Characteristic of theories. He seems to
understand material theories as complex systems that can be split in
individual parts. Every material philosophical theory accordingly contains
one part that he characterizes as “pure,” “rational,” or as “a priori”, and
it may contain a second, “empirical” part. Kant presupposes that in both
the doctrine of nature and the doctrine of morals the two parts can be
isolated from each other. It follows, therefore, that there are two a
priori types of theory: on the one hand, a “metaphysics of nature,” and, on
the other, the sought after “metaphysics of morals”

Thus, a metaphysics of morals would be the following type of theory:

(a) It is not purely formal, but rather deals with definite objects.
(b) It deals with objects in so far as these are subsumed under “laws of
freedom.”
(c) It contains no empirical elements.

At this juncture Kant does not yet presuppose that such a theory actually
exists or that it would be possible for a philosophy to work out
convincingly such a theory. He has not even argued yet that it is
advantageous or even necessary for philosophy to treat the a priori part
separately from the empirical part. Kant pursues these lines of questions
in the subsequent passages. [page 4, 5]

Accordingly, we may as an ANTHROPOCENTRIC {

- regarding the human being as the central fact of the universe.
- assuming human beings to be the final aim and end of the universe.
- viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and
values.

} syncretism, consider an unified paradigmatic perspective of Kant’s idea
of an otherwise twofold metaphysics, the idea of a METAPHYSICS OF NATURE
{ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based seven number) = #294
x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS = 365.242321 days} and of a
METAPHYSICS OF MORALS {

TETRAGRAMMATON {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA: #1 + #2 + #3 +#4 = #10 } HIERARCHY
VALUE AS THE METAPHYSICAL CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE TO THE HOMOIOS THEORY OF
*NUMBER*

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

}. Physics will thus have its empirical but also a rational part; and
ethics likewise; although here the empirical part in particular could be
called practical anthropology, but the rational part could properly be
called morals.

Syncretism or the Mixed School within Chinese philosophy is an eclectic
school of thought that combined elements of Confucianism, Taoism, Mohism,
and Legalism. The Syncretist texts include the Huainanzi, Lüshi Chunqiu,
and the Shizi. The (c. 330 BCE) Shizi is the earliest of the Syncretist
texts.

And Michael Nylan's exceptional work conveys the notion that HAN DYNASTY
(206 BCE to 220 CE) sage YANG HSIUNG's two published works: Canon of
Supreme Mystery (T'AI HSÜAN CHING) within 4 BCE and the Elemental Changes
within 2 BCE are called the Mystery by its devotees as a true guide for
those seeking the Way of the sages. Today, in the West, readers will find
the Mystery an essential tool for understanding the Tao as it operates in
the cosmos, in the psyche, or in sacred texts like the l CHING. Written in
2 BCE., the Mystery represents the first grand synthesis of the dominant
strands of Chinese thought. As it weaves together elements of Confucianism,
Taoism, Yin/Yang Five Phases theory, alchemy, and astrology into a
systematic, organic whole, all the fundamental components of early Chinese
belief appear within its pages which formed the basis to the STATE ideology
of China from 134 BCE two 1911 CE, an ideology that in turn provided the
intellectual foundations for the Japanese and Korean STATES, therefore the
importance of this book can hardly be overestimated.

As a book of divination, the Mystery provides a method for weighing
alternative courses of action. As a book of philosophy, it conveys a sense
of the elemental changes in life. Intricately structured in eighty-one
tetragrams (four-line graphs), the Mystery accounts for the movements of
the sun, moon, and stars, the shifting rhythms of the seasons, the
alternations of night and day, and the ebb and flow of cosmic energy—in
short, all the dynamic relations of the realms of Heaven, Earth, and Man.

It addresses questions of Fate, assessing the degree of control that
individuals have over their destinies. It suggests the fabric that binds
families, communities, and states together. As a book of poetry, the
Mystery unfolds a literary vision of seeming simplicity but surpassing
depth. The long poem divides into short sections of rhyming couplets that
focus upon a single mundane event or familiar phenomenon.

The Roman writer Censorinus, who in his 238 CE publication DE DEI NATALI
(THE NATAL DAY), claims that the Pythagorean advocate Philolaus (470-385
BCE) as preceeding Plato (c. 429–347 BCE), being the principle proponent of
the Pythagorean doctrines on “the world’s nature is a harmonious compound
of the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF
VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the
UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} elements which is similar to
the totality of the WORLD-KOSMOS in itself and all it contains:

“JESUS {he is saved / a saviour; a deliverer} OF NAZARETH {SOVEREIGN; one
chosen or set apart; separated; crowned; sanctified} ANSWERED, *ARE*
*THERE* *NOT* *TWELVE* *HOURS* *IN* *THE* *DAY* {ie. 24 x 60 minutes =
#1440 / #72 = 20 minutes allocations}? *IF* *ANY* *MAN* *WALK* *IN* *THE*
*DAY*, *HE* *STUMBLETH* *NOT*, *BECAUSE* *HE* *SEETH* *THE* *LIGHT* {ie.

#41 x #9 = #369 as similarly Philolaus located the fire at #CENTRE and
calls it HESTIA of the ALL, the GUARDPOST OF ZEUS, the MOTHER OF THE GODS,
the ALTAR, the LINK and the MEASURE OF NATURE-GENESIS

} *OF* *THIS* *WORLD*-*KOSMOS*.

BUT IF A MAN WALK IN THE NIGHT, HE STUMBLETH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO LIGHT IN
HIM.” [John 11:9-10 (KJV)]

HESTIA AND THE PYTHAGOREANS: THE FIRE IN THE MIDDLE
“The Pythagoreans offered significant cosmological observations . . . It is
also noteworthy that the early Pythagoreans denied the geocentric and
geostatic model of the universe. According to the testimony of Aristotle
(De caelo 293.18), they placed *fire* and not earth at the centre of the
universe. The earth became a celestial body, which creates day and night by
its circular motion around Hestia (hestia meaning ‘hearth’). Ten divine
celestial bodies – ten being the perfect number, which encompasses the
whole nature of numbers – rotate rhythmically around Hestia in the
following order: the dark counter-earth (antichthon), the earth, the moon,
the sun, the five planets (Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury) and the
sphere of the fixed stars (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986). This new
cosmological model is usually attributed to Philolaus and explained through
the importance of the Monad in Pythagorean metaphysics. Since the Monad is
the divine source of all numbers and is identified with, or represented by,
the purity of the fire, the source of the celestial bodies should be a
divine fire in the centre of the cosmos (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986).” [p.
38-39, Introduction to Presocratics: A Thematic Approach to Early Greek
Philosophy with Key Readings by Giannis Stamatellos]

<https://paganreveries.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/hestia-the-queen-of-fire-part-three/>

Wherefore the Pythagoreans had defined by a BINOMIAL notion of the THEORY
OF NUMBER which they regarded as SOVEREIGN and the AUTOGENIC {ie. coming
from within as self-generated} DAEMONIC FORCE which maintains the eternal
permanence of cosmic things. Whilst Philolaus considered the natural year
as comprising of 364 and a half days in being consistent with the Chinese
HAN Dynasty (206 BCE-220CE) MYSTERIES understanding (#81 x 4.5 days = 364.5
days) of them. [Pythagorean Sourcebook p 168, 171]

According to the 4.5 day designations of this natural year cycle into #81
sections, this would then equate the #CENTRE as occurring upon 13 to 17
September;

However the Chinese DAOist cosmic understanding of the DAO-ZIRAN of NATURE
with its GRAND INCEPTION upon the midnight new moon solstice of 21 December
103 BCE as an schematic articulation of the natural year (as equivalent to
the New Testament notion as TROCHOS-course of NATURE-genesis [James 3:6])
articulated as YANG HSIUNG’s treatise that was published within 4 BCE and
known as the "Canon of Supreme Mystery", reconciled it's unified
arrangement of the DAO TE CHING's #81 sections as specifically the
TRINOMIAL (tetragrammaton) notion od the HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER where the
REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE INHIBITOR perspective which is then mapped to the
ROMAN JULIAN 365.25 day notion as the basis to its EMPIRE GOVERNANCE as
then the common understanding given to the PYTHAGOREAN HETEROS THEORY OF
NUMBER and its CHINESE I CHING's H64 designations (of necessity some are
repeated) as being a common perennialist paradigmatic perspective. Whereby
the trinomial value: TETRA: 60 - ACCUMULATION is mapped to binary value:
H26 - GREAT DOMESTICATION, RESTRAINING FORCE, GREAT ACCUMULATING, THE
TAMING POWER OF THE GREAT, GREAT STORAGE, POTENTIAL ENERGY;
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
dolf
2018-08-25 00:12:22 UTC
Permalink
— (SYNCRETIC DRAFT: 25 AUGUST 2018) WHAT IS A METAPHYSICS OF MORALS: #56 -
TARGETED RELIGIOUS #312 - HATRED, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT AND SLANDER
BY MISNOMERED PIETY WITHIN SAINT ANDREWS CAUSE CÉLÈBRE AS BOER / ANZAC
DEFAMATION?

Nous: #56
Time: 10:10 hrs
Date: 2018.8.25
Torah: [#40, #30, #5]@{
@1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
@2: Sup: 70 (#110); Ego: 30 (#70),
@3: Sup: 75 (#185 - I AM NOT BOISTEROUS IN BEHAVIOUR {%25}); Ego: 5
(#75),
Male: #185; Feme: #75
} // #75

Dao: Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity
Tetra: #46 - Enlargement
I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding, Fullness

Latin: Multus {God who delivers from the evil} Alt: Hyaiel {God and Man
Exist} {

1. PROTECTS AGAINST WEAPONS & PERILS OF TRAVEL
2. MEDICINAL HERBS
3. WATER
4. Chumis
}

Solar Eclipse: 1 August 2008 (AEST)

Judah {Praise of the Lord; confession}

Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#434 / #383} / HETEROS {#449 / #350} / TORAH {#474 /
#403}

<http://www.grapple369.com?zen:3,row:4,col:9,nous:56&idea:{m,143}&idea:{f,132}&idea:{m,434}&idea:{f,383}&PROTOTYPE:HOMOIOS>

***@zen: 3, row: 4, col: 9, nous: 56 [Date: 2018.8.25, Super: #434 /
#51 - Natural Guides and Nursing Virtuosity; I-Ching: H47 - Oppression
(exhaustion), Confining, Entangled; Tetra: 69 - Exhaustion, Ego: #383 / #56
- Abstruse Mysterious Virtuosity; I-Ching: H55 - Abundance, Abounding,
Fullness; Tetra: 46 - Enlargement]

Kant does not introduce the Preface of the Groundwork with a
characterization of the work’s content; rather he attempts first of all to
define the place of a metaphysics of morals within philosophy. For this
task, he makes use of three criteria. Kant first differentiates
philosophical theories by whether they are “formal” or “material.” Formal
philosophy, according to Kant, is equated with logic. It possesses no
specific object; rather it concerns itself, “without distinction among
Objects,” with “the universal rules of thinking in general”. In contrast,
every material philosophy “has to do with determinate objects and the laws
to which they are subjected”.

KANT: “Logic can have no empirical part, i.e., a part such that the
universal and necessary laws of thinking rest on grounds that are taken
from experience; for otherwise it would not be logic, i.e., a canon for the
understanding or reason which is valid for all thinking and must be
demonstrated. By contrast, natural and moral philosophy can each have their
empirical part, because the former must determine its laws of nature as an
object of experience, the latter must determine the laws for the will of
the human being insofar as he is affected by nature—the first as laws in
accordance with which everything happens, the second as those in accordance
with which everything ought to happen, but also reckoning with the
conditions under which it often does not happen.

One can call all philosophy, insofar as it is based on grounds of
experience, empirical, but that which puts forth its doctrines solely from
principles a priori, pure philosophy. The latter, when it is merely formal,
is called logic; but if it is limited to determinate objects of the
understanding, then it is called metaphysics.

This formulation already offers an indication of the second criterion. Kant
subdivides material theories, in turn, into two Classes. Kant distinguishes
them by with reference to the laws to which the objects that the theories
deal are subjected. He seems to assume that there are exactly two kinds of
laws. And, correspondingly, he differentiates between two types of material
philosophy: on the one hand, “physics,” or “doctrine of nature,” or,
alternatively, “natural wisdom;” and, on the other hand, “ethics,” or
“doctrine of morals,” or, alternative. “moral wisdom.” It is a matter of
the “laws of nature,” in the one case, and of the “laws of freedom,” in the
other, that each theory is respectively concerned. What can Kant mean by
this? The expression “laws of nature” seems to be relatively unproblematic.
But what is to be understood by the expression “laws of freedom” [which are
implicit to the INTELLECTUS AS GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS (ie. exercise of
voluntary will)]?

From Kant’s elucidation one can infer a more exact interpretatlon: Laws of
nature are therefore laws “in accordance with which everything happens,”
while the laws of freedom are those “in accordance with which everything
ought to happen”.

Obviously, one can draw the parallel here to the modern terminological
distinction between descriptive statements which present an account of how
the world is being analogous to the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS
DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY
DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the normative statements presenting an
evaluative account, or an account of how the syncretic world should be as
existentially the UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} in being
optimally something that should be lived up to; or that should be pursued.

At the center of a philosophical doctrine of nature, there would then stand
general descriptive judgments; that means, more precisely, statements of
law that describe how objects of nature act. And at the center of a
doctrine of morals there would stand normative judgments that exhibit a
comparable degree of generality and modal status. I will later address more
thoroughly what it could mean that some normative judgments exhibit a
comparable modal status to statements of law in the natural sciences. Such
a parallel is far from trivial. On the contrary, it is one of the critical
challenges for the interpretation of Kant’s ethical writings. The first
step toward a unified interpretation of the two kinds of laws consists in
seeing both kinds equally as propositionally structured entities that
demonstrate a clearly identifiable logical form.

Next to formality versus materiality and the two types of laws, Kant
introduces a third distinctive Characteristic of theories. He seems to
understand material theories as complex systems that can be split in
individual parts. Every material philosophical theory accordingly contains
one part that he characterizes as “pure,” “rational,” or as “a priori”, and
it may contain a second, “empirical” part. Kant presupposes that in both
the doctrine of nature and the doctrine of morals the two parts can be
isolated from each other. It follows, therefore, that there are two a
priori types of theory: on the one hand, a “metaphysics of nature,” and, on
the other, the sought after “metaphysics of morals”

Thus, a metaphysics of morals would be the following type of theory:

(a) It is not purely formal, but rather deals with definite objects.
(b) It deals with objects in so far as these are subsumed under “laws of
freedom.”
(c) It contains no empirical elements.

At this juncture Kant does not yet presuppose that such a theory actually
exists or that it would be possible for a philosophy to work out
convincingly such a theory. He has not even argued yet that it is
advantageous or even necessary for philosophy to treat the a priori part
separately from the empirical part. Kant pursues these lines of questions
in the subsequent passages. [page 4, 5]

Accordingly, we may as an ANTHROPOCENTRIC {

- regarding the human being as the central fact of the universe.
- assuming human beings to be the final aim and end of the universe.
- viewing and interpreting everything in terms of human experience and
values.

} syncretism, consider an unified paradigmatic perspective of Kant’s idea
of an otherwise twofold metaphysics, the idea of a METAPHYSICS OF NATURE
{ie. ‘OTH CYCLE of 6D x #364 = #2184 days x 49J (based seven number) = #294
x #364 = 107,016 days / 293 as TROPICAL YEARS = 365.242321 days} and of a
METAPHYSICS OF MORALS {

TETRAGRAMMATON {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA: #1 + #2 + #3 +#4 = #10 } HIERARCHY
VALUE AS THE METAPHYSICAL CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE TO THE HOMOIOS THEORY OF
*NUMBER*

+ 0, 27, 54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - *FORMULA* *FOR*
*UNIVERSAL* *LAW*}

+ 0, 9, 18 {ie. System’s Cosmology as Earth - *FORMULA* *OF* *HUMANITY*}

+ 0, 3, 6 {ie. Self identity - *FORMULA* *OF* *AUTONOMY* *AS* *SUI* *JURIS*
/ *MEMBRUM* *VIRILE*}

+ 1, 2, 3 {ie. *FORMULA* *OF* *PROGRESSION* of individual phenomena}

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE AS HUMAN NATURE BEING THE
DISCRIMINATING NORM}

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

}. Physics will thus have its empirical but also a rational part; and
ethics likewise; although here the empirical part in particular could be
called practical anthropology, but the rational part could properly be
called morals.

Syncretism or the Mixed School within Chinese philosophy is an eclectic
school of thought that combined elements of Confucianism, Taoism, Mohism,
and Legalism. The Syncretist texts include the Huainanzi, Lüshi Chunqiu,
and the Shizi. The (c. 330 BCE) Shizi is the earliest of the Syncretist
texts.

And Michael Nylan’s exceptional work conveys the notion that HAN DYNASTY
(206 BCE to 220 CE) sage YANG HSIUNG’s two published works: Canon of
Supreme Mystery (T’AI HSÜAN CHING) within 4 BCE and the Elemental Changes
within 2 BCE are called the Mystery by its devotees as a true guide for
those seeking the Way of the sages. Today, in the West, readers will find
the Mystery an essential tool for understanding the Tao as it operates in
the cosmos, in the psyche, or in sacred texts like the l CHING. Written in
2 BCE., the Mystery represents the first grand synthesis of the dominant
strands of Chinese thought. As it weaves together elements of Confucianism,
Taoism, Yin/Yang Five Phases theory, alchemy, and astrology into a
systematic, organic whole, all the fundamental components of early Chinese
belief appear within its pages which formed the basis to the STATE ideology
of China from 134 BCE two 1911 CE, an ideology that in turn provided the
intellectual foundations for the Japanese and Korean STATES, therefore the
importance of this book can hardly be overestimated.

As a book of divination, the Mystery provides a method for weighing
alternative courses of action. As a book of philosophy, it conveys a sense
of the elemental changes in life. Intricately structured in eighty-one
tetragrams (four-line graphs), the Mystery accounts for the movements of
the sun, moon, and stars, the shifting rhythms of the seasons, the
alternations of night and day, and the ebb and flow of cosmic energy—in
short, all the dynamic relations of the realms of Heaven, Earth, and Man.

It addresses questions of Fate, assessing the degree of control that
individuals have over their destinies. It suggests the fabric that binds
families, communities, and states together. As a book of poetry, the
Mystery unfolds a literary vision of seeming simplicity but surpassing
depth. The long poem divides into short sections of rhyming couplets that
focus upon a single mundane event or familiar phenomenon.

— IRISH CATHOLIC SAINT PATRICK’S PLAGUE —

“TREASON ONLY TREASON.
TO BE SURE, TO BE SURE. {#1 - PIECE CUT OFF}
THERE IS NO OTHER REASON.
LEPRECHAUN CAUSE SO PURE.

DOES CURSE OUR SOVEREIGN.
AND FLETCH {provide (an arrow) with feathers for flight} THE PAPAL ARSE.
{#2 - LE JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL}
SUCH LOVE WHICH YOU FEIGN.
AS JINGOISTIC PIOUS FARCE.”

YOUTUBE: “Qantas Australia Home - TV Ad 1998”



SUI JURIS / MEMBRUM VIRILE@{
@1: Sup: 56 (#56); Ego: 14 (#14),
@2: Sup: 11 (#67); Ego: 70 (#84 - I AM NOT A MAN OF VIOLENCE {%2}),
@3: Sup: 28 (#95); Ego: 33 (#117),
@4: Sup: 45 (#140 - I DEAL NOT FRAUDULENTLY {%14} / I AM NOT AN
EAVES-DROPPER {%16}); Ego: 33 (#150 - I INDULGE NOT IN ANGER {%28}),
@5: Sup: 8 (#148 - I AM NOT A TRANSGRESSOR {%12}); Ego: 62 (#212),
@6: Sup: 38 (#186 - I AM NOT ONE OF INCONSTANT MIND {%31}); Ego: 57 (#269),
@7: Sup: 40 Male: #436; Feme: #536
}

<http://www.grapple369.com/?idea:{436}&idea:{526}>

“And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they
worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to
make war with him?

And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies;
and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months {ie.

T’AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: 42 months / 3 = 14 x #91 [30, 30, 31] = #1274 days % #41 = #3 -
Political Prescriptions, Quietude; I-Ching: H46 - Climbing, Moving/Pushing
Upward, Ascending; Tetra: 8 - Opposition;

THOTH MEASURE: #3 - Oh thou of the Nose, who makest thine appearance at
Chemunnu; *I* *AM* *NOT* *EVIL* *MINDED*.

    #VIRTUE: With Mired (no. #3), great woe.
    #TOOLS: With Encounters (no. #43), small desire.
    #POSITION: The ways of Purity (no. #37) and ...
    #TIME: Pattern (no. #47) where some are simple and some are complex?
    #CANON: #130

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_130@{
   @1: Sup: 3 (#3); Ego: 3 (#3),
   @2: Sup: 46 (#49); Ego: 43 (#46),
   @3: Sup: 2 (#51); Ego: 37 (#83),
   @4: Sup: 49 (#100); Ego: 47 (#130 - I AM NOT EVIL MINDED {%3}),
   Male: #100; Feme: #130
} // #130

}. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name,
and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. And it was given unto
him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given
him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not
written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation {ie. #41
x #9 = #369 as the MEASURE OF NATURE-GENESIS} of the world. If any man have
an ear, let him hear. He that leadeth into captivity shall go into
captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword.
Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.” [Revelation 13:4-10
(KJV)]

“And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the
remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the
testimony of Jesus Christ.” [Revelation 12:17 (KJV)]

“And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See [thou do
it] not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the
testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit
of prophecy.” [Revelation 19:10 (KJV)]

SUPER (MALE) Y-M-T-A HOMOIOS THEORY ON NUMBER IDEA: {OUTER: #31 - Military
Stratagem, Quelling War; I-Ching: H32 - Perseverance, Endurance, Duration,
Constancy; Tetra: 51 - Constancy / INNER: #26 - Ambiguous Reversals, Virtue
of Gravity; I-Ching: H3 - Birth Throes, Initial Difficulties, Sprouting,
Difficulty at the beginning, Gathering support, Hoarding; Tetra: 3 - Mired}
#436 has 8 Categories:

G993@{
   @1: Sup: 2 (#2); Ego: 2 (#2),
   @2: Sup: 72 (#74); Ego: 70 (#72),
   @3: Sup: 73 (#147); Ego: 1 (#73),
   @4: Sup: 42 (#189); Ego: 50 (#123),
   @5: Sup: 47 (#236); Ego: 5 (#128),
   @6: Sup: 66 (#302); Ego: 19 (#147),
   @7: Sup: 69 (#371); Ego: 3 (#150 - I INDULGE NOT IN ANGER {%28}),
   @8: Sup: 74 (#445); Ego: 5 (#155),
   @9: Sup: 31 (#476); Ego: 38 (#193),
   Male: #476; Feme: #193
} // #436

T’AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #439 % #41 = #29 - Deeming, Non-Assertion; I-Ching: H36 -
Suppression of the Light, Sinking/Darkening of the Light, Brilliance
injured, Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 67 - Darkening;

THOTH MEASURE: #29 - Oh Kenemtu, who makest thine appearance in Kenemit;
*I* *AM* *NOT* *GIVEN* *TO* *CURSING*.

    #VIRTUE: With Decisiveness (no. #29), numerous affairs, but
    #TOOLS: With Exhaustion (no. #69), not a single happiness.
    #POSITION: With Change (no. #28), creating the new.
    #TIME: With Constancy (no. #51), cleaving to the old.
    #CANON: #177

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_177@{
   @1: Sup: 29 (#29); Ego: 29 (#29),
   @2: Sup: 17 (#46); Ego: 69 (#98),
   @3: Sup: 45 (#91); Ego: 28 (#126),
   @4: Sup: 15 (#106); Ego: 51 (#177 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO CURSING {%29}),
   Male: #106; Feme: #177
} // #177

#436 as [#2, #70, #1, #50, #5, #100, #3, #5, #200] = Boanerges (G993):
{UMBRA: #5 as #439 % #41 = #29} 1) a nickname given to James and John, the
sons of Zebedee, by the Lord. The name seems to denote fiery and
destructive zeal that may be likened to a thunder storm;

YOUTUBE: “Thunder (Imagine Dragons)”



G2300@{
   @1: Sup: 9 (#9); Ego: 9 (#9),
   @2: Sup: 14 (#23); Ego: 5 (#14),
   @3: Sup: 15 (#38); Ego: 1 (#15),
   @4: Sup: 53 (#91); Ego: 38 (#53),
   @5: Sup: 54 (#145); Ego: 1 (#54),
   @6: Sup: 11 (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS {%21}); Ego: 38 (#92),
   @7: Sup: 20 (#176); Ego: 9 (#101),
   @8: Sup: 21 (#197 - I AM NOT NOISY IN MY SPEECH {%33}); Ego: 1 (#102 - I
AM NOT RAPACIOUS {%4}),
   @9: Sup: 31 (#228 - I HAVE NO UNJUST PREFERENCES {%40}); Ego: 10 (#112),
   Male: #228; Feme: #112
} // #436

T’AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #136 % #41 = #13 - Status, Loathing Shame; I-Ching: H5 - Waiting,
Delay, Attending, Moistened, Arriving; Tetra: 17 - Holding Back;

THOTH MEASURE: #13 - Oh Eater of Blood, who makest thine appearance at the
Block; *I* *HAVE* *NOT* *SLAUGHTERED* *THE* *SACRED* *ANIMALS*.

    #VIRTUE: With Increase (no. #13), the beginning of florescence, but
    #TOOLS: With Eternal (no. #53), what lasts to the very end.
    #POSITION: With Opposition (no. #8), at court, but
    #TIME: With Inner (no. #65), on the sleeping mat
    #CANON: #139

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_139@{
   @1: Sup: 13 (#13); Ego: 13 (#13),
   @2: Sup: 66 (#79); Ego: 53 (#66),
   @3: Sup: 74 (#153); Ego: 8 (#74),
   @4: Sup: 58 (#211); Ego: 65 (#139 - I HAVE NOT SLAUGHTERED THE SACRED
ANIMALS {%13}),
   Male: #211; Feme: #139
} // #139

#436 as [#9, #5, #1, #200, #1, #200, #9, #1, #10] = theaomai (G2300):
{UMBRA: #6 as #136 % #41 = #13} 1) to behold, look upon, view attentively,
contemplate (often used of public shows); 2) to view, take a view of; 3) to
learn by looking, to see with the eyes, to perceive; 1a) of important
persons that are looked on with admiration; 2a) *IN* *THE* *SENSE* *OF*
*VISITING*, *MEETING* *WITH* *A* *PERSON*;

G2904@{
   @1: Sup: 20 (#20); Ego: 20 (#20),
   @2: Sup: 39 (#59); Ego: 19 (#39),
   @3: Sup: 40 (#99); Ego: 1 (#40),
   @4: Sup: 16 (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5}); Ego: 57 (#97),
   @5: Sup: 21 (#136); Ego: 5 (#102 - I AM NOT RAPACIOUS {%4}),
   @6: Sup: 31 (#167); Ego: 10 (#112),
   Male: #167; Feme: #112
} // #436

T’AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #691 % #41 = #35 - Great Guiding Signs?, Virtue of Benevolence;
I-Ching: H17 - Following, Allegiance; Tetra: 19 - Following;

THOTH MEASURE: #35 - Oh Tem-sepu, who makest thine appearance in Tattu; I
am not one who curseth the king.

    #VIRTUE: As to Gathering (no. #35), it is success.
    #TOOLS: With Failure (no. #75), loss of fortune.
    #POSITION: With Ascent (no. #7), high ambitions.
    #TIME: With Sinking (no. #64), low ambitions.
    #CANON: #181

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_181@{
   @1: Sup: 35 (#35); Ego: 35 (#35),
   @2: Sup: 29 (#64); Ego: 75 (#110),
   @3: Sup: 36 (#100); Ego: 7 (#117),
   @4: Sup: 19 (#119); Ego: 64 (#181 - I LEND NOT A DEAF EAR TO THE WORDS
OF RIGHTEOUSNESS {%24} / I AM NOT ONE WHO CURSETH THE KING {%35}),
   Male: #119; Feme: #181
} // #181

#436 as [#20, #100, #1, #300, #5, #10] = kratos (G2904): {UMBRA: #7 as #691
% #41 = #35} 1) *ROME*: force, strength; 2) power, might: mighty with great
power; 3) dominion; 2a) a mighty deed, a work of power;

EGO (FEMALE) Y-M-T-A HOMOIOS THEORY ON NUMBER IDEA: {OUTER: #40 - Reversal,
Avoiding Activity; I-Ching: H36 - Suppression of the Light,
Sinking/Darkening Light, Brilliance injured, Intelligence hidden; Tetra: 68
- Dimming / INNER: #34 - Great Guide, Trust in its Perfection; I-Ching: H18
- Ills to Be Cured, Arresting Decay, Correcting, Work on what has been
spoiled (decay), Decaying, Branch; Tetra: 27 - Duties} #526 has 95
Categories:

H3423@{
   @1: Sup: 6 (#6); Ego: 6 (#6),
   @2: Sup: 16 (#22); Ego: 10 (#16),
   @3: Sup: 26 (#48); Ego: 10 (#26),
   @4: Sup: 64 (#112); Ego: 38 (#64),
   @5: Sup: 40 (#152); Ego: 57 (#121),
   Male: #152; Feme: #121
} // #526

T’AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:

UMBRA: #526 % #41 = #34 - Great Guide, Trust in its Perfection; I-Ching:
H18 - Ills to Be Cured, Arresting Decay, Correcting, Work on what has been
spoiled (decay), Decaying, Branch; Tetra: 27 - Duties;

THOTH MEASURE: #34 - Oh Nefertmu, who makest thine appearance in Memphis;
*I* *AM* *NEITHER* *A* *LIAR* *NOR* *A* *DOER* *OF* *MISCHIEF*.

    #VIRTUE: With Kinship (no. #34), drawing close to goodness, but
    #TOOLS: With Closure (no. #74), closing out feelings of obligation.
    #POSITION: As to Closure (no. #74), both are shut off, but
    #TIME: As to Closeness (no. #33), all use the One.
    #CANON: #215

ONTIC_OBLIGANS_215@{
   @1: Sup: 34 (#34); Ego: 34 (#34),
   @2: Sup: 27 (#61); Ego: 74 (#108),
   @3: Sup: 20 (#81); Ego: 74 (#182 - I AM NOT FRAUDULENT IN MEASURES OF
GRAIN {%6}),
   @4: Sup: 53 (#134); Ego: 33 (#215 - I AM NEITHER A LIAR NOR A DOER OF
MISCHIEF {%34}),
   Male: #134; Feme: #215
} // #215

#526 as [#6, #10, #10, #200, #300] = yarash (H3423): {UMBRA: #4 as #526 %
#41 = #34} 1) to seize, dispossess, take possession off, inherit,
disinherit, occupy, impoverish, be an heir; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to take
possession of; 1a2) to inherit; 1a3) to impoverish, come to poverty, be
poor; 1b) (Niphal) to be dispossessed, be impoverished, come to poverty;
1c) (Piel) to devour; 1d) (Hiphil); 1d1) to cause to possess or inherit;
1d2) to cause others to possess or inherit; 1d3) to impoverish; 1d4) to
dispossess; 1d5) to destroy, bring to ruin, disinherit;

H4159@{
   @1: Sup: 40 (#40); Ego: 40 (#40),
   @2: Sup: 46 (#86 - I AM NOT A ROBBER OF FOOD {%10}); Ego: 6 (#46),
   @3: Sup: 45 (#131); Ego: 80 (#126),
   @4: Sup: 40 (#171 - I AM NOT UNCHASTE WITH ANY ONE {%20}); Ego: 76
(#202),
   Male: #171; Feme: #202
} // #526

#526 as [#40, #6, #80, #400] = mowpheth (H4159): {UMBRA: #9 as #526 % #41 =
#34} 1) wonder, sign, miracle, portent; 1a) wonder (as a special display of
God’s power); 1b) sign, token (of future event);

H6680@{
   @1: Sup: 30 (#30); Ego: 30 (#30),
   @2: Sup: 39 (#69); Ego: 9 (#39),
   @3: Sup: 45 (#114); Ego: 6 (#45 - I AM NOT A DOER OF WRONG {%1}),
   @4: Sup: 40 (#154); Ego: 76 (#121),
   Male: #154; Feme: #121
} // #526

#526 as [#30, #90, #6, #400] = tsavah (H6680): {UMBRA: #7 as #526 % #41 =
#34} 1) to command, charge, give orders, lay charge, give charge to, order;
1a) (Piel); 1a1) to lay charge upon; 1a2) to give charge to, give command
to; 1a3) to give charge unto; 1a4) to give charge over, appoint; 1a5) to
give charge, command; 1a6) to charge, command; 1a7) to charge, commission;
1a8) to command, appoint, ordain (of divine act); 1b) (Pual) to be
commanded;

H4438@{
   @1: Sup: 30 (#30); Ego: 30 (#30),
   @2: Sup: 70 (#100); Ego: 40 (#70),
   @3: Sup: 19 (#119); Ego: 30 (#100),
   @4: Sup: 39 (#158 - I AM NOT HOT OF SPEECH {%23}); Ego: 20 (#120),
   @5: Sup: 45 (#203); Ego: 6 (#126),
   @6: Sup: 40 (#243); Ego: 76 (#202),
   Male: #243; Feme: #202
} // #526

#526 as [#30, #40, #30, #20, #6, #400] = malkuwth (H4438): {UMBRA: #42 as
#526 % #41 = #34} 1) *ROYALTY*, *ROYAL* *POWER*, *REIGN*, *KINGDOM*,
*SOVEREIGN* *POWER*; 1a) royal power, dominion; 1b) reign; 1c) kingdom,
realm;

The Roman writer Censorinus, who in his 238 CE publication DE DEI NATALI
(THE NATAL DAY), claims that the Pythagorean advocate Philolaus (470-385
BCE) as preceeding Plato (c. 429–347 BCE), being the principle proponent of
the Pythagorean doctrines on “the world’s nature is a harmonious compound
of the LIMITED {#9 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL AS DAEMONIC IMPERATIVE OF
VOLUNTĀTIS / SEMINAL REASON GENERALLY DETERMINED FROM BIRTH} and the
UNLIMITED {#72 - ANTHROPOCENTRIC PROTOTYPE} elements which is similar to
the totality of the WORLD-KOSMOS in itself and all it contains:

“JESUS {he is saved / a saviour; a deliverer} OF NAZARETH {SOVEREIGN; one
chosen or set apart; separated; crowned; sanctified} ANSWERED, *ARE*
*THERE* *NOT* *TWELVE* *HOURS* *IN* *THE* *DAY* {ie. 24 x 60 minutes =
#1440 / #72 = 20 minutes allocations}? *IF* *ANY* *MAN* *WALK* *IN* *THE*
*DAY*, *HE* *STUMBLETH* *NOT*, *BECAUSE* *HE* *SEETH* *THE* *LIGHT* {ie.

#41 x #9 = #369 as similarly Philolaus located the fire at #CENTRE and
calls it HESTIA of the ALL, the GUARDPOST OF ZEUS, the MOTHER OF THE GODS,
the ALTAR, the LINK and the MEASURE OF NATURE-GENESIS

} *OF* *THIS* *WORLD*-*KOSMOS*.

BUT IF A MAN WALK IN THE NIGHT, HE STUMBLETH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO LIGHT IN
HIM.” [John 11:9-10 (KJV)]

I have before POPE FRANCIS {ie.

born 17 December 1936 as Jorge Mario Bergoglio) is the 266th and current
Pope and sovereign of the Vatican City State. Francis is the first Jesuit
pope, the first from the Americas, the first from the Southern Hemisphere,
and the first pope from outside Europe since the Syrian Gregory III, who
reigned in the 8th century

} IRELAND APOSTOLIC JOURNEY upon SATURDAY 25 AUGUST / SUNDAY 26 AUGUST 2018
FOR THE OCCASION OF THE WORLD MEETING OF FAMILIES IN DUBLIN, provided
various examples relating the neural linguistic programming process of this
consciousness which accords to the LAWS of NATURE by which one may
confidently exercise the self identity as formula of autonomy with an
appropriate and coherent use of the underlying intellectus as genitive
voluntātis.

And thereby stated the cognitive hypothesis as the theoretical obvious
concern of this dialect correspondence with this SEPTET driver to the
mathematical theoretical noumenon which provides by an equitable
distribution of trinomial number an ontological basis for the entelechy:

- the realization of potential.
- the supposed vital principle that guides the development and functioning
of an organism or other system or organization.
- such self-organization requires a special biological force which is known
as entelechy.
- the soul for the spiritus.

It therefore may be considered as quintessentially the ‘INTELLECTUS AS
GENITIVE VOLUNTĀTIS’ of an unencumbered will and ought to conform with the
following dialectic which chronicles the: levels / phases / stages /
duration / milestone of any perennial cycle as the dispensational
governance basis of LETTERS PATENT TO THE FEDERATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF
AUSTRALIA OF 1901 represented by a theoretical mathematical trinomial
noumenon as an Intellectual Property:

MENTALISM {#41}: #1 - Will, free will, choice / Remember the Sabbath Day

CORRESPONDENCE {#82}: #2 - desire, inclination / Honour Parents

VIBRATION {#123}: #3 - disposition towards (something or someone) / Do Not
Kill

POLARITY {#164}: #4 - favour, affection / Do Not Commit Adultery (ie. Avoid
Heteronomy Against Autonomy)

RHYTHM {#205}: #5 - last will, testament / Do Not Steal

CAUSE AND EFFECT {#246}: #6 - goal, object, purpose, intention / Do Not
Bear False Witness

ENGENDERING / ENUMERATE {#287}: #7 - signification, import / Do Not Covet
[LATIN definition: VOLUNTĀTIS]

The NOLUNTĀTIS is then a consequence of an opposition as consideration
being a question of relativity as the interoperability by mutuality on what
#8 - TRANSFORMATIVE prototype is to be deployed where the default is the
hetero-square spirogyra order:

#8 as TRANSFORMATIVE PROTOTYPE {#328}: #1 - unwillingness;

But this is in my view a matter of protocol selection which can be
identified by the classification duality of both the cryptographic # and
the vRUDOLPH DATE being determined by a cosmogonic observation as
computation of rational 22/7 from #0 of Equinox on Wednesday of 20 March
1996 associated to any EVENT as slider dispersal from calendar to the
noumenon.

The Autonomous Prototype is then the source amalgamation of the binomial,
trinomial and chrononomial (#YEAR, #DECADE, #CENTENARY and #MILLENNIUM
orientation) meta descriptor prototypes for each MIRRORED reality:

#9 as MIRRORED AUTONOMOUS PROTOTYPE OF EACH OTHER’S SOVEREIGN AUTONOMY
{#369}: #2 - ill will, negative disposition (toward something) [LATIN
definition: NOLUNTĀTIS]

HESTIA AND THE PYTHAGOREANS: THE FIRE IN THE MIDDLE
“The Pythagoreans offered significant cosmological observations . . . It is
also noteworthy that the early Pythagoreans denied the geocentric and
geostatic model of the universe. According to the testimony of Aristotle
(De caelo 293.18), they placed *fire* and not earth at the centre of the
universe. The earth became a celestial body, which creates day and night by
its circular motion around Hestia (hestia meaning ‘hearth’). Ten divine
celestial bodies – ten being the perfect number, which encompasses the
whole nature of numbers – rotate rhythmically around Hestia in the
following order: the dark counter-earth (antichthon), the earth, the #369 -
moon, the #111 - sun, the five planets (#15 - Saturn, #34 - Jupiter, #65 -
Mars, #175 - Venus, #260 - Mercury) and the sphere of the fixed stars
(Aristotle, Metaphysics 986). This new cosmological model is usually
attributed to Philolaus and explained through the importance of the Monad
in Pythagorean metaphysics. Since the Monad is the divine source of all
numbers and is identified with, or represented by, the purity of the fire,
the source of the celestial bodies should be a divine fire in the centre of
the cosmos (Aristotle, Metaphysics 986).” [p. 38-39, Introduction to
Presocratics: A Thematic Approach to Early Greek Philosophy with Key
Readings by Giannis Stamatellos]

<https://paganreveries.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/hestia-the-queen-of-fire-part-three/>

Wherefore the Pythagoreans had defined by a BINOMIAL notion of the THEORY
OF NUMBER which they regarded as SOVEREIGN and the AUTOGENIC {ie. coming
from within as self-generated} DAEMONIC FORCE which maintains the eternal
permanence of cosmic things. Whilst Philolaus considered the natural year
as comprising of 364 and a half days in being consistent with the Chinese
HAN Dynasty (206 BCE-220CE) MYSTERIES understanding (#81 x 4.5 days = 364.5
days) of them. [Pythagorean Sourcebook p 168, 171]

According to the 4.5 day designations of this natural year cycle into #81
sections, this would then equate the #CENTRE as occurring upon 13 to 17
September;

“And the LORD God said unto the serpent {#34 - JUPITER (SERPENT)}, Because
thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every
beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat
all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman,
and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt
bruise his heel {

- <http://www.grapple369.com?telos:400>

#0 MOD 22 = 22 [#TAU / #400 - Jacob {He takes by the heel, he supplants,
That supplants, undermines; the heel}] as 4000 BCE

... [THE APEIRON] ...

The apeiron is central to the cosmological theory created by Anaximander,
(c. 610 – c. 546 BCE) pre-Pythagorean (c. 570–495 BC) Greek philosopher
whose work is mostly lost. From the few existing fragments, we learn that
he believed the beginning or ultimate reality (arche) is eternal and
infinite, or boundless (apeiron), subject to neither old age nor decay,
which perpetually yields fresh materials from which everything we can
perceive is derived. Apeiron generated the opposites, hot-cold, wet-dry
etc., which acted on the creation of the world. Everything is generated
from apeiron and then it is destroyed by going back to apeiron, according
to necessity. He believed that infinite worlds are generated from apeiron
and then they are destroyed there again.

His ideas were influenced by the Greek mythical tradition and by his
teacher Thales (7th-6th century BCE). Searching for some universal
principle, Anaximander retained the traditional religious assumption that
there was a cosmic order and tried to explain it rationally, using the old
mythical language which ascribed divine control on various spheres of
reality. This language was more suitable for a society which could see gods
everywhere; therefore the first glimmerings of laws of nature were
themselves derived from divine laws.

*THE* *GREEKS* *BELIEVED* *THAT* *THE* *UNIVERSAL* *PRINCIPLES* *COULD*
*ALSO* *BE* *APPLIED* *TO* *HUMAN* *SOCIETIES*. *THE* *WORD* *NOMOS*
(*LAW*) *MAY* *ORIGINALLY* *HAVE* *MEANT* *NATURAL* *LAW* *AND* *USED*
*LATER* *TO* *MEAN* *MAN*-*MADE* *LAW*. [ref: Wikipedia 2016:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Apeiron_(cosmology)>]

#8800 MOD 22 = 22 [#TAU / #400 - Jacob {He takes by the heel, he supplants,
That supplants, undermines; the heel}] as 8800 CE

}.” [Genesis 3:14-15 (KLV)]

However the Chinese DAOist cosmic understanding of the DAO-ZIRAN of NATURE
with its GRAND INCEPTION upon the midnight new moon solstice of 21 December
103 BCE as an schematic articulation of the natural year (as equivalent to
the New Testament notion as TROCHOS-course of NATURE-genesis [James 3:6])
articulated as YANG HSIUNG’s treatise that was published within 4 BCE and
known as the “Canon of Supreme Mystery”, reconciled it’s unified
arrangement of the DAO TE CHING’s #81 sections as specifically the
TRINOMIAL (tetragrammaton) notion od the HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER where the
REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE INHIBITOR perspective which is then mapped to the
ROMAN JULIAN 365.25 day notion as the basis to its EMPIRE GOVERNANCE as
then the common understanding given to the PYTHAGOREAN HETEROS THEORY OF
NUMBER and its CHINESE I CHING’s H64 designations (of necessity some are
repeated) as being a common perennialist paradigmatic perspective. Whereby
the trinomial value: TETRA: 60 - ACCUMULATION is mapped to binary value:
H26 - GREAT DOMESTICATION, RESTRAINING FORCE, GREAT ACCUMULATING, THE
TAMING POWER OF THE GREAT, GREAT STORAGE, POTENTIAL ENERGY;

It is also possible to divide the number of days in 400 years in the
Gregorian calendar reforms as 146,097 days by 7 and that when made
divisible by 22 to obtain the remainder, and to arrange the Hebrew letters
in a pattern which has a remainder of #13 as being in the middle of the
Chinese 4 BCE published DAO TE CHING / I CHING division of the year into
364.5 days and the Jewish Kabbalah equivalent which deployed a magic square
of #369 having a distinct mathematical property at centre of #41 for the
equivalent date of 13 September.

4. FORMULA OF UNIVERSAL LAW AS SOVEREIGNTY / *REMEMBER* *THE* *SABBATH*
{3W1D}
— THE UNION OF A MAN AND A WOMAN

TETRAD - #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {BETH (DOUBLE - #1 - NATURE
CONTAINS NATURE {#4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE}) / CHERUBIM (Gk.
Cheroubim - a cherub or imaginary figures which covered the mercy seat to
the Ark of the Covenant [Exodus 25:17-22] and from where God communed with
Israel)}

+ 0, H27, H54 {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal
Law}

#0 MOD 22 = 22 [#TAU / #400 - Jacob {He takes by the heel, he supplants,
That supplants, undermines; the heel}] as 4000 BCE
#400 MOD 22 = 17 [#PE / #80 - Serug {Branch, Layer; twining}] as 3600 BCE
#800 MOD 22 = 12 [#LAMED / #30 - Arphaxad {I shall fail as the breast: he
cursed the breast-bottle, A healer; a releaser}] as 3200 BCE
#1200 MOD 22 = 7 [#ZAYIN / #7 - Enoch {Initiated. Figuratively to initiate
or discipline; dedicate, train up}] as 2800 BCE

5. (MOTHER) FORMULA OF HUMANITY AS HEAD OF STATE / *HONOUR* *PARENTS*
— TO THE EXCLUSION OF ALL OTHERS,

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #1 + #2 = #3 as #MIND (DING-DONG BY PSYCHO-SEXUAL
IMPUNITY): MARION (MOTHER) STATUTE AS BABYLONIAN FASCIST WHOREDOM ON SAINT
PATRICK’S DAY 17 MARCH 2017

MONAD - #1 - NATURE CONTAINS NATURE: {ALEPH (*MOTHER* - SCALES OF MERIT) /
SERAPHIM {Heb. Saraph Gk. Ophis - burning, that is, (figuratively)
poisonous (serpent); specifically a fiery (serpent) or symbolical creature
(from their copper color))} {ARCH KAI TELOS OIDA {1 + 2 + 3 + 4 = 10}

TETRAD - #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {BETH (DOUBLE - #1 - NATURE
CONTAINS NATURE {#4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE}) / CHERUBIM (Gk.
Cheroubim - a cherub or imaginary figures which covered the mercy seat to
the Ark of the Covenant [Exodus 25:17-22] and from where God communed with
Israel)}

PENTAD - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}

+ 0, H9, H18 {ie. System’s Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity}

#1600 MOD 22 = 2 [#BETH / #2 - Seth {Substituted, Compensated; That God has
heard my prayer and has delivered me out of affliction. Power & Strength;
put; who puts; fixed}] as 2400 BCE
#2000 MOD 22 = 19 [#QOPH / #100 - Terah {Station, delay, a station of
Israel in the wilderness, To breathe; scent; blow}] as 2000 BCE

6. FORMULA OF AUTONOMY AS INDIVIDUAL / *DO* *NOT* *KILL*
— VOLUNTARILY

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #3 + #4 = #7 as #SCIENCE (POOH-POOH DEFECATION AS ANAL
SADISTIC / RETENTIVE / FIXATION) - FASCIST SWASTIKA / PYTHAGOREAN FORMULA
EMPATHY AS SUBSTITUTED VIRTUE UPON THE ANZAC TRADITION ON SATURDAY
(SABBATH) 8 OCTOBER 2016.

PENTAD - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {GIMEL (DOUBLE - #2 - NATURE
REJOICES IN ITS NATURE {#5 - ACT OF NATURE}) / THRONES (Gk. Thronos - a
stately seat; by implication power or (concretely) a potentate:—seat,
throne)}

HEXAD - #4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE / #1 - NATURE CONTAINS NATURE:
{DALETH (DOUBLE - #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE {#6 - FORM OF NATURE}) /
*DOMINIONS* (Gk. Kuriotes - mastery, that is, (concretely and collectively)
rulers:—dominion, government)}

#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE / NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE: {ZAYIN /
*PRINCIPALITIES* (Gk. *EXOUSIA* - (in the sense of ability); privilege,
that is, (subjectively) *force*, capacity, competency, freedom, or
(objectively) mastery (concretely magistrate, superhuman, potentate,
*token* *of* *control*), delegated influence:—authority, jurisdiction,
liberty, power, right, strength)}

+ 0, H3, H6 {ie. Self identity - Formula of Autonomy}

#2400 MOD 22 = 14 [#NUN / #50 - Heber {The region beyond, One that passes;
anger}] as 1600 BCE

7. FORMULA OF PROGRESSION / *AVOID* *SPIRITUAL* *ADULTERY* *AS*
*HETERONOMY* *AGAINST* *AUTONOMY* {CIRCA 49J7W} [John 5:43-47]
— ENTERED INTO FOR LIFE.

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #5 + #6 = #11 as #OPINION (BOW-WOW BY RABID DOGS):
Collegium Pontificum: *COLLEGE* *OF* *PONTIFFS* (510 BCE) AS PROPONENTS OF
THE PYTHAGOREAN [BABYLONIAN WHOREDOM] AS HETEROS BINOMIAL METHODOLOGY BEING
THE THEORY OF NUMBER AND INTELLECTUAL TETRAD {#15 CE ... #34 CE ... #65 CE
... #111 (#36 / #666)} COMPRISING THE CONSPIRATORIAL MURDEROUS INTENT
[WHICH] FOLLOWS IN THE UMBRA OF THAT ISLAMIC PALESTINIAN FERAL DOG MAHMOUD
ABBAS ON SATURDAY (SABBATH) 14 JANUARY 2017 VISITING THE VATICAN EMBASSY AS
A ‘PLACE (#6) OF PRIDE (#5)’ AS INAUGURATION OF THE VATICAN-BASED MISSION
OF PALESTINIAN EMBASSY.

#5 - ACT OF NATURE / #2 - NATURE REJOICES IN ITS NATURE: {HE / *VIRTUES*
(Gk. Arete - excellence (intrinsic or attributed):—praise, virtue)} and

#6 - FORM OF NATURE / #3 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {VAV / *POWERS* (Gk.
*ARCHE* - a commencement, or (concrete) *chief* (*in* *various*
*applications* *of* *order*, *time*, *place* *or* *rank*):—beginning,
corner, (at the, the) first (estate), *magistrate*, power, principality,
principle, rule)} multiplied by themselves, represent, and retain
themselves.

HEPTAD - #11 / #8 - TRANSFORMING NATURE {KAF (DOUBLE - #4 - NATURE AMENDED
IN ITS NATURE: {#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE}) / Government & Non-Government
Organisations}

+ H1, H2, H3 {ie. Formula of Progression of individual phenomena}

THE MAJOR PREMISE {YANG/FATHER/HEAVEN/MALE/FORM - Formula of Universal
Law}, which contains the law of that will: 7 x 24 *courses* *of* *priests*
x 13 = 2184 days of the ‘oth cycle = 6D or 6 x 364 associated to the
‘constant sequence of sun and moon’ as 354 x 3 + 30 day intercalation =
1092 days x 2 = 2184 days.

“And God spake all these words, saying, ‘I am the LORD thy God, which have
brought thee out of the land of Egypt {that troubles or oppresses;
anguish}, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before
me...” [Exodus 20:1-3 (KJV)]

#2800 MOD 22 = 9 [#TETH / #9 - Lamech {Powerful, Poor; made low}] as 1200
BCE
#3200 MOD 22 = 4 [#DALETH / #4 - Kenan {Fixed, (nestlings; figuratively a
chamber or dwelling:-nest, room), buyer; owner}] as 800 BCE

8. DISCRIMINATING NORM (HUMAN NATURE) AS OBJECTIVE GROUNDING OF INFINITY /
*DO* *NOT* *STEAL* {72J + 3(3²+1)/2}

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD: #7 + #8 = #15 as #SENSE (TA-TA AS SYSTEMATIC
ELIMINATION BY ANNIHILATION): *EMBLEM* *OF* *THE* *BRITISH* *FLAG*,
*POLICE* *AND* *EMERGENCY* *SERVICES* *SYMBOL* as Collegium Vinariorum:
College of *WINE* Dealers AS WELLINGTON SHIRE KIDS DAY ON SATURDAY
(SABBATH) 4 MARCH 2017 AS ALSO GLBTI MARDI GRAS CELEBRATION / UNLAWFUL
LIQUOR BAN BY ACTING SERGEANT JASON MCCOY / ALLEGED EVENT @ STAR HOTEL OF
26 MARCH 2017 / WELLINGTON LIQUOR ACCORD 30 MAY 2017 / RECEIVED 5 JUNE 2017
AS HABITUAL DISRESPECTFUL CONDUCT BY THE IGNORANT SALE STATION OF THE
VICTORIA POLICE.

#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE / NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE: {ZAYIN /
*PRINCIPALITIES* (Gk. *EXOUSIA* - (in the sense of ability); privilege,
that is, (subjectively) *force*, capacity, competency, freedom, or
(objectively) mastery (concretely magistrate, superhuman, potentate,
*token* *of* *control*), delegated influence:—authority, jurisdiction,
liberty, power, right, strength)}

#8 - TRANSFORMING NATURE / ACT OF NATURE: {CHETH / ARCHANGELS (Gk.
Archaggelos - a chief angel)}

#15 - NATURE SURMOUNTS NATURE: {SAMEK}

= #36 (ie. H27 - Realm of its Nature as Heaven - Formula of Universal Law +
H9 - System’s Cosmology as Earth - Formula of Humanity)

+ 0, 81, 9(9²+1)/2 = #369 {ie. ORGANIZATION OF THE MYRIAD OR *NUMBER* OF
THINGS (WAN WU) OF SOCIETY AND NATURE}

THE MINOR PREMISE {YIN/MOTHER/EARTH/FEMALE/MATTER - Formula of Humanity},
which contains the command to behave in accordance with the law, that is,
the principle of subsumption under the law: x 49 = 6J or 294 x 364 days or
365.2425 x 293 years - Vernal Equinox Wednesday 20 March 1996 / 21 March =
1 Nisan 5756;

AS BEING A LOGICAL GROUNDING OF INFINITY;

“... Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the
LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon
the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And
showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my
commandments...” [Exodus 20:5-6 (KJV)]

#3600 MOD 22 = 21 [#SHIN / #300 - Isaac {He laughs}] as 400 BCE
#4000 MOD 22 = 16 [#AYIN / #70 - Reu {Friend, His friend; his shepherd}

As ‘eye’, ‘to see’, and by extension, to understand and obey, it represents
the primeval light, that is the spiritual light of God [Genesis 1:3] as
distinct to the celestial lights [Genesis 1:14-18]] = #0 CE

9. BINDING NORM (NORMA OBLIGANS - MARRIAGE?) AS FAUX SUBJECTIVE GROUNDING
OF INFINITY / *DO* *NOT* *BEAR* *FALSE* *WITNESS*

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD IMPLEMENTATION: #9 + #10 = #19

#9 - AUTONOMOUS NATURE / #6 - FORM OF NATURE: {TETH / ANGELS (Gk. Aggelos -
a messenger; especially an ‘angel’; by implication a church pastor or
ecclesiastic)}

#10 - TOTALITY OF NATURE / ENGENDERING NATURE: {YOD / Sovereignty}

#19 - ENGENDERING NATURE: {QOPH - *OATHS* OF DIEU ET MON DROIT}

As BINDING NORM (NORMA OBLIGANS - MARRIAGE?), AS FAUX SUBJECTIVE GROUNDING
OF INFINITY / *DO* *NOT* *BEAR* *FALSE* *WITNESS* *BY* PYTHAGOREAN
[BABYLONIAN] HETEROS (MALE/FEMALE MARRIAGE — WHAT IS SIN & WICKEDNESS?)
being a binary (ie. gender and spermatic as bifurcated entities) unnatural
autonomic transformative prototype imposed upon the biological natural
order and commences the symbolic associator series as the MACROCOSM:

Thus in the Pythagorean HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER, the sacred notion of
marriage according to the religious mysteries of Roman State Religion and
Empire Governance is as a hieros gamos or heirogamy (‘holy marriage’) in
being the natural and common law entitlement to invoke a coacervation of
the feminine and the masculine within a sexual ritual that plays out a
marriage as between a god and a goddess, especially when enacted in a
symbolic ritual where human participants represent by the planetary
deities:

PYTHAGORAS HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER BEING A METATHESIS AS CANON OF
TRANSPOSITION IS THE DETERMINED MEANS BY WHICH A DEMIURGE SEEKS TO
THREATEN, DESTABILISE AND OVERTHROW A SOVEREIGNTY BY USE OF MARRIAGE.

As the practice of Roman Imperial Governance, Social Culturing and
enactment of a State Religion as a practice of the Mysteries by a
designation of seven grades {ie. the macrocosm in which all phenomenon
occurs):

This distinctive reliance upon the Pythagorean sophistic conjectural vast
OPINION of CENTRE #0 CE v’s #CENTRE (#123 = JUDGMENT / #246 = ANGEL
GABRIEL) OF #41 AS 13 to 17 SEPTEMBER 2001 as an occultism made against the
transcendent and equilibrium properties that are intrinsic to the Magic
Squares and into this matter or substance of thing (materia, substantia:
#15CE ... #34CE ... #65CE ... #111CE ... #175CE ... #260CE ... 369CE), as
his means to purvey the binary distillation so as to derive the notion of
gender and spermatic attributions as bifurcated elements, so then convey
the proof of its SCIENTIFIC essence of a thing (essentia, ousia: ) only by
then being a potentiality obtained by means of reduction made upon the
Magic squares, whereas the form {#36 (ie. H27 - Realm of its Nature as
Heaven - Formula of Universal Law + H9 - System’s Cosmology as Earth -
Formula of Humanity)}, as considered in itself as actuality by a CANON OF
TRANSPOSITION, requires an embodiment #111 (#36/#666 - Sol Invictus):

(HETEROS as *1* - *MONAD*, *2* - *DUAD*, *3* - *TRIAD*) THEORY OF NUMBER
and the reliance upon the Theorem: c² = a² + b² which is otherwise
associated to Roman Empire Governance, Roman Catholicism (et al) and
fascist (see image above).

#4400 MOD 22 = 11 [#KAF / #20 - Shem {Exhalted Name, Name, renown}] = #400
CE
#4800 MOD 22 = 6 [#VAV / #6 - Jared {Descent/A ruling; commanding; coming
down}] = #800 CE
#5200 MOD 22 = 1 [#ALEPH / #1 - Adam {Taken from 4 corners, Earthy; red}] =
#1200 CE
#5600 MOD 22 = 18 [#TSADE / #90 - Nahor {Snorting, Hoarse; dry; hot}] =
#1600 CE
#6000 MOD 22 = 13 [#MEM / #40 - Shelah {Sprout/That breaks; that unties;
that undresses}

As waters, peoples, nations, languages and tongues; the spring of Torah
being the source of knowledge and wisdom] = #2000 Y2K / Equinox of
Wednesday DATE(1996,3,20) + (5 * 364) + 182 days = Wednesday
DATE(2001,9,12) with Equinox of Saturday DATE(2001,9,23) commencing the
Sabbath year of ‘oth cycle

10. MANIFESTING NORM (NORMA DENUNTIANS) / *DO* *NOT* *COVET* {122J3W1D +
9(9²+1)/2}

THE CONCLUSION {ZHUN/SON/SEA/ENUMERATE/OFFSPRING - Formula of Autonomy},
which contains the verdict (sentence), what is laid down as right in the
case at hand: ... 6,000 as 122J3W1D + 9(9²+1)/2 as #369 with Septet #41
centric on 13-17 September 2001 / 18 September = 1 Tishri 5762.

“...Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD
will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.’” [Exodus 20:7
(KJV)]

AS BEING A SUBJECTIVE GROUNDING OF INFINITY AS ETERNITY.

PYTHAGOREAN TETRAD CENTRE: #11 + #12 = #23 AS Y-M-T-A = 23 ELEMENTS / THE
SEX CHROMOSOME

#11 - TRANSFORMING NATURE: {KAF (DOUBLE - #4 - NATURE AMENDED IN ITS NATURE
{#7 - ENGENDERING NATURE}) / Government & Non-Government Organisations}

#12 - AUTONOMOUS NATURE: {LAMED / General Populace}

#6400 MOD 22 = 8 [#CHET / #8 - Methuselah {Man of the dart/javelin (weapon,
missile, sprout), He has sent his death}]
#6800 MOD 22 = 3 [#GIMEL / #3 - Enosh {Husband, (certain, mortal) man;
sick; despaired of; forgetful}]
#7200 MOD 22 = 20 [#RESH / #200 - Abraham {Father of a multitude, chief of
multitude}]
#7600 MOD 22 = 15 [#SAMEK / #60 - Peleg {Division}]
#8000 MOD 22 = 10 [#YOD / #10 - Noah {Rest, Repose; consolation}]
#8400 MOD 22 = 5 [#HE / #5 - Mahalalel {Praise (fame) of God}]
#8800 MOD 22 = 22 [#TAU / #400 - Jacob {He takes by the heel, he supplants,
That supplants, undermines; the heel}] as 8800 CE

YOUTUBE: “Doctor Who - The Parting of the Ways - Bad Wolf speech”

-


In many instances, the Torah also uses words and phrases in ways that
cannot be understood in their literal sense. There are a number of very
obvious examples of this in the narrative of the Creation, for the
metaphysical events that took place at that time were far removed from the
natural order of the world we know today. They could not have been
accurately described in ways that we can understand, nor in language that
we can relate to. For example, the Torah tells us how God brought the world
into being through speech, when in fact He created the world through a form
of thought. When the Torah describes God’s thought process as speech, it
makes it easier for us to grasp the idea on our own level. [(c) 2001 by
Rabbi Daniel Travis and www.Torah.org]

The Jewish Kabbalah seeks to define the nature of the universe and the
human being, the nature and purpose of existence, and various other
ontological questions. It also presents methods to aid understanding of the
concepts and thereby attain spiritual realisation.

- dolf

AN EXPANDED PDF COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT WILL BE AVAILABLE FROM THIS URL:

<http://www.grapple369.com/docs/Augustus.pdf>

Initial Post: 25 August 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"

http://youtu.be/H-7OuqWi4vQ

SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*

Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit

<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>

SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]

Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.

It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.

<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>

The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."

That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)

After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS
Loading...