|The Laymanís Petition/Preface 2017 US Federal Election|
Page 3 of 4
In The Layman’s Petition, my view is that academic society has inattentively perpetuated an auto-verifying lie of omission effectively obstructing the world’s population from reaching a timely and spontaneous global adulthood. I do not expect the average person, with their basic consumer/market driven education (legal?)—clinging desperately to the precarious social and financial symbols of that conditioning—to have the energy or opportunity to enthusiastically entertain such unsupported questions. But if one considers oneself to possess a higher education, to be a creator or sustainer of society, then I expect him or her to understand immediately (and profoundly) what thought is and what its full ramifications are.
In Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, “thought” (the irrefutable fact of it) is the primary (hence first to be stated) issue; followed by its subsidiary issues of: “conscience,” “religion” and “belief”—followed in turn by their subsidiary issues of what amount essentially to individual self- expression. Because we have not ‘identified’ what ‘thought’ (subsidiary belief) actually is, and because we have consequently and conversely guaranteed the unqualified protection of ‘unidentified thought’ (subsidiary belief) into law—we have effectively validated and intrusively established the finite chronological/philosophical particulars of one’s ‘personal entry tradition’ (childhood/sequential conditionings) into the context and territory of universal adulthood. We have legislatively and therefore systemically obstructed both the primary acknowledgement and practical development of our own collective global adulthood.
Ask anyone you meet, “What is thought?” and you will see how and why Article 18 refers to the normal and natural developmental perspective of a child and not that of a fully realized and neurologically conscious contemporary adult human being. ‘Belief’ (subsidiary of thought) in and of itself, taken as an authoritative and universally guaranteed personal right—and the ‘honor’ and ‘dignity’ that therein follows (‘honor’ as discussed by Steven Pinker)—is really the luxury of childhood and a perfectly logical/forgivable adult imperative of earlier historic times (my words). I ‘believe’ that most human beings today understand ‘belief’ to be a ‘practical working premise in the absence of larger factual information or perspectives’. We can still celebrate and respect the sincerity, innocent thought and unimaginable human costs of each others ‘entry traditions,’ but that is what they are—sincerity and innocence by virtue of their time/place thought-generated aspirations for a better world. They exist inseparably together—in the context of a universal ‘grappling with thought’ found in every human entry tradition (spiritual or material)—as viewed through our contemporary insight into ‘thought itself’ (global adulthood).
In ‘BETTER ANGELS,’ as a working demonstration, Steven Pinker refers to the Christian Bible as essentially a wiki, a work of many writers over an extended time. He also speaks about the many biblical references to violence as a normal course of action in those periods in which they were written. He goes on to point out that virtually no one today embraces those entries (involving violence) as acceptable, and that the bible, today, is really more like a talisman (pages 11,12 ‘BETTER ANGELS’) than an actual guide/verbatim to daily living (my adaptation of his words). In the same way, most people recognize that “belief” (thought’s remedial accommodation of not knowing) without the moderating insight of its conditioned nature, is in fact the definition and recipe for conflict and extremism in all forms. “...Economy is war by other means.” If one is going to take excessive personal comfort