ImageEverthing that I know looks through me at the world, every experience, every book I have read, every interaction I have had, every person I have loved.

Aristotle, “The soul is in a way phenomena.”

My experiences in the world, of the world, look back at the world. What I know of the world turns again on the world and scrutinizes it.

God be thanked for books; they are the voices of the distant and the dead, and make us heirs of the spiritual life of past ages.Channing, William Ellery

Every time you touch the world the world leaves its mark on you and you on it.  Like two ponds touching each other and both rippling in response.  If relationship is an approaching, then how are you in relationship with relationship?  How do you approach approaching?  You judge and interpret the world and the world judges and interprets you.  You try to change the world and the world tries to change you.  Traces left on each other by lovers or gladiators.

I say that all narrative is doxography, point of view.  Research shows that we memorize facts by stringing them together with a narrative, a sutra, a suture, a stitch. That string is our personality, the narrative that we are telling ourselves about how the world works.  It creates our sense of self.  Are we pessimistic?  Are we hyper vigilante?

Imagine that when you listen to a person speaking that you are driving by a very long fence next to a road.  Beyond the fence is a castle, but you can only catch a tiny glimpse each time you pass a slat in the fence.  If you let your eyes focus on the castle it starts to take shape and the fence disappears.  You can’t see the forest because the trees are in the way.

When a person’s world starts to take shape, you begin to become aware of who is speaking and what they are actually saying.  This can be quite troubling for people that conceal what they are.  It drives them crazy, like they are always naked in front of you and clothes were never invented.

Praxis of the Rational.


I_____________________ promise to myself that I will never stop learning or growing being interested, curious, questioning, questing. I will love the real and the true, no matter what it is. I will admit when I am wrong and correct myself happily. Because all knowledge is self knowledge, to have accurate knowledge is to know myself. To reject truth is to hate reality and avoid myself. If I cling to the untrue, the illogical, unreasoned, I hate my true self. If I am not growing and not learning then I am already dead. I will slay that which is deluded in me by learning what is true.I will stay in real-ationship. “Epanasundesi” I realize that the walking on the path is the destination. I will not think about a desired destination. That destination is becoming and I have already arrived. If I realize that I have stepped foot off the path, the praxis of the rational, I will make amends and return to my path that I have set before myself. Not out of guilt or shame but a returning to the analytical, the rational. I will reciprocate good for good. I will not be distracted from those relationships that support me and help me, that create value. I will not take from those relationships and squander resources on relationships that do not pay me back.

I will not engage in strategic behavior to manipulate a desired outcome. I will speak plainly and my words will reflect my accurate thoughts, emotions and actions. I will speak my truth boldly “Parr Hesia” I will remember that there are 3 hidden subjects, my experience of reality, your experience of reality and reality itself. I will not judge tacitly from analogy thinking that I must contend over experiences of reality, I do not choose what is good for others, they do no choose what is good for me. My resources do my will as long as they do not affect the resources of others. Combined resources do combined will, but at the same time remain the property of the persons that earned them.

I will not be tyrannical, arbitrary, or inconsistent. I understand that all valid philosophies pose a meritocracy of some sort so that the individuals can move around freely. I understand that I must remain consistently rational in order to be considered rational. That I must know myself and represent myself accurately. Even when the lights are off and no one is watching I still remain loyal to my own philosophy for myself which I will not conceal from others for the sake of personal gain. I will be known as I am and I will know others accurately as they are. We are equal under reason.

I have taken this burden on myself to make the world a better place, one that I want to live in. I own all wisdom by having the ability to understand it and apply it. All best processes belong to me through this faculty. In order to live in a rational world the people in it have to be rational. I recognize the authority of reason and reason alone. The law was not made by man, but the laws that govern success in relationship are preexisting and immutable. If I want to live in a rational world, I must behave rationally in rational relationship in rational environments.

I am a citizen of the world.

By Shivastus Solomonicus


COMPLIMENTARY SCHIZMOGENESIS and the I, You, and We Narratives



Deborah Tannen, the foremost expert on male/female communication rituals refers to arguments between men and women as complimentary schizmogenesis.  She is referring to a pattern that is created between tribes and nations where in their relationships they keep on repeating their party lines.  I wanted to give credit to her but I want to be clear that much of my stuff is my understanding and my personal philosophic calculus, so don’t think that all of what I am about to say is coming from her.  I like her and I think we would have a very interesting and edifying conversation.  However we disagree on many aspects.  Scientific materials are descriptive, prescriptive and predictive.  Linguistics chooses to focus on the descriptive part of language, the patterns and processes that occur within living languages without making judgments as to what is good and what is bad.  My focus is on how to make relationship work, how to create the most value in a relationship for the most people, so I do judge and I do prescribe.  

What happens in complimentary schizmogenesis is that each person retreats behind their shibboleths and they start repeating the behavior they believe to be dominant.  Each thinks they deserve to win or deserve their way because of either the masculine solution or the feminine solution.  Each has retreated from the We narrative into the I and you narratives. (my personal philosophic calculus).  She communicates femininity to him and he communicates masculinity back to her.  They do not compromise and create a we narrative.  In my SHARED STATE THEORY OF COMMUNICATION there are 4 shared states, communication, understanding, agreement, participation.  Proximity could be a shared state too and it is necessary for the other 4 more or less but it has less to do with communication.  

I believe in “equality under reason” which means that the most reasonable person gets their way or the most reasonable solution is created.  Everybody hearing that agrees with it, but women think that I am talking about pleasantness, and moral authority and they nod their head in agreement and the go,  “MMMMMHMMMMMM!”  and men do the same but they think I am talking about pragmatism and the end result.  

Women consistently use moral authority to discount, judge, block, criticize, prevent, and not participate with the masculine solution or desires.  When women do not want to participate they will leave the we narrative.  When they require or desire participation they will say “we need to do this.”  and when they refuse to participate they will communicate tautologies of non relationship, “you need to use your own resources”  or, ” I think everybody should do what they are comfortable doing.” 



I have been asked repeatedly to write down my techniques for what I learned to do with human behavior and psychology.  I think Cris Blakk will particularly find this technique interesting so I dedicate this blog to him.  https://plus.google.com/115599668920707439466/posts

When I think a person might be behaving strategically towards me, which is any unprovoked deviation from rational relationship for the purpose of maximizing what they are getting from the relationship without contributing equal value, or an attempt to establish dominance or leverage themselves, or refusing to participate, communicate, understand I have a little test to see if they are being self-referentially consistent.

Most people in trying to falsify another person do so from their own perspective making visual emotional judgements.  “I feel that you are wrong, therefore you are wrong”.  In order to actually falsify someone you have to do so from their perspective, which means understanding their philosophy if it is valid and non arbitrary, and if it is sound prove to them that their behaviors are not congruent with their beliefs.

I will use a tautology of the behavior or the strategic communication on them and see how they react to their own strategy.  If they respond as they want me to respond when they use it I know they are not intentionally being strategic, but if they don’t I know it is some manner of subterfuge.

I came up with this technique from my ASCENDING DRAGON STYLE TAI CHI that i created when I was in Washington state.  The concept is that you only turn the energy used to attack you back on your opponent.  You must make your ego very small and remove your judgments and interpretations from the interaction to ensure that they are in relationship with their own tactics through you.  I also sometimes refer to this as the silver ray technique. http://finscribeofwisdom.blogspot.com/2012/10/ascending-dragon-style-tai-chi.html

One of the tests for intelligence in animals is to see how long it takes them to realize that they are fighting their own reflection.  The mirror technique is fascinating because you get to see how the person is in relationship with their own strategies.  There is a part of my consciousness that sits back and just observes.  If you use 100% of your energy for the physical stuff or the emotional stuff you will not have the energy to sit back and learn and remember.  You can’t be completely invested in the conflict, you have to have a reserve of energy to learn and remember so that you can improve and compensate for that strategy in the future.

They are not fighting me, they are fighting themselves.  Sometimes people become aware of this.  Other times they become psychotic and feel they must destroy me.  They use as much dumb physical force as they muster and they enter a self destruction loop.  They become completely unconscious and completely obsessed with my destruction.  Paul Eckman refers to this as a refractory state, he says that a permanent refractory state is synonymous with insanity.  This is the technique I used to troll trolls and entire groups of trolls off the internet.  Right now I am apparently too controversial for facebook, lol.  They won’t let me have a single profile and it has been 6 months.  WINNING!




This is my personal philosophic calculus, so please give me credit if you use this term.  I believe that we automatically and unconsciously expand and retract our sense of self.  Imagine that you are at a store and you have put some items in a cart and you are distracted for a moment and find your cart missing.  How do you feel?  not good, right?  Because you expanded your sense of self to include the cart temporarily, because the items in the cart have positive survival data for you.

 In the same way a toddler expands his sense of self to include his mother’s bewbies.  THEM’S MY BEWBIES!  He feels a sense of possession and protective of them.  We can do this with people, objects, our issues, ideas, etc.  Some people expand their sense of self to include fatness, or rape victims.  We feel sympathy, same pathos.

A problem can arise when a person is not emotionaly healthy and they don’t want to be.  They cling to disease or error and they champion error.   They conflate themselves with the issue.  Take for example Medusa, she was raped once and from that moment forward she hated all men.  All men did not rape her.  I refer to this as the problem of the general, the specific, and the personal.  She was personally raped by one man but blamed all men.  That is not understanding the difference between the personal and the general.  it is a form of conflation, a logical fallacy that I believe I am the first to point out.

When two people have the same addiction, damage, or issue and they form a relationship based on it not wanting to be healthy.  I refer to this as “the disease is in relationship with itself through them”.  This always reminds me of the ancient concept of demonic possession.  The interesting thing is that these dysfunctional relationships are formed much more quickly than functional relationships.  How often do we ally ourselves with the better angels or our brothers and sisters?




I was not always an asshole, I chose to be an asshole.  I realized that I was constantly getting screwed.  People would be my friend strategically, and then as soon as they had an opportunity to take advantage, or as soon as I had trouble, they turned on me. So I realized that I had to sour the milk.  To quote Aristotle, “A man that is a friend to everyone is a friend to no one.”  

I coined the phrase, “threat filter” to show how people make decisions about threats.  I show up on everybody’s radar as a potential threat.  Because I am ridiculously talented, insanely smart, strong, funny, creative, fast like a motherfucker.  I am a renaissance man, a philosopher king.  People have categories like trash cans.  They don’t like people that do EVERYTHING well.  You can only do one or two things well, not everything.  I am not arrogant, I evaluate myself correctly.  I know I do that because I have depression and depressed people are the only one’s that evaluate themselves correctly, common psychological knowledge.  The normal person is over rates their ability.  It is known as the dunning kruger effect.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

It isn’t like awesomeness is a finite resource and I am helping myself to too much of it.  I think humility is a very good thing it is just that everyone else has me beat in the humility game because they have so much more to be humble about.  (insert satanic grin)  3:})

My point is this, everybody LOVES to hate me, and they create a refractory state towards me.  They inoculate themselves to me.  They try to thwart me, sabotage me, they talk shit about me.  But I am not the guy they have to worry about.  It is the one that is concealing his thoughts, the one trying to appear to be a none threat, unintimidating, harmless.  I am the obvious threat, because I could be if I wanted to.  I am not intimidating you.  You feel intimidated by me.  And as long as you are in a refractory state towards me you are not looking for the actual threat.  The one that you are never gonna see coming.  So, I guess, in a way, I won another undeclared war that was waged on me without even lifting a finger.  My enemies are so smart they destroy themselves.  

The problem with morons is they forget to account for something in their interpreting and judging reality.  Something very important.  The fact that all of their calculations are made by a complete fucking idiot…..



Original, Analytic, Philosophic, Creative and Humorous Content.