Tag Archives: organic computer theory

Theater Deconstructed by Rabbi Ba’al Shivah


Since the dawn of civilization their have been two instincts in man at war with one another.  Tyranny and Democracy.  One of the weapons or tools in that battle was the Theater but Theater predisposes itself to more good than harm precisely because of how it succeeds in creating value for the people witnessing it.


I wish I had recorded the source, I thought it would be easy to find again but most etymologies don’t go back as far as they could.

The English word theory was derived from a technical term in philosophy in Ancient Greek. As an everyday word, theoriaθεωρία, meant “a looking at, viewing, beholding”, but in more technical contexts it came to refer to contemplative or speculative understandings of natural things, such as those of natural philosophers, as opposed to more practical ways of knowing things, like that of skilled orators or artisans.[8] The word has been in use in English since at least the late 16th century.[9]Modern uses of the word “theory” are derived from the original definition, but have taken on new shades of meaning, still based on the idea that a theory is a thoughtful and rational explanation of the general nature of things.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory#Ancient_uses

Theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking. Depending on the context, the results might for example include generalized explanations of how nature works. The word has its roots in ancient Greek, but in modern use it has taken on several different related meanings. A theory is not the same as a hypothesis. A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory#Ancient_uses

The word theos (θεός) of course being the Greek word for god and Enthusiasm, Enthusiasmos meaning literally “in God”.  

When I was creating Shared State Theory of Communication I realized that Theater had an uncanny ability to “communicate a state” which means a thought, a perspective, or an idea.  One is inclined to sympathize with the character portrayed as the protagonist.  Throughout the play of film one projects one’s sense of self onto the protagonist and this elicit’s emotions akin to those of the protagonist.  In a manner of speaking you get to walk in the shoes of another person or look through their eyes, a shared state.

platos cave


For those of you that are skeptical of my research, remember that Plato was a contemporary of Pythagorus and his math cults and Plato used the allegory of the cave.  The cave represented the Greek caste system.  The director (Philosopher King), could directly the form of the good.  The Guardians basically did what they were told and manipulated the images, and the slaves or non citizens that didn’t understand the ideals/idols of the culture were subjected to indoctrination in the form of observing the shadows on the wall of the theater.  It is also of interest that early Christians who were more like a Secret Society when they were created, and I believe Christianity traces it’s origins to the Pythagorean math cults, held their secret initiations in underground caves.  Ask yourself this, Why do some cultures have long, proud, traditions of art and literature and others do not?

This tool can either be used for propaganda purposes as it was by various tyrants and dictators or it can be used as an educational tool or even a political tool.  When of the great uses of the Civilized Western world is the use of Satire, more or less forbidden in the Tyrannical and Islamic countries where theater is used solely for the purpose of Propaganda.  Muslims have sentiments that excesses of laughter are a bad thing and that one should not mock or ridicule others, raping, torturing, removing limbs, and be-headings are more acceptable. . .

One would, most likely, first remember “Leni” Riefenstahl  and the Nazi propaganda machine.  Hitler used the Pollock joke as a form of psychological warfare to lower the self esteem of his opponents before he attacked Poland and killed off all of their intellectuals and artists.



When I was creating Organic Computer Theory which states that Neural Myelination passes onto our children in the form of cellular memory, I noticed how certain types of intelligences were more prevalent in certain groups of people.  For example the Jewish people have more comedians than almost any other group of people and far more female comedians than any other group of people.

I believe that they integrated the genes, which they considered valuable, of a group of transgressively sacral artists that were allowed to exist in early Greece for the purpose of keeping a certain denomination of Persians from feeling comfortable in their state.  Narcissistic Psychopaths don’t have a sense of humor about themselves and can’t stand being mocked.  Socrates, himself, exposed the “Pretenders to Wisdom” and his entourage used to eaves drop on his conversations and laugh as they saw through the illogic and unreason of the Pseudo Wise.

The name Cynic derives from Ancient Greek κυνικός (kynikos), meaning “dog-like”, and κύων (kyôn), meaning “dog” (genitivekynos).  It seems certain, however, that the word dog was also thrown at the first Cynics as an insult for their shameless rejection of conventional manners, and their decision to live on the streets. Diogenes, in particular, was referred to as the Dog,[5] a distinction he seems to have revelled in, stating that “other dogs bite their enemies, I bite my friends to save them.”[6]


Say: I seek refuge with the Lord and Cherisher of Mankind,
The King (or Ruler) of Mankind,
The God (or judge) of Mankind,-
From the mischief of the Whisperer (of Evil), who withdraws (after his whisper),-
(The same) who whispers into the hearts of Mankind,-
Among Jinn and among men.

—Quran, sura 114 (Al-Nas), ayat 1–6[15]

In Islamic theology, Shaytan and his minions are “whisperers,” who whisper into the chests of men and women, urging them to commit sin. This is where the desire to sin comes from, according to Islam.


Jewish people were instructed to teach their children a craft so that they could be gainfully employed and provide for themselves wherever they went in the world.  Every major World Civilization has always had one thing in common, a large middle class, craftsmen could move horizontally and nomadicly with relative freedom.   The Jewish people were more or less nomads because they were constantly getting exiled.  As they moved about from here to there they were exposed to different ideas and philosophies.  Ideas can be a very dangerous thing.  Theater can basically frame a new form of the good, a new god.

idea (n.) Look up idea at Dictionary.comlate 14c., “archetype of a thing in the mind of God; Platonic `idea,'” from Latin idea “idea,” and in Platonic philosophy “archetype,” from Greek idea“ideal prototype,” literally “the look of a thing (as opposed to the reality); form; kind, sort, nature,” from idein “to see,” from PIE *wid-es-ya-, suffixed form of root *weid- “to see” (see vision). Sense of “result of thinking” first recorded 1640s.  http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=idea&searchmode=none


At this particular moment in time the vast majority of Secret Society members are entertainers, both actors and musicians, they are the current “middle class” craftsmen…


Response to Scientific American: A Matter of Time.


I was very intrigued by your recent article on time, I wanted to respond to it in my own terms or thought technology as I like to refer to it.  Since time seems to disappear from the formulas of theorists and doesn’t appear necessary to exist many people in the scientific and physics communities believe that it is an illusion.  Time doesn’t necessarily need to exist.


Albert Einstein Quotes Wallpapers3[15]

Why does the human experience exist?

This is how I want to approach the subject.  To quote myself, “All humans have finite capacity, if they had infinite capacity they would be the universe.”  This is a reference to Einstein’s reason for thinking that man cannot travel at the speed of light because he would approach infinite mass, becoming everything in the universe.  Which is interesting because it suggests that the person moving at the speed of light would become the super position, everywhere at the same time.  If you look at the concept of time dilation, there would be much more time from the perspective of that person because time would be moving much more slowly for him.

It is because we have finite capacity that time appears to exist because we the individual are not whole and in order to make ourselves whole we must continue to interact with our surroundings to maintain a kind of wholeness.  We return to the universe for food, sustenance, shelter, to expel waste, to procreate, and for us survival is wholeness.  One self must rely on the ONE SELF, the universe for survival.

If you look at the connection between mind time and pain what you realize is that pain stimulates the mind and the mind exists to help us connect ourselves with that which would temporarily make us whole, what we need, what we want.


The reason we have failed to discover the theory of everything is because of the cornerstone that we reject, the human perspective.  Fred Hoyle, formerly an atheist, became a deist when discovering the Triple-Alpha process.  This was the first time the Anthropic principle was invoked predictively.  It suggested that the universe might exist for the experience of human beings.

From my experience humans are the brain cells of god.  Intelligence is a very mysterious thing, even though we know it exists and we know it has a huge effect on it’s environment we can’t quantify intelligence like we do everything else.

I have a series of questions for you:  Is intelligence native to the universe?  If so do you believe it had to be here in some form at the inception of the universe?  Would you agree that there is a big difference between intelligent creatures and inanimate objects insofar as we are able to influence our environment?  Now please tell me what percentage of the universe is intelligent?  What percentage of the earth is intelligent?  What percentage of the human body is intelligent?  What percentage of the human brain is intelligent?

Human beings and the human perspective are integral to the theory of everything.  If you examine the way in which math and language frame the problem one (language) presupposes relationship and the other presupposes a singular will, which would be the will of the universe, which would be god’s will, which the mathematician conflates with his own will.



There are two different perspectives that the human being can have.  The person that perceives the universe as an object presupposes tacitly a singular will, one volition, and from their perspective they possess that will and they objectify the universe and those around them, I call this being delusional towards people or relationship.  The person who perceives the universe as a person might be delusional about facts but they tend to be less delusional about relationship, imho.  There is a meeting place between Psychology and Philosophy where the rational man stands, both non-deluded about facts and the universe and non deluded about people as well.

The Ancient Indian Philosophers tell a story of Markandeya, one of the greatest Hindu saints, that like Jonah found himself expelled from the mouth of Vishnu who symbolized the universe.  Outside of Vishnu he found himself floating in cold water in permanent night, not being able to see anything.  Until suddenly he saw Vishnu floating on the water in the lion’s pose, after much prayer he was able to get back into Vishnu’s mouth and into our Universe.  This story communicates to me that our universe was created for our mind.  There is no reason we should be able to understand or contemplate the universe.  And I doubt that anything outside of the universe would be in the least way intelligible to the human brain.  We are god, understanding god, inside of god.  Think of our lives as introspection as it were.  Life has experiential data.  It has meaning for the individual that it doesn’t communicate to anyone else.  Our life, in a way, is like a private conversation between us and the universe.


My Organic Computer Theory suggests that humans are not as unpredictable as we think.  Every event or fact or statement has positive or negative survival data to the individual, which creates negative or positive emotions.  (the binary code for Organic Computers) This depends on how the individual defines themselves.  The definition set of the individual determines who they project their sense of self onto (plasticity of the sense of self) and who they retract their sense of self from.  This is determined by the character they are playing and the story they think they are in.

Linguistic science and cognitive science believe that we remember things in a matrix of narrative.  That is how we string facts together and how we remember them.  If we genuinely understand an individual we know how they will interpret events and what kind of impact those events will have on their psyche.

Unlike facts and objects humans are less predictable, less objectifiable, more difficult to understand.  So the person good with science and numbers might be almost retarded when it comes to relationship.  Thus I refer to humans as Intelligent Objects to distinguish them from facts and objects.



The above is how I describe the universe, if their is nothing their can’t be change, and if their is change their can’t be nothingness.  If the universe has the ability to settle into grosser and finer elements when nothing is happening. Then one end of the spectrum would be more active and the other end more static, if you were to turn this pole in a circle and touch both ends you would get an explosion as faster and slower moving elements came into contact with one another.

Ponder this, if their were only one source of light in the universe and no mass, their would be no friction and therefore their would be also no heat.

Furthermore, if nothingness, the original substance is like a fluid, if it were to be stirred would it create brecciated nothingness?  If that was the case than once again their would be difference and their would be change.


Another question I have pondered, if time doesn’t exist, why does empty space exist?  How come everything isn’t smashed so close together movement is impossible?  You see I am very suspicious of this thing called empty space that allows me to see from here to there.  What is this substance that I am looking through?  I think empty space is a very mysterious substance.  We don’t contemplate it because we categorize it as nothing.  Is there some force that is the opposite of gravity, perhaps levity that is simultaneously pushing things apart and separating them?  Observe how quickly some substances diffuse in a vacuum or even a fluid.  Why doesn’t everything diffuse to fill empty space.

In the article it is suggested the time can be a singular dimension not necessarily associate with the other 3.  For example, like a photograph their could be space but their wouldn’t be time so their wouldn’t be movement.  But why is there space in the first place?  Why is their separation?  If nothing banged why is it not like we are living in a singularity?


One final comment, if time is an illusion, that means that there must be some time some place before time or outside of time.  Which means that all their is right now is the singularity and the illusion of plurality. I wrote a fiction piece a while back showing how this would work, potentially.  From the perspective of the person in the singularity every moment of time would be immediately accessible.  (http://shivastus.wordpress.com/2013/09/22/out-of-time-2nd-noah-socrates-story/)

If time isn’t real, the Universe isn’t real because the big bang never banged.  Which means all their is, is the ONE SELF.  So, if that is the case, are we the dream of God?



Ponder this, how many people have had an enjoyable experience with a bewb?  Now how many people have had an enjoyable experience with a penis?  The vast majority of people are not analytical philosophers, they don’t know the logical fallacies and they don’t know the cognitive biases and as such they can’t stop themselves from making them.  Furthermore I have found that neural myelination accounts for 90% of the decision making of human beings which means cellular memory.  I refer to humans as organic computers because they are predictable.  In their judgments there are certain patterns that emerge, such as a pro female bias.

Contemplate how many more people spend on breast cancer than veterans or prostrate cancer and the fact that Veterans charities are rampant with fraud and theft, which is not tolerated with breast cancer awareness, people are much more hyper vigilant.  But women didn’t sacrifice themselves for us.  Every person that served protected the entire nation from threats.  A woman having breasts is not necessarily a mother or our mother.  Yet we are far more sympathetic to feminine concerns than masculine concerns.

Every year at least $1.5 billion is spent on breast cancer research.  Some of this money comes from an ever-growing number of breast cancer non-profit organizations, but the vast majority comes from government organizations such as the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Department of Defense (DoD).  The funds go largely to preventionand early detection.http://thinkbeforeyoupink.org/?p=1772


Men women and children have the same bias, choosing in favor of femininity and weakness.  Men are even insensitive to their own desires.  Men don’t even question this when asked to sacrifice themselves for women and children, they just presuppose the validity of it.  Women also don’t question it.  Women have gotten so arrogant and so expectant that men will sacrifice their desires and wishes for women and children that even after not having contributed anything meaningful to a man’s life women finding they don’t have enough of what they want will turn to the man and expect him to sacrifice himself so that she can have more.


The manliest men go off to war, they are in relationship with death and the threats and the ugliness, they create the outside perimeter, the grizzled, gnarly, rind, the crust, the tough outer layer.  That is why I say the male mind is sociopathic.

Inside that are the effeminate men, the champions of normalcy and pleasantness, captain save a ho, the white knights, the arm chair philosophers, with their feminist, elitist, bias.  It is the guy that is not fit to go into battle.  He acts as a moral authority protecting the women from the manly men, but also gaming the system for his own benefit.  He is to cowardly to do what the manly man does.  He is a champion of femininity.


The butch women essentially perform the same function as the effeminate men, protecting women from the truth, reality, ugliness, and death.  Lying to women about themselves.  Telling them they are equals to the men and not to worry.  The butch women are closer to the women and children then the effeminate men.  Women have an innate feeling of inferiority to men, Sigmond Freud got that right.  If you observe women in their reasoning, arguing, and behavior, they want to control the penis, they want to own it.  They want to direct the activities of the penis.  They want to send it to attack their enemies.  They want to control how it thinks and they want to be the focal point of its attention and the only source of its happiness.

Penis envy in Freudian psychoanalysis refers to the theorized reaction of a girl during her psychosexual development to the realization that she does not have a penis. Freud considered this realization a defining moment in the development of gender and sexual identity for women[1] — the parallel reaction in boys to the realization that women do not have a penis being castration anxiety. In contemporary culture, the term sometimes refers inexactly or metaphorically to women who are presumed to wish they were men.[2]


What is the most fascinating is how the behaviors used to champion negate their own arguments.  The manly women copy the behavior of men, therefore demonstrating that they tacitly believe that masculinity is dominant.  Fritz Perls said that you copy what ever behavior you believe is dominant when you want to win.  So the fact that they use masculine behavior when they want to win demonstrates that they believe masculinity is dominant.  You have to understand the psychosis that the individual must have to use a means different from their argument in order to obtain a sense of victory.  Women do this because it is a natural psychopathic/female strategy to expand and increase feminine authority.  Women think of themselves as a group, WOMEN.  Whereas men do not think of themselves as MEN, they think of themselves as a man.  Men do not feel that their position is increased by being men, while women do, and this comes from the fact that their need recognition was stimulated in that they closetedly feel inferior to men, thus the need for the repeated conquest against men.

The effeminate man will argue that the woman is the equal of man in mental function and ability, but if that is so why does she need the protection of the effeminate man?  The effeminate man argues against reason, and the participation therewith to increase the amount of poontang he has available to himself and not being able to compete with the manly man in manly endeavors, he adopts a strategy flying in the face of reason he presupposes that women need protection from the manly man and that they are incapable of dealing with reality and handling the truth.

The fascinating thing about people’s judgments, when they are no analytical philosophers, is that their judgments always make themselves correct.  It always justifies why they are good for wanting what they want.  Because their are so many weak, stupid, and incorrect people out their all of these strategies and judgments create a disparate impact in favor of weakness, stupidity, and failure.  Why are we attracted to emotional pornography?  Puppies, babies, kittens?  because they are harmless, because we feel like we could protect them and contribute to them, that has positive survival data for us, it means we are surviving well and that we are capable of providing for another.  If we were really secure we wouldn’t judge so hatefully and immediately against things that pose potential threats.   We wouldn’t be controlled by our emotional reactions and pre emptively attack people because they appear strong or smart.


http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/organic-computers-definition-by-joxuashiva/ https://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/deuchebag-nation-womans-world-part-2/ http://finscribeofwisdom.blogspot.com/2012/10/unsustainable-emergent-patterns-in.html http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/armchair-philosophers/ http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/histrionic-co-morbidity-psychopaths-at-work-part-2/ http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/emotional-pornography/