Friday, May 24, 2024

Accepting humankind’s power and authority to the good on earth

 In my struggle to resist America’s decline, I doubt liberty, preferring responsible independence. It seems obvious that humankind has not the liberty to doubt, let alone question, the laws of physics. Rather it is human duty to discover physics and apply it to the good. Humankind may and can earn independence from ever present bad, which does not respond to reason. How has the present dilemma come into existence?

                All animals learn by retaining memory of sense impressions, like pictures without grammar. The power and authority of the individual human being seems limited only when death terminates education and discovery. Research on tool making touches humankind 3.39 million years ago[1] and the inventions reflect thought, whether individual or collective. “Over the last million years or so, people evolved the ability to learn from each other, creating the possibility of cumulative, non-genetic evolution.”[2] The capacity to develop thought on par with today’s people evolved “300,000 years ago [and] within just the past 12,000 years, our species, Homo sapiens, made the transition to producing food and changing our surroundings.”[3] Travel for trade had already begun.[4] Religion emerged more than 50,000 years ago.[5] Sumerian kings invented law codes[6] and the “first systematic grammar of Sanskrit originated”[7] some 5500 years ago. Grammar is essential to develop human being (verb).

                The Sumerian law codes empowered civic citizens 5500 years ago to constrain dissidents and rebels to the good and eliminate villains and alien killers. The civic culture would neither originate nor accommodate harm to or from any person or society. The Babylonians conquered Sumer and issued the Code of Hammurabi, which added innocence until guilt is proven.[8] In the West, the Greeks and Romans connected Mesopotamian law and facilitated segue through German law and French law to British common law.[9] The 13 English colonies in America declared independence and with aid from France and Spain defeated the English in 1781. In 1787, in Philadelphia, signers issued a religion-free Constitution, framed for ratification by the people in their states. The 1787 Constitution improves the ancient Sumerian, monarchical law codes to rule by the people “to ourselves and our Posterity”. Individual and civic independence would empower the good in a world of bad.

                Essential to human being (verb) is the opportunity to develop your unique person according to responsible private preferences. Without this provision, humankind does not exist. The choices are grounded in potentials: personal aptitude and public need for developed skills. As a youth, I studied both the violin and the piano. I had better instruction in violin and continued through high school. I had keen interest in sciences, building a tesla coil and producing ozone with it. I distilled bituminous coal into light and heavy fractions. In college, I sidelined music, chose the chemical engineering curriculum, and finished with honors. Along the way, I increased prior fascination with American literature but put it aside until after graduation. As a senior-elective credit, I chose “The Philosophy of Science” and benefited. Senior seminar instilled in me the intention that nothing I would help design could blow up, risking public injury. I’m the only chemical engineer from my H.S. class of 110 students. I served one company for 35 years and nothing we designed can blow up. With a B.S., I rose to R&D Advisor before retirement. During the experience, I rejected opportunities for personal intimacy, because I felt they risked my autonomy. The public honored my independence.

Thus, for my career, starting with polylogism limited by my education, I chose “one logic, one truth, one path of thinking”. The outcome verifies my choice. But the key to my appreciation is the civil culture in which I was reared. There was no “race, gender, religion, nationality, language,” or something else to prevent safety. Every citizen I encountered had civic integrity and took seriously their obligation to preserve security. There was evil in town, and the people I encountered protected me. My hard-earned college money was not threatened on any front – not at stores where I shopped, not at campus events I attended, not at coffee shops with late 1960s local protest singers. Guest speakers appeared and spoke. Someone could present the case that a+b = a+b’, where b’ = b+1. But a country boy could present 2 apples and 2 oranges and ask the speaker how many fruit were there: only 4. I am grateful and want today’s youth to enjoy slimilar opportunity.

                So what went wrong in only 58 years? I think both believers and non-believers realize that monotheism is its own polylogism. The seminary trains the priest to present doctrine about a mystery. There’s so much dogma the believer cannot grasp the message and settles for what he or she imagines. Listeners depart, reluctant to express what they imagined. The event turns mystery into chaos the believer can escape by turning to a competitive monotheism. It never occurs to the believer to be humble to the God, whatever it may be. Thus, monotheism preserves its power over people who believe. The public is awakened to this ruse, no longer wants to fund it, and doesn’t know what to do about it. Can anything good come from monotheism? I think so: acceptance.

                The Sumerian political philosophy asserts that humankind may and can independently rule to the good on earth. This physics-affirmed assertion is primitively expressed as creation in Genesis 1, CJB and NIV; first, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Then, in Genesis 1:26-28 the earth gets an independent ruler: humankind – Homo sapiens. Humankind has the power and authority to rule to the good on earth. Semitic-speaking people in Mesopotamia recorded these ideas and need not be faulted; everything that happened brought us to today’s opportunity. One man in history, Yeshua of Nazareth, a Jew, studied the literature of his time, commended Genesis 1:26-28, and improved colloquial law codes. Statutory justice pursued by the law codes requires humankind to constrain the bad and eliminate evil in order to promote the good. There is as logic, a process, and intentions humankind may and can accept without objections, in order to thrive rather than merely survive. Perhaps the responsible good humankind and its posterity may and can achieve is the God.

                The opportunity is to reform rather than to destroy. I regularly participate-with and contribute-to my church, in order to facilitate acceptance of the God without objection or imposition, pursue Yeshua’s civic influence to the good, accept the power and authority to develop human being, and encourage civic citizens to share their views. I listen for the chance to improve my opinion. I also vote in local, state, and national elections, hoping to direct my tax contributions to my self-interest: independence rather than liberty; responsibility more than rights. I pursue the ineluctable[10] truth.

                I appreciate Jeffrey A. Tucker[11] for motivating this essay.

Copyright©2024 by Phillip R. Beaver. All rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted for the publication of all or portions of this paper as long as this complete copyright notice is included. 



[1] Online at https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/becoming-human-the-origin-of-stone-tools-55335180/.

[2] Online at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2781880.

[3] Online at https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-sapiens.

[4] Online at https://www.si.edu/newsdesk/releases/scientists-discover-evidence-early-human-innovation-pushing-back-evolutionary-timeline.

[5] Online at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prehistoric_religion.

[7] Online at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammar.

[8] Onilne at https://www.history.com/news/hammurabi-code-legal-system-influence.

[9] Online at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_history.

[10] “Ineluctable” entails the combination unavoidable, unchangeable, and irresistible.

No comments:

Post a Comment

I want your opinion and intend to respond.