Tuesday, 19 July 2016

Straight Fibbing : Newton, The Man by John Maynard Keynes

Jupiter Enthroned by Sir Isaac H. Newton

“It is with Pietro Pomponazzi that we see the explicit factional pedigree of the dead souls faction. 

Pomponazzi started from Aristotle, as the Venetian Party always does. 

Aristotle asserted that there is no thought which is not mixed with sense impressions. This meant that there is no part of our mental life which is not contaminated by matter. For Pomponazzi, this proved that the soul does not exist, since it has no immaterial substance. 

Contarini warned Pomponazzi not to take this matter any further, but also remarked that the only time that the existence of the soul is really certain is when the person is already dead. For Contarini, as a practical matter, there is no empirical human soul that you can be aware of while you are still alive.


Francesco Zorzi was the envoy of this group to Henry VIII, to whom he became the resident sex adviser. 

Zorzi illustrates the typical profile of a Venetian intelligence operative in the early 1500s: He was a Franciscan friar whose main occupation was black magic of the Rosicrucian variety. 

He was a conjurer, a necromancer, an apparitionist. 

Think of Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus, and you have the portrait of Zorzi. 

Not exactly a role model for science nerds of any age. 

As the 1500s turned into the 1600s, this profile began to present serious drawbacks and limitations...."

The Philosopher's Stone by Sir Isaac H. Newton



"But this was a dreadful secret which Newton was at desperate pains to conceal all his life. 

In the main the secret died with him. But it was revealed in many writings in his, big box. 

A hundred years later Sir David Brewster looked into the box. 

He covered up the traces... with some straight fibbing."

John Maynard Keynes,
1946

John Maynard Keynes: Newton, the Man


The Royal Society of London planned an event to celebrate the tercentenary of Isaac Newton's birth in 1942. However World War II made it essentially impossible and the celebrations did not take place until July 1946. Lectures were given by E N da Costa Andrade, H W Turnbull, Niels Bohr and Jacques Hadamard. John Maynard Keynes had also been invited to lecture but unfortunately he died in April 1946, three months before the celebrations took place. Keynes was fascinated by Newton's manuscripts and had been the first person to see some of the manuscript material by Newton which had been kept secret until his papers were sold in 1936. Keynes' lecture, Newton, the man was delivered at the celebrations by his brother Geoffrey Keynes. Here is the text of the lecture:-


Newton, the Man

John Maynard Keynes
It is with some diffidence that I try to speak to you in his own home of Newton as he was himself. I have long been a student of the records and had the intention to put my impressions into writing to be ready for Christmas Day 1942, the tercentenary of his birth. The war has deprived me both of leisure to treat adequately so great a theme and of opportunity to consult my library and my papers and to verify my impressions. So if the brief study which I shall lay before you today is more perfunctory than it should be, I hope you will excuse me.
One other preliminary matter. I believe that Newton was different from the conventional picture of him. But I do not believe he was less great. He was less ordinary, more extraordinary, than the nineteenth century cared to make him out. Geniuses are very peculiar. Let no one here suppose that my object today is to lessen, by describing, Cambridge's greatest son. I am trying rather to see him as his own friends and contemporaries saw him. And they without exception regarded him as one of the greatest of men.
In the eighteenth century and since, Newton came to be thought of as the first and greatest of the modern age of scientists, a rationalist, one who taught us to think on the lines of cold and untinctured reason.
I do not see him in this light. I do not think that any one who has pored over the contents of that box which he packed up when he finally left Cambridge in 1696 and which, though partly dispersed, have come down to us, can see him like that. Newton was not the first of the age of reason. He was the last of the magicians, the last of the Babylonians and Sumerians, the last great mind which looked out on the visible and intellectual world with the same eyes as those who began to build our intellectual inheritance rather less than 10,000 years ago. Isaac Newton, a posthumous child bom with no father on Christmas Day, 1642, was the last wonderchild to whom the Magi could do sincere and appropriate homage.
Had there been time, I should have liked to read to you the contemporary record of the child Newton. For, though it is well known to his biographers, it has never been published in extenso, without comment, just as it stands. Here, indeed, is the makings of a legend of the young magician, a most joyous picture of the opening mind of genius free from the uneasiness, the melancholy and nervous agitation of the young man and student.
For in vulgar modern terms Newton was profoundly neurotic of a not unfamiliar type, but - I should say from the records - a most extreme example. His deepest instincts were occult, esoteric, semantic-with profound shrinking from the world, a paralyzing fear of exposing his thoughts, his beliefs, his discoveries in all nakedness to the inspection and criticism of the world. 'Of the most fearful, cautious and suspicious temper that I ever knew', said Whiston, his successor in the Lucasian Chair. The too well-known conflicts and ignoble quarrels with Hooke, Flamsteed, Leibniz are only too clear an evidence of this. Like all his type he was wholly aloof from women. He parted with and published nothing except under the extreme pressure of friends. Until the second phase of his life, he was a wrapt, consecrated solitary, pursuing his studies by intense introspection with a mental endurance perhaps never equalled.
I believe that the clue to his mind is to be found in his unusual powers of continuous concentrated introspection. A case can be made out, as it also can with Descartes, for regarding him as an accomplished experimentalist. Nothing can be more charming than the tales of his mechanical contrivances when he was a boy. There are his telescopes and his optical experiments, These were essential accomplishments, part of his unequalled all-round technique, but not, I am sure, his peculiar gift, especially amongst his contemporaries. His peculiar gift was the power of holding continuously in his mind a purely mental problem until he had seen straight through it. I fancy his pre-eminence is due to his muscles of intuition being the strongest and most enduring with which a man has ever been gifted. Anyone who has ever attempted pure scientific or philosophical thought knows how one can hold a problem momentarily in one's mind and apply all one's powers of concentration to piercing through it, and how it will dissolve and escape and you find that what you are surveying is a blank. I believe that Newton could hold a problem in his mind for hours and days and weeks until it surrendered to him its secret. Then being a supreme mathematical technician he could dress it up, how you will, for purposes of exposition, but it was his intuition which was pre-eminently extraordinary - 'so happy in his conjectures', said De Morgan, 'as to seem to know more than he could possibly have any means of proving'. The proofs, for what they are worth, were, as I have said, dressed up afterwards - they were not the instrument of discovery.
There is the story of how he informed Halley of one of his most fundamental discoveries of planetary motion. 'Yes,' replied Halley, 'but how do you know that? Have you proved it?' Newton was taken aback - 'Why, I've known it for years', he replied. 'If you'll give me a few days, I'll certainly find you a proof of it' - as in due course he did.
Again, there is some evidence that Newton in preparing the Principiawas held up almost to the last moment by lack of proof that you could treat a solid sphere as though all its mass was concentrated at the centre, and only hit on the proof a year before publication. But this was a truth which he had known for certain and had always assumed for many years.
Certainly there can be no doubt that the peculiar geometrical form in which the exposition of the Principia is dressed up bears no resemblance at all to the mental processes by which Newton actually arrived at his conclusions.
His experiments were always, I suspect, a means, not of discovery, but always of verifying what he knew already.
Why do I call him a magician? Because he looked on the whole universe and all that is in it as a riddle, as a secret which could be read by applying pure thought to certain evidence, certain mystic clues which God had laid about the world to allow a sort of philosopher's treasure hunt to the esoteric brotherhood. He believed that these clues were to be found partly in the evidence of the heavens and in the constitution of elements (and that is what gives the false suggestion of his being an experimental natural philosopher), but also partly in certain papers and traditions handed down by the brethren in an unbroken chain back to the original cryptic revelation in Babylonia. He regarded the universe as a cryptogram set by the Almighty - just as he himself wrapt the discovery of the calculus in a cryptogram when he communicated with Leibniz. By pure thought, by concentration of mind, the riddle, he believed, would be revealed to the initiate.
He did read the riddle of the heavens. And he believed that by the same powers of his introspective imagination he would read the riddle of the Godhead, the riddle of past and future events divinely fore-ordained, the riddle of the elements and their constitution from an original undifferentiated first matter, the riddle of health and of immortality. All would be revealed to him if only he could persevere to the end, uninterrupted, by himself, no one coming into the room, reading, copying, testing-all by himself, no interruption for God's sake, no disclosure, no discordant breakings in or criticism, with fear and shrinking as he assailed these half-ordained, half-forbidden things, creeping back into the bosom of the Godhead as into his mother's womb. 'Voyaging through strange seas of thought alone', not as Charles Lamb 'a fellow who believed nothing unless it was as clear as the three sides of a triangle'.
And so he continued for some twenty-five years. In 1687, when he was forty-five years old, the Principia was published. 
Here in Trinity it is right that I should give you an account of how he lived amongst you during these years of his greatest achievement. The east end of the Chapel projects farther eastwards than the Great Gate. In the second half of the seventeenth century there was a walled garden in the free space between Trinity Street and the building which joins the Great Gate to the Chapel. The south wall ran out from the turret of the Gate to a distance overlapping the Chapel by at least the width of the present pavement. Thus the garden was of modest but reasonable size. This was Newton's garden. He had the Fellow's set of rooms between the Porter's Lodge and the Chapel - that, I suppose, now occupied by Professor Broad. The garden was reached by a stairway which was attached to a veranda raised on wooden pillars projecting into the garden from the range of buildings. At the top of this stairway stood his telescope - not to be confused with the observatory erected on the top of the Great Gate during Newton's lifetime (but after he had left Cambridge) for the use of Roger Cotes and Newton's successor, Whiston. This wooden erection was, I think, demolished by Whewell in 1856 and replaced by the stone bay of Professor Broad's bedroom. At the Chapel end of the garden was a small two-storied building, also of wood, which was his elaboratory. When he decided to prepare the Principia for publication he engaged a young kinsman, Humphrey Newton, to act as his amanuensis (the MS. of the Principia, as it went to the press, is clearly in the hand of Humphrey). Humphrey remained with him for five years - from 1684 to 1689. When Newton died Humphrey's son-in-law Conduitt wrote to him for his reminiscences, and among the papers I have is Humphrey's reply.
During these twenty-five years of intense study mathematics and astronomy were only a part, and perhaps not the most absorbing, of his occupations. Our record of these is almost wholly confined to the papers which he kept and put in his box when he left Trinity for London.
Let me give some brief indications of their subject. They are enormously voluminous - I should say that upwards of 1,000,000 words in his handwriting still survive. They have, beyond doubt, no substantial value whatever except as a fascinating sidelight on the mind of our greatest genius.
Let me not exaggerate through reaction against the other Newton myth which has been so sedulously created for the last two hundred years. There was extreme method in his madness. All his unpublished works on esoteric and theological matters are marked by careful learning, accurate method and extreme sobriety of statement. They are just as sane as the Principia, if their whole matter and purpose were not magical. They were nearly all composed during the same twenty-five years of his mathematical studies. They fall into several groups.
Very early in life Newton abandoned orthodox belief in the Trinity. At this time the Socinians were an important Arian sect amongst intellectual circles. It may be that Newton fell under Socinian influences, but I think not. He was rather a Judaic monotheist of the school of Maimonides. He arrived at this conclusion, not on so-to-speak rational or sceptical grounds, but entirely on the interpretation of ancient authority. He was persuaded that the revealed documents give no support to the Trinitarian doctrines which were due to late falsifications. The revealed God was one God.
But this was a dreadful secret which Newton was at desperate pains to conceal all his life. It was the reason why he refused Holy Orders, and therefore had to obtain a special dispensation to hold his Fellowship and Lucasian Chair and could not be Master of Trinity. Even the Toleration Act of 1689 excepted anti-Trinitarians. Some rumours there were, but not at the dangerous dates when he was a young Fellow of Trinity. In the main the secret died with him. But it was revealed in many writings in his, big box. After his death Bishop Horsley was asked to inspect the box with a view to publication. He saw the contents with horror and slammed the lid. A hundred years later Sir David Brewster looked into the box. He covered up the traces with carefully selected extracts and some straight fibbing. His latest biographer, Mr More, has been more candid. Newton's extensive anti-Trinitarian pamphlets are, in my judgement, the most interesting of his unpublished papers. Apart from his more serious affirmation of belief, I have a completed pamphlet showing up what Newton thought of the extreme dishonesty and falsification of records for which St Athanasius was responsible, in particular for his putting about the false calumny that Arius died in a privy. The victory of the Trinitarians in England in the latter half of the seventeenth century was not only as complete, but also as extraordinary, as St Athanasius's original triumph. There is good reason for thinking that Locke was a Unitarian. I have seen it argued that Milton was. It is a blot on Newton's record that he did not murmur a word when Whiston, his successor in the Lucasian Chair, was thrown out of his professorship and out of the University for publicly avowing opinions which Newton himself had secretly held for upwards of fifty years past.
That he held this heresy was a further aggravation of his silence and secrecy and inwardness of disposition.
Another large section is concerned with all branches of apocalyptic writings from which he sought to deduce the secret truths of the Universe - the measurements of Solomon's Temple, the Book of David, the Book of Revelations, an enormous volume of work of which some part was published in his later days. Along with this are hundreds of pages of Church History and the like, designed to discover the truth of tradition.
A large section, judging by the handwriting amongst the earliest, relates to alchemy - transmutation, the philosopher's stone, the elixir of life. The scope and character of these papers have been hushed up, or at least minimized, by nearly all those who have inspected them. About 1650 there was a considerable group in London, round the publisher Cooper, who during the next twenty years revived interest not only in the English alchemists of the fifteenth century, but also in translations of the medieval and post-medieval alchemists.
There is an unusual number of manuscripts of the early English alchemists in the libraries of Cambridge. It may be that there was some continuous esoteric tradition within the University which sprang into activity again in the twenty years from 1650 to 1670. At any rate, Newton was clearly an unbridled addict. It is this with which he was occupied 'about 6 weeks at spring and 6 at the fall when the fire in the elaboratory scarcely went out' at the very years when he was composing the Principia - and about this he told Humphrey Newton not a word. Moreover, he was almost entirely concerned, not in serious experiment, but in trying to read the riddle of tradition, to find meaning in cryptic verses, to imitate the alleged but largely imaginary experiments of the initiates of past centuries. Newton has left behind him a vast mass of records of these studies. I believe that the greater part are translations and copies made by him of existing books and manuscripts. But there are also extensive records of experiments. I have glanced through a great quantity of this at least 100,000 words, I should say. It is utterly impossible to deny that it is wholly magical and wholly devoid of scientific value; and also impossible not to admit that Newton devoted years of work to it. Some time it might be interesting, but not useful, for some student better equipped and more idle than I to work out Newton's exact relationship to the tradition and MSS. of his time.
In these mixed and extraordinary studies, with one foot in the Middle Ages and one foot treading a path for modern science, Newton spent the first phase of his life, the period of life in Trinity when he did all his real work. Now let me pass to the second phase.
After the publication of the Principia there is a complete change in his habit and way of life. I believe that his friends, above all Halifax, came to the conclusion that he must be rooted out of the life he was leading at Trinity which must soon lead to decay of mind and health. Broadly speaking, of his own motion or under persuasion, he abandons his studies. He takes up University business, represents the University in Parliament; his friends are busy trying to get a dignified and remunerative job for him - the Provostship of King's, the Mastership of Charterhouse, the Controllership of the Mint.
Newton could not be Master of Trinity because he was a Unitarian and so not in Holy Orders. He was rejected as Provost of King's for the more prosaic reason that he was not an Etonian. Newton took this rejection very ill and prepared a long legalistic brief, which I possess, giving reasons why it was not unlawful for him to be accepted as Provost. But, as ill-luck had it, Newton's nomination for the Provostship came at the moment when King's had decided to fight against the right of Crown nomination, a struggle in which the College was successful.
Newton was well qualified for any of these offices. It must not be inferred from his introspection, his absent-mindedness, his secrecy and his solitude that he lacked aptitude for affairs when he chose to exercise it. There are many records to prove his very great capacity. Read, for example, his correspondence with Dr Covell, the Vice-Chancellor when, as the University's representative in Parliament, he had to deal with the delicate question of the oaths after the revolution of 1688. With Pepys and Lowndes he became one of the greatest and most efficient of our civil servants. He was a very successful investor of funds, surmounting the crisis of the South Sea Bubble, and died a rich man. He possessed in exceptional degree almost every kind of intellectual aptitude - lawyer, historian, theologian, not less than mathematician, physicist, astronomer.
And when the turn of his life came and he put his books of magic back into the box, it was easy for him to drop the seventeenth century behind him and to evolve into the eighteenth-century figure which is the traditional Newton.
Nevertheless, the move on the part of his friends to change his life came almost too late. In 1689 his mother, to whom he was deeply attached, died. Somewhere about his fiftieth birthday on Christmas Day 1692, he suffered what we should now term a severe nervous breakdown. Melancholia, sleeplessness, fears of persecution - he writes to Pepys and to Locke and no doubt to others letters which lead them to think that his mind is deranged. He lost, in his own words, the 'former consistency of his mind'. He never again concentrated after the old fashion or did any fresh work. The breakdown probably lasted nearly two years, and from it emerged, slightly 'gaga', but still, no doubt, with one of the most powerful minds of England, the Sir Isaac Newton of tradition.
In 1696 his friends were finally successful in digging him out of Cambridge, and for more than another twenty years he reigned in London as the most famous man of his age, of Europe, and - as his powers gradually waned and his affability increased - perhaps of all time, so it seemed to his contemporaries.
He set up house with his niece Catharine Barton, who was beyond reasonable doubt the mistress of his old and loyal friend Charles Montague, Earl of Halifax and Chancellor of the Exchequer, who had been one of Newton's intimate friends when he was an undergraduate at Trinity. Catharine was reputed to be one of the most brilliant and charming women in the London of Congreve, Swift and Pope. She is celebrated, not least for the broadness of her stories, in Swift's Journal to Stella. Newton puts on rather too much weight for his moderate height. 'When he rode in his coach one arm would be out of his coach on one side and the other on the other.' His pink face, beneath a mass of snow-white hair, which 'when his peruke was off was a venerable sight', is increasingly both benevolent and majestic. One night in Trinity after Hall he is knighted by Queen Anne. For nearly twenty-four years he reigns as President of the Royal Society. He becomes one of the principal sights of London for all visiting intellectual foreigners, whom he entertains handsomely. He liked to have clever young men about him to edit new editions of the Principia - and sometimes merely plausible ones as in the case of Facio de Duillier.
Magic was quite forgotten. He has become the Sage and Monarch of the Age of Reason. The Sir Isaac Newton of orthodox tradition - the eighteenth-century Sir Isaac, so remote from the child magician born in the first half of the seventeenth century - was being built up. Voltaire returning from his trip to London was able to report of Sir Isaac - 'twas his peculiar felicity, not only to be born in a country of liberty, but in an Age when all scholastic impertinences were banished from the World. Reason alone was cultivated and Mankind could only be his Pupil, not his Enemy.' Newton, whose secret heresies and scholastic superstitions it had been the study of a lifetime to conceal!
But he never concentrated, never recovered 'the former consistency of his mind'. 'He spoke very little in company.' 'He had something rather languid in his look and manner.'
And he looked very seldom, I expect, into the chest where, when he left Cambridge, he had packed all the evidences of what had occupied and so absorbed his intense and flaming spirit in his rooms and his garden and his elaboratory between the Great Gate and Chapel.
But he did not destroy them. They remained in the box to shock profoundly any eighteenth- or nineteenth-century prying eyes. They became the possession of Catharine Barton and then of her daughter, the Countess of Portsmouth. So Newton's chest, with many hundreds of thousands of words of his unpublished writings, came to contain the 'Portsmouth Papers'.
In 1888 the mathematical portion was given to the University Library at Cambridge. They have been indexed, but they have never been edited. The rest, a very large collection, were dispersed in the auction room in 1936 by Catharine Barton's descendant, the present Lord Lymington. Disturbed by this impiety, I managed gradually to reassemble about half of them, including nearly the whole of the biographical portion, that is, the 'Conduitt Papers', in order to bring them to Cambridge which I hope they will never leave. The greater part of the rest were snatched out of my reach by a syndicate which hoped to sell them at a high price, probably in America, on the occasion of the recent tercentenary.
As one broods over these queer collections, it seems easier to understand - with an understanding which is not, I hope, distorted in the other direction - this strange spirit, who was tempted by the Devil to believe at the time when within these walls he. was solving so much, that he could reach all the secrets of God and Nature by the pure power of mind Copernicus and Faustus in one.

JOC/EFR March 2006
The URL of this page is:

http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Extras/Keynes_Newton.html




[A Grove.]



Enter FAUSTUS to conjure


  Faust.  
Now that the gloomy shadow of the earth

Longing to view Orion’s drizzling look,

Leaps from the antarctic world unto the sky,

And dims the welkin with her pitchy breath,
Faustus, begin thine incantations,

And try if devils will obey thy hest,

Seeing thou hast pray’d and sacrific’d to them.

Within this circle is Jehovah’s name,

Forward and backward anagrammatis’d,
The breviated names of holy saints,

Figures of every adjunct to the Heavens,

And characters of signs and erring 1 stars,

By which the spirits are enforc’d to rise:

Then fear not, Faustus, but be resolute,
And try the uttermost magic can perform.

  Sint mihi Dei Acherontis propitii! Valeat numen triplex Jehovae! Ignei, aerii, aquatani spiritus, salvete! Orientis princeps Belzebub, inferni ardentis monarcha, et Demogorgon, propitiamus vos, ut appareat et surgat Mephistophilis. Quid tu moraris? per Jehovam, Gehennam et consecratum aquam quam nunc spargo, signumque crucis quod nunc facio, et per vota nostra, ipse nunc surgat nobis dicatus Mephistophilis! 2

Enter 
[MEPHISTOPHILIS] 
a DEVIL

I charge thee to return and change thy shape;

Thou art too ugly to attend on me.
Go, and return an old Franciscan friar;

That holy shape becomes a devil best.  
[Exit DEVIL

I see there’s virtue in my heavenly words;

Who would not be proficient in this art?

How pliant is this Mephistophilis,
Full of obedience and humility!

Such is the force of magic and my spells.

[Now,] Faustus, thou art conjuror laureat,

Thou canst command great Mephistophilis:

Quin regis Mephistophilis fratris imagine. 3
Re-enter MEPHISTOPHILIS 
[like a Franciscan Friar]

  Meph.  
Now, Faustus, what would’st thou have me to do?

  Faust. 
 I charge thee wait upon me whilst I live,

To do whatever Faustus shall command,

Be it to make the moon drop from her sphere,
Or the ocean to overwhelm the world.

  Meph.  
I am a servant to great Lucifer,

And may not follow thee without his leave

No more than he commands must we perform.

  Faust.  
Did not he charge thee to appear to me?
  Meph.  
No, I came hither of mine own accord.

  Faust.  
Did not my conjuring speeches raise thee? Speak.

  Meph.  
That was the cause, but yet per accidens;

For when we hear one rack 4 the name of God,

Abjure the Scriptures and his Saviour Christ,
We fly in hope to get his glorious soul;

Nor will we come, unless he use such means

Whereby he is in danger to be damn’d:

Therefore the shortest cut for conjuring

Is stoutly to abjure the Trinity,
And pray devoutly to the Prince of Hell.

  Faust.  
So Faustus hath

Already done; and holds this principle,

There is no chief but only Belzebub,

To whom Faustus doth dedicate himself.
This word “damnation” terrifies not him,

For he confounds hell in Elysium; 5

His ghost be with the old philosophers!

But, leaving these vain trifles of men’s souls,

Tell me what is that Lucifer thy lord?
  Meph.  
Arch-regent and commander of all spirits.

  Faust.  
Was not that Lucifer an angel once?

  Meph.  
Yes, Faustus, and most dearly lov’d of God.

  Faust.  
How comes it then that he is Prince of devils?

  Meph.  
O, by aspiring pride and insolence;
For which God threw him from the face of Heaven.

  Faust.  
And what are you that you live with Lucifer?

  Meph.  
Unhappy spirits that fell with Lucifer,

Conspir’d against our God with Lucifer,

And are for ever damn’d with Lucifer.
  Faust.  
Where are you damn’d?

  Meph.  
In hell.

  Faust.  
How comes it then that thou art out of hell?

  Meph.  
Why this is hell, nor am I out of it.

Think’st thou that I who saw the face of God,
And tasted the eternal joys of Heaven,

Am not tormented with ten thousand hells,

In being depriv’d of everlasting bliss?

O Faustus! leave these frivolous demands,

Which strike a terror to my fainting soul.
  Faust.  
What, is great Mephistophilis so passionate

For being depriv’d of the joys of Heaven?

Learn thou of Faustus manly fortitude,

And scorn those joys thou never shalt possess.

Go bear these tidings to great Lucifer:
Seeing Faustus hath incurr’d eternal death

By desperate thoughts against Jove’s deity,

Say he surrenders up to him his soul,

So he will spare him four and twenty years,

Letting him live in all voluptuousness;
Having thee ever to attend on me;

To give me whatsoever I shall ask,

To tell me whatsoever I demand,

To slay mine enemies, and aid my friends,

And always be obedient to my will.
Go and return to mighty Lucifer,

And meet me in my study at midnight,

And then resolve 6 me of thy master’s mind.

  Meph.  
I will, Faustus.  

Exit.

  Faust.  
Had I as many souls as there be stars,
I’d give them all for Mephistophilis.

By him I’ll be great Emperor of the world,

And make a bridge through the moving air,

To pass the ocean with a band of men:

I’ll join the hills that bind the Afric shore,
And make that [country] continent to Spain,

And both contributory to my crown.

The Emperor shall not live but by my leave,

Nor any potentate of Germany.

Now that I have obtain’d what I desire,
I’ll live in speculation 7 of this art

Till Mephistophilis return again.  
Exit.


Note 1. Wandering. [back]
Note 2. “Be propitious to me, gods of Acheron! May the triple deity of Jehovah prevail! Spirits of fire, air, water, hail! Belzebub, Prince of the East, monarch of burning hell, and Demogorgon, we propitiate ye, that Mephistophilis may appear and rise. Why dost thou delay? By Jehovah, Gehenna, and the holy water which now I sprinkle, and the sign of the cross which now I make, and by our prayer, may Mephistophilis now summoned by us arise!” [back]
Note 3. “For indeed thou hast power in the image of thy brother Mephistophilis.” [back]
Note 4. Twist in anagrams. [back]
Note 5. Heaven and hell are indifferent to him. [back]
Note 6. Inform. [back]
Note 7. Study. [back]

The 7-Step Plan for Climbing Out of Hell


The 7-Step Plan for Climbing Out of Hel 
("Hell")


“On the other hand, a goddess of death who represents the horrors of slaughter and decay is something well known elsewhere; the figure of Kali in India is an outstanding example. Like Snorri’s Hel, she is terrifying to in appearance, black or dark in colour, usually naked, adorned with severed heads or arms or the corpses of children, her lips smeared with blood. She haunts the battlefield or cremation ground and squats on corpses. Yet for all this she is ‘the recipient of ardent devotion from countless devotees who approach her as their mother’ 

Hilda Ellis Davidson (2002 [1998]). 
Roles of the Northern Goddess. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-13611-3


E pur si muove


"...and yet it still moves."

Monday, 18 July 2016

Verrocchio


The Baptism of Christ is a painting finished around 1475 in the studio of the Italian Renaissance painter Andrea del Verrocchio and generally ascribed to him and his pupil Leonardo da Vinci. Some art historians discern the hands of other members of Verrocchio's workshop in the painting as well. The picture depicts the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as recorded in the Biblical Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. The angel to the left is recorded as having been painted by the youthful Leonardo, a fact which has excited so much special comment and mythology, that the importance and value of the picture as a whole and within the Å“uvre of Verrocchio is often overlooked. Modern critics also attribute much of the landscape in the background and the figure of Christ to Leonardo da Vinci as well.

The painting is housed in the Uffizi Gallery in Florence.

LaRouche vs. The Cathars



The cult of Buggery vs. Cusa and Kepler

Let' s situate the problem in terms of science as such . 

What we call modern science-that is, the idea of an integrated, comprehensive mathematical physics, or physical science, began during the second quarter of the 15th century-we might say, in effect, at about the time of the 1439 Council of Florence. From inside science itself, the policy and perspective, the Christian Platonic approach to science typified by the work of Cusa, who is the virtual founder of modern science, by Leonardo da Vinci, and by followers such as Kepler, was essentially uncontested, that is, within science itself, up until about the beginning of the 17th century; and after that period, the foundations of science laid by, principally, Cusa, Leonardo da Vinci, and Kepler, were continued by people such as Desargues, Fermat, Huygens, Leibniz, the Bernoullis. and so forth. into Monge and Poncelet, Riemann, Gauss, and Cantor, in the l9th century. 

The problem on which we should focus, both in science-that is, the problem of lack of understanding of what the cold fusion experiments signify, the crisis in science, the epistemological crisis in science prompted by the cold fusion experiments- results, and the witch-hunt itself-both go back to something which happened essentially during the 17th century in England and France. On the British side, the problem was the establishment of what became known as British empiricism by a group of Rosicrucian cultists associated with Francis Bacon, Thomas Hobbes, Elias Ashmole (the founder of British Freemasonry), John Locke and, of course, including Isaac Newton


These people introduced an anti-Renaissance, what was considered at that period an anti-science, Aristotelian method, which was infused in a very peculiar with one element. This element was the introduction into science of what became known as empiricism, but was originally the central feature of the most notorious, sexually perverted religious cult in the history of medieval Europe - that is, the Cathar, Bogomil, or Bugger cult from the district of southern France associated with Albi and Toulouse. 
The same thing happened in France itself. Buggery, in the form of the influence of this cult upon science, manifested itself in the work of Rene Descartes, particularly in Descartes's notion of deus ex machina. This established Cartesianism as a form of Buggery which has been traditional in French science and poisoning it or buggering it to the present day. This is quite literally the case: a Rosicrucian cult (which featured alchemy as one of its claims to fame), which was Aristotelian, cabbalistic, and Bugger (that is, it featured this split between spirit and flesh, as the new materialistic doctrine), which is characteristic of the Buggery cult of south France, of the Rhone district and Albi-Toulouse centuries earlier. 
This cult merits a little bit of attention just so we know what we're talking about. Most people don't know this. 
Before Christianity, there were established some very vicious cults in the area near Babylon: Oriental cults. These cults led to the various manifestations of a particular form of cult called Manicheanism. Now, one of these Manichean cults was situated in the eastern part of Turkey in the mountainous areas. For a while, this cult was used - it was a very vicious, bloody-handed cult - by the Caliphate against the Byzantine Empire. Later, according to Gibbon and others, a Byzantine Emperor called Constantine Copronymous took the cult, transplanted it or a good part of it from eastern Anatolia and stuck it in what was then Thrace, which is today modern Bulgaria. This cult was given the position of guarding the northern borders of the Byzantine Empire against these Slavs who were coming down into the area at the time. 
As a result, as the cult became embedded there, sponsored by the Byzantine Empire, no less, the cult took a Slavic name, and became known as not only the Cathars, but also the Bogomils. 
The cult was spread by Venetian bankers working on behalf of the Byzantine Empire, into the south of France, where it was known variously thus, as the Bogomil cult, which is what the Bulgarian branch of the cult called itself, the Cathars, which all called themselves, that is, the Cathars, the "pure," or the purified, and it was also known in France as the Bulgarian cult. So we had the French les bougres, which was translated into English for the convenience of the English speaker, as "the Buggers." 

Now, because of this cult's peculiar sexual perversion - that is, the belief that a man putting semen into a woman to impregnate her, was propagating the flesh, and that was evil - it resorted to various other kinds of sexual recreation and thus the name "Bugger" in English became associated with what it has become associated with in English to this day. 


So quite literally, Francis Bacon and his tribe buggered science and the result of this was empiricism. And a similar thing happened in France, in the form of the cult of Descartes, of Cartesianism. 

This cult, this pseudo-alchemic cult called "Rosicrucian" during that period, and later called Freemasonic (based on the Freemasonic orders which were spun out of Rosicrucianism by people such as Elias Ashmole, Bacon, Hobbes, Locke and so forth), has been the dominant influence in what is called (or was called partly during the 17th century and more so during the 18th century), "the Enlightenment.

The characteristic of the Enlightenment is that it was anti-Renaissance, and that it promoted materialism. Now, let's look exactly at what that means, and how that affects the kind of problem in science we're dealing with in cold fusion today, how the two things intersect. First, as I said, we'll look, from the scientific side, at the epistemological crisis, and secondly, let's look at it from the standpoint of the cult aspect of the crisis.


The Essential Subjectivity of Science

Lurking among the numerous accomplishments of modern science, there is the absurd, but popular delusion, that "physical science" is both "materialist" and "objective." The worst, and most widespread forms of this delusion assume, first, that scientific method is essentially statistical, and that "mathematical science" is associated with measurement of forces acting along a straight-line pathway between two points. This popular delusion was key to the widespread "systems analysis" hoaxes, such as Professor Norbert Wiener's "information theory."

The proof, that such definitions of "objective science" are absurd, is elementary; that proof is given as a central feature of this author's introductory course in Leibniz's science of Physical Economy.45 We summarize the background considerations, point by point 

1. If man were a mere animal, that is, like a baboon, a creature innately disposed to what is called "primitive hunting and gathering" modes of social reproduction, at no time could the living human population of this planet have exceeded about ten millions individuals 

2. The increase in the human population, and the associated improvements in life-expectancy and standard of existence, are the cumulative benefit of what we may identify most simply and fairly as "scientific and technological progress." The measure of this function of progress is an increase in the potential population-density of the human species; this represents a higher per-capita standard of living and longevity, combined with a decrease in the total number of hectares required to sustain an average individual human life 

3. These improvements are expressed functionally through a succession of successful, radical changes in human productive behavior, a succession akin to the series of discontinuities associated with A, B, C, D, E, ... referenced above. These changes in the behavior of successive levels of upward development of society are analogous in form or function, and effect, to successful, upward biological evolution of species among the lower forms of life.46

4. Thus, the problem of both discovering and choosing a Type of sequential ordering of thought-objects, corresponding to a negentropically ordered succession of revolutionary scientific modifications in known scientific principles, is a subjective matter. It is a matter of discovering which subjective Type of creative-mental generation of thought-objects corresponds to a negentropic sequence of increase in man's cultural potential for increasing potential population-density.

Thus, from this point of view, the subject of science is that higher-order of thought-object—a transfinite—which correlates formal scientific progress with rate of increase of this science-driven rate of growth of a culture's potential population-density. In other words, man willfully increasing mankind's power to perpetuate ever-more successfully his own species' dominating existence within the universe.

This view is in contrast to the popularized materialist mythos of so-called "objective science," of man as the contemplative mathematician-observer.

"I see myself creating, as I define creation, as a common principle of that array of named thought-objects of fundamental discovery associated with such as Plato, Archimedes, Cusa, Leonardo, Kepler, and Leibniz. I locate my own creating-activity in respect to an effort to attribute a higher thought-object, a Cantorian Type, to the manifold composed of such historic names of original discoverers. This attribution of a specific choice of order for such an 'aleph-manifold,' and of attributing a Type to that choice of ordering, is the immediate subject of my inquiry.

"This Type defines a relatively fundamental scientific principle, as an hypothetical choice of such a principle; in Plato, this is referenced as 'hypothesizing the higher hypothesis.' I now correlate that hypothetical choice of Type with a manifest ordering of science-driven growth of relative potential population-density, of relatively superior and inferior modes of physical-economic culture."

This correlation is the characteristic activity of physical science; seeking to subsume all such hypothesizing of the higher hypothesis as a manifold of a yet higher Type, is physical science.47

As described in other locations,48the details of this phenomenon are of the following form. The hypothetical inference of a new Type of ordering of crucial thought-objects of fundamental scientific discovery as a manifold (or, sub-manifold), in respect to a single Type of crucial (or, "unique") paradox, subsumes an experimental design for some crucial expression of this new hypothesis. That subsumes, in turn, the design of either an experimental apparatus, or an observational method akin to such an apparatus.

Thus, from fundamental discovery of (transfinite) ordering-principle, through the design of an experiment, through that experimental design expressed as a new principle of machine-tool (or, analogous) design, is the generation of a discovery of scientific principle transmitted and assimilated into a general increase of social productivity. In every step of that process, the essential thing is the generation of a new conceptual thought-object by, within, and in accord with the sovereign, individual creative mental processes of the mind of a sovereignly individual person.
We should emphasize by aid of such means as reiteration, that the process just outlined is Plato's "hypothesizing the higher hypothesis." The higher hypothesis is the Type of cardinality to which corresponds a manifold (or, sub-manifold) of thought-objects arranged in a certain choice of ordering. The choosing of such a particular such higher hypothesis, the hypothesizing of the selection of one or more such higher hypotheses for such an array of individual thought-objects, is itself the consideration of a manifold of such alternative Types. The latter manifold's Type is what we should signify by physical science.

In other words, physical science is essentially the process of discovering those rules of creative behavior of our individual mental processes which lead us to discoveries of a Type through which general culture may be changed to optimize the rate of increase of our species' potential population-density. In this fashion, physical science is essentially subjective.

Admittedly, that does not complete the argument. If a certain type of "hypothesizing the higher hypothesis" is physical science, then increases in potential population-density, so successively achieved, show us that the intelligible form of lawful ordering of nature is coherent with the process of perfection of our hypothesizing the higher hypothesis. Thus, it is our successful hypothesizing of the higher hypothesis, in this fashion, rather than our sensory impressions, the which is the proper basis for determining the lawful composition, and ontological characteristics, of that real physical universe which lies beyond the full reach of our mere senses.
Our creative-mental processes do not address directly sensory objects as sensory objects per se.Human thought knows only change; we know only a thinkable correspondence between a change in our behavior and a correlated change in the manifest behavior of nature. It is a correspondence of the two Types of change which constitute the entirety of real physical science. That correspondence is what is intelligible for us; we must discover everything else respecting nature from this approach to the elementary primacy of change, to the universal elementarity in space-time of nothing but change.

This point is clearer, if we look now at the historical source of the leading opposition to the picture we have presented.
The leading opponent of our Leibnizian view of science, and the modern opponent of Plato, Cusa, Leonardo da Vinci, Kepler, and Leibniz, for example, is the so-called "materialist," or "mechanistic" standpoint of Francis Bacon, Robert Fludd, Elias Ashmole, René Descartes, John Locke, and Isaac Newton. This "materialist" dogma was introduced to seventeenth-century France and England by the then newly-established cult of the Rosicrucians. The essence of this gnostic Rosicrucian dogma is typified by René Descartes' deus ex machina49 and Isaac Newton's maxim hypotheses non fingo.50This is also the axiomatically "hereditary" origin of such modern forms of radical positivism as von Neumann's "systems analysis," Professor Noam Chomsky's Korschite "linguistics," and Wiener's "information theory" hoax.
Consider as much of this Rosicrucian cult's dogma as is essential to locate the origins of that popular delusion we recognize most readily as the mythos of "objective science." The derivation of the Rosicrucian cult is the best vantage-point for this undertaking.

The seventeenth-century Rosicrucian cult of Fludd, Ashmole, et al. was a resurfacing of a notorious, usury-practicing, medieval sect known variously as the Cathars, Bogomils, or, more commonly, "The Buggers."51 

This sect, which infested the market centers of northern Italy and southern France ("Languedoc"), was one of many varieties of kindred gnostic cults sprung up over the centuries from such very ancient pagan origins as the Phrygian cult of Cybele-Dionysus, the Delphic cult of Apollo-Dionysus, the Hellenic cult of Osiris, and the sundry Babylonian and Canaanite mystery religions.

The relevant feature of these gnostic forerunners of Ashmolean Rosicrucianism is the doctrine of utter depravity of the "flesh" which is the direct source of the materialist dogmas of Bacon, Descartes, Locke, Newton, et al.The sexual perversions of the Cathars are a direct, doctrinaire correlative of this materialist dogma of theirs. Briefly, one of the cult's Elect was forbidden to place his semen in the vagina of a woman, lest he cause the procreation of newborn human flesh! The spirit inhabiting the Elect must be kept apart from the utter depravity of the fleshly process of human procreation.52

That said, consider the case of science-driven increase of society's potential population-density. The origin of a new, valid, fundamental discovery, is a mental act of creation, a spiritual act, the generation of such a thought-object. The derivation of a design of experimental apparatus, and then a machine-tool principle, from the new thought-object, is the source of a powerful material effect. This is the connection which the Rosicrucian Descartes insisted must be broken: deus ex machina,and which Newton forbade: hypotheses non fingo.
What kind of society do these Manichean, or Bugger Elect represent? The Elect are forbidden to interfere with nature; they cannot till the soil, nor perform other productive labor. They are permitted to subsist by begging for alms, or to loan their accumulation of monetary savings from alms-gathering in usury. The Elect form, thus, a parasitical class subsisting by tribute and usury.

The strength of such a usury-practicing gnostic conspiracy, is that the Elect of the "Bugger" sect could sell a note for twelve or more ducats in Lyons, which could be redeemed by the bearer at discount for ten ducats, or less, in Padua. Thus, spider-web networks of Elect "Buggers" spread across northern Italy and southern France of the Garonne-Tarn and Rhône regions, in symbiosis with the other principal usury-practicing "Elects" among Lombard bankers and Jewish money-lenders.

The following summary is fair. As the oligarchical, usury-practicing I Nuovi faction of the Venetian merchant-bankers spread their parasitical, oligarchical power, by such vehicles as the Levant Company, into England, the Netherlands, and the old Hanse regions of Northern Europe generally, the Netherlands and England became the target for the launching of such Levant Company spin-offs as the Bank of England, the City of London financial center, and the Dutch and British "India" companies. London became thus the "new Venice," a union of the usurious Levant Company "Lombards" with the Rosicrucian cult of Bacon, Ashmole, et al.

These seventeenth-century developments were the roots of the combined work of the Liberal Party and (later) Fabians of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, in seeking to establish London as the capital of a "Third Roman Empire," a worldwide form of pax universalis, a British Empire which would be a revival of the pagan Roman Empire of Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Nero, and Diocletian.

Originally, science was solely a creation of the Platonists of the Golden Renaissance, chiefly the work of those fifteenth-century moral and intellectual giants who are best typified by Cardinal Nicolaus of Cusa and Leonardo da Vinci. This tradition was continued by the work of such as Kepler, Gilbert, Fermat, Desargues, Pascal, Huygens, Leibniz, and the Bernoullis. That seventeenth-century Leibnizian tradition was carried into the nineteenth century by such figures as France's Gaspard Monge, and Germany's Gauss and Riemann. This tradition is sometimes called "continental science," to distinguish it from the Cartesian, empiricist, and positivist outgrowths of the Rosicrucian influence.
The cases of Bacon, Fludd, Descartes, and Newton established the counter-science variously expressed as Cartesianism,empiricism, and positivism. The hegemony of this cult's "Enlightenment" materialism in most science classrooms today, is the result of British participation in victories in most of the wars of the past three hundred years. The supremacy of the Rosicrucian's materialist dogma in today's scientific establishment is not a scientific, but a purely political phenomenon.

The practical issue of this political division in the science establishment, is the overarching conflict between the two principal, conflicting social systems which have, almost entirely, dominated European history since Solon's defeat of the oligarchical usurers of ancient Athens, more than two-and-a-half thousand years ago. This is the point made by Friedrich Schiller's contrasting the humanist, republican constitution of Solon to the American-Confederacy-like law of Lycurgus' Spartan slave society.53

To sustain scientific and technological progress requires appropriate education of virtually all participants in the society's productive processes. A population so educated will not tolerate indefinitely that division of society's population into oligarchs and helots which was characteristic of Lycurgus' Sparta, the pagan Roman Empire, and the American Southern Scottish Rite Jurisdiction's Confederate States of America. The brutish ignorance to which the slaveholders' oligarchical system degraded not only the Confederates' "poor whites," but also most of the so-called "planter aristocracy,"54 illustrates the point at issue. The so-called "socialist" zero-technological growth decrees of the Roman Emperor Diocletian are a notable, consistent precedent for the brutish degeneracy pervading the old Confederacy.55
On the other side of the same issue of policy, an ignorant people is not capable of self-government. To govern oneself requires the capacity for efficient comprehension of qualities of processes which are, by their nature, intrinsically beyond the developmental capacity of the scientifically illiterate strata. As several founders of the U.S. federal republic warned, the survival of such a democratic republic as theirs under natural law required a certain minimal quality of compulsory education.56 Friedrich Schiller presented the conceptual basis for the most successful model of Christian classical humanist education, the reforms of Wilhelm von Humboldt.57
Under the influence of such a quality of universal compulsory secondary education, that educated citizenry will conspire to free itself from any oligarchical rule. Yet, without such an intrinsically anti-oligarchical form of education, a society could not generate, transmit, or assimilate efficiently scientific and technological progress in a general way. The self-interest of the oligarchy, as a social formation, is to destroy nations practicing generalized scientific and technological progress, and then seek to outlaw, throughout the world, both classical education and the practice of scientific progress. That is the entropic Type of cultural policy represented by the "(guild) socialism" of Diocletian, wherever the like appears, down through the ages of history since not later than the Phrygian Cybeline cult of Dionysus.
Like Kant's pro-irrationalist Critiques later, Descartes' gnostic deus ex machina dogma sought to paint a picture of the material world independent of that indispensable subjective agency, the creative mental processes upon which the discovery of all scientific knowledge depends absolutely. Kant did not deny the efficient existence of creative powers of scientific discovery, but pronounced deliberative creative acts to be impossible.58
That is the kernel of what passes for sophisticated philosophical materialism. To the credulous simpleton, the materialist demagogue exhibits himself as a solid, down-to-earth good fellow, one, perhaps, with all four feet firmly planted on the ground. "We materialists believe in nothing we cannot experience first-hand, with our own good five senses." To thoughtful, literate audiences, such cheap rhetoric is not persuasive; the argument of the Kantian unknowable thing-in-itself and Descartes' deus ex machina is offered, instead.
For us, the relevant experience on which physical science must be premised, is not fixedness, but change: the correlation of a change in our scientific thinking for practice, with the resulting change in the responsive behavior of nature. Unlike that theology as such which references the Absolute of Plato's the Good,59mere physical science does not know the Absolute, but only Cantor's Transfinite. The domain of the transfinite is, at its highest level, Plato's hypothesizing the higher hypothesis, the domain of physical space-time, the domain of change, of perfecting that which remains unperfected. Thus, for physical science, the science of physical space-time, experience is change, and change is the elementary substantial feature of all scientific experience.
As the illustrative case of the experiment shows, change begins as an ostensibly non-material, subjective act of valid creative discovery of new, un-utterable Geistesmassenthought-objects.This first step in the causal sequence of human action is spiritual, not "material." Under the "foremanship" of the relevant thought-object, a crucial experimental design is fashioned, a material medium for the spiritual cause, which latter is the thought-object. So, we had next, the derivation of the new machine-tool principle, and the medium through which man's per-capita power over the universe, per square-kilometer, is increased. The latter is the relevant material effect.
It is this sequence, this spiritual change causing the material change, which every successful experiment demonstrates. The materialist insists that the results of the experiment must be described only in such ways as leave the generation of the relevant new thought-object out of account. Since the universe responds to the experiment as it is actually developed, as prompted by an initially spiritual cause, materialism, with its materialist's fanatic adherence to formal deductive consistency, falsifies the universe by such reductionist fallacy of composition.

top


Footnotes

45. LaRouche, "In Defense of Common Sense," chaps. II-IV; and "The Science of Christian Economy," chaps. II-IV, VI; in Christian Economy, op. cit.
46. Cf. Nicolaus of Cusa. Cusa's view in an early work, On Learned Ignorance, is that "God has implanted in all things a natural desire to exist with the fullest measure of existence that is compatible with their particular nature .... There is in them a discernment that is natural and in keeping with the purpose of their knowledge, which ensures their natural inclination serving its purpose and being able to reach its fulfillment."
Later, in "The Vision of God," (1464), Cusa develops the conception that each species, with its natural faculties as they develop, "yearns" for the existence of a higher species, as man does for the knowledge of the Absolute, of God. Here, Cusa's idea of negentropic species-evolution as the characteristic of Creation, is expressed by the poetic conception terminus specie. The universe consists of negentropic growth of higher orderings, whose microcosm is human reason. The species recognizes this divine order of creation, in its own way, and becomes a singularity in the transition from one ordering to the next. Thus the species has a terminus specie, the actualization of infinity in one point, which enables further development. "This power, which I have from Thee, and in which I possess a living image of the power of Thy almightiness, is the free will through which I am capable of either increasing or reducing the capacity to recive Thy beneficence."
47 See LaRouche, U.S. Science Policy, chap. III, section "The Geometry of Creative Reason," op. cit.
48 See LaRouche, "In Defense of Common Sense," chaps. IV, XII; "Project A," chaps. XVII, XVIII; and "The Science of Christian Economy," chaps. IV, VII; in Christian Economy, op. cit.
49 On Descartes' deus ex machina, see LaRouche, U.S. Science Policy, chap. IV 
50 Sir Isaac Newton, in his The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy (New York: The New York Philosophical Society, 1964), states "hypothesis non fingo" (I don't make hypotheses), and explains his reasons for this on grounds of induction versus hypothesis 
51 See LaRouche, U.S. Science Policy, chap. IV, op. cit.
We first hear of the Bogomils in the tenth century a.d.i n Bulgaria. (In Bulgarian, Bogomil means "beloved of God.") Among their beliefs is the characteristically gnostic one, that the Father of Jesus Christ was not the Creator of the world. For the Bogomils and later the Cathars, the power of the devil worked through the nature and constraints of the material world; matter and spirit were never meant to co-abit. This division and its corresponding principles of good and evil, light and darkness, is broadly called dualism. For the origins of the Bogomil or Cathar cults in Manicheanism, and the Albigensian Crusade against them, see LaRouche, Christian Economy, pp. 485-486, op. cit.
52 The Cathar cult was known in France as the Bulgarian cult, or "Les Bougres," which translated into English as "the Buggers." Because of the cult's peculiar sexual perversion, which flowed from their gnostic doctrine of separation of matter and spirit, it resorted to various other kinds of sexual activity, and thus the name "Bugger" became associated in English with homosexuality.
Overt gnostic cultism continues to this day, including the sexual perversions. In Colombia, for example, the head of the Universal Christian Gnostic Church, Samael Aun Weor, is the author of a book entitled Perfect Marriage,which asserts: "The age of sex is coming, the New Age of Aquarius .... Sexual magic will be officially admitted in the universities of the new Aquarian Age." The book continues: "To create a child, you do not need to spill semen. The spermatozoid which escapes without spilling semen is a choice spermatozoid of a superior nature, totally mature. The result of such impregnation is a new creation of exremely high order. That is how we can form a race of Supermen. In the mysteries of Eleusis, the sacred dances, the naked dances, the burning kiss and sexual connection, they make men unto Gods ... the Sufi dances and the whirling dervishes are tremendiously marvelous." Aun Weor is also the author of The Social Transformation of Society, which sketches the Gnostics' political program for Latin America. The Gnostic Church has been the political controller of the M-19 narcoterrorists who today share power with the government of Colombia 
53 See Friedrich Schiller, "The Legislation of Lycurgus and Solon," in Friedrich Schiller, Poet of Freedom, Vol. II, ed. by William F. Wertz, Jr. (Washington, D.C.: Schiller Institute, 1988) 
54 See Fred Henderson, "Free Trade, The Confederacy, and Slavery," The New Federalist, Vol. V, No. 36, Nov. 11, 1991, pp. 5-6; "The Lee myth is debunked but not the more dangerous mythmakers," Executive Intelligence Review, Vol. 18, No. 38, Oct. 4, 1991, p. 62ff 
55 The decrees of the Roman Emperor Diocletian (284-305 a.d. attempted to freeze the economic crumbling of the Roman Empire by fixing prices and wages by law. This led in the fourth century to the reforms of the Emperor Theodosius, which established legal enforcement of the occupation which each Roman citizen was forced to follow for his entire life. These Malthusian reforms were the earliest attempt to impose socialist decrees by totalitarian government. See Global Showdown, §2.3 (Washington, D.C.: Executive Intelligence Review, 1985), on the edicts of Diocletian and his successors 
56 See, for example: Benjamin Franklin, "Proposals Relating to the Education of the Youth in Pennsylvania," Philadelphia (1749). Thomas Jefferson, "A Bill for the More General Diffusion of Knowledge" (1779), in Thomas Jefferson: Writings, ed. by Merrill D. Peterson (New York: Library of America, 1984): "[T]he most effectual means of preventing [tyranny] would be, to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people at large .... [Therefore] it becomes expedient for promoting the public happiness that those persons, whom nature hath endowed with genius and virtue, should be rendered by liberal education worth to receive, and able to guard, the sacred deposit of the rights and liberties of their fellow citizens, and that they should be called to that charge without regard to wealth, birth, or other accidental condition or circumstance." John Adams, "Thoughts on Government" (1776), in American Political Writing During the Founding Era: 1760-1805, Vol. I, ed. by Charles S. Hyneman and Donald S. Lutz (Indianaplis: Liberty Press, 1983). Benjamin Rush, "A Plan for the Establishment of Public Schools and the Diffusion of Knowledge in Pennsylvania; To Which Are Added, Thoughts upon the Mode of Education, Proper in a Republic" (1786), in American Political Writing, op. cit.
57 See Friedrich Schiller, "Aesthetical Lectures (1792-1793)" and Wilhelm von Humboldt, "On Schiller and the Course of His Spiritual Development," both in Friedrich Schiller, Poet of Freedom, op. cit. Humboldt, who predicated his work on the influence of and education provided him by Schiller, was for a time responsible for all educational policy in Prussia 
58 See Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, trans. by Norman Kemp Smith (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1965); Critique of Practical Reason, trans. by Lewis White Beck (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1956); also, in particular, Critique of Judgment, trans. by J.H. Bernard (New York: Hafner Press, 1951), §30-54, p. 152ff.: "[Genius] cannot describe or indicate scientifically how it brings about its products .... [A] Homer ... cannot show how his ideas ... come together in his head, simply because he does not know, and therefore cannot teach others."
59 Plato's arguments connecting the idea of the Good (or the Absolute Infinite as expressed by later Christian Platonists), both to the evolution of the physical universe, and to the process of Becoming proper to human reason, are developed with more and more arduous rigor in a number of dialogues: Theaetetus, Parmenides, Sophist, Republic, Philebus, Timaeus, Critias.
60 See footnote 58 
61 Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment, op. cit.
62 See A Manual on the Rudiments of Tuning and Registration, Vol. I (Washington, D.C.: Schiller Institute, 1992), chap. 11 
63 See footnote 1 
64 Georg Cantor, Theory of Transfinite Numbers, op. cit.
65 See Nicolaus of Cusa, "On Conjectures," in Philosophisch-Theologische Schriften, Vol. II (Vienna: Herder & Co., 1982), p. 158. "Man is indeed god, but not absolutely, since he is man; he is therefore a human god. Man is also the world, but not in a contracted way everything, since he is man; man is therefore a microscosm or a human world. The region of humanity therefore embraces God and the whole world in its human potentiality."
66 See Nicolaus of Cusa, "On the Filiation of God," in Philosophisch-Theologische Schriften, op. cit.,, p. 640. "Indeed, just as God is the actual essence of all things, so is the intellect, separated and united in itself vitally and reflexively, a living similitude of God. Therefore, as God Himself is the essence of all things, so the intellect, the similitude of God, is the similitude of all things. Cognition, however, is effected through similitude. However, since the intellect is an intellectual living similitude of God, it knows, when it knows itself, everything in itself as the one."
See also Philo of Alexandria, op. cit., §XXIII: "Moses tells us that man was created after the image of God and after His likeness (Gen. 1:26).... Let no one represent the likeness as one to a bodily form; for neither is God in human form, nor is the human body God-like. No, it is in respect of the Mind, the sovereign element of the soul, that the word "image" is used; for after the pattern of a single Mind, even the Mind of the universe as an archetype, the mind in each of those who successively came into being was moulded.... [The human mind] opens by arts and sciences roads branching in many directions, all of them great highways.... (W)hen on soaring wings it has contemplated the atmosphere and all its phases, it is borne yet higher to the ether and the circuit of heaven, and is whirled round with the dances of planets and fixed stars, in accordance with the laws of perfect music, following that love of wisdom which guides its steps. And so, carrying its gaze beyond the confines of all substance discrenible by sense, it comes to a point at which it reaches out after the intelligible world."
67 See LaRouche, "In Defense of Common Sense," chap. XI; "Project A," chap. II; and "The Science of Christian Economy," chap. V; in Christian Economy, op. cit.
68 Cf. A Manual on Tuning, op. cit. References are the Preface: "The Classical Idea," passim; chap. 2: "The Six Species of Singing Voice"; chap. 9: "The Principles of Bel Canto"; chap. 10: "The Synthetic Geometry of Composition"; and chap. 11: "Artistic Beauty: Schiller vs. Goethe."
See also LaRouche, "Solution to Plato's Paradox of the 'One and the Many,' " and Jonathan Tennenbaum, "The Foundations of Scientific Musical Tuning," Fidelio, Vol. 1, No. 1, Winter 1992 
69 A Manual on Tuning, op. cit., chap. 10 
70 Cf. A Manual on Tuning, op.cit., chap. 11 
71 The attribution of musical notions to Cantor's work is ironically most appropriate. Cantor was an able amateur musician, of a musical tradition traced to his maternal grandfather Kapellmeister Ludwig Böhm, whose violinist brother, Joseph, was the teacher of the great virtuoso Joachim. (Adolf Frankel, Das Leben Georg Cantors, cited in Georg Cantors Gesammelte Abhandlung, op. cit., p. 452.) It was this Ludwig Böhm who delivered the definitive performance of Beethoven's late string quartets on Beethoven's behalf 
72 See footnote 46 for Cusa's concept of species-evolution 
73 See, G.W. Leibniz, Monadology, trans. by George Montgomery (LaSalle: Open Court Publishing Co., 1989) 
74 See footnote 3 
75 The, unfortunately, popularized myth of an "Hegelian" division of musical history, into successive "baroque," "classical," and "romantic" periods, should be simply ignored as nonsense. The work of Classical composerssuch as J. S. Bach, his famous sons, Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Schumann, Brahms, et al., is separated by a moral principle of composition from the contrasting, irrationalist principle of ascending chromatic eroticism adopted by such nineteenth-century Romantics as Berlioz, Liszt, and Wagner, et al.
76 Johann Sebastian Bach, "Musical Offering," BWV 1079 (New York: G. Schirmer, 1944) 
77 Joseph Haydn, Opus 33, "Russian" string quartets (Mineola, N.Y.: Dover Publications, 1985), ed. by Wilhelm Altman 
78 Cf. Bernhard Paumgartner, Mozart (München: 1991), chap. 31, pp. 299-311; p. 548 

79 See A Manual on Tuning, op. cit., chap. 12 passim, on the principled approach of Beethoven and Brahms to composing a set of variations on a theme 

80 Cited in Herbert Meschkowski and Winfried Nilson, eds., Georg Cantors Briefe, (Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, 1991), pp. 9-10, 478; from J. Bendiek, "Ein Brief Georg Cantors an Pater Ignazius Jeiler O.F.M.,Franzisch Kannischer Studien 47, 1965, pp. 65-73. "Die modernen Mathematiker in ihrer Mehrheit durch den glänzenden Erfolg ihres stets sich vollkommenden Formalwesens, das immer mehr Anwendungen auf die mechanische Seite der Natur zulässt, in einen Siegesrausch hineingeraten sind, der sie zur materialistischen Einseitigkeit verkommen lässt and sie für jegliche objektiv-metaphysische Erkenntnis and daher auch für die Grundlagen ihrer Wissenschaft blind macht."

81 See footnote 28.


Witness Protection


"Peace is more than the absence of war
Absence of war
Are we gonna see another bloody day?
We're tired of the cryin' and people dyin'
LET'S TAKE ALL THE GUNS AWAY"

Prince, feat. Eryn Allen Kane
Baltimore
2015

"His life was in danger. There is no doubt about it. It's clear from the FBI documents. There were serious assassination threats made against him"

Gail Giorgio, Author of "Oiron", "Is Elvis Alive", and "The Elvis Tape"

"Face Down - Dead, Like Elvis"

The Artist,
Face Down
Emancipation





[Eryn Allen Kane:]
Baltimore

[Prince:]
Nobody got in nobody's way
So I guess you could say it was a good day
At least a little better than the day in Baltimore
Does anybody hear us pray
For Michael Brown or Freddie Gray?
Peace is more than the absence of war
Absence of war

[Prince & Eryn Allen Kane:]
Are we gonna see another bloody day?
We're tired of the cryin' and people dyin'
LET'S TAKE ALL THE GUNS AWAY

[Prince:]
Absence of war, you and me
Maybe we can finally say
Enough is enough, it's time for love
It's time to hear
It's time to hear the guitar play, guitar play
Baltimore, ever more

If there ain't no justice then there ain't no peace
If there ain't no justice then there ain't no peace
If there ain't no justice then there ain't no peace
If there ain't no justice then there ain't no peace

[Prince & Eryn Allen Kane:]
Are we gonna see another bloody day?
We're tired of the cryin' and people dyin'
LET'S TAKE ALL THE GUNS AWAY

If there ain't no justice then there ain't no peace
If there ain't no justice then there ain't no peace
If there ain't no justice then there ain't no peace
If there ain't no justice then there ain't no peace

We have to interrupt the regular scheduled programming 
to bring you up to date on a developing situation in Los Angeles...






"Recently, Gail Giorgio and myself viewed FBI documents obtained by Gail.

In these documents, Elvis was the subject of numerous death threats.

Some of these threats came from well-known underground figures. It was also common knowledge that an undercover agent travelled as one of Elvis' band members.

It's because of this affiliation that Elvis had with government agencies, because of these death threats and the fact that this agent travelled as one of his band members, that lead us to conclude that the strong possibility exists the he may very well be a part of the Witness Protection Program.

But being a member of the Law-Enforcement Community myself, this prevents me from ever undermining the efforts of another law-enforcement agency.

And it also prevents me from telling you the answer to this question - which I know is The Truth."

Sunday, 17 July 2016

BreXit : The Economic Migrant Question




Yes, but Shango was born as a subject of the British Crown and the British Empire, and came to London as a Citizen of the British Commonwealth, at a time when most of our young men in the 1950s were dead, injured or maimed or overqualified for minimum wage entry-level unskilled jobs on account of their wartime training and skills.

There were far too many poorly paid menial jobs to be filled and nothing like the number of applicants needed who could do them for peanuts wages.

None of that applies to EU economic migrants, or to refugees of wars we started in their countries and it's an insult to the British public and to the intelligence of the British, Commonwealth Nations, Iraqi, Syrian, Romanaian, Polish and Bulgarian people (amongst  many others) to  assume we don't understand the the difference and won't noticed how you are trying to divide us against ourselves, instead.