Simple Analysis
Home Up Site Map

Complex Analysis


ll question stems from seven basic interrogatives.  They are who, what, when, where, how, why and which.  They in turn form the basis for our inquiry into the nature of truth.

As the less noble side of fate would have it, common place answers to basic questions vary considerably.  This is because variations in experience establish priority within everyone differently.  This has resulted in a human history riddled with confusion and controversy.  Until Einstein popularized relative thinking, the world was divided into two main camps of though regarding the 'certainty' of truth.  Plato is best know for framing one, Aristotle the other.

To paraphrase: Plato believed that all answers to foundational questions were logically constrained by an overarching principle that manifested itself in the form of unity.  This allegiance to singularity caused him to be known as an idealist.  Conversely, Aristotle believed that the evidence surrounding the search for it, provided a closer approximation of truth.  This affinity for multiplicity caused him to be known as a realist or practicalist.  To this day, the value of these two approaches remains in contention.

The reason for this enduring conflict is because every idea, except for 'certainty,' is naturally duplicitous.  This means that it depends upon an opposing idea for its qualification.  Hence "good" only assumes to meaning (for us) because there is "evil," just as up only has meaning (for us) because there is a down, etc.  We call this interdependency upon opposites dichotomy.  And, since both ideas are inseparable from one another -- in order for either to be known -- determining their priority initially fell to specific case and situation.  However, this left a lot of latitude by which to qualify anything, and that wound up yielding a complexity that is currently obscuring the fundamental interlinked nature of everything.

Enter 'certainty.'  By establishing the structure within thought by which opposing ideas achieve relevance, it provides a way to circumvent the controversy over priority within dichotomy inherent to conclusions -- and hence, the resultant complexity it has spawned.  This also establishes 'certainty' as the ideal or standard by which to understand everything else -- including who and what we are and how we've come to be.  Additionally, it logically fixes the undeniable responsibility that each person has to the potential that we mutually share with one another and life itself.

Why is all this important?  It's important, because nothing less than the realization of a common origin and attendant purpose can ever bring resolution to otherwise irresolvable conflict.  Anything less compelling can only be temporary, self serving, and overtly contentious.

However, in spite of its long recognized importance, the "form" of ‘certainty‘ has continued to elude discovery down through the ages.  As confounding as all this might seem, the reason is actually quite simple.  It is because the nature of ‘certainty’ appears to run counter to the language by which we assume to meaning for ourselves.  Language is temporally constrained while 'certainty' by definition is not.  This is because it characterizes the dynamics by which linear thought finds application for us, not the conclusions that we are able to reach by way of it.  Hence, we are predisposed to discard the possibility inherent to 'certainty' in favor of retaining continuity within the language by which we confirm our own existence.  Missing from this equation has been the understanding of how to respectfully combine the two.  Fortunately, this is now possible. 

In the following material you will be introduced to what many feel is the most important logical construct ever isolated from the field of human knowing.  Why would anyone pay such homage to an idea?  Because, by yielding the nature of truth, ‘certainty' establishes the terms by which we can justifiably judge and thereafter expect to be judged by whatever intellect has cause to do so.  Hence, it introduces undeniable responsibility into the human equation.  It does this, even as it confirms the necessity for acceptance of an all encompassing intellect which cannot be denied without invoking self denial.  In other words, with the delineation of 'certainty' comes the world's first logical (albeit generic) proof for what mankind generally refers to as Deity or God.  It is these understandings that touch the human soul at its very foundation, thus making them essential to the construction of a successful global peace initiative. 

Given the enormous amount of effort that has gone into authenticating the form of 'certainty' which you will consider later in this work, it is fair to say that a stronger case has never been made for any other idea throughout the history of mankind. (see Reviewers)

Due to the absence of 'certainty,' mankind has collected into competing power structures intent upon preserving delusional ideas about the importance of one's self.  Entwined with political, religious, economic and ideological divisions, this has allowed the threat from ‘critical issues’ to continue to grow unabated.  With science and technology providing the wherewithal, we now have a situation where societies can escalate localized conflict to global proportion with weapons of mass destruction.  This in turn puts all sentient life on Earth at direct risk.  Without a self imposing vision capable of overcoming the importance of existing division, it is now obvious that mankind has no viable future on this planet.

Back to Top