ver the last 8 years some 700 of the world's finest scholars received a
"formal" request to review the logical construct that you're about to
[see Reviewers]. This was done in order to
identify and resolve all legitimate concerns, capable of being voiced by credible authority, prior to the
introduction of this material to the general public. The reason for this thoroughness
self evident, once the enormous implications inherent in this construct
finally sink in.
responded enthusiastically. Others did so begrudgingly. The rest chose to circumvent
this issue by remaining silent -- in spite of repeated attempts
to engage them. The exchange
with participants was both intense and productive. It also confirmed that no one
was able to find a way to invalidate this construct. This caused
many authorities to endorse it. Given the results of this
Herculean task a claim to valid "proof" for this construct is now
justified. Hence, it is being made.
The 'proof' that you are about to consider marks the end of an
age old quest to
find the missing link that allows for a coherent representation of human understanding.
With its emergence, we are now able to visualize the true relationship between the
universal and particulate forms of unity -- i.e. quality and quantity, or the ideal and the
real. In addition, because it promotes a representation of the
Ultimacy of reason's function, it
cannot be denied without invoking self-denial. Since nothing more fundamental to human
understanding can or does exist, this construct stands as a moral /ethical imperative of the
absolute highest order.
To Summarize: 'Foundational theory' promotes a succession of ideas that cannot be
logically denied. It does this by exploiting the logical link that
makes possible the recognition of our own existence.
idea of the greater self is the inherent qualifier of all forms of the lesser self,
all claims to existence made by us simultaneously confirm Ultimacy's existence
-- albeit the
existence of a Deity as It finds cause to be manifested within time.
onsistent with including all recognized
authority in the validation process, MENSA (USA) was "formally" challenged to try
an invalidate this construct in June of 1996. For those who do not know what MENSA is, it is a collection of high IQ individuals that comprise the
top two percent of the population. Given its claim to "collective
genius" the request
I made of them was more than appropriate. After
nine months of negotiation an agreement was finally
reached to disseminate this proof to their 55,000 members in March of 1997.
Then, without prior notification or reason, officials within MENSA went back on their word. Calls to senior officials, including the chairman
of their board, yielded no explanation. Instead,
he justified the action as being one of "prerogative."
Hoping to circumvent national irresponsibility, I submitted the same challenge to MENSA
International. Included were copies of all my prior correspondence with their US
affiliate. Ashamedly, they too backed down without reason. So nineteen months and 21 pieces of
correspondence later, the genius of MENSA has yet to have the opportunity to address the
'formal' challenge extended to them. This is a sad commentary on their
"intellectual superiority;" when by association, they allows
become publicly discredited by officials that supposedly represent them. Hopefully the more insightful within MENSA will
eventually rectify this situation and act accordingly. Until then my challenge
o recap: Human thought necessarily promotes the
existence of an 'ordered unknowable' that cannot be denied without
invoking self denial. It is this idea, of an 'ordered unknowable,'
which is fundamental to all Deity concepts.
So, by demonstrating 'certainty' in the form of a logically
undeniable construct, we gain an understandable definition for Ultimacy that
simultaneously proves our necessity to recognize Its existence. In addition, by defining the constraints of relative
knowing -- a by-product of this exercise -- we now have a way to qualify the meaning of
truth. This is something without which we would remain forever ignorant of the meaning and purpose
of life; since we would have no way to consciously construct an approach to
self-justification without awareness of the necessity that truth implies.
Also, in the process of confirming that Deity must exist
for us, this proof
inadvertently qualifies the nature of
our shared reality (with It) within the field of knowing. By so doing, it gives us a meaningful tool
by which to anticipate the future. Thus we can and do know that Deity's next
upon the world of 'time' is imminent and logically inevitable. It became inevitable when existing knowledge first exceeded our
temporal ability to qualify its purpose relative to ourselves. This in turn destined us to
a divisiveness that necessarily obstructs our ability to realize unity.
Coupled with the sophistication of existing technique, current knowledge now threatens
the existence of all sentient life on earth. Unable to control our own destiny, it
necessarily reverts to the foundational dynamics that provided for its arising.
process of reassuming dominance, these dynamics are inherently unforgiving.
So by quantifying knowledge past the point where it is capable of sustaining the
difference between diametrically opposed forms of self, we inadvertently activated the
primal movement of Ultimacy. In other words, by violating ourselves to excess, we have now
become guilty of inevitably and incontestably violating the ultimate form of self -- or
Deity. This in turn causes the grounds for judgment to arise simultaneously within both
Deity and self; thus preventing them and the necessity they demand from being contested by
Back to Top