Blog's Base Foundation

Foundation in general

A lot of my form of expressions come from great articles, great findings, great people that I am sure will drive the world all together into a new "order".

The reason I created this blog was to delve seriously into the "second stage" of learning. This is complicated to express, but to put it in simple terms, I need to re-evaluate my thoughts that I have collected so far. For that reason I express them through blog posts (which those form of expressions may or may not be the most accurate of all in terms of expressing the truth). Each blog post will be assessed at a later time for the possibility of adding new ideas, concepts, interpretations, or different findings from my original posts.

Again, I have to re-iterate that I collected a lot of raw information "actively" for almost a decade, but I have not organized them in the most precise way as they should be. For that reason, I encourage everyone  to also express their findings, because no matter what, there will be at least some certainty of truth in it (no matter what form this truth comes out from). I encourage urgently everyone to always be in an open environment to express in some form because that is the only way to access your "critical thinking". In this society, we get a lot of information as "input" and most of our responses are not scientific and individualistic, but more to what is more "appropriate". Instead, our response should be the other way around. I do not encourage though to just "immediately" delve and express yourself until you have a strong conscience and direction. However, make sure you do at one point, as what I have figured out and been "dosed" out of it without noticing was this: This society will hardly encourage critical thinking or remind you about that.

Each of you will probably have some foundation about what life is. Or maybe not, but that is okay (you can start creating one, it is required to trigger critical thinking). I think all of you will have some source foundation: Religion, Science, Politics, Economics, and so on. From my childhood, I always felt each of those foundations lacked something (sorry, but I do not have any offense to any of those foundations, and for that reason, to not offend anyone, I just speak it in general terms): In religion, I liked the atmosphere and the kindness of all people that are formed by a "belief" or something, but I always felt "empty" having to stand every Sunday for a mass praying that no one wants to "understand" or "interpret" it. There is a saying in religious folks, to "always read the right sources or right books", to not read other sources that have the "wrong interpretations". However, how can I really believe a religion when nobody will try to interpret anything because they will be afraid of saying something wrong or goes against the "practices" of their religion?  Although there is a good reason to not not alter the content of the origin (that saying can go well for scientific view points too). But how can someone learn something if the individual does not put a thing in their own context? I never really liked religions the way they were due to how "shallow" the practices were. I have figured though quite recently why all people love religions in the way "they are" (because most people take and live things in life concretely). Politics was always a laughing stock to me. Why do "big people" control the life of millions of people? Well, I guess it is obvious, because "everybody" believes they do. If everybody believes they do, then it makes sense, to admit they do not have much control of their life and that most has been taken away from political parties. In some sense this is true in concrete ways, but to influence their whole life, their whole reflection upon them (if you think they are a problem, why do you act on depending them more to do "better"?). I really do not get it, as the only thing this perception does is aggravating the problem instead of solving it. This has to do more with the "habits" of people and do not have the tolerance to "remove it", especially since it gets triggered everyday in the media. Politics, although realistically represents what society is constructed out of, the way unfortunately it is presented by the people and the press is toxic. If anything, most political discussion or topics are nice to watch like a "horse racing game" instead of taking any constructive content out from it. Economics and Science were probably the most interesting things in life. At least it tried to explain the world through an "external means". At least of all systems, science was the one through its cause and effects that gave us a "tangible" product that we cannot deny out of its service.

My foundation

However, I found a decade ago, that things in life are more deep than what science does not tell us. Although science tells a lot about humans in general, they are afraid to make connections with other subjects of their fields (they are starting to do it, but they are not so committed to it). Two "crazy" (or I can say "sane" cause the rest live "crazy"?) individuals tried to integrate all of those things and discuss what the "next phase of civilization of life" hopefully will be. The research is so extensive and the biggest of all life in earth (because what is more extensive to discuss than "life" itself?) that you may have to take "years" to first collect "data" in a different way (maybe less if you have a lot and a lot of time, passion and dedication). I found this foundation to be the best of the best so far in this existence to our galaxy. If you really wanted to know what life is about, then this researcher is all about it. It is almost the real deal. It has the least gimmicks.

However, I have to conclude, that understanding life is not so pleasant and maybe not understanding it at all may be "better" than understanding it. In addition, it is better to not start it if you leave it half way through. If we want to take it in a metaphorical context, assume you have a computer virus that does automated tasks you do not know and the antivirus is the foundation we are talking about. However, unlike other foundation "packages", this one you "have to code the antivirus" yourself. Let us say you have coded the antivirus software and was able to identify that you indeed have a virus in your computer. If you stop there and do not add features to your antivirus, such as eradicating a virus, what is the point of it? Would it not make you feel better you never knew you had a virus than knowing you have a virus? At least you would perform better that way. In addition, it is better to have a virus running in your computer than not running it, because if it does not run, you have to manually control it or code it. If you don't know how to code it, then it is better to let it run automatically by the virus (it is better to have something instead of nothing). For that reason, this foundation, if it is taken seriously and integrated within individuality, there is a very huge "risk" taken. Unlike a "strong virus" running a pattern that will keep you self preserved, this one is created all from scratch. In addition, unlike computers requiring no effort to "recode" a program from its flaws, a human requires much effort to "recode" itself, leading humans to live a life with full of flaws for a lot of years. Fortunately, most humans have self defense mechanisms, thankfully from society, to be "objective" and not integrate stuff within the individual itself (that is why we have fields like "anthropology"  that talk things in term about "population" instead of the "individual"). However, if you do integrate it yourself, expect a huge "war" within your body (fighting the virus), a lot of "freezing" within your mind (who codes a thing and expects it will not freeze out of a bug or a "missing piece"?), and many more that will make you avoid this theory.

When I saw this research about a decade ago, a lot of concepts you will see within this foundation were not linked together. This theory or foundation is evolving. It is a "living" thing. In addition, compared to other theories and research which most are done for the sake of "making money" or making a "simple discovery and that is it", this one tries to "test the water" with other theories and books. It has "passion" inside it and is more than a "means to an end". Going a decade back, this research did not emphasize much on the aspects of religion. However, this researcher tried to be as non-bias as much as he could. For that reason, he could not "object" to religion based on premises of what is "appropriate" or not. However, if I read this research today instead of 10 years ago, I would have not read or taken a glimpse of this research at all (because it discusses the topic of religion). For that reason only, I would encourage for everyone who is willing to read this and be liable of the risks ahead the following: Read things in a non-religious manner and then to make your own doubts about the rest of the concepts the researcher specifies. Or on the other hand, if you are a religious person, you could presumably read things the other way around?

As I have said in one of my blog posts, "If we only depend on receiving content, buying content and aiding on creating content not within our critical thinking or our own understanding, we will not feel  integral to this part of society." The researcher says almost the same with the following words:  "We will suggest that effective education should begin with rote learning and blind faith but that it must lead to critical thinking and rational understanding" (Friesen, Lorin (2012-02-10). God, Theology & Cognitive Modules (p. 14).) .

Lastly, I have to add that this researchers are very "professional" in the usage of English. So if you do not understand something or feel it is too complicated, the issue is more on understanding the "extent of the context" and "its practices" instead of its "saying" and "meaning".

Most of the time, this blog will discuss topics about this foundation. I feel shame if anybody reads this and does not know the direction my blog posts are taking.  Hence, the reason I am making this post. In order for not everyone to get lost, I have provided links in the menu section "references".