What convinced you?

[MistaG]

Hello MistaG,

I have not abandoned you Just still very busy with the holiday season. I had some small bits of time to browse Jean-Paul Sartre's wikipedia page, but that's about all so far. I am very interested in seeing how this work pairs with the Law of One information, as I am always interested in finding external validations when the chance comes up. The way I see it, a universal truth should permeate and filter in to all aspects of society, even societies that live in densities that are heavily veiled.

I agree. If something is claimed to be universally true there should be correlations all over the place.

I wanted to ask you quickly the origin of screen shots you've put in to the first post. I presume these were put together by someone in more recent times who was aware of both TLOO material and Sartre's? I suspect so because in the first pane the terminology "service to self" is used on the left hand side, and I thought that it was more LOO related than coincidence. Have you compared TLOO to Sartre's original texts on scarcity, or is there any chance that the above charts/diagrams are less accurate in favor of someone wanting to find specific meanings?

The diagrams were put together by me back in the August time-frame well before I knew anything about the Law of One. This is why I was so shocked when I found the LOO. Not only were the ideas similar it used the same terminology (as you noted "service to self") that I was struggling with in an attempt to convey the idea to other people. Frankly I would have thought the Law of One was all a con if it didn't correlate so tightly with this idea and the, for lack of a better word, "visions" that occurred to me back in July / August.

Even more weird I keep seeing something like this:



Which seems to fit with notions of dimensionality of objects being composed of an infinite series of points spread out over a space to then create a geometrical object (i.e. similar to the banach-tarski paradox). Where in the case of the picture the 1st dimensional point leads to the 2nd dimensional plane, 2nd to 3rd, and then there's a 4-th dimensional object that's then the natural off-shoot of the 3rd; on and on ad-infinitum.

But back to your questions. Really Sartre's work is terribly incomplete on what scarcity truly represents. Jean Paul Sartre described life as disjunction in thought between an imperative, a value and a good - depending upon where a person resides in the economic class system. Yet beneath these three ways of viewing life lie one original source: All of my actions are for the good of myself. It is only thus that the importance to self of one's own life decreases in value as economic power increases. So when I can easily provide myself with food and shelter, I need no longer think about preserving my own life all the time. Now I have the luxury of thinking of other things -- perhaps other people's lives as well as my own.

Quoting Elizabeth Bowman and Robert Stone's summary of a 1965 Cornell lecture on "Sartre's Morality and History," Sartre summed all of this and concluded,

Life in the biological sense can either be an imperative, a value, or a good, depending on the social class of the agent. For the unfavored, life is a fundamental exigency, an imperative. For the middle class, it is a value to be produced and reproduced. For the privileged, it is a good that is automatically preserved by the labor of others and, as such, is a means for realizing other supposedly more worthy norms.

From this it can be seen that Sartre realized that there's a layer of reality that permeates all things causing them to rise to greatness having to first fight through exigency, then life as a value to be produced & reproduced, and finally life as a good.

Sadly Sartre stopped there and then went off to explore "Being and Nothingness."

Really I just picked up where he left off. Taking this idea of what scarcity represents and then gave it a mathematical treatment (which was when the big realization of what this all means occurred to me) to illustrate that life as a value, life as a good, and life as exigency are functions of one another meaning there's a sort of class-system built in to the very fabric of reality.

I call attention to Sartre's work because it serves as an excellent starting point to give people an in-road so they can understand a foundational piece of this idea without me having to rehash the whole thing. It's also easier for people to accept the idea, without having to get in to many needless debates, since Sartre is considered by many to be one of the preeminent philosopher's of our time.

You've probably already considered these things, but I just wanted to throw them out there so that we can be clear about the Sartre/LOO connection before moving on.

Actually I have no philosophical background. I'm an engineer. So for me to have this idea before being exposed to Sartre, before being exposed to the LOO, before being exposed to any mystical / esoteric areas, is ... well ... hard to understand.

cheers! Hope you are having a good holiday thus far!

Same! Have a fun New Year!

-Dustin