A dissertation.

[Guest guest]

The only point and challenge of my platform is this. Solve this. Solve

me. I know the answer. Here is my puzzle. Please read in its entirety

before you jump to any conclusions.

 

Creation vs. Evolution.

An attack on 'Mental Illness'.

 

By:

 

Tim Harris (Ph.D?)

 

If you side with science, and agree that we were not created by a God(s)

but by physical sciences then consider: Why do you hold onto your

'absolute' understanding of the model of 'normal'? Are your 'theories'

not subject to this evolution that you support? Or is it that you place

conditions on your theories? Are these conditions then subject to the

failure of your theory? Is it that 'your' mind is complete? If you

suggest 'yes' then you claim to be a model of perfection which is the

'God phenomena'. You claim to 'be' God. Yet, your view has no room for

God as you can not 'prove' its existence. To label my understanding as a

'mental illness' is to debunk your own insight as, you to, at some point

were 'inspired'. Inspired by what? God or 'imagination in original

thought'? Is there a difference? Prove it.

 

Paradox is proof of noncompliance and a flawed theory. Will you continue

to play 'God the know-it-all' or do you agree that, by the science that

'you' have proven, that evolution is a force that is beyond your

control? Then why do you wish to control it? Then, why do you label me

as 'mentally ill'? Is it that I look at the complexity of your theories

and can explain them within moments in a child like understanding? Is it

that I can take this and that and put them together like lego?

 

If you side with religion, and agree that we were created by a God(s)

and not by physical sciences as we understand them, then consider: If

God has created everthing perfect and in accordence to his will then are

we not what it is we are suppose to be? Do we all not have something to

contribute? Or, in the context of the non-personified Tao, that all

things flow and are not outside of the Tao, then why do you label me "a

perfected creature of creation made by God or flowing in Tao", 'mentally

ill'? Am I not at least as perfect as you? If you suggest 'no', then I

say that you do not know God or Tao but are merely borrowing the idea to

support your efforts. So then, we judge your words by your hypocracy and

it is your hypocracy that judges me. "Judge not lest you be judged."

What is our 21st century idea of religion? Is it the religions have

soured? Or, is it those that 'know' and make a show based on ratings are

distracting people from religion's purpose?

 

Here to, is the paradox of noncompliance of a flawed system. Why do we

desire to seek God or Tao or whatever we label as the sacred source of

our life (that which went before us) and yet deny others this experience

due to the blanket of our own personal perception that we cast over

those that choose to follow? Religion is a personal issue. Look at the

Charters of the free world countries. And yet we, the free world, run

around telling everyone that Jews are wrong, the Hindus are evil, Islam

is the devil's religion and that our religion is the only religion. Are

you blind to your own hypocracy?

 

Racism is an issue of state. I do not feel racism and if you asked most

from my generation you would find that we are not racists. Yet our

leaders create, based in their own out-dated, obsolete, model of 'equal'

but not the same, devices to instill racism in its people. We can not

deny that slavery and prejudism have existed. However, by implementing

programs such as "affirmative action" only weakens our resolve to

eliminate racism and supports our prejudism and intolerance. I wish to

be hired based on my credentials not the color of my skin, my sexual

orientation, my demographic, my status, or my handicap. There is no

pride in knowing this and those around feel that preferntial treatment

has been given. Does this not feed the fires of discrimination and

racism?

 

All men/women are created equal and share equal opportunity. It is by

stiffling these voices that we create racism and discrimination. By hand

feeding we create favortism and thus dissention between man. Perhaps we

need more jobs. Perhaps voices need to be heard. Perhaps we should put

our resources into providing opportunity instead of limiting oportunity

and creating inequality.

 

Feminism is misguided. As with all great causes, woman deserve to be

recognized. I believe that the grass roots movemnet had the right idea

but over time newer feminist lost sight of an undefined goal. I believe

feminism was steered wrong when women tried to measure up to a man's

world instead of defining, independantly, what it was to be a woman.

There is strength in numbers yet weakness in resolve. Woman should be

defining their world outside of the context of the male perspective.

They should be intimately interested in business, politics, religion,

and social responsibility. Naturally, some will be angered at me, a man,

saying these things which only proves my point.

 

Do not compare the accomplishments of women to men. We have been in

control of the 'system' longer and are deeply rooted. Look at the

advancement of the woman's causes in relation to the context of woman's

issues among women. Here, we all agree, are the true sign posts of an

evolving force. Hatred for 'men as pigs' in general, is only self

defeating an encourages us to become opposition. I am one man that

beleives that woman are necessary to balancing world peace. It is the

mothers that send their beloved children away to be killed in these

wars. Men are proud of their slain children's courage yet the mothers

weep. Who do you think we have at the helm?

 

In conclusion, we limit ourselves by ourselves. We seek an opposition to

our ideas then fight the opposition rather than implement change. Would

it not be simpler to ignore the opposition, which is generated as you

seek, gather those of like mind, and work independantly? Would it not be

simpler to focus on action rather than demonstrations of inequality? I

could go on all day here as I have deeply considered many of the

problems that we, as human kind, face as we go head long into the 21st

century. I wish to speak to you in person so that we can address the

issues of the day. The internet is a tremendous resource yet it is no

substitute for human interaction. I wish to open a dialogue of change

with you. Our challenge is to separate ourselves from this baggage. For

if we take it with us, surely we will find ourselves faced with this

inequality when we are on the doorstep of the 22nd century...that is, if

we don't destroy ourselves in the meantime.

 

Regards.

 

Tim Harris