Eventually, more Pragmatic and Experimental philosophers decided to call the Analytical philosophers bluff: they investigated if the typical philosopher’s intuition about knowledge holds true across cultures. The answer turned out to be: most certainly not. — “20190115” – Jan 15, 2019

We have deep depth. — Yogi Berra

In The Metaphysics of Indo-European Tripartition, Part 2: Tripartition in Human Society, Psychology, & Physiology, Collin Cleary explains why computer programmers like me are the natural aristocrats of the human race.

Plato’s other psychological point is that people differ in terms of the proportions of these elements in their individual souls. To put it simply, some people naturally tend toward being intellectual or spiritual. Others are predominantly spirited, aggressive, concerned with things such as competition, honor, and glory. Still others are predominantly appetitive, with concerns that typically do not rise above the level of physical, sensual satisfaction, or material gain. In short, for Plato and for the Indo-Europeans, there are natural rulers and priests, natural warriors, and natural producers and businessmen.

Society, for the Indo-Europeans must exhibit a tripartite structure because human beings themselves fall into such a grouping. Incidentally, Plato considered most of humanity as falling within the third, appetitive class, and this is why he opposed democracy. Rule by “the majority” inevitably means rule by those who are not primarily reasonable, spiritual, or honorable, but rather those primarily concerned with personal gain, and with the moment.

Because I know how to program computers, I think logically, therefore do not suffer the biases of hoi polloi. This places me along side of the modern philosophers such as Curtis Yarvin. Because I am smart, and think very logically, obviously I enjoy playing role playing games such as Dungeons & Dragons because it appeals to my logical and philosophical nature, because it includes such Profundities as the Character Alignment System.

Even I don’t understand the dead cat. — Larry Gopnik, A Serious Man

So prepare to be amazed as I teach you the Secrets of Ancient Wisdom by counting to three, but instead of using numerals and geometry, I will instead bamboozle you with words combined using the ambiguous grammar of natural language.

One: everything is One. We are All Connected. Everything is a part of a whole.

But then the Universe divides; we have reached the Duality. Light vs. Dark, Day vs. Night. Good vs. Evil. Knowledge and Ignorance. Dualities are profound: TWO! The Principles of Opposites!

But you have not achieved enlightenment yet, because Man is Three. Three! Three is the nature of Man, the Universe, and everything. The Christian Trinity. As Plato says, the human soul is one of Gold, Silver and Bronze; yet within each soul is each of Gold, Silver, and Bronze. The inner expressed itself in the outer.

Pair up in threes. — Yogi Berra

The Essence described as the primally existent cannot be a shadow cast by Being, but must possess Being entire; and Being is entire when it holds the form and idea of intellection and of life. In a Being, then, the existence, the intellection, the life are present as an aggregate. When a thing is a Being, it is also an Intellectual-Principle, when it is an Intellectual-Principle it is a Being; intellection and Being are co-existents. Therefore intellection is a multiple not a unitary and that which does not belong to this order can have no Intellection. And if we turn to the partial and particular, there is the Intellectual form of man, and there is man, there is the Intellectual form of horse and there is horse, the Intellectual form of Justice, and Justice. — Plotinus, The Six Enneads

No! It will be awkward! Look I have internet access. I know all about what particles do when nobody’s looking! — The Quantum Computing Talk

In Dungeons and Dragons, we have two axes; one of morality and one of alignment. For morality we have Good and Evil, for alignment, we have Lawful and Chaotic. It is possible to be Morally Good, yet Legally Chaotic. But it is also possible to be Lawful Evil; this is Tyranny. 2^2=4 combinations!

Yet you still do not see. Because one can be neither good nor evil, but Neutral! Now we can have Lawful Neutral, or even Neutral Neutral! Now we have 2^3=9 alignments!

Yet both axes has a “neutral” which is neither either or. Zero. Dude, ZERO. All is Void. Yet I think therefore I am, therefore ONE. Yet — ONE and ZERO are … TWO NUMBERS! We are back to Duality. So each number has not just a magnitutde, but a type or a sign – positive and negative. Now we have two axes, yet two types, therefore: THREE! We are back to Trinity!

So Aristotle’s Theory of Forms is like classification, a taxonomy. Identity. But Plato emphasized change. If an entity with an identity changes, is it the same entity? What is the ineffable essence of an identity that can change. Whoa.

Aristotle’s Forms are like object programming, but Plato is like functional programming. In the first, we have the primitive of type and in the second the primitive of change – yet both contain Identity. Whoa.

All you need is one more bong hit and you’ve finally achieved True Zen: you become enlightened and realize the Greatest Philosopher of All History was, in fact, Yogi Berra. “We make too many wrong mistakes.”

We make too many wrong mistakes. A mistake is not really a mistake! There are good mistakes and bad mistakes, we have to make the correct mistakes, not the incorrect mistakes, to understand that it is, in fact, a mistake! So therefore, a mistake is not a mistake – it is simply The Path of Tradition!

So mistake vs. not-mistake, a not-mistake is actually a mistake because it’s the wrong mistake. 2^2, until we realize that some things are neither mistakes nor not-mistakes – they do not have the mistake nature – 2^3.

The Hegelian Dialectic. Problem, reaction, solution. They create the problem to introduce the solution! It’s a conspiracy, man.

This is a light that breaks forth on spiritual substance, and shows absolute content and absolute form to be identical;—substance is in itself identical with knowledge. Self-consciousness thus, in the third place, recognizes its positive relation as its negative, and its negative as its positive,—or, in other words, recognizes these opposite activities as the same i.e. it recognizes pure Thought or Being as self-identity, and this again as separation. This is intellectual perception; but it is requisite in order that it should be in truth intellectual, that it should not be that merely immediate perception of the eternal and the divine which we hear of, but should be absolute knowledge. This intuitive perception which does not recognize itself is taken as starting-point as if it were absolutely presupposed; it has in itself intuitive perception only as immediate knowledge, and what it perceives it does not really know,—for, taken at its best, it consists of beautiful thoughts, but not knowledge. — Hegel’s Lectures on the History of Philosophy

Now you may agree with the critic Heinrich Graetz that the Zohar contains no actual “wisdom” at all, but is in fact simply the result of neurological degeneration, that trying to find wisdom in Kabbalah is like trying to find something profound in your mother’s post-Alzheimer’s ravings.

When I asked my elderly grand-mother what the world really needed, she replied ““Someone has to stand up and say: We Want Lamps!”

Then she kicked me in the shins, hard.

Immediately, I became enlightened.

Lamps. The Light. Duality, Oneness, Identity, Change … the Trinity and Becoming.

And they all said that grandma was just “crazy” and suffering from “advanced dementia.” Ha! Their souls of lead simply could not understand how profound she really was!