The Cruelty of Apprentice Sarah Louise
April 16, 2016
G.D.O'Bradovich III
Non mi dir che son io crudel con te.
Donna Anna
Donna Anna
1
It is a personal quirk of Yours Truly that we do adequately process information as quickly as I would like, or more likely, as fast as we think we should. We assign the reason for this slow assimilation of new experiences to our Mercury in Capricorn. To date, the upper limit of a realization has been several decades, as witnessed by Apprentice Thomas in the spring of 2008. We are grateful that the vast majority of our revelations are of a much shorter interval.
This charge of cruelty against Apprentice Sarah Louise was related through several parties, so it is possible that there has been a misunderstanding on the part of one or several of the purveyors of opinions. Although this information was presented to Yours Truly in early February, 2016, but only today did we understand the veracity of the accusation. It is the hallmark of a great mind that while it is engaged in mundane tasks, such as showering, that epiphanies present themselves. We must keep in mind that although Apprentice Sarah Louise has been described as a “recovering Libra”, she remains a committed Libra and, thus, remains within the realm of her Libran influence. Of the four elements found in Astrology, the air signs are to be understood as dualistic, either implicitly as Aquarius, who carries two water jars and whose glyph is two waves, or explicitly as Gemini, the twins, and Libra, the scale.
“Cruelty” is not a word that immediately comes to mind when a Great Occultist describes the typical behavior of air signs and the special domain of Libras should be balance or fairness. However, if at times we speak of Libras and their natural desire or need for balance, we must not forget that “scales” are symbols of the legal system and the application of the law cannot always be described as fair or just. Objective legal decisions can be described as cruel.
In order to properly examine of charge of cruelty, it may be beneficial to move beyond the specific circumstances regarding Apprentice Sarah Louise to gain an unbiased view, similar to moving beyond good and evil to understand the opinions of morality. We inquire: Is there a commonality among Fred's Superman, the inhabitants of Galt's Gulch, and Apprentice Sarah Louise? We answer in the affirmative, as we believe a commonality exists and we must examine the Superman and John's associates in hope of discovering the presence of cruelty, whether it is justified or not, and if this trait is also found in Apprentice Sarah Louise's behavior.
We have no doubts that Fred's Superman will be described as cruel and he will be cruel, since he will use Nature as his standard for his actions. Nature cannot be accurately described as “willfully causing pain or suffering to others”, nor can Nature have “feelings” or “concern about” pain or suffering. Therefore, Nature is not cruel, but it can be described as hierarchical, indifferent, and wasteful.
The inhabitants of Galt's Gulch do not describe themselves, or each other, as cruel. However, the accusation of cruelty was charged against each of them by multitudes of people before they lived in the Gulch. Can so many people have an incorrect perception about so few people? Of the main protagonists, perhaps Hank Reardon can be understood as being the most cruel, while Dagney is frequently described by characters as being unfeeling. We suggest that cruelty and unfeeling are the subjective experiences of those individuals who do not have a hierarchy of values, yet these people feel that were forced to “suffer” from Hank's cruelty and Dagney's absence of feelings. None of the protagonists were accused of lacking a hierarchy of values, in fact, their adherence to values were cause of the novel's conflicts.
In order to understand cruelty, in general, and Apprentice Sarah Louise' cruelty, in particular, we must note the fundamental difference between the future actions of the Superman and the behavior of the fictional characters in “Atlas Shrugged”. We do not doubt that during the rule of the Superman there will be intentional human deaths, as the struggle to reclaim humanity from the compounded unnaturalness of Modernity cannot be achieved in a timely manner without murder on a global scale. Yet, for all the perceived cruelty and lamenting of cruelty found throughout “Atlas”, there is only one murder, and it occurs towards the end of the book [we note that the death could have been avoided]. While there are instances of physical pain and suffering in “Atlas”, the vast majority of the pain and suffering that is related in the book is mental.
We quote in full: “Mental abuse, is a form of abuse characterized by a person subjecting or exposing another to behavior that may result in psychological trauma, including anxiety, chronic depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder”.
We immediately note the subjective nature of “Mental Abuse” and the possibility, but not the assurance, that it will result in trauma, anxiety, depression, and PTSD. We are incredulous that war veterans and those unfortunate to experience Apprentice Sarah Louise for extended periods of time display identical symptoms. On a personal note, we are amused by the thought of hysterical television commentators vilifying the Superman, as he will be the cause of innumerable cases of trauma, anxiety, and depression. The Gentle Reader may reach their own conclusions regarding narcissistic media personalities and their to desire to talk [where talking is understood as not always relating information] and the uncertain opinions regarding Apprentice Sarah Louise.
We are certain that the Superman and the protagonists from “Atlas” suffer from the frequently unrecognized condition characterized by a hierarchy of values, otherwise said, people will, always and without exception, experience mental abuse due to their unwillingness to accept that certain people know that objective reality is superior to some people's subjective beliefs and feelings.
Personally, we find this accusation against Apprentice Sarah Louise to be “willful” with the express purpose of “causing” her “pain” and “suffering”. How can we reach this conclusion? Because at a certain point in the distant past, we were described as being “cold” and “calculating”, as though we were a perpetrator in the penultimate scene of a crime drama. Since this encounter occurred before becoming familiar with the useful wording found in “Atlas Shrugged”, we were unable to respond to this ambiguous opinion; it was an opinion, as no facts are required to express either an opinion nor is a recourse to reality required to express feelings. As we feel certain that there is a direct line between “cold” and “calculating” and cruelty, I can empathize with Apprentice Sarah Louise' difficult and unfortunate situation.
Therefore, we conclude that the Superman, Apprentice Sarah Louise, and the associates of John Galt have a hierarchy of values. Surprisingly, they rely on their respective hierarchies of values and, almost unbelievably, they constantly refer to their hierarchies of values as a guide not only for their respective behavior, but also as a touchstone for those they encounter. If a like mined individual encounters any of our three subjects under consideration, then nothing exceptional will happen. However, if one feels that values are subjective and are not necessarily applicable to all, then an ensuing encounter with two our subjects will invariably result in charges of cruelty or “mental abuse”, and in the event of an unfortunate encounter with our third subject, a swift death.
This charge of cruelty against Apprentice Sarah Louise was related through several parties, so it is possible that there has been a misunderstanding on the part of one or several of the purveyors of opinions. Although this information was presented to Yours Truly in early February, 2016, but only today did we understand the veracity of the accusation. It is the hallmark of a great mind that while it is engaged in mundane tasks, such as showering, that epiphanies present themselves. We must keep in mind that although Apprentice Sarah Louise has been described as a “recovering Libra”, she remains a committed Libra and, thus, remains within the realm of her Libran influence. Of the four elements found in Astrology, the air signs are to be understood as dualistic, either implicitly as Aquarius, who carries two water jars and whose glyph is two waves, or explicitly as Gemini, the twins, and Libra, the scale.
“Cruelty” is not a word that immediately comes to mind when a Great Occultist describes the typical behavior of air signs and the special domain of Libras should be balance or fairness. However, if at times we speak of Libras and their natural desire or need for balance, we must not forget that “scales” are symbols of the legal system and the application of the law cannot always be described as fair or just. Objective legal decisions can be described as cruel.
In order to properly examine of charge of cruelty, it may be beneficial to move beyond the specific circumstances regarding Apprentice Sarah Louise to gain an unbiased view, similar to moving beyond good and evil to understand the opinions of morality. We inquire: Is there a commonality among Fred's Superman, the inhabitants of Galt's Gulch, and Apprentice Sarah Louise? We answer in the affirmative, as we believe a commonality exists and we must examine the Superman and John's associates in hope of discovering the presence of cruelty, whether it is justified or not, and if this trait is also found in Apprentice Sarah Louise's behavior.
We have no doubts that Fred's Superman will be described as cruel and he will be cruel, since he will use Nature as his standard for his actions. Nature cannot be accurately described as “willfully causing pain or suffering to others”, nor can Nature have “feelings” or “concern about” pain or suffering. Therefore, Nature is not cruel, but it can be described as hierarchical, indifferent, and wasteful.
The inhabitants of Galt's Gulch do not describe themselves, or each other, as cruel. However, the accusation of cruelty was charged against each of them by multitudes of people before they lived in the Gulch. Can so many people have an incorrect perception about so few people? Of the main protagonists, perhaps Hank Reardon can be understood as being the most cruel, while Dagney is frequently described by characters as being unfeeling. We suggest that cruelty and unfeeling are the subjective experiences of those individuals who do not have a hierarchy of values, yet these people feel that were forced to “suffer” from Hank's cruelty and Dagney's absence of feelings. None of the protagonists were accused of lacking a hierarchy of values, in fact, their adherence to values were cause of the novel's conflicts.
In order to understand cruelty, in general, and Apprentice Sarah Louise' cruelty, in particular, we must note the fundamental difference between the future actions of the Superman and the behavior of the fictional characters in “Atlas Shrugged”. We do not doubt that during the rule of the Superman there will be intentional human deaths, as the struggle to reclaim humanity from the compounded unnaturalness of Modernity cannot be achieved in a timely manner without murder on a global scale. Yet, for all the perceived cruelty and lamenting of cruelty found throughout “Atlas”, there is only one murder, and it occurs towards the end of the book [we note that the death could have been avoided]. While there are instances of physical pain and suffering in “Atlas”, the vast majority of the pain and suffering that is related in the book is mental.
We quote in full: “Mental abuse, is a form of abuse characterized by a person subjecting or exposing another to behavior that may result in psychological trauma, including anxiety, chronic depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder”.
We immediately note the subjective nature of “Mental Abuse” and the possibility, but not the assurance, that it will result in trauma, anxiety, depression, and PTSD. We are incredulous that war veterans and those unfortunate to experience Apprentice Sarah Louise for extended periods of time display identical symptoms. On a personal note, we are amused by the thought of hysterical television commentators vilifying the Superman, as he will be the cause of innumerable cases of trauma, anxiety, and depression. The Gentle Reader may reach their own conclusions regarding narcissistic media personalities and their to desire to talk [where talking is understood as not always relating information] and the uncertain opinions regarding Apprentice Sarah Louise.
We are certain that the Superman and the protagonists from “Atlas” suffer from the frequently unrecognized condition characterized by a hierarchy of values, otherwise said, people will, always and without exception, experience mental abuse due to their unwillingness to accept that certain people know that objective reality is superior to some people's subjective beliefs and feelings.
Personally, we find this accusation against Apprentice Sarah Louise to be “willful” with the express purpose of “causing” her “pain” and “suffering”. How can we reach this conclusion? Because at a certain point in the distant past, we were described as being “cold” and “calculating”, as though we were a perpetrator in the penultimate scene of a crime drama. Since this encounter occurred before becoming familiar with the useful wording found in “Atlas Shrugged”, we were unable to respond to this ambiguous opinion; it was an opinion, as no facts are required to express either an opinion nor is a recourse to reality required to express feelings. As we feel certain that there is a direct line between “cold” and “calculating” and cruelty, I can empathize with Apprentice Sarah Louise' difficult and unfortunate situation.
Therefore, we conclude that the Superman, Apprentice Sarah Louise, and the associates of John Galt have a hierarchy of values. Surprisingly, they rely on their respective hierarchies of values and, almost unbelievably, they constantly refer to their hierarchies of values as a guide not only for their respective behavior, but also as a touchstone for those they encounter. If a like mined individual encounters any of our three subjects under consideration, then nothing exceptional will happen. However, if one feels that values are subjective and are not necessarily applicable to all, then an ensuing encounter with two our subjects will invariably result in charges of cruelty or “mental abuse”, and in the event of an unfortunate encounter with our third subject, a swift death.