The Wonderful World of Occult Research™
April 28, 2017
Apprentice RJ
1
Apprentice RJ, of his own free will, is desirous to study under a Master of the Occult Arts and Sciences and, until that opportunity presents itself, he is content to Apprentice under Yours Truly.
During this stage in our career, we are less concerned with the modern convention that our writing should remain on topic, that is to say, our titles oftentimes have little relevance to the subjects of the essay. Therefore, in this initial work, Apprentice RJ will be free to write upon topics that are not necessarily related.
Master is known to state that he is a Christian for the same reason he is an American: an accident. One implication of this strange statement is that Master intended to be neither a Christian nor an American, yet, as Master delights in his Hauten heritage, it seems that Master’s hometown is not to be understood as an accident. Master has noted on several occasions that in the Modern Age “being” a Christian has its origin in a certain type of belief or professing an opinion and, as a result, recourse to reality is not necessary. We believe that Master obfuscates his “Christian” worldview through various appeals to philology, reason, and history. If Master were indifferent towards, or disliked, Christianity, he would avoid it as a viable and frequent topic for discussion, that is, Christianity would marginalized through omission. Therefore, Master’s consistent behavior betrays his mind's opinions regarding Christianity.
Recently, Master paraphrased a passage from Saint Matthew on social media and, for the Gentle Reader's benefit, a fuller version follows:
During this stage in our career, we are less concerned with the modern convention that our writing should remain on topic, that is to say, our titles oftentimes have little relevance to the subjects of the essay. Therefore, in this initial work, Apprentice RJ will be free to write upon topics that are not necessarily related.
Master is known to state that he is a Christian for the same reason he is an American: an accident. One implication of this strange statement is that Master intended to be neither a Christian nor an American, yet, as Master delights in his Hauten heritage, it seems that Master’s hometown is not to be understood as an accident. Master has noted on several occasions that in the Modern Age “being” a Christian has its origin in a certain type of belief or professing an opinion and, as a result, recourse to reality is not necessary. We believe that Master obfuscates his “Christian” worldview through various appeals to philology, reason, and history. If Master were indifferent towards, or disliked, Christianity, he would avoid it as a viable and frequent topic for discussion, that is, Christianity would marginalized through omission. Therefore, Master’s consistent behavior betrays his mind's opinions regarding Christianity.
Recently, Master paraphrased a passage from Saint Matthew on social media and, for the Gentle Reader's benefit, a fuller version follows:
Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand,
Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. |
"Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said,
This is an hard saying; who can hear it?"
The Fourth Gospel 6:60
2
Fundamental Christians never tire of contrasting the superiority of their faith over other people’s inferior works, by referencing appeals both to Saint Paul’s epistles and to the fourth Gospel. However, Christ is unambiguous regarding the reason people ascend to Heaven or arrive in Hell: feeding, clothing, and visiting. By appealing directly to the authority of the Master himself, Master has subverted fundamentalist opinions concerning guaranteed salvation.
We believe this passage from Saint Matthew holds a significance for Master, as it demonstrates the idealism that rarely can be attained, the eternal struggle to achieve. In fact, we would suggest that although this idealism appeals to Master's Sagittarian nature, Master would surely note that charity without the recognition of virtues necessarily results in the denial of all virtues and this type of mindless altruism, without values and lacking virtues, inexorably leads to nihilism. Of course, the Master would acknowledge the difficulty in consistently applying this teaching, such as contrasting quotidian items such as camels and needles and the accompanying difficulty of excursions.
Causeless love has the same origin as causeless charity; mindlessness. We suggest that those who eagerly, all too eagerly, accept any and all charity without the recognition of virtues are justly described as looters both of matter and of spirit. The Gentle Reader will form his independent opinion on the type of individual who refuses help, and the sole reason for refusal is that the person offering assistance has no virtues, or similar values, recognized by the intended recipient. In conclusion to this part, standards are not to be compromised, for what is the lack of standards, or possessing flexible standards, other than the end justifying the means? Therefore, standards are not synonymous with pragmatism, that is, values are not practical.
As a general observation, we may say that sheep are easily led, or they are easily directed, while goats are independent and willful. As Spinoza noted, the Bible does not attempt to teach reason, as the ability to reason is not applicable to all people, but the Bible consistently teaches obedience, as everyone can be obedient. Hence, the multiple images of sheep as followers of Christ is consistent both with Spinoza’s opinion and Christ in the role of the good shepherd.
The gods are frequently associated with the act of generation. Oftentimes, generation is understood, whether correctly or not, we do not know, as a euphemism for sexual exploits. We believe this opinion indicates both certain inhibitions and limited understanding on the part of those who hold and promote such opinions.
However, generation may be understood as productivity: the creation or the generation of vast quantities, either generally or specifically. Osiris is depicted with green skin, not because he has died and reigns as the God of the Dead, but due to his association with generation, as the Lord of Life. As a god, Osiris is correctly described as ambiguous; he partakes both of the living and of the dead and, as always, the context is the key to the correct understanding.
Food, clothing, and shelter are the modern hierarchy of needs. Yet, the Master has mentioned only food, clothing, and visitation. We would do well to question this divergent opinion. Specifically, the Master mentions visits in the context of prisons. We are reluctant to suggest that our world is a prison, however, we look forward to Associate to Assistant to Apprentice Denver Joe Isaac’s (Newton) exegesis on this subject that will include, without any doubt, various presumptions and assumptions that are both reasonable and unverifiable. We suggest that the Master has exchanged “visits” for “shelter” since most people have a need for personal contact and interactions, that is, shelter is a want and people can endure homelessness, provided personal interactions are readily available. We admit “personal interactions” is an uncertain term and, as such, price and participation will vary. It seems that shelter may come and go, but people are a fixture, otherwise said, people are more important than things.
Although we are neither Biblical scholars nor great wits, it seems as the passage from Saint Matthew may recall the Master's sentiments, if not his words. We suggest this proposition as the meaning is easily understood, but the implementation is difficult, whereas both easily understood and easily followed are unlikely to originate from a teacher of a higher morality; such as when the Master claims that lust is synonymous with adultery; once again, this is easily understood and difficult to practice.
[This is an excellent observation. Yours Truly proposes to declare “Apprentice RJ’s Rule of Dissimilarity” (ARRD) as a viable tool to discover authentic sayings of the Master.]
We believe this passage from Saint Matthew holds a significance for Master, as it demonstrates the idealism that rarely can be attained, the eternal struggle to achieve. In fact, we would suggest that although this idealism appeals to Master's Sagittarian nature, Master would surely note that charity without the recognition of virtues necessarily results in the denial of all virtues and this type of mindless altruism, without values and lacking virtues, inexorably leads to nihilism. Of course, the Master would acknowledge the difficulty in consistently applying this teaching, such as contrasting quotidian items such as camels and needles and the accompanying difficulty of excursions.
Causeless love has the same origin as causeless charity; mindlessness. We suggest that those who eagerly, all too eagerly, accept any and all charity without the recognition of virtues are justly described as looters both of matter and of spirit. The Gentle Reader will form his independent opinion on the type of individual who refuses help, and the sole reason for refusal is that the person offering assistance has no virtues, or similar values, recognized by the intended recipient. In conclusion to this part, standards are not to be compromised, for what is the lack of standards, or possessing flexible standards, other than the end justifying the means? Therefore, standards are not synonymous with pragmatism, that is, values are not practical.
As a general observation, we may say that sheep are easily led, or they are easily directed, while goats are independent and willful. As Spinoza noted, the Bible does not attempt to teach reason, as the ability to reason is not applicable to all people, but the Bible consistently teaches obedience, as everyone can be obedient. Hence, the multiple images of sheep as followers of Christ is consistent both with Spinoza’s opinion and Christ in the role of the good shepherd.
The gods are frequently associated with the act of generation. Oftentimes, generation is understood, whether correctly or not, we do not know, as a euphemism for sexual exploits. We believe this opinion indicates both certain inhibitions and limited understanding on the part of those who hold and promote such opinions.
However, generation may be understood as productivity: the creation or the generation of vast quantities, either generally or specifically. Osiris is depicted with green skin, not because he has died and reigns as the God of the Dead, but due to his association with generation, as the Lord of Life. As a god, Osiris is correctly described as ambiguous; he partakes both of the living and of the dead and, as always, the context is the key to the correct understanding.
Food, clothing, and shelter are the modern hierarchy of needs. Yet, the Master has mentioned only food, clothing, and visitation. We would do well to question this divergent opinion. Specifically, the Master mentions visits in the context of prisons. We are reluctant to suggest that our world is a prison, however, we look forward to Associate to Assistant to Apprentice Denver Joe Isaac’s (Newton) exegesis on this subject that will include, without any doubt, various presumptions and assumptions that are both reasonable and unverifiable. We suggest that the Master has exchanged “visits” for “shelter” since most people have a need for personal contact and interactions, that is, shelter is a want and people can endure homelessness, provided personal interactions are readily available. We admit “personal interactions” is an uncertain term and, as such, price and participation will vary. It seems that shelter may come and go, but people are a fixture, otherwise said, people are more important than things.
Although we are neither Biblical scholars nor great wits, it seems as the passage from Saint Matthew may recall the Master's sentiments, if not his words. We suggest this proposition as the meaning is easily understood, but the implementation is difficult, whereas both easily understood and easily followed are unlikely to originate from a teacher of a higher morality; such as when the Master claims that lust is synonymous with adultery; once again, this is easily understood and difficult to practice.
[This is an excellent observation. Yours Truly proposes to declare “Apprentice RJ’s Rule of Dissimilarity” (ARRD) as a viable tool to discover authentic sayings of the Master.]
Reading/Comprehension
Easy Easy Difficult |
Implementation
Easy Difficult Difficult |
Conclusion
Not the Master The Master Not the Master |
3
We have suggested that Master has attempted to create confusion regarding his views on Christianity. If Master has been careless about obscuring his pro Christian opinions, then he has successfully created uncertainty regarding his opinions of the “high schoolers”.
We offer that Master's unsatisfactory conclusion that the high schoolers are ambiguous is due entirely to sham reasoning. Master quotes Strauss’ comment stating that man, as man, is ambiguous, then Master states that high schoolers are men and confidently, but not convincingly, concludes that high schoolers are ambiguous. We suggest that Master has borrowed a writing technique from A.E.Waite, whereby important hints and vital clues are offered and their validity are subsequently questioned and invariably maligned.
We note the evolution in the descriptive style that differentiates Denver over several months: from Denver to potential Apprentice Denver and, finally, to Apprentice Denver. Yet, there is not one sentence, nor one word, of praise for Apprentice Denver, no indication of Master’s recognition of Denver's virtues, various misdirections abound and, judging solely by the documentation, Apprentice Denver possesses no virtues and no qualities. Whenever Apprentice Denver makes an appearance in an essay, the Gentle Reader can expect at least one instance of marginalization, usually Apprentice Denver’s youth is either proposed or implied as a liability; and one example of conflict, usually, but not always, between Apprentice Denver and Master.
The Gentle Reader can be forgiven if he infers the intended implication: Apprentice Denver is worthless. Yet, we know that Apprentice Denver is “more special” than he currently realizes.
Unless Master is attempting to equate worthless and “more special”, we are confronted with a contradiction in the style of A.E.Waite. This supposed contradiction is resolved once we accept the reasonable presumption that Master is fond of Apprentice Denver and Master's efforts at deprecating Apprentice Denver are intended to prevent accusations of favoritism. The supposed ambiguity of the high schoolers is also resolved, once we accept the reasonable premise that Master has a genuine fondness for the group.
We feel obligated to offer an explanation for Master's frequent contradictions: irony. Perhaps the best example of irony is when certain people claim to have knowledge, so called, beyond the mortal senses. We can only declare to these individuals that we lack this ability to know, and inform them that they have supernatural abilities that we lack. They are satisfied with their superior insight and we are amused at their self satisfaction and their informed opinions of our ignorance. The fact that their valued opinion is external from themselves and its origin is found in us should be of little concern.
As most people can hold and offer contradictory opinions, they would not find this behavior in other people to be suspicious. Of course, we do not believe that Master has contradictory opinions, he simply enjoys expressing himself in contradictory terms. The Gentle Reader should recall that the existence of a contradiction typically indicates either an incorrect assumption or improper reasoning, although an attempt at ironic humor should not be excluded a priori.
In conclusion, now I know that from the darkness comes the light and I now know what Master will do for a burrito.
Apprentice RJ
We offer that Master's unsatisfactory conclusion that the high schoolers are ambiguous is due entirely to sham reasoning. Master quotes Strauss’ comment stating that man, as man, is ambiguous, then Master states that high schoolers are men and confidently, but not convincingly, concludes that high schoolers are ambiguous. We suggest that Master has borrowed a writing technique from A.E.Waite, whereby important hints and vital clues are offered and their validity are subsequently questioned and invariably maligned.
We note the evolution in the descriptive style that differentiates Denver over several months: from Denver to potential Apprentice Denver and, finally, to Apprentice Denver. Yet, there is not one sentence, nor one word, of praise for Apprentice Denver, no indication of Master’s recognition of Denver's virtues, various misdirections abound and, judging solely by the documentation, Apprentice Denver possesses no virtues and no qualities. Whenever Apprentice Denver makes an appearance in an essay, the Gentle Reader can expect at least one instance of marginalization, usually Apprentice Denver’s youth is either proposed or implied as a liability; and one example of conflict, usually, but not always, between Apprentice Denver and Master.
The Gentle Reader can be forgiven if he infers the intended implication: Apprentice Denver is worthless. Yet, we know that Apprentice Denver is “more special” than he currently realizes.
Unless Master is attempting to equate worthless and “more special”, we are confronted with a contradiction in the style of A.E.Waite. This supposed contradiction is resolved once we accept the reasonable presumption that Master is fond of Apprentice Denver and Master's efforts at deprecating Apprentice Denver are intended to prevent accusations of favoritism. The supposed ambiguity of the high schoolers is also resolved, once we accept the reasonable premise that Master has a genuine fondness for the group.
We feel obligated to offer an explanation for Master's frequent contradictions: irony. Perhaps the best example of irony is when certain people claim to have knowledge, so called, beyond the mortal senses. We can only declare to these individuals that we lack this ability to know, and inform them that they have supernatural abilities that we lack. They are satisfied with their superior insight and we are amused at their self satisfaction and their informed opinions of our ignorance. The fact that their valued opinion is external from themselves and its origin is found in us should be of little concern.
As most people can hold and offer contradictory opinions, they would not find this behavior in other people to be suspicious. Of course, we do not believe that Master has contradictory opinions, he simply enjoys expressing himself in contradictory terms. The Gentle Reader should recall that the existence of a contradiction typically indicates either an incorrect assumption or improper reasoning, although an attempt at ironic humor should not be excluded a priori.
In conclusion, now I know that from the darkness comes the light and I now know what Master will do for a burrito.
Apprentice RJ
We enjoyed Apprentice RJ's initial essay for several reasons, notably his suggestion that Yours Truly occasionally engages in the technique of "sham" arguments and reasoning to arrive at the desired conclusion. We are amused to be subjected to such techniques towards the end of the essay.
Apprentice RJ omitted stating the fact, although implied throughout, that Yours Truly only engages in “sham” arguments, so called, when the topic is the high schoolers. This omission is an example of taste and, surprisingly, our discussion is not, as might ne expected, in poor taste, due to the immunity afforded the commentator.
For the Gentle Reader’s benefit, we note that “reasonable” assumptions are different from “unreasonable” presumptions by degrees only, not by kinds, otherwise said, a “reasonable” assumption is ultimately no different from an “unreasonable” presumption, as neither require demonstrable facts, and both are based on subjective opinions or values touching upon what is “reasonable” and what is “unreasonable”.
Apprentice RJ omitted stating the fact, although implied throughout, that Yours Truly only engages in “sham” arguments, so called, when the topic is the high schoolers. This omission is an example of taste and, surprisingly, our discussion is not, as might ne expected, in poor taste, due to the immunity afforded the commentator.
For the Gentle Reader’s benefit, we note that “reasonable” assumptions are different from “unreasonable” presumptions by degrees only, not by kinds, otherwise said, a “reasonable” assumption is ultimately no different from an “unreasonable” presumption, as neither require demonstrable facts, and both are based on subjective opinions or values touching upon what is “reasonable” and what is “unreasonable”.
Hell, the never-ending punishment for a temporal transgression, is unreasonable,
yet this unreasonableness does not preclude the existence of Hell.
Reincarnation without remembrance of things past is repugnant and unreasonable,
yet this unreasonableness does not preclude the existence of reincarnation.
The assumption that our world is a planet is reasonable,
yet reason does not preclude the existence of a flat earth.
yet this unreasonableness does not preclude the existence of Hell.
Reincarnation without remembrance of things past is repugnant and unreasonable,
yet this unreasonableness does not preclude the existence of reincarnation.
The assumption that our world is a planet is reasonable,
yet reason does not preclude the existence of a flat earth.
Although, “fondness” is a reasonable assumption explaining Yours Truly’s behavior vis-à-vis Apprentice Denver, specifically, and the group, generally, the possibility remains that “fondness” is an incorrect assumption and, therefore, remains subject to revision.
Truly, Apprentice RJ, subtlety is the soul of irony.
In conclusion, the Gentle Researcher cannot be too rich, too thin, too cautious, or too ironic.
G.D.O'Bradovich III
Truly, Apprentice RJ, subtlety is the soul of irony.
In conclusion, the Gentle Researcher cannot be too rich, too thin, too cautious, or too ironic.
G.D.O'Bradovich III