Ayn Rand, I and The Universe Part 1

Ayn Rand, I and The Universe Part 1
by Manfred F. Schieder

Dedicated to the memory of Ayn Rand

Disclaimer: Due to the presently and worldwide existence of juridical dispositions, variously stated and with diverse contents, related with accepting the responsibility of the content of a writing, of the external works mentioned in such a writing and the connections and possible connections with sites in the Web (Webpages/Websites/Homepages), including possible attachments (Pop-ups, etc.) and any other present or future means of communication, this disclaimer clearly indicates that the opinions contained in this writing correspond solely to the author himself. External connections (Links) or other means of communication that might be mentioned have the exclusive purpose of providing the reader with additional information in relations with the themes dealt with in this writing. Any such additional information is by no means to be understood as if the author of this writing adheres either partially or completely with said other sources of information, not even in the case that they could eventually coincide with the opinions of the author of this writing, since derivatives and conclusions presented in such external sources could eventually not concur with those of the author of this writing. This distancing refers to every theme dealt with on the pages of the Web or, in general, the Internet or any other means of communication of any form they may take and, particularly, to metaphysical, epistemological, ethical, political and esthetic (art and culture in general) considerations that may be part of such media. The ideas and the arguments, which the reader may obtain from these other sources of information, will remain completely with the reader’s own responsibility and cannot be related to opinions or considerations which belong to the author of the present writing. This acceptance of responsibility on the side of the reader does not only correspond to his decision of reading or not reading this writing but also to the opinions, he may personally develop in relation with its content. The mention of other pages of the Web and other means of communication can under no condition whatsoever be understood in the sense of being a publicity or an invitation to purchase, rent, lease, etc. whatever products and/or services on said means of communication. This disclaimer has been issued due to the existing dispositions of international, national or of any other possible juridical and/or legal level mentioned at the beginning of this disclaimer. The author will not accept under any condition any responsibility for the reading or any further use of this writing. This writing may contain general mistakes, neglect or oversight, typographical errors or incorrectness, any and all of which will be corrected when found, but giving neither an implicit nor a declared warranty for it. All the information contained in the writing is delivered “as is” and the author cannot be made responsible, either implicitly or explicitly for any direct or indirect harms, damages or financial losses that may result from reading this writing. This includes but is not limited to implicit or explicit warranties of any type and for any specific purpose that may be. The use of this writing, for any purpose whatsoever, will be at the reader’s or user’s full responsibility and any consequence of the use to which it may be applied will be at the reader’s or user’s own charge and responsibility

GENERAL COMMENT: This writing is neither a clone nor a repetition of Ayn Rand’s works using other words (for a direct information of Ayn Rand’s ideas I suggest the reader to refer directly to her works) but my own personal view of Objetivism as applied to the themes here dealt with combined with personal concepts, ideas, considerations and possibilities which Ayn Rand did not mention in her works nor would, eventually, even had endorsed, such as my personal view on the death penalty or the replacement of governments by a system of general insurance policies which is not followed up to now and to my knowledge, by any insurance company world over.
I was born in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on December 4, 1937 and live now, since 1985, in Vienna, Austria. I am recognized as having first introduced Ayn Rand’s Philosophy of Objectivism to the Argentine public through articles published between February 1983 and December 1997 in Argentine newspapers and magazines. A further collaboration was published in Spain. All these articles were free collaborations on Ayn Rand ideas as applied to local and international issues. They were published without any change or shortening of their content. The interest of the Argentine public grew to the extent that several institutions in Argentina invited me to deliver lectures on Ayn Rand’s ideas. In 1997, due to private requirements, I interrupted my writing engagement. The present article was developed in the ensuing time. I continue to adhere completely to Ayn Rand’s ideas. My efforts yielded excellent results: In 1985, with the collaboration of several Objectivist friends in Argentina, I produced a translation into Spanish of “The Virtue of Selfishness” which was published as the first foreign edition of one of Rand’s purely philosophical works. Institutions dedicated to spread Ayn Rand’s ideas in seminars and universities, etc. were created in Argentina even after I had left the country and during 2003 the publishing house “Editorial Grito Sagrado” of Buenos Aires issued a de luxe edition of the Spanish translation of “Atlas Shrugged” (“La Rebelión de Atlas”). I have been informed that the issue met a total success since the first edition reached immediately the 2nd place among the first 10 bestsellers in Argentina and the full edition was sold during the first month of publication. Further editions are now following and “Grito Sagrado” issues now Spanish translations of other books by Ayn Rand.

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT: In a way similar to the Guardian keeping the gate of the entrance to the Palace of Justice (in the present case Truth) in Kafka's drama "The Process" I must warn the reader that this writing, titled "AYN RAND, I AND THE UNIVERSE", may not correspond to his way of thinking. It forms an integrated whole and may by no means and in any way or media existing in the present and/or the future, be changed or altered either in its content or phrasing. Only the author himself can change or extend any statement contained in the article. This statement and the copyright notice is an integral part of its content and may neither be erased nor altered. For many readers specifically interested only in the structure of the universe it will come as a surprise that so many additional themes form part of the writing itself. Reading through it will clarify this since the universe and man, as a reasoning being, together with the corresponding ethics, politics, and form of society and art make up an unbreakable total. Also in the way of the Guardian mentioned at the beginning of this statement it remains totally at the personal resolve of the reader whether he decides to enter Truth through this Gate.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.    INTRODUCTION: THE TRAGIC CONSEQUENCES OF THE ERROR WITH "GOD"
METAPHYSICS, THE FIRST COLUMN OF PHILOSOPHY: WHERE AM I ?

2.    ERASING IMPOSSIBILITIES

3.    THE STRUCTURE OF THE UNIVERSE

4.    OUR CAPACITY TO THINK
EPISTEMOLOGY, THE SECOND COLUMN OF PHILOSOPHY: HOW DO I KNOW IT?

5.    THE REQUIRED CHANGE OF ETHICS
ETHICS, THE THIRD COLUMN OF PHILOSOPHY: WHAT AM I TO DO?

6.    THE LOGICALLY RESULTING TYPE OF SOCIETY
POLITICS, THE FOURTH COLUMN OF PHILOSOPHY:
THE ENVIRONMENT REQUIRED BY THE RATIONAL INDIVIDUAL

•      MURDERERS ARE NOT HUMANS

•      WHICH IS THE STRENGTH AND, AT THE SAME TIME, TOTAL WEAKNESS
OF SOCIALISM OR WHY DOES CAPITALISM FAIL IN ITS ENDEAVOR TO
CONVINCE, WHILE GIVING SO MANY BENEFITS TO THE GENERAL
POPULATION IN THE RARELY ATTAINED OPPORTUNITIES WHEN IT IS
EFFECTIVELY APPLIED?

7.    THE REFUELING OF OUR POWER FOR CREATION
AESTHETICS, THE FIFTH – AND LAST - COLUMN OF PHILOSOPHY:
HOW CAN I CONCRETIZE THE ABSTRACT?

8.    DEFINITIONS

"All other things remaining equal, we may assume the superiority of the demonstration which derives from fewer postulates or hypothesis."
(Aristoteles)

"Do not multiply entities beyond necessity. What can be explained on fewer principles is needlessly explained by more."
(William of Occam's "Razor principle", 13th century)

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION: THE TRAGIC CONSEQUENCES OF THE ERROR WITH "GOD" [1]
METAPHYSICS, THE FIRST COLUMN OF PHILOSOPHY: WHERE AM I?

In general, the universe seems to signify too complex a matter to be understood by the "common man", a term scornfully used to describe those individuals considered to have only a small if any intellectual curiosity for the fundamentals that explain their existence.

Certainly, there is a part of humanity physically incapable of following a logical string of thought on any matter whatsoever, but this portion consists mainly of poor creatures suffering from up to now unsolvable brain damages, either hereditary or caused by accident. These are cases for psychiatric and/or clinical attention, and the cure for many of such handicaps, diseases and sufferings will surely be found in the future. In this relation, never before have the possibilities been brighter.

For the overwhelming majority of mankind such impairments are, fortunately, not the case even though, as perfectly explained by philosopher Ayn Rand in her article "The Comprachicos", their brain has been molded on purpose by what they have been taught. Learning is an absolute requirement for man's survival but this includes also the very sad fact that interested parties and powers that be use it to implant in the mind of human beings an almost unbreakable barrier not only against certain strings of logical thought but, what is worse, against the development of the personal will to deduce aspects of reality which stand in stark contrast to what can be termed "the official standpoint".

Their interest is to withhold knowledge from the general population – as it happened in the far past (in Ancient Egypt, for example) and continues to be in every other country worldwide – but as this became more and more difficult to accomplish through the ages, they now do everything possible to direct the interest of the general population into an easily controlled direction of their preference. This is what environmentalists do with the help of the media and the ruling powers. It is also the reason why teaching methods designed to build individuals capable of thinking for themselves - as the Maria Montessori method is - have, from the official standpoint, always been viewed with suspicion and even direct prohibition by the political interests.

This is also the motive why all governments and religious authorities eagerly keep the area of education in their hands. Teaching becomes, then, not the fitting tool for learning, understanding, reasoning and deducing by oneself, but truly a weapon of subversion against man's survival. Man thus becomes a directed instead of an independent rational being.

This triggers a phenomenon, which, as science and technique advances at an increasingly faster speed, becomes more and more evident. Even those subject to government and religious manipulations since their earliest youth are still capable of solving complex mathematical formulas, bring to fruition extremely complicated inventions, direct highly sophisticated business operations, and operate on a high level of what can be termed “mechanical thinking”. However, beyond this point their brain operates in a watertight compartment where a stern and arrogant adherence to impossibilities and senseless beliefs of old age apparently cannot be overcome. A perfect example of it are those persons who accept the lessons of the evolution of the species but, at the same time, adhere to impossible religious beliefs. They carry throughout their life a fundamental contradiction of terms which they themselves do not seem to be aware of but which, nevertheless, produces an intellectual and moral conflict. It takes a strong will of character to recognize truth and defend it against all kinds of attacks, particularly those that are so subtle that they even go unnoticed.

In this relation, a good example comes to mind in the book "The Language of Life" written by Nobel Prize laureate George Beadle (together with his wife Muriel). It contains a perfectly structured explanation of the development of life and enters with a clear language into the most difficult areas of the workings of DNA molecules. However, a few pages before the book's end, the Beadles are unwilling to recognize the totally evident fact that the universe is all there is, that it is a self-explaining axiom, which neither needs nor justifies any other "additional" clarification. Blind to this they revert at this point to mysticism and religion. Intellectually, thus, do the authors show their incapacity to think for themselves when it comes to the fundamental point of the origin of life itself. Suddenly they are unable to recognize that life evolved by the logic content of matter itself; that life is a state which matter can adopt, when and where the circumstances are correct.

Nothing of this sort of mental fog can be found in another, extraordinary book written on the same subject: "The Wellsprings of Life", by Isaac Asimov. This book is both a revelation and an intellectual pleasure.

There are many reasons that can be named in relation with a behavior like that of the Beadles or similar to it. Some act like this following the path of the slightest resistance; others, although going already against biblical "teachings", do not want to be caught in the open. Beyond a certain point they state the artificial notion that nothing of what they said up to that point runs against any official position although it is evident to the alert reader that they are already doing so; some carry the teachings or, better, the fears taught them in their youth, so deeply within that they cannot build up the resoluteness to go the full length with truth, while others accept what they have been taught, never stopping to think out for themselves the correct explanation.

These reasons do not end the long list of possible motives and excuses. Be this as may be, it suffices to evidence the fact that nothing has done so much harm to mankind and its fast progress than the existing combination between religions and the secular political power, used to subject mankind to its joint rule. Philosopher Ayn Rand has demonstrated this impressively in her works.
As we shall see, in its beginning the deplorable fact of this joint control came not from human planning but as the result of the natural evolution of man from his beastly origins.[2]

However, once the joint control was established, the threat of terror, the use of torture and the certainty of violent death were used as tools to impose an almost insurmountable barrier against the disclosure of truth. Impossibilities established as dogmatic certainties through the very real use of these frightening acts of violence were sufficient to silence an almost endless line of generations. In the end, man's reluctance to suffer and die established The Big Lie as a general custom.

Even some of the bravest were reluctant to risk their necks: Copernicus decided to have his deductions on Earth's revolution around the centrally placed Sun – obtained from ancient Greek knowledge and which ran against the official and religious version of his time - published after his death. Giordano Bruno, who did risk his neck, was burned because he held to the truth he had discovered that all stars are suns, and Galileo was silenced and ostracized to stop him from shaking the established dogmas. Lavoisier was killed because "the state does not require scientists",

Moseley, one of the most brilliant minds when it comes to the science dealing with the structure of atoms, was sent by a very stupid war machinery to a certain and useless untimely death. Many others to whom we owe an ever-deepening understanding of the universe and a betterment of our general conditions of life were either ridiculed or physically persecuted for their ideas, their race or any other of many such irrational "reasons". Surely, the positions held by the clergy and the kings and their followers alike provided extraordinary possibilities to wield power over their fellow men and allowed them to obtain, through it, enormous and unjustified amounts of wealth. However, all this also resulted in an extraordinary delay in the development of humankind, a delay that can easily signify total destruction for humanity as the sciences, restrained by these powers, have only now come to notice. We will return to this point later. In the end, holding such positions of senseless power even acted against the holders of it, as can be ascertained by the fact that any man in the civilized area of the world can enjoy far more of life than any ancient kings and rulers ever could.

The main dogma existing in human civilization is the belief that the universe is the product of a "God"[3] that created it. The beginning of this notion lays far away in our evolutionary origins and is not even common to every group of human beings .[4] It comes from the times when we were still nearer to irrational animals than to our, though not always, actual state of rational beings. It comes from the fears, which we shared with other animals when facing facts, which were, at that time, incomprehensible. Against the animal's incapacity to think, our growing mind searched for explanations and developed, in the process, fantastic interpretations which were to form the basis of religions. Religion is a very early form of philosophy, stated philosopher Ayn Rand, an early way to explain things thought to be unexplainable, a contradiction in terms, which, by its very statement, cannot be resolved, since something "unexplainable" cannot be "explained". This created a sense of frustration and, in turn, gave an additional tool of submission to all those group leaders who, noticing in the majority of their fellow men the existing failure to understand, drew from it the inherent power it held to exercise control over them; using then as they are still doing today, the main element to obtain and hold power: the use of spiritual and physical menace and brute force.

As a clear example, I can mention the rational deduction of forthcoming eclipses that was held secret by the Egyptian priests so that it could be used to frighten their subjects by showing that they had a special knowledge obtained through their "direct" connection to supernatural powers (“Ra”, i.e. the Sun, etc.). To better show the "powers" they held, the priests physically used the heads of animals on their own heads to impersonate gods, which held, as they said. The outstanding characteristics believed to be distinctive to these animals, such as a sharp vision, swiftness, ingenuity, etc. This in itself shows how close humanity was still at that time to the kingdom of irrational animals from where our species comes.

All of it helped to establish the belief that an understanding of the universe was a very difficult if not insurmountable, even impossible matter which only a few anointed were selected to grasp. It was held that it belonged to a higher realm, not open to the common person. From it, the strangest philosophies and all kinds of religions and sects have drawn their profit, their power and their expansion. As mentioned earlier, persecution, torture and murder secured the power it gave those who should have extended the knowledge of their fellow men by rational teachings. It was determined by authority that a majority of people were to live on an inferior level for the benefit of the few. These few where Plato's "Guardians", that kept their fellow men in the dungeons. Plato rationalized primeval beliefs.

However, this did not mean that those excluded from the possibility of having access to the circles of power were also automatically condemned to be morons. Many of the things, which helped us to obtain better tools for survival, were discovered and invented by autodidacts. Science popularizer and novelist Isaac Asimov stated once that we owe a large part of our higher standard of living to people who never or only partially visited a university. High quotients of intelligence are not necessarily documented by a doctorate. These advances did their own to push back the veils of ignorance. The push of individual will can be seen everywhere, and a Gauss curve can be drawn showing that the overwhelming majority of mankind can quite easily understand very complicated matters indeed, if they are presented in a logically structured, comprehensive form. The acceptance among the public, which popularizers of science such as Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, J. Bronowski and many others enjoy, makes a strong point here. As an afterthought, it is amazing how so many academic doctors came to accept impossibilities as unshakable truths. In time, the anointed, as Tomas Sowell has termed them, always fail prodigiously.[5]

Rationality is the main and major advantage over all other things and beings existing that man has, the one central point, which allows us to look consciously at nature, understand its workings and use it to our advantage. Further on, rational thinking and rational behavior clear the way from impossible and useless fears. This, as pointed out by philosopher Ayn Rand, does not preclude the disadvantage involved that we may reach rationally unsupported and logically unsustainable conclusions, a stern warning that we must be careful with the inductions and deductions traced. However, once a fact of reality is understood it becomes truth and axiom.

At our far away beginnings, we misconstrued many rationally unsustainable conclusions because we did not understand correctly the events of nature. Moved by the fear and terror, which triggers the reactions of irrational animals, we understood these facts of nature to be expressions of wrath from beings more powerful than ourselves.

Look at a dog as he writhes when he hears a thunder, and you will have a good example of what is meant. Already Xenophanes, in ancient Greece, concluded that we imagined such overwhelming powers in our own image and likeness and the image and likeness of animals with which gods of all kinds were imbued is a further proof of this. In due course mental economy reduced these "powerful beings", all thought to be gods, to an elderly bearded man who was then called "God". He was elderly, and bearded because in the then existing civilizations those considered to be the wisest among the community were all elderly and bearded (shaving, at that time, being a painful procedure). And since impatient men become even more unbearable the older they get, the character of "God" ("Baal", "Jehovah", "Zeus", "Jupiter", "God", "Allah", etc.) was a copy of the human characteristic of wrathfulness used against other men whenever something wished isn’t immediately obtained. Polytheism changed to monotheism for mental economy's reason but else nothing much changed neither then or much later. Even as, with the accumulation of knowledge, all the data required to negate the existence of any god became available, the power held by certain men to dominate those below their status was sufficient to delay truth for thousands of years. It was to take up to our times for those knowing the truth to have a wider platform from where to voice it at a lower risk to themselves.

The knowledge of truth did not automatically separate us from the behavior proper of animals who cower when they hear the thunder of a storm. The holders of truth are still a small, though continuously growing, group of mankind. For most of mankind, it still seems a good idea to continue cowering, as it has always done, whenever confronted with the incomprehensible hullabaloo and ire existing in nature. Religions are still a dominating factor. Out of such an automatic submissive behavior, kept by the power wielding groups for whom this has always been very convenient, originated rites and rules imposed for an easier control of the general population. This, of course, was also a quid pro quo, since the general population itself was, of course, no major luminary at all. In addition, religious fanaticism continues to be used to obtain power and the destruction of enemies as self-blastings show continuously.

Cringing, as a sign of submission, still exists nowadays. It has not disappeared. Churchgoers do it when they kneel in front of the altar and the cross, both being symbols of power. That the cross is a symbol of man's genitals has been forgotten since long. Acolytes of the ruler or rulers of a tribe and these themselves devised such demeaning ways of conduct for the rulers benefit. A silenced subject is easily tied to another man's will with ceremonies and duties, particularly when bloody practices are added.

People were pushed alive into the furnaces of "Baal" in Carthage, hearts were torn from living human beings among the Aztecs, and people were tortured and burned alive by the Inquisition. Many more examples could be added to these cruelties.

All this closed the doors to rational investigation, discovery and invention. It delayed a good way of life for the majority of mankind for thousands of years. People were condemned to suffering, illness and early death. In the end, however, such irrational behavior involves certain dangers even for those who hold to it. We have been lucky in all these last thousands of years. It is only now that we are starting to think about the possible weapons of defense that we could device against an incoming meteor. Catastrophes such as the impact of a comet like the one causing the giant crater in Arizona or the yet not fully explained site of destruction at the Tunguska in Russia and the reason for the death of the giant Saurians are examples of the kind of tragedies which mankind may suffer if no means of defense are devised. But such a defense can only be devised by knowledge, never by ignorance.

Reality is quite different from what early, and even today's man imagined and still imagine. There are no proofs (nor can there ever be as we shall see later on) that such "supernatural" powers or beings as imagined exist or ever existed. Unfortunately as this may be we are still living in a world of man-made-fantasies, which are the dominant cause of our hardships and problems.
Reality punishes us continuously for not obeying its laws, for not living as our defining characteristic commands: as rational beings. It is not necessary to present many examples of what is meant. I have mentioned already that plagues and epidemics were supposed to be imposed by "the wrath of 'God'". Without the superstitions sustained by religions, we would have learned much earlier of viruses and bacteria, of the basic rules of hygiene, of the disposal of wastes and litter, of medicine and cleanliness, etc. Much suffering could have been avoided through the ages. For a long time the notion was imposed, that to disclose one's body for the procedure of washing was a sign of sin. For a similar length of time, cats were considered to be companions of the "Devil". This allowed rats to multiply with their load of pests and contamination. It was easy to state that it was the "Devil" who imposed so much misery on mankind, and just as easy it was to add that "God", in his "infinite wisdom", allowed the "Devil" to act as he wished so "God" could evidence his own strength to his "flock". Such a situation showed both "God" and the "Devil" to be creatures devised by evil minds, but nobody dared to say so.

These were not the only evil errors committed. It was held as an axiom that the sun rotated around the earth. This neither hindered the sun to remain at the center of the planetary system nor the earth to rotate around it, but it did delay a new way of looking at things, which, once established, brought in its trail the discoveries and inventions, which form the basis of our present general betterment of life. As a matter of fact, the authoritarian stupidity of holding to a knowledge that is wrong has meant death for countless individuals all over the world. Nobody dared to oppose the notion of the sun rotating around the earth. As said before, Copernicus was careful to die before it was disclosed that he was the author of "De revolutionibus orbitum coelestium" ("On the circular movements of the planetary bodies").

Just by following this same line of reasoning to state that the still existing social system, based on the deceitful notion that an overwhelming power rules our existence, must be replaced on a worldwide basis by a rational system if mankind is to survive as such, may sound as too ample a purpose. Those who hold to the existing social system as the source of their self-imposed power and privileges know that it can only survive by a continued imposition of lies and threats. Philosophers and scientist themselves have adhered, for convenience's sake or for haughtily held ignorance, to such falsehood.
To read nowadays what the majority of philosophers and scientists have presented as the analysis of metaphysics and its related areas is a disheartening experience. Every sharp angle is avoided, every logic evaded, every conclusion eluded. Philosophers like Leibniz, Kant and Heidegger as well as scientists like Einstein, Hawking and Beadle have all adhered to the impossible notion of a supernatural being. Their last analysis has always been a string composed of ignorance, mistakes and deceit.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
In our days, finally and unavoidably, the moment of truth has come. Human brain's rational capacity has reached a level and developed an intellectual sharpness, which can no longer be hidden. A long road lies behind. More and more knowledge has been accumulating through time, more and more rational conclusions have been reached. The total shapes now into what is a magnificent set by way of a philosophical and political system devoid of mistakes and deception, which provides a firm ground for a fully rational society. Not unexpectedly, the originator of this has been a woman of colossal intellect, philosopher and writer Ayn Rand.

The common citizen, however, has not noticed it yet for the spread and acquisition of knowledge takes a long time. Hence, even nowadays and up to the end of their lives, the majority of mankind does not know where its existence takes place. For most of mankind life's main questions: Where, How and What, remain unanswered. Most of men spend their lives in a world of which they know little or, at least, far less than the knowledge now accumulated would allow them to answer, by themselves, the three questions mentioned. This shortcoming is a result from being either unaware of where to look for the answers or being too timid to confront the established beliefs. The common citizen leaves the matter to religion, its sects and other such superstitious contraptions. The present writing is part of a historically long string of writings that have the purpose to rectify this, for those who know the truth are multiplying constantly.

To have stated a little earlier that the understanding of the universe and its necessary consequences is an easy endeavor for whoever wants to know where his existence takes place, will come, perhaps, as an unexpected statement. After all, the subject is the most colossal matter existing. Yet, as so often happens when we face a problem armed with a clearly defined knowledge of where to look for a solution, neither the knowledge of complicated mathematical formulas nor the brain consuming understanding of convoluted philosophical statements is required. As the great science popularizer Isaac Asimov once stated, if a given matter is too complicate to be explained in simple terms it is better not to touch it at all. I will add here that the understanding of the universe is, as we shall see, a very simple thing indeed.

The reader will now surely forward the question of why then has it not been explained much earlier. This is a quite different matter and relates to what has been described earlier in this writing. The pieces of the puzzle building up an understanding of the universe have been accumulating through the ages. Still, they only coalesced into a finely structured total in our days, mainly due to the extraordinary mind of the genius of philosophy: Ayn Rand.

It could have happened much earlier since most of the component parts have been available for a long time already. A reading of history shows, however, that the made-up combination of falsehoods, prohibitions and threats mentioned earlier as spread and imposed by the groups interested in keeping their full control over the rest of mankind and their brains, operated against the parts being structured together. Perhaps some earlier but forever unknown thinker assembled the parts but did not dare to publish his conclusions. There could have been an earlier but unknown "Copernicus" even more timid than he was. There could have been more "Copernicus" than we may even think of. Though for one part a really formidable brain such as Ayn Rand's was required to connect the pieces of the puzzle, it was a further requirement that this mind had to have the courage of presenting the facts to the public by confronting not only the existing secular and religious power groups but also conservative academics and scholars.

I have already stated earlier that the "powers that be", the religions of any creed and color together with the politicians, authorities and sundry academics, intellectuals and fellow travelers that constitute said power have applied superstition, fear, physical persecution, terror, torture and murder to effectively delay, blur, hide and forbid the explanation.

These tools of deterrence were even used to silence the less significant facts such as the earth’s translation around the sun.

However, the time arrived when the existing curtains of silence could no longer stop the knowledge that knowing the universe is the basis of all further knowledge. It includes, thus, all the discoveries, inventions and developments required to support and extend the life of each individual embodying, of course, those who never thought and, perhaps, never will even come to think of this being so.
It should not come as a surprise, as Mrs. Rand made clear, that this "new knowledge" implies an ideological and political breakdown, out of which a truly humane social structure will then develop. Just as the theory of Chaos has already shown that small effects can have tremendous results, so large effects necessarily have overwhelming, all encompassing, results.

I have said already that the majority of philosophers and scientists, imbued by a religiously dominated education, have held to the most amazing vagaries, inconsistencies and incongruities. This is even truer when it refers to the universe itself. Here they are the main culprits of hiding the truth, for it has always been their responsibility to present it to the wide public. However, they rejected their responsibility. It is a disheartening matter to read the works of the principal physicists, astronomers and sundry thinkers whenever they talk about the universe. Unable to present a solid explanation based on logic they start to blabber – no better word can be used to define what they do – without paying the slightest reverence for the basic definitions of what words mean.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
For the common citizen life happens mostly in an intellectual vacuum of which he himself is only partially guilty. By the time he dies, he has not known anything of the place where his life elapsed nor did he even think that it was important to know. After all, it is a comfortable and relieving position to believe that a never shown nor demonstrated "God" or whatever other name can be given to such "supernatural power" nonsense, always had a total control over the whole. But it is also a demeaning one, as the reader will see further on, when I quote Kira Argounova and Andrei Tagarov's talk from Ayn Rand's "We the Living." As we shall see, there is no such "supernatural power", and this fact relates directly to the existence of the universe and its structure. The existence of the universe excludes any alternative. We will show this for the record though, basically, it is not even the atheist who has to provide any proof for the non-existence of any "supernatural power". After all, the need of proof rests on those who claim that such "power" exists.

Before entering the main theme itself I suggest the reader to turn to the last pages of this writing to read a list of the definitions mentioned there as a glossary. This is a part I often miss in books and writings in general since only once both the writer and the reader know the clearly defined concepts can they start from a common understanding that eliminates the need for detours and repetitious explanations. Clarity is necessary. In this specific instance, clarity is paramount.

During the exposition I will quote, at length and wherever necessary, from the writings of scientists and philosophers, mainly from Mrs. Rand's works. However, not only quotes from her or her followers from the "dogmatic" as well as the "heretic" strain (like David Kelly, Nathaniel Branden, et al.) will be mentioned. For "copyright" security purposes, I will use the definitions for my own use and aim in this writing, though I will never change their meaning or read into them anything that has not been clearly stated by the authors themselves. Where I diverge from what they say I will clearly indicate this and give the reasons for it. Definitions are to provide a clearer and easier understanding of the main part of this writing. As said before they will avoid unnecessary repetitions, references, etc. Good mutual understanding is, at least, half of the whole process.

[1] While other authors have used a variety of different arguments to prove the nonexistence of "God" – which are all correct – I base my argument on the definition of "Universe" as accepted by the English and German language, i. e. "Everything that is or exists". For certain other languages however, Spanish for example, this argument is not valid since the definition of the term has been changed, erasing the definition just mentioned and replacing it with a different one ("Everything that has been created"). Such languages are, thus, incomplete since they lack a word to mean "Everything that is or exists". Such a change is, of course, very useful for the religions predominating in countries speaking the language mentioned which, thus, lacks the term required for the definition on which I base my argument. But this also renders the related language incomplete. To invent a new term to mean "Everything that is or exists" would be, however, a useless effort since the correct meaning of "Universe" has already been internationally established excepting in those languages that have been subjected to the subversion mentioned. Only recently have some Spanish dictionaries incorporated the definition as used in this writing, though only as an additional definition while the main one remains untouched.
Further analysis on the theme of this chapter will be found by the reader in the following books which, however, should not be considered as the only authorities on the matter as there are many other books by atheist authors worldwide: "Atheism, The Case against God", by George H. Smith, "The Problem of God", by Peter A. Angeles, "The Atheist Debaters Handbook", by B. C. Johnson, "Disciples of Destruction" by Charles W. Sutherland, "Critiques of God", compiled by Peter Angeles, "God, A Critical Inquiry" by Anthony Flew, "Philosophy and Atheism" by Kai Nielsen, "Against the Faith" by Jim Herrick, "Classics of Free Thought" (compiled by Paul Blanshard), "An Anthology of Atheism and Rationalism" (compiled by Gordon Stein, Ph.D.), "The Best of Robert Ingersoll" (compiled by Roger E. Greeley) and "The Ruins of Palmyra" by Count F. du Volney (http://www.volney.org/), originally published at the end of the 18th century.

[2] Again, from this we can deduce the fact that the great accomplishments of the American Nation resulted from the decision taken by the Founding Fathers to strictly separate these two powers that the well-known psychologist Nathaniel Branden symbolized as Attila and the Witch Doctor, i.e. the rulers by brute force and the rulers by spirit.

[3] The word "God", as general synonym of “Allah”, “Zeus”, etc. and the apparent counterpart "Devil", etc. which "personify" apparently super-natural beings will always be written between quotation marks. These terms are fantasy names that have been introduced into our language with the pretense to stand for really existing beings, things or powers. They do not even justify the use of an upper case for, as the reader will see, they do not represent any definable person or object. However, upper case writing will be respected to not harm the grammatical rules of the language. Besides, history has shown that "eternal" gods are destroyed by time, as another replaces a given civilization. This can be particularly noticed in phrases such as "’Zeus’ was the Greek's principal god", where god is written in lower case.

[4] For more details on this, consult Will Durant's "Our Oriental Heritage", Volume 1 of his impressive "History of Civilization".

[5] "The Vision of the Anointed", by Thomas Sowell

Discuss this Article (7 messages)