Writen BY

FEMI MARTIN.

Introduction

I had an idea which I strongly believe is plausible to a great degree. I foresighted, seeing the state of decadency the moral principles were constricted by personal justification in these conscious age of today, in the advent of the precipitating……..avarices of the world view. Out from the latest general overview of the nature of the philosophy which is presently ……..proliferate in the ethos, it emerge with expanse of ideal with the same perception varying on the same philosophies as enacted by previous philosophers.

Avarice of man consistently tends to deem as variable and is consistent with the emergent time which is effective to condone its use. The natural periodic sequence and the age periods seem to emerge out most with in profligacy and perfidiousness that could only be account to the tenor of a great avarice. And fortune I come to understand is irrespective of the morals indulged in or the strength accorded but it tends only to be vowed only to by a nature deem favorable as to being her camouflaging nature within the sub-intellect strata. And, with the teal of the person concerned, and again with the little accomplishment of a tedious task not a great deal of jobbing or tasks like that of the Hercules task ,would not really really categorize the person for less than the worth of deserving the bounty riches of good favor. In this recent progression of things earthly, impertinent lushness amid the Philippians morale which is still eerie at its daft days, yet still vivid arbitrarily, stemming through with a youthful grace towards a core objective purposed only on fortune. It seems to escalate with a gradual maneuvering with heart to apply to … the avarice. Without which when care is not paid to by bit consciousness there is no guarantee of a certain favor. There is so great insignificance pay to moral principle. The wit is not gloss to appease to anyone moral judgment or justification but it is luster toward the attainment of fortune. Its more of a general cosmopolitan observance, it is in the making of it that is quite out of keeping with the pedantic tutelage of moral principle of the bygone days. In days passed, very early in our life, we were first directed in morals before we grow observant of the means of fortune but these were antiquated and suburbanite in days today. The early diction of these days is in fortune and morals are stowed away for later days. Yet it emancipate from study that these days will be followed up, for the benefit of the fact that they would revert back to moral principles when the extortion of various early avarice has been thoroughly in toto.

I was reasoning on this length likewise, with an excogitating train of thought, that the moral principles will need rarefaction and class form from the variable nature dispositions observed in the nature of man. The law of nature or empirical nature shows within that there is inequality in nature, in this constant variability, I know that there is diverse moral observation and these I was intrigue by and further aiming to put it into writing as a moral practicable principle. Example of such is these one I have complied by the standard of its genre and call it Noble.

From the first paragraph onward, it started at a slow pace rising on and on as you delve deeper into reasoning and philosophical views ensuing in the content of the writing. It lean greatly on some earlier compiled philosophical writings, that is assuming its nodes from the common substances of our day to day life. Then, on it drift on into a more shrewd analogy of an empirical moral principles within these structure, the entire body of the writing could possibly be seen only in fragments. But at a whole it is like the formation of the body into different parts before each could come together to form a whole being.

I must have glimpse at the world with a mirror while on the course of these moral issues which be more preponderate ethics. The earlier philosophers of ethics and the poet whom glimpse up on Olympia at the gods, must have conceive more rudimentary ideas of the entire conceptual idea of the world. Moving from one strata to the next of things prevalent in their thought and sight they would be developing their idea of how things were, how things should be and how thing would eventually be. I think I did make effort at revealing the state of the idea of things in the present and in the nearest future.

The entire writing has a general idea which I hope you too would be able to acknowledge in the writing before you get to the end of it. I think both in the body of the writing, and the mind of the reader, it should assume to an associative form of a doing standard in the moral perception and in principle. What it might eventually show is that even though in things epigene, constant in time, between doing and doing not, active and inactive, all are a matter of choice and vulnerability. That’s to say as long as a man remain occluded to the differences between his choices and its vulnerabilities he would negate the mere neutral existences to adduce to a nature and tutelage of which he has no controversy to opinion.

In the writing, the more I tried to explain the differences in the acts of folly and the wits in practices of man. I tends to be drawn more into the rudimentary theological concepts of the moral obligation; from source to spring, these are related in the writing as in my dotting on on the idea of “playing the devil”, the source of the devil and its function with the natural man. The open format cover the ideal person within the foolishness, and with such rudimentary necessity like clothes, money, laziness, and idleness. Out from which I have tried to draw -out an ideal foolish person from the use of these practical things. I think in my own ideal moral obligation there is need to annotate this impairment of vulnerable nature and the fact that it is in trend of this present day principal practice of what could be termed as a ‘pretence folly’. That’s to say anyone realizing his or her vulnerability and still does not assume to a sort of foolishness on this term is either ‘god’s fool’ or the mare fool. No one is the wiser whence the knowledge of oneself allow oneself to obtain those goods that would not have been possible if the person remain with the assumption of trying to attain to a perfection in wisdom. it is far remove from the natural person he or she is.

In the context of these writing, on the aetiology of the wise, starting from the idea of playing the devil, then to other laterally preponderate issues of the emotions and the mindsets. A bit more mnemonic than the latent ephemeral observance adduce to the whole bad idea of the mean devil. For example, the idea and doctrine of ‘fate and destiny’ is in a practical mindset thing. That is by way of saying; ‘man is the author of his own fate’ and the destiny is ‘what you are observing and desires while hoping for a thing’ as a person. We still think Fate to be in the unknown, of things taking place without our opinion or knowledge. Seems it’s not vent unto control by any man. But the intellect is lock in like wheel and axle, with the fates revolving around in the immediate environment.

The later part of the writing is in the form of a more practical approach to thing we are more handy with. Very very practically handy cognitive principle to observe on a daily basis if anyone mind to reckon with it. From the first view of Charity, the Acts, “the acts of rule’ paternal dominion and finally, Practical wisdom. It talks of goods and bads’ wits which are practicable and folly most likely to ensue out from impairment.

I most agree, that the main embodiment of the writing has to do with inspiration from previous writing work. It gives a sense of agreement with views and relate the understanding of the whole issue of the moral principle which I perceive as a Noble conduct.

Contents of the writing isn’t as much of an essay type put in a jot of basic points concisely in relative manner, that could be understood by every lay person whom has not even had the idea or knowledge of a moral principle before. They were all very precise and compact, I foresee, it to be a very good travel companion which can be delve into anywhere to ponder on. It is useable to any genre of nature of people for the sake of knowledge of it or for the practical guild. Anyone can apply to it gestures of personal wit, anyone whom see the need to conduct a moral principle and strategically based life.

Preface

This wasn’t written on, merely observing people on mere bare logic of the perception. Varying on the flow of thought, not in the order of sabotage intents as a means to point insulting fingers in every direction that seemly appear revelry to the thought that is been delve into and conductive of these empirical principles in writing. More often its been said that from ones’ instinct and perceptual mindset proceed the rational direction which guild us into the maze of life non-materials. At the brim edge of every thought is that presiding mindset to produce a material objective means which would bring the happiness of purpose.

judgement in ones’ mind is a basic factual analogy which, when analysed, most often goes beyond the theoretical concept of ones mere observation. Judgement must possess a practical concept of the subject in the analytical mode of the mind. From every judgement is what we could possibly believe to be the implement of the rational quota of the realistic know how.

From many conversation and variable congenial practices of the people in a known society, in measure of the quality or quantity, that amount of instinctive judgement (judgement at a glance)used ……is quite much within the population at large…… with the hope of the people often left to hang in the thin air, in limbos of guesses. It has become a maybe subject, most often a God Help situation. ‘’’’’’’’’’’

This has a lot to do with a short coming in the philosophical conception of these present days,

Days of the scientific, technological, and practical proof for evidence which leave no other room but to see into the moralistic practices that assist us at gaining the substantial quota of happiness. If by judging the subjects and object of such and such happiness reveal increase of

a variable inconsistence in the hope to achieve such and such a happiness.

Philosophy of this present days require less of human thoughts and instinctive judgement and more of practical evidence, feasible and constructive perception, thus from the

past document of instructions and means to know how, is a means tested of value.

Understanding this would again stretch further the reasons why books were being written on daily bases and the upgrading of storage spaces. I dread the thought that would end all thoughts of publication. It is not that I don’t have anything apart which command my fear, all the same, hats off for this lingering jeopardy of emerging situation.

Books were written for certain critical reasons established on sound judgement, that is held in extreme value. Information were relay through books just like other media publications. Fantasy, instruction intended to serve towards a purely educational purposes.

This cut right down, bringing us little by little in form, to the purpose why this book was written. Even, considering the uncoming nature of the subject discussed within the closed context of the book.

Probably, this is a way ahead of this or another generation coming if consideration should be given to such a ……………..

to consider such topic at discussions, analyse the view of the people and to bring into the public awareness such intriguing perception of other people in close contact relationship. And sometimes by oneself. In a broader view its a bit of rarefication attempted on the past philosophical conceptions.

Where many books were written for personal reasons and personal gains with just a fraction of thought toward those that will read it, this is focused mainly on the reader and the benefit that the reader will derived from such rear subject of what and what is acceptable conduct but yet a very common occurrences. To be taught what to do and how to do it before you could be accepted.

Ordinarily I couldn’t have wake up one day and decide I want to write a book on what is and what is not, who is and who is not, A Fool.

It all started with a turmoil, then a surge of realisation then comes in with the energy and understanding. Verification, perception and consciousness comes in later on references. I refer to the consciousness, it is believed to be the difference between animal and man. From sociology the place of consciousness of the human is highly valued in the society. Where each individual is defined by it's’ relationship to it's’ society. And the entire existence of man is brought down to ideas. The society is a product of ideas and even more the materialistic world of the present days. Each person is placed in a society or the society in each, no individual could be separated from a society as that individual cannot develop outside a society; but this does not mean that men are totally constrained by social pressures and history. They do inherit a ready made world, but they are quite able to change it.

“Morality, religion, metaphysics, all the rest of ideology and their corresponding forms of consciousness, thus no longer retain the semblance of independence. They have no history, no development; but men, developing their material production and their material intercourse, alter, along with this their real existence, their thinking and the products of their thinking. Life is not determined by consciousness, but consciousness by life. (Marx and Engels, 1970)

This was from a sociologist perception on the individual and the Society. The thought of the man and its’ final results as it is reveal in the society prospect. What use does all of his thinking without the evidence of the thoughtful life. What determines the life is the man and what determines the man is the society. The life of the man evolves around his thinking while his thinking is evolves round his intelligence either acquired or lost. This will be an evidence of his existence. In the existentialist context, he lived. He was alive somewhere, by the evidence of his existence in the invisible corporeal where his thought occupies the lateral domine. From there it graze on few receptive mind playfully at every intervals of interjectory reasone, like horse grazing on the field. But realistically he display a deep hacking insubstantial enough to sustain a desire for the real life. His mind is variably incapable to act on the reality of his mind.

Within these confused claustrophobic jammed detailing of what should naturally be ignored as obscene indoctrination and misleading of human being. Though not to be. There should be no misconception whatsoever related to the enlightenment we have of the man which embraced these approach of reasoning.

Here is a book, a morality conceivable in a typical mindset which could be termed as being too pious. It stresses the need to apply wisdom to the understanding of the openly rejected conducts which resides in the secret of most every heart. It suggested to the need to implement part of the ways left aside for the abandoned. This is not a teaching on eradication but the acceptance and mastering. The nature nurtured study of not being confused of what every other person is confused by. Graceful clarity of the mind is accorded, to a measurable degree as to be able to masterminding every aspect of every day of your life even raising the temptation of mastering the code of life of the people around you.

This book touches authorities beyond normal conception, exercising control and affirming position where there is no valid verification of any such.

These observe foolishness in thoughts and practice, expound on the need for the mind to deter from errors which might cause such foolishness. To know the degree of the foolishness in the man is to measure the level of his errors. 'foolishness is created from errors'.

The accumulation of errors is the accumulation of foolishness. Not necessarily doing or not doing of his free will. Picture a fold filled with errors, every member of the fold has the sticker on that read the number of his errors and somebody should then ask; Who is the fool that did this?

Further, it focus on the essence of the sensible reactions and actions; expression and the mindset of the individual; Because each individual expression is a reaction determined in process by the mindset of the individual "Expression is the reality of the mind".

After observing this degree of foolishness; ways to mitigate such degree of absurdity conduct is studied and expressed in such ways that it could be applied to life. Foolishness is a moral conduct which is often consciously induced into attitude of a person own volition, in most cases known the free will to act on own volition with respect to thought or aim is bind with the freedom to or not to moral principle and to or not to natural law or individual virtue.

Would a man rather be in charge of his fate than submit to be ruled by an untamed fate, but being in charge because of desire and purpose, and sway by will to objectives which is claimed to fates. Circumstances for fate, preceding to fortune is bourn with patient thus fortune is the mentor of the young man. It has been a believe that fate is lord over destiny however, fate is more conditioned than lord; Nietzschen says in his epistemology; “the condition for greatness in a man is love of fate, 'amor fatei' – ‘You either be Mad or pretend to be mad’ is what he is actually purporting for a condition.

A good desire to succeed is a more realistic approach than an untamed madness of fate irresolute interjection.

Seems from fate is the condition for greatness or heroism. It could be said in an absurd term that it is conditioned and only satisfied by certain leverage to unintended foolishness. Heroism is obtain doing what you believe is possible when you and every one think it is foolishness. What is possible to do is not at all time permitted to do with full leverage only in occasion one is of free volition to or compulsed to an unwilled foolishness. In other sense, what is possible is not what is allowed, what is allowed is not of the free will; and the volition to a possible action and a free will is not granted without yielding to foolishness. Although foolishness does not really certify this condition but is adduce to it as it is adduce to every condition of fortitude.

That to say in most uncertain situation of man, that a man that invariable acceded to obedience finds itself inefficacious without obedience. He will do not without it.

Why do man adduce to the virtue of truth than lie, he rather do good than do bad? or Why do man rather chose wealth than chose poverty and pleasure than pain? These are consequential ambiguous of the virtue we so much claim power to and which are certain of things of general ephemera. It is the incompletness in a man considering the sincerity he abuse, in use to lay claims on the good. Like Socrates has said;

“A bad runner is simply not one that loose but he is the one that loose while he was trying to win; therefore, he lost against his will.

Likewise it is the same principle in application to a poor man, whom could be said is not simply not be poor, but he is poor because while he was trying to be rich he became poor; therefore, he chose not his destiny and became poor against his will. On this charge, often to choose a courageable stead is the maxim said that; ‘Contentment is the shield of the poor.’ A man is thus wilful of what is right to do and what is wrong to do simply because it conduce to his happiness. Acting is a knowledge or prove of it. Putting it rightly, to act is to know.

What is false is true, for what is true could only be accepted on a pragmatically basis. And for what is false could not be perceived as false in practice any longer than what is true is perceives as true. But what is true is believe to be what is… Like an artist, whom in his artwork did an original copy. But should somebody else, presumably another artist made a representation of the artist work, it would be assumed that the replica is false; but it is true. The question is that could the replica pass as the original and that is true also and seemly false. It is possible to acknowledge this if we acknowledge that what is, is what is true. Whence, what is, is define as a ‘Noun’, thus, true is what is, and the false is what is not. On the condition that when what is, the Noun. In reality both work ‘is’ and both are true. The false could not be because it is ‘what is not’, in existence from the artist artwork. “Thus, every statement is a true statement when they refer to what is.” In pragmatism, it purport the believe that;

'a true statement must agree with a working of reality either of present or past reality'. “By making the truth of our belief to consist in their own verifiability, and their own verifiability with the way in which they do work for us. By this we know the truth”.

Book is an invention of leisure, and probably all inventions are, and the greatest among all inventions is the invention of books.

If reading a book means obtaining knowledge, should the knowledge redound by reading more books? Or should knowledge abound only by reading one book or more books? An abundance of knowledge which is presently possible to be obtained ends by the read of a book Whence, by the read of more books it would be read into more abundances. Thus, knowledge will redound by reading one book and would abound by reading more books than one.

Leisure is more books reading than one;

One would suppose the content of one book varies in knowledge to the next and to read more books is the possibility of its contents being of knowledge and could not easily varies from one to the next because the more you read the more you discover that all books were saying the same thing differently.

A book is written with less than what fills its’ volumes- by a jot.

The content of a book is often volumes more than its knowledge which is more or less apparent in the volumes.

A book of knowledge is more or less in volume. And, the likes of a book is often more in volume than less in volumes. So shall the power/authority of the jot(word) publish it. ‘Jot a dot and worth a pickle’; it is these phenomenal life of the writer, for that dot is worth a dotal. Its worth a dot that which is a dot. The more we continue to revel with these books’ pragmatic pedagogues, the more we would consistently discover the purge that what actually unravels a book is a dot in the worthy place.

The sceptical statement of Pragmatism is that; “What is new is not true, and what is true is not new” the reality of a truth is then merely an unequivocal accumulation of our own intellectual inventions. Not the deposition of an innate person

This book deals in what is in the reality and applies to reality although most were draw from practical theories, and it lend to cordial verification of it being a practical truth. In so much as its truth in concise, is seemly based on previous account of intellectual philosophical views, maxims and principles, it would ground down on practical knowledge of certain truth. So it is not entirely new but a rarefication of the old and present views. Not as primitive as such also. It is left for those whom can to; “C'elui qui veut, peut”- “Who will can”

Part I

“Foolishness is in the Heart of a Child, but the rod of correction will send it off.”

As a proactive pungent truth is… you don't like this guy known as the fool, and another resemble insinuating proximity like congruence of thing is; in influx. He does not like himself, now that do seem not like your average dense fool. This is pointing to a person once in the arms of Morpheus, on rebound from an early stupor slumber from the entire reality. It is very much akin to a revivalist whom just assume to the wake of the world around him. But what differentiate him from the fool you make-an active fool or self created fool – a passive fool and that, that was assumed pretentiously and the unperceiving god- fool. Him be weary of – he is innocent, precarious and has no sin that you can assail him with. For he's the proairesis of his life willed in course before the timidity of time.

What is so abhorring in this guy to have to incur so much repulsive aura about himself?

If left not, to his inefficacious, mulish and cultivated abstruse to reason, which still make rooms for a conclusive gene juxtaposition of one's own complete cognisant of his reality and his mental aptitude. They should be the same, one would suppose except that the mind is heavy with task, ideals, and concept of himself and others the reality ensuing constrict him to do. This is proposed as in the act ons’ or, and, to fully generate believes that would probable re-generate a physical reality of his mind conceptions.

A rare and several mental disorder 'Austism', developing in early childhood with characters in learning difficulties, extreme self absorption, inability to relate to other people and the outside world. Latter in year it would be followed by a strong resistance to changes in the familiar surrounding and some disorder in the body known as repetitive body movements. People with this disease are mostly disabled at physically helping themselves and others.

Inability of a person to take thoughtful actions and reasons for his actions and purpose will fail most people in competitive life of his surrounding. Of such as which foolishness is made. A fool is made by people and not born as a human. By god and not own volitions, by deeds and not by action, by course and not by curse.

You could spell out a fool from your own dictionary with as little a word as the four letter word that credited it. ‘F O O ….. L’.

That being in word, is not akin to the expressive understanding of the word in mind Not to elaborate uselessly on the meaning, the person of the word outspan the technical relative meaning as it comes to be more at question than the word did with a corrosive Superstitious derivation.

‘Man hate a fool, so does God’

One real truth which is constantly amusing, there exist two body possibly with the ability to create, whom stood against the influences of a fool upon them. Condemnation that is worst than the cross of Christ, is brought down upon anyone caught in the web of foolishness and non will dare venture into showing an iota kindness to such individual. Its the spider's web, the taking is for the meal.

Often at times, I do, but now i have grew accustomed to, calling a person ‘A fool’ in very common

way. Every lips is awry regretfully, and presumably justified by knowing, at sometimes in the progression of affair with a boiling anger must have mutter the word, some with a delicate preciseness which the victim could not denial. It’s right, a damn truth it is and a heard capsule to swallow, not the absurd truth of admitting to the fact of being a fool only but to the shamefulness which convict the fatality.

Curiosity has got the best of me, from the ever rapping voices around, here and there, people discovering there innermost being, that of the reality of the other person around them. It's more a pungent air to breath with the animosity and loneness accordance which surround the life of any person revealed or recognised in his impudent foolishness.

Is it that a fool does not has a heart? Was he not born with one or what actually was this fool created from ? There has to be an answer somewhere in the secret secluded, destitute and desperation of the heart. When the heart is the man, obviously the man is a thinking can. A fool is destitute of a heart, a thought and apparently the intelligence of a fore sight and visions of a thinking heart.

But a few out of the whole lot will accept their foolishness, the incompetence of going above the strategic line of an idiot. Accepting a verdict of foolishness, one will often call an open mind to instruction and thus a step from ignorant to understanding. This withdraw the wicked heart that blocks the heart of a fool and stops his thoughts like the shell of a snail.

“Wickedness is in the mind and soul of a fool but he can not do it”

This has not been practically investigated it is merely a theory, which the visibility of its reality is beyond speculation. Many things have been made apparent in this age, many being dotted in black and white while some few remain in grey areas.

Visible part of the thoughts of a fool is believe and accounted for to proceed from countless pains, sorrows which comes from regret, rejection, shame, destitution and desperation. Of these is the fool made before these he is.

One person get fooled while the other becomes the wise one, very common occurrences

like the attitude of the serpent against mankind then the devil against every other man.

Hardly will anyone open up to be fooled, that is what tells the difference, those that master the situation at hand, with a conscious mind lay in wait ever potent and the only one to avert the tricks and evade the traps of a masterful minder.

I can tell a fool when it walks bye, merely looking at him because I can easily discern and fish him out and that’s to say I will call him a fool ‘a fool often rang a bell when he walks bye’.

What makes one a fool and the next person wise ?

I should think that is when one person is unable to go beyond that idiot over there, which is what I called the strategic line of thought of an idiot. The boldness to act is often cornered with a certain amount of fear, bread out of ignorant. The inability to solve a confronted problem is denoted with the foolishness therein.

“Principles is master to a fool because he cannot attain it”

like a bowl of bone in front of a dog so is principles to a fool, a dog is fooled with bones, it could not complete the battle of trying to break it, it merely lost taste, then left so is principle to a fool.

Ignorant, far from speculation, it is an inhabiting diseases, the fool comes from the ignorant endeavours of which a continuing endless efforts will afterward breed a foolishness.

Should not a man be free to express himself ?

After a great good knowledge of the scripture the entire doctrine of the scripture, I might conclude is laid upon a basic emphasis and that emphasis is for you not being a fool and those that continue in there foolishness were set forth towards destruction.

They are slaves, slavery which comprises of back bending labour without a show for it, at the end conjure up foolishness which is very apparent to every eyes that can see. Such is the continue endless efforts.

The scripture emphasis the need to be wise, it create principles, many like the birds on the sea-shore , how many can you identify.?

When one is identified with a particular species then one is enlightened for that course in classification. These species not being the bird per-say but the principles withheld within the doctrines of the scripture. Apart from that, principles were made out of errors, just like fool were made out of wisdom.

It is the simple fact of a person getting wise from his errors and the next person becoming a fool from the same errors so – ‘Principles were made out of errors, the same way foolishness is made from errors’.

I suggest a fool should forget his name so often to made apparent his inability then we might have compassion and designate that has a disability – Deficiency in memory.

“Foolishness is not a disability, it is simply foolishness”

On the ground of slavery, a slave is made out of the inability to eke out resources or out of his shortfall in resources to carry out a well laid planned life. And since he couldn’t think out another plan to act upon or otherwise, discover a new life- regretfully he submitted to slavery.

This correspond to the inability to solve a confronted problem. Then he is a fool for that -‘Slavery is one type of foolishness breed from fear and strengthen with fear ’

Now here is a simple philosophical view of slavery and foolishness, every sides has been strengthened by adequate effort, all sides viewed in the mirror of this aetiology – channel of reasoning what slavery is to foolishness.

Out from a slavery, that which is not of the body else I would be in chains-

That slavery of the body which on impulse, I have rejected,

But the slavery of which i speak, subject to the mind I tried to broaden-

I was not slaving to my mind but slaved in my mind.

Many were that slaves to their mind, less

a person will fool them not.

But me slaved in my mind, does not permit me to be fooled,

Even though tried, which was the reason I was made slave in my mind.

I perceive the foolishness in others slaved by the mind.

My slavery in the mind comes out of several possibilities I confronted.

Do I know it is possible yet proving not to be, yet

Do I endure the impossibilities to make it possible-

Thence, foolishness goes bye, in endless effort-

A good many knows to define the man when he is in his act this is what it is suppose to be ‘a dirty dish of shit’ when a fool is in his way.

Often it comes to me like that when I step into a pile of freshly made shit- which is the closes in comparison to when a fool is in his way.

I could admit that I understood the way of a fool’ if you don’t, it’s high time that you know.

Days of walking, working and talking

with different people in different words a fool will often emancipate – do you recognise?

At this end, it is relatively adequate that you should understand that what makes a man a fool is far from the basic undue fact but what makes man a fool is how he sat on his foolishness.

There is apparent difference between these two and when these two occur each do occur in its own ignoble special way.

The society has tried to eliminate the foolishness of man’s heart, if not to eradicate it. It does tried to protect their awareness - like giving out a banana to catch the monkey – so is the monkey that is you.

The society is bread out from necessity – ‘necessity being the mother of invention, but now, that a lot amenities has already been invented, ‘necessity lends to discovery’.

Where the society has done this much we would think there should be not a person that will follow yet after foolishness.

Doctrines with the works of thoughts are often derived at with great believe and a mindset by most leaders where only an idiot is allowed to criticize and reject it. Doesn’t that sound more like the pages of the scripture? It says, ‘A wise man follow instruction but a fool reject every instruction’.

When I think of it finding a fool with a head and one that walks like a man, he rules a city, though foolishness is in man, the least of all is when the serpent is in rule, the man is not a man, then the sum up of it all is that ‘a fool is less than a man’

As an ardent believer of the scripture, the story of the Serpent’s deceitful act is still held in great good heart, thus, as the doctrine goes in the bible. It has laid down, any man whom is not capable of confronting and overcoming the Serpent in you at his act is lesser than man and live under the leadership of the animal.

The Serpent has been made symbolic as a master of deceit, yet it isn’t define the act of wisdom because the Serpent stood as a test of man to know wisdom.

Wisdom is with man and makes his dwelling among man,

On the other hand, the subjection of the animal race did little to annul any antagonistic insurgence of the serpent. Animal has been subjected by power under man. In all doctrines, philosophy and believes of the physical reality, man is held in much more great awesome standard than the other lower species of animal. But from time the Serpent is held in a most fearful regard as a deceiver, like the lion as king of the jungle and man too is at skait to confront him. Yet it, the serpent’s still remains an instigator. In other wise then, the animals has got the upper hand if they should be able to claim the body of man.

How long do I have to search before I find what I’m looking for? You too might consider answering that question – although it is rhetorical .

You know – our man, the fool with a head and that rules a city.

You know when you are looking for someone you will need a description, just like the missing person file. It is barn to be filled with pictures from description or photograph of the missing candidate.

Likewise, in this same picture frame, I could search out a fool. It is very intellectual. Many things have of recent age been made more apparent than before and this isn’t the privilege to victimised each individual whom has privileged from the work of the open minded society.

I think it’s worth the try to practise this simple intellectual search at a sit or on a wide horizon search every other day, being vigilant. And probably, that same candidate might come in-handy one day, just like the Eve came in handy for the Serpent to get to Adam. The believe is that Adam was the target, being the one with the ultimate authority in the garden.

Doctrine has taught me that foolishness lies in the heart of man but the rod of correction will send it away – Then I thought to myself, I must have taken a few of that while I was growing up. And, now that I am a man of my own, my quest for survival, my strive to step up the ladder, from nobody to somebody has also been another rod to remove any foolishness from the heart.

This doesn’t in anyway particularly identify a fool however, it is significant to us when we started taking this simple practise. Understanding is required, because what’s locked in the heart is kind of a little bit hard to get rid of so easily. This tells me like it should to you, you shouldn’t worry so much, you will find your man – he is quite different from your frequent dispel of the abusive word ‘Fool’.

However a few could savour the taste of a long sentence to define what a fool is :A fool is somebody that keeps doing the same thing over and over again without any visual prospect. You have to be a fool to keep on doing the same thing and making the same mistake over and over again and again.

Have I ever done anything of that nature before? I kept asking myself, not very apparent, but a blur vision of prospect. Not every time we were aware of the reason we embark on a mission – not every time you think before you do some things and when you must have done it finish, then you will ask yourself; Why did I even do that?

You do things you’re not aware of the outcome, or just out of mind and you stop in the middle and ask yourself what am I doing? In situation of this sort, most people were often saved by knowledge which is in them- those they have gathered over the years.

It would be a shameful thing to find myself buried in the same moody water I was drawing others out of.

‘Meanness is the defence of the fool just as the same as anger in the bosom or heart of a fool’

Does that sound as a riddle? If it does, the simple solution is the basic understanding that, he is often and easily spurn to meaningless anger. He is like a beard live circuit.

Something very close in contact is wickedness, it is a real weapon at hand for the fool. Where in many cases is also leads to his destruction.

The pages of the preacher rang in my mind; ‘Don’t be too wicked and destroy yourself, and also don’t be over righteous and go before your time’. Eccl. 7 :16- 17.

“A fool does not change his clothe” :-

What the heck has clothe got to do with being fool or not? Simple enough, ‘not all clothe are taken to the laundry’

A fraction of decision is the total abstinent from what you think is the right way; obviously, there is great different from not knowing the right way.

These verification in personality could be identified :-

One is the person that knows what is right and does it not.

Another is the one that does not know the right thing to do,

And again, one that knows the right way, but could not do it.

Where another does the right thing but came out wrong;

Similarly there is another that does the right thing but did not succeed.

Then there is one that either the right nor the wrong thing he did neither.

One that is not included is the person that does the right thing and another that does his own thing and succeed in it; obviously, he will be wise for it.

So in this light one is open to changes while the other will continue, while at the best bet all at one point is often liable to changes.

In a simple practical mindset; why should anyone forget or reject to change his clothe.?

Well the first inclination will be that it wasn’t dirty and the second will most probably be that, that is the only thing he’s got available to wear and the third is more like it, which is because he has no money (resources) to buy another. “A borrowed clothe is still a change of clothe but you won’t reject the dirt (Shame) that comes off it”

That is the right sense of it, in this society a fool can still earn money working and anyone who does not earn money or means of earning money in this Society is in good faith pronounced as a fool.

One of the law which is also a philosophy, speaks well on this regard was when it talks of the thief and the mind of the people. ‘People will not crucified a thief when it thief to satiate his hunger but when he his caught he will pay more than he bargain for- more than what he stole’.

Someone thought deep enough to coin the idiom that; ‘Not all clothe are fit for the Laundry’

Both idioms were relatively connected, in words and in understanding, the subject of each being the clothe which is also the epitome of the expression.

There is a close call in meaning of the idiom ‘Not all clothe are fit for the Laundry’ to one of the proverbs of Solomon, ‘A fool will say all that he has in him or all that is in his mouth/mind or heart’.

Clothes :- “ Does the clothe makes the Man?” or the man makes the clothe”

I was reading through a book when I came across the expression; “the Clothes makes the Man” instantly something within me disagree with the statement, there is a foolishness in the statement to set straight. It doesn’t issue out of good knowledge to be called a word of the wise. It stinks of misguiding and kills the man than makes him alive. Probably that is what it was intended to do while I am now disqualifying their work and think I can save those they intended to mislead by the wrong type of knowledge.

Let's try this channel of thought, at vista face, to think through the essence of clothe to the man him being the 'be' factor affected by the statement. ‘Man makes the Clothe’ and ‘the Clothe makes the man’.

One speaks of why the clothe was made and the other speaks as in the appearance it talks like gold in hand’. Where the clothe makes the man, it is apparently certain that the man has lost his essence even though his appearance is like gold in hand. Clothe is a creativity and no means a creatorship.

“Appearance is acceptability” but never the less the clothe does not count more than the man. You put the clothe above the man if the clothe makes the man, the man should show out of the clothe not the clothe shown out of the man. However, I still think that the; ‘clothe is made for the man, man makes the clothe not the clothe the man.’

Money :- ‘Man makes the money, not the money the man’.

I dearly love the Americans when it comes to telling a simple plane truth directly to the face of anybody without prejudice. They are known to speak their heart, making their feelings known not like the Britons whom I kind of have grown accustomed to. They will tell you to keep your feeling to your self, and save yourself some complicated explanation. Simply let your Yes be Yes and your No be No. Politeness and pleasantness and else more, stick to procedure. I somehow got so bored to death with the silly procedures and the mind thing without putting it into words to the next person.

I first heard from an American mouth the expression; ‘Make the money, don’t let the money make you’.

What it is cut down to is that a wise person will make the money while in that of a fool, the money makes the person. “The wise will makes the money while the fool get made by the money” in awkward sort of way both are with money.

There are some that the money makes and they live because many of them will be dead while there are those that make the money. There doesn’t seems to be any other alternative route for a man to take than to make the money, get made by the money, or don’t have a live of your own at all. The indoctrinate ground factor of the entire survival of man is that he’s got to have the money somehow by any means possible because ‘money answers all questions’.

By an unequal determinant factor which still could not be accounted for, money has found its way into the life and blood stream of man like the ichors in the veins of the gods and what made it expedient to make the money remains in the unsolved mystery. Maybe when it is solved, we could get rid of money essentiality which means there will be non any wiser.

Money still possess an unparalleled control which justify the popular expression that money rules the World. To bridle this unabated authority connoted to money by this expressions is the effort made to strengthen the mind of each individual that; ‘Man makes the world go round’

If many unthougthful person should argue blindly to the last iota of their vowels, that the expression ‘money rule the world’ is a right quote emphasising the dominant influence of money. They might be quoted right however that should be counted and indoctrinate as the foolishness of the unthougthful minds. What and who made man that foolish?

I could not account for it in a single expression so I decided to use a single word ‘money’

‘money is the foolishness of man’

It is essential that we clarify this issue about money with this person – The fool’

Let the fool say for its justification; ‘Money is the root of all evil’. Yes he is right nevertheless, will you justify him for not having money on that account?

A fool needs to be fed, if he willingly will submit to the obvious physical fact that he can’t do it by himself. If he should allow you, he will be wise for that account.

A fool cannot make money; a true philosophy.

Whence a few mind will hold the fact that a fool can make money, in the same place, many will disagree and adamantly stick to the fact that he does not know how to even make the money.

Finally, if man makes money, who does the money makes?

LAZINESS :- “levity is ill but laziness is due no exception ”

You could easily think of a better way to spend the day and whom to spend it with. But in solitude of one own world there are few choices left to chose from that could possibly pays ones dues.

Thinking of a better way to pass the day, right from the morning till late in the night. If not watching television Reading books, playing games on the computer or the Internet, there are few other choices left. What do you discover?

The day is young and free, nothing to do and if there is I don’t feel like doing anything worth the thought, thinking of what to do will often times come to the same result- not doing anything.

Instead of wasting precious time to return to do the first thing at last, why not do the first thing first, anyway it’s even the simplest thing to do, anyone could see that - Thinking

When the day started with a good breakfast, after the breakfast, there are various program to watch on the TV. This could be done laying back in bed in front of the television– if the TV is in the bedroom. Normally the best time for such is on the weekends and Sundays but what the heck, what is good to Sundays is good to Monday and the rest .

Thinking of the best and relaxing way to watch TV I would suggest laying back will prove the best because you can doze off and if you were laying back, it serve the best.

You know in the morning TV program could be very boring especially if there is no cable television or Sky television. At this time, dozing off in front of the TV screen might not be easily avoided, which even makes it simple because where we are heading to is thinking away into day dreaming.

Like that, laying back in-front of the TV, which is less important, except at period of special program. You could dream away – off into a pleasant sleep doing the things you have thought of, or imagined yourself doing in real life. Dreams could be very actively connect to actual life and presently occurring activities.

That is still short –coming to pleasure, dreams were never made to last a life time, just because you are never made to a sleep at once for a life time. One dream could not last you a life-time; you will need another and another to live by everyday. More the same way to when you were sleeping . To keep you dreaming is the reason you need to sleep ever so often. Dreaming makes a good sleep more enjoyable. This is revealing; but fantasy, this is very pleasant, more pleasant and can last longer than dreaming.

A good difference between dreaming and fantasising is the control that involve within. True to knowledge, you can control yourself when you are fantasising but you can hardly or not even be able to control yourself when you are dreaming. Little or total lack of control is a factor that deprive the mindset of certain pleasure.

You could just fantasise away just about when you were waking from a slumber dream if,

Supposing the dream wasn’t frightful. Lots of things to choose from to spend endless time on fantasising even a life time is never enough for what you enjoy doing. One or two of the best place people often look toward is their music idol, best friend, movie star and sex partner. You can even fantasise on a new car you have been dreaming of buying; think yourself driving it, just about as little of the whole lot of what people find indulging to spend time on.

Indulge yourself in something dreaming and pleasant. What is more to fantasy is that you could pick up where you stop the last time. It is just fantastic. Doing it this way, you will at the end have a kind of fantasy that could go on and on like the tales in the Arabian Nights.

If you were to look into the dictionary, the definition for fantasy first establish the fact of it being a pleasant day dreaming. A longed for but unlikely to happening; a product of the imagination and finally a vision of things desire.

By all chance, we should concentrate on the visionary aspect of the definition of fantasy. Vision, firstly is defined by the same dictionary as an image conjured up vividly in the imagination; and the ability to perceive what is likely, and plan wisely for it; A fore sight, An image communicated supernaturally.

Vision is totally outside the body, the limitation of the mind away from the present presence into the past or the future presence. That is to say therein that fantasy of the present is the imagination of the future event and memory of the past. Anticipating the splendour of the future and indulging to dwell in it .

Many people could be taken away by the mindset of what could come out the power of imagination.

Does this described your ideal pleasant way to pass away time and live one day at a time while planning for the future. You will need to move around also and keep the dream alive.

IDLENESS :- “An idle hand the Devil use”

Akin to laziness, like a twin born of a parent on a day before the other. Both were alike and bear similar trade marks. I never set eye on an idle person without noticing his laziness.

The best time I often indulge in a lazy act is mostly on Saturday. What makes the difference between idle and lazy is that; lazy do not want to do and idle cant find to do. I kind of reckon both were acceptable due to disregard of employment and exception. No joking about it, I am often lazy on weekends and Sundays especially when I’ve got my girlfriend around the house for the weekend. And some other times she comes with her friends. But what’s the heck? I do that because I’ve got room for other things in my life; like writing and reading which I do quite often. Apart from this, and you lazy buggers, what have you got to loose from endless hours spent doing nothing. Nothing to loose, especially when you’ve got people around you to do those things you will normally spend endless time doing not considering being boring. Better if those times are rather spent doing something you will enjoy, non will be the wiser.

One philosophical mindset suggest that; hardly will you get told off for doing nothing, at least not by most people, but you will get told off for bugging other people and for something done the wrong way. And for doing something others don't want, cannot do or don't like you doing.

People would be on the defensive when what you are doing they can do not, offensive when it would affect them, and reproachful when you do it the wrong way, other words, make a mess of it. They would only tends to indifference in that what is done is before their knowledge.

What has been notice is that, recently, in the present years, from a candid outlook, it is a fanciful indulgence – the least you could become is a coach potato.

However where most people were getting told off for trying to do something and as a result get in other people’s way, you could save yourself the pain of such insulting inception.

Reckon you can figure out what idleness is and what makes people idle. Is it a problem or just a symptom of the mind at work so often? Does this have anything to do with the real you? And if it does what difference is it likely to impact upon your life?.

Part II

Aetiology of the wise :

Theology, philosophy and different aspect of the works of thoughts originate from what we consider as wisdom. These and more others are basic principles which form and shape this our present world from aeon till the present days.

Religion is not a way of life but merely a principle that encamp life; this is far far differ from the concept of the intelligence that this book is observing. Where religion might count some of it's doctrines as evil and generally unsuitable for man to adhere to, the concept of this book does not look at this doctrine as the religious way. Reasoning within any doctrines as this book is concern is applicable to life in whatever situation that might occur. The application of reasone and judgement either from principle, doctrine or any philosophical aspects to obtain a desired outcome does not tolerate nor regard any other phenomenal aspect of it's application either religiously or principle. With no disrespect to any religion or doctrine the basic conception of this stretches the use of all reasoning and philosophy to achieve a basic need.

Which is in line with the philosophical view of Nietzchan when he said “Nothing is true but all thing is accepted”. Preservation and advance of any life is avowed to judgement and rational reasone.

Observation with good reasons describe the path we were being directed nowadays as being open minded and plain. No man is allowed the privilege of a secret life but all things were recorded and could be known by any one curious enough to look into them. From annual earning to family life circle, even in some cases social life were things being reveal on daily basis. Who dear keep a secret nowadays might end up blaming himself, that is the obvious truth of this present age. Either it is good or profitable, it is left for the individual judgement and reasone. This i could vouch is a step developed from insincerity to faithfulness, from error to judgement.

Playing the Devil:

Most commonly, the devil is notorious for only a few things, this are; Lies, deceit, theft, and murder. All this are no more a phenomenon but the reality of our day to day lives and of our society. No man is bound by the law of self against any of this act but all man being in fear of the law of judgement flee from this acts. However I will rather prefer the care of the other mankind to deter you away. Whence not for its sake, but the religious concept will say the

‘fear of God’ while some religion will suggest it to do God a favour. Even human thoughts and principles is more conscientious.

Playing the devil is a fact of life and one principle that could work like magic. This one intelligence all would dear not conceive to put into practice so as to obtain a needed life.

Lets leave the trivial parts of the devil, leave the lying, thieving and the killing which every reasonable and ordinary person will consider a good choice.

However playing the devil in this knowledge is far from the killing, or thieving but it is a mind set of the devil we were about to observe and see the practical reality of his judgement.

Generously I observe a “live and let’s live” means of life rather than a “live and let’s die”. Most criminal especially the thieves (armed robbers and bugler) would prefer a situation Where they won’t have to shed any blood but as to the mastermind of the act they were conceived they often cannot go away without fulfilling the full code name. So for them to live they often kill, this is a pity and a waste of life.

The devil did the same act and did kill just because he has to live and be the accepted (best).and the full code name is the full garment of his name which he is ever the mastermind and not the instigator. It is like you couldn’t taste the orange without peeling away the …….

Of course as you might have guess, I do not conceive playing the devil in this viewpoint however, where the total mindscape of the devil is locked in this regard. We have to look at his short coming and what was not in his favour so as to play the devil without becoming the devil.

Devil is a forbidden name and one big ominous name to refer to by most people but the truth is that they have one huge blinding religious and spiritual fear which is the result of their ignorance to the reality of the devil. Theological reasoning designate the devil as a celestial being and one which abide within the human mindscape, spiritual atmosphere of our present earth. Now that is the philosophy of this present earth and the fate of man. They abide within the second layer of the earthly surface, which is the lithosphere.(1)

Now the philosophy speaks in terms of knowledge, the origin, and ways of the devil with man. From the name devil, I could derive an analogy which resembles what most mindset is composed of D- evil or “The Evil”. In more reckoning, this says he is the Evil within man. In a philosophy, more or less a generalise reasoning, there is a devil inside most human if not all mankind; this is believable and don’t yield to deceive because theological analogy or any spiritual conception will not unveil this to you, it prefer to make you feel safe by saying there are angels around or more -God. The truth is, if it isn’t the devil, then it will be a beast. Because the only god that could and does exist on earth is man. And the devil is merely a creation generated from man because of a will of purpose.

I should like to believe it is a reasonable judgement to first get familiarised with this phenomenal phlegmatic phantom of a creature who has lived through many epoch, and has claimed the entire earth, the heritage of man to become his descendant. Man is the devil; a very common phrase, it isn’t a lie but it is not the entire truth, the truth is, actually the devil, this phenomenal phantasm is a name and appellation

A man lived many epoch ago, when the earth was still fresh and glorious and the glory of the (God) creator is still among man. The man lost his manly nature by an act of sin and became half beast and half man. The devil is a creature of two nature, made up of two individual which is; A Beast and A Man.

He wasn’t created like that but was recreated; he became a man of a double nature through an act of circumstantial error. He became half man and half serpent.

The man himself is not around till now but his descendant lives on and they bear witness by their spirit, and has fill the earth; ‘multiply and fill the whole earth’ A lie is that which assume that the devil still exist. He eternalise himself with a perpetual appellation whence no one could admit to the death of the devil. His death was not commemorated but he did live six hundred and sixty-six years before he died.

Like many would have guess; so what difference does it make if the whole mankind is been

Turn into devils; all men were liars. So me and you, each person is breading a devil within, or might have even had a full grown one within.

This is a basic theological aetiology of whom the devil is and where he could be found. A basic history of the devil is enough familiarisation with him.

What started as one long tale has now been shorten into a little parable with a short phrase; ‘To catch the monkey, you will have to do like the monkey does’. That is to say; to beat the devil you will have to master the devil and do like the devil does. He is one kind that does not play fairly, he has got the crookedness of the serpent.

What I gather up is this; there is hardly not much a distance you could ever effectively strut to or waft, before coming into contact with a devil, In human. It is no cause of freight, if you should be running off from people because they are devil then apparently obvious you will be running away from some one close to you and yourself. Knowingly on account of precaution it has been said and further it is said again; ‘ there is a devil inside most of man’ – I think this notion has been said, generally accepted by most and that settled it. But what has not been known I will reveal to you in just a single phrase as the one said above, don’t be bewildered, of –course a revelation of the present time, is a secret; ‘there is a beast in most man’ whatever beast it could be, either of rodents, or reptile like; snake, lizard, crocodile, insects and pest, or amphibians, such as Frog or Toad, birds even dogs and cats, there seems not to be an ending to what any man could be formed from and shaped into. These are one heck of different breeds of devils and of course it is the destruction of the soul from Devastation of the man that effectuate this belittledness.

Don’t confuse whom and what the devil is, it’s a most terrible mistake. The first error that man made which resulted from divers mismenour, was to constitute different form, origin, shape and nature for the devil, was a bit lacking in knowledge.

It stands very unprofitable to continue this ramble, precisely one huge elaborative writing of what has been done from epoch, though it might prove to be of little use, however in this study, too much might be too dangerous because we aren’t theology student of any kind, not even in the philosophy of the present man.

This basic knowledge of discovering whom the devil is, prove has a sensible adequate domesticity background information, the best to have, as knowledge permit in knowing how to play the devil without becoming the devil. One thing need to be clear as crestal in your mind and that thing is; don’t be too enticed to loose your mind but be exceptionally foresighted and remain focused.

I think a few people will appreciate the memory of this to be a progressive practise since man has understood wisdom. And known how to apply wisdom or force into each daily living. However nobody will mindedly openly admit and submit to a self-absorbed ego by accepting the fact that he was and is actually playing the devil rather palpable to console the conscience and embrace a form of lily-white, is the use of a rare accustom phrase ‘ I am playing God’. Just like a liar will never tell you he will be lying.

There’s the probability they did not understand what they were doing. Does a liar not know? or a murder not know? Do thieves and deceivers not know;? I supposed that is one thing the devil will not want you to understand. The funniest ego we all have been wrapped up with, was the imagination and the thought entrenched in both the conscious and the unconscious mind of our, of angels. Many immature mind is choke already with the sound of angels; Such a pleasant thing, I do agree, however, angels were not of the earth like man and the devil. The devils you have with you all the time but the angels you don’t have with you all the time, if at all you have them. Most people have sum this up regretfully, to coin the phrase; ‘better the devil I know than the angel I know not’. Morally I don’t buy that being a perfect thing to emphasis upon because a taste of heaven is a taste of heaven even if you ware to die and depart to hell. You should not spend all life and eternity in obliviousness.

We’ve taken of the subject at hand however, we have not focus attention on the analysis, the aspect attached with playing the devil which is persistently looming in our mind within this previously define mindscape.

How do you play the devil ? and, when can you play the devil ? might to ask- if you are privileged to get away with it. This is to tell you that even the devil don’t often get away with his acts.

This should think led him into such acts as lying and murdering. To steal and to deceive are his best acts.

The entire acts of the devil were mostly applied with force, these could be understood to be relatively far different from the luring apprehension of the mind, the thought and every reaction of target.

For a deceiver or a con artist to achieve any of his purposes he has to take the target through a perfectly lied functioning process to captivate and subsequently confine the target mind to an expected outcome. A close comparison in line with the incarceration, or the undeviating confinement of the thoughts and actions into one. The mindscape has to be locked into one.

Countless amount of alluring speeches with enough enticement were used to influence your thought drastically, this will form a mist of believability, this is a swap from your unbelief into accepting what they had judgementally predict you will think. Before coming in close contact with such ordeal, in both the mind and action, it is expedient to know that it’s useless to think of apprehending the devil, completely fruitless. His means of escape to keep virtue is his vice and belligerency. Devils were easily recognised, at any confrontation made, at close contact with the devil. And if there should be no clearly distinguished awareness of his presence, that obviously, is your funeral; what else ? obvious to any discerning heart, once the consciousness is blurred, you are left to your fate.

Your fate at the hand of a deceiver or a con: apparently they are the same person; is like the terrible midnight wind, the influence of the ethos, living you with an awakening conscience to wake up to in the morning thinking you just finished a day life soap opera

When confronted with the devil the only option open to you is a steadfast objection and rejection. That is surely applicable when you were not enticed yet. There is no reason to start playing a mind game, undetermined - leaving room for consideration. Also the same way playing a mind game will bring you down to his level, make you capable of thinking like he is thinking, you will have the tendency, a higher intensity of observing every details just like he does, this is like a prenatal agreement; a premature confusionist.

Your action might tell whom you are and thus open doors to future engagement, so also your reaction is an open invitation for trouble. And what more to add to it; trying to apprehend a person who is liable to implement a forceful action like lying, theft or murder is definitely an obvious invitation to trouble.

Lying, doesn’t come in under the jurisdiction of force on normal consequence however on this regard it collated as a forceful act mainly for it's origination and the circumstances that often warrant a lie. To all individual lie is a defence, a hiding place either to cover a shame or otherwise to make a gain. But unfortunately to most people it is a way of life. Lie is a vice.

Theft is a disease just as the lack that warrant the theft. The strength of theft is supposed to be in a lack however, to many it has become a way of life and what fixed them within this cubicle, to separate them from the other people alive is one strong force which has until that time entangled them like a spider web, it further subject their mind under one ruling conception of worth, authority, wealth and power., and further to this the mindset is one of a good understanding and intelligence. All this are fabrication of the real things, they were segregated individual, just a mindset, dummies on wheels.

This is a protection, a retribution and a vengeance, it’s terrible to know whom reap the satisfaction from a murder and whom bear the pain of murder. Does the dead cry? to know if they felt the pain of their death; yes, the dead do cry, the blood that were shed in wickedness supplicate for their lost and seek retribution from him who left them forlorn. Most dead tried desperately to live their lives again, the lost, wandering souls of the abyss. Murder is a great lost not to those that were alive only but to the one that were killed also.

So far the essential aspect of this analogy has not been reasoned out, basically the ground we’ve been able to cover seems like an awakening call to remember what we so often neglected. It will not have been far from the truth if our mind has conceive the idea that wicked acts have been fought and reed from our communities. Is it true or not? It isn’t, believing they have is a very dangerous mindset and what is around the corner is a bewilderment of the fool.

This is one mindset which will get disappointed after what it has been blinded from came into realisation. Being innocent is quite very charitable, but being blinded to the truth of the real world is stupidity. After you have been made a sucker, then and then only will people around you lament to you ‘welcome to the real world’.

Actions and reaction are simple mind originating influences; they sing song like a yellow dress in the sun. with a little word as the English slogan, you could be taken in; sold or giving away; ‘It’s good to talk.’ Where your action might stand as a warning signal your reaction might as well be termed as a green light.

These are basic signals, a give away to the watchful eyes. They do act as pre-em’s to yielding to the beguiling of the serpent. These will off-course first and foremost collate in the mind, then the face will tell the story or ask the question and followed by the body.

The risk of the person opposite you is taken is in your response. He might bluff his way into heaven but he’s got only one way and that is through Jesus Christ. They don’t waste time on any non - profiting individual, you have something he needed that is the reason you were been confronted. If he promise the entire earth at your disposal it is because he is getting it from you. well I could get somebody else but to him really ‘one bird in hand worth a thousand on the tree’. You could say No! or you could say Yes! But your yes is highly recommended, it will be of great regard consequently, faithfully rewarded. It’s no bullshit, it's the open truth.

It isn’t such a wicked act to play the devil; there will be a time that you either do it or you get done. Quite often, softness makes people becomes a victim of situations which they should have be the master. But when they were wounded, don't be surprised if they should turn into a gun rage murderer. Why is this so often the circumstances that smarten people up. You need to hurt them before they could take stern decision and when they do, you could tell the difference, because some will do it to the extreme, while some other folks knows when to stop, when to run, when to hide, and when to stay their ground. Before a fool's wrath is easily known.

In a short sense of the word to deceive it meant to con but on a wider view it envelopes the act of lying while in the real sense of it, it is purely beguiling – the effect of luring with enticement into doing what is contrary to yourself.

Deceive is often use in this composition mainly for its wide acknowledgement. Most people could relate to deceive easily but not the word beguile. Con is another word which has its meaning in law as deception or fraud. In the interest of this writing, beguile could be embraced more than deceiving or con because for its deep understanding and a compound word which combine different acts of deceit, not just deceit only but deceit with alluring temptation to arouse a desire.

The form beguiling took at a stand as to entice with pleasantness, it carries an emotion, it is a yielding from the heart not just the confusion of the mind which will erode away after a little time. A beguiler is seeking for the heart, is seeing for total commitment of oneself and will. To you the beguiler is like somebody who is trying hard enough to draw you out of a deep well, an eye opener, a deliverer. This is the work of beguiling, and it is very sweet to exercise and to listen to.

Finally, remove the sour from the lime, and the colour from the paint, could you imagine what is left likewise is beguiling without deceit; the lie. You will be damn too plain, very visible to any naked observation. what often does the trick is the lie and that is where the serpent hide, it is his covering.

We are one step away from perfecting a very common act which every one in a thousand soul tried effortlessly to resist. For they were easily prone to this act because they tried to avoid it .

Why were they in such a turmoil to avoid lots of things and yet they has never achieve the endurance to resist it.

Most people found themselves lying while they don’t want to lie. Most found themselves falling for deceit and beguiling while they were watching their steps actually being vigilant. They fell into the trap of con men because they were cautious of their actions too dam much to prevent such occurrences. Why did what you fear most often come to you at the last end.

On the other hand, most people were pregnant non-thoughtlessly with the ideas of getting away with lies and deceiving. Why do they lie and not be able to get away with it? Why do you lie and never get what you want ?

Strategic thinking deployed precisely is as precious as the water you drink. Observing this at a different angle; let say for example a substance such as water has got it's own tactics of functioning when taking at precise time otherwise it will become a residue within you, which of course might be of use at latter days but first and foremost you will have to beer the burden before it is put to work. it's tactics is thirst. This is example of precise deployment of decisions. Signals and signs. Actions and reaction.

The value placed upon this preciseness in deployment of decision; in action and reaction; in signs and signals that will still be manifesting in every step taken on this rear reasoning. (aetiology). And by the time you finish this book you will never be the same person again, never again.

We are one step away from perfecting a common act which man has never but one in a thousand resisted. This is lie. How to know it is not to be involve in it. When you find it hard to resist lie the solution is not to tell it. A lair does not recognise a lie, though he knows he lies but he can tell not who else does it. But one thing is sure, he knows the truth when he sees it. Confusion is often around a liar. Like wonders and bewilderment surround a fool.

Sit on the fence for a while, this mind test will open your understanding of the people around you. Tell a lie, notice how many believe, accept or even reject you. then turn around again, tell a truth of a different thing; notice how many people reject, accept or question you. this will often work on the silence ones too. The kind of people that reserve their judgement, they couldn't do it both times without falling out on you. Another positive result of this is that you have the consciousness of both.

When somebody does this to you, if you were the 'I reserve my comment type' don't do it the second time or else you become a fool. One way out is to walk away before the second try. But if you respond to the first you must as well listen to the second.

A question to ask is why do people lie and they don't get what they wanted, or be found out ? two things is in close relation with this; one you either be a poor blinded liar or secondly you don't know how to lie. A blinded liar will reveal himself as being desperate, unstable and afraid of being found out. But a good liar will have weighted the consequences before he lied. Being blinded to the lie you are telling is another issue resulting from desperation need and necessity.

The question of not obtaining the result needed is a substantially good question to consider and often an emotional one because a liar is emotionally tied to the result of the lie, emotionally, he has to display a kin interest in the person he' s lying to this thus spelling out the difference between success and failure. Just to what my mum often tells me; never tells a lie which won't cover your heels.

At often times your lies with purposes shamefully falls not as a desirable means, but an irresistible, all means necessity which at the point might seems a life wire. if it break, permeated, then you are done, finished. It is only a fool who will lie for fun when it is not needed and serve no purpose whatsoever. Therefore to enjoy the benefit of your risk, you will need to know how to do it right. Many people often get away with lies, some were good while others were blatantly stupid. Some of the greatest lies ever told, if they were discovered it will cause chaos, and disbelieve .

Still these question remains unanswered; why did you play the devil and it doesn't work or why do you lie and don't ever get what you want. There is a simple answer; you never does it like the serpent . You can be the devil and do your thing, you can resist the devil catch him at his act but you cannot catch the serpent in the devil. And when you kills the devil, you can never find the serpent dead with the devil.

Another reason and the most prominent one among all others that people fail with lying is because they lie twice or more for a single cause. If you lie too much you will be caught in a net that was not set for you.

Is it a surprise to find the snail dead outside it's shell ? it has to have been an extraordinary performances such as the ones only the serpent can make. It is very relevant as before to understand the differences between these two creatures, moreover never in any doctrine have they been identified as two, having two different nature and life . The serpent has ever since been called the same as the devil and the serpent. None I mean no doctrine or man has it ever come into his mind to differentiate between the two.

Apart from committing a tragic theological offence, an error against one doctrine of the scripture which as ever resisted to separate the two creatures but mysteriously placed them as one and a single being. But through various studies and deep reasoning the revelation of the two nature suffice.

Here is the mystery of the devil who was made by the beast, the serpent, which through corny errors has falling into the form of a creepy animal. This is the theological perspective. Whatever the devil did is the product of the serpent habitual presence with him, otherwise the fall to the deceit of the serpent. The serpent discover the lie, deceit, beguiling, alluring and whatever. And , the devil did the lying, improvise the murdering and device theft. Very sociable; isn't it ? Condemnations - this are what rule the world around you and the devils. And probably the devils now is a bared truth.

But a mystery of this nature could be remould as history to this wakening age to create an atmosphere of greater understanding within these confused claustrophobic detailing of what should naturally be ignored as obscene indoctrination and misleading of human being. Mystries is a misleading knowledge confused firstly in itself before it lead. There should be no misconception whatsoever in the mind, as to how far fetched the details of such reasoned study as this could entails and the kind of individual which it may revive, recreate or even diminished. Basically a notion of this kind, of what might have been suggested as an adaptation of a past historical occurrences studiously laid down from era of accountability. May by many still obscure reasons they were conserve and remain a mystery, however reasoning and thought will not despise us further. If we were to compose a thoughtful and reasonable account of these events, though an incontestable baseless for our accounts.

Where there is a devil in most people or each person walking the street, who is the saint ? That is actually not relevant, to avoid such prejudice we simply could channel our thought to, to observe where the serpent is ? Referring to the knowing.

Where there is a conformation and addiction to an habit, generically, by inheritance or simply by a conscious or unconscious adaptation of such a habit would either be to honour or derogatory. More like being hooked on drug, and observe the inverted depreciation inclined to oneself. With a creative mindset of this kind you will live above such adaptation and addictions. It is the mindset of the Mastermind.

From the mastermind reasons and purpose is implemented into every action of the being. Pluto has indoctrinate on acting with reason without which the action is falsified. A folly and lame action ensuing without philosophy, principle and reason fostered towards a “real good” or “apparent good” such actions are chanced to spiritism or otherwise as often said of the illit to be that ill- forbidding omen called fate. To do nothing about a circumstances is what is often released to the hands of fate. Is it fate who do what the person could not do? Or the action of other man is constricted by such circumscriptive portents.

Put these in a good order, analysed this? Adaptation to an habit and it's conformation, when being hooked precede ever before any generic introduction, inheriting such habit. An habit is a very influencing thing and as a result could be very very catchy- finding it's way into the unconscious mind of another less opportune person. Adaptation in clinching to the habit is a moral honour and beneficiary. Further to this, such habit could be inherited -influenced through generation.

All along till now we have tread upon a delicate edge of the biblical doctrine which anybody within the Christendom might want to object to even challenged with a prove. However that isn't perturbing. Is the fate the religion held and not a destiny; Fate is not bound by a law but it bound the man that use to its law. Destiny observe the materialist physical law or the world- idea; the religion observe philosophical moral acts; a philosophical man could not be afflicted by much error than he knows of, his affliction is the soundness of his philosophy. The man is not often at fault because soon he would be the same as the philosophy which he is instructed by, with this assertion, reckon every man responsible to be assertive of the right moral justification of his acts.

How do we pictured this and compose it into what we have already established in our mind. The induction to the act of playing the devil also stress the danger of becoming the devil. Instead to merely playing, setting the mind as to that of the devil or more above that of the devil, the man should relegate his devilishness to subordinates. The mindset which bring into existence a circumstances without your veto is the devil mindscape and is ruled by the serpent habitual presence with you. Meaning the ideas that bear sway in you that brink about the mistakes in your actions.

The danger incubate within these such a mindscape has been notched, it is of the mind and also of the life involved. Total dominion under the devil is a persisting evil but where you will want to be and developed is a mind that precede over that of the devil, that which bring to past the present circumstances or predicament and fixation of condition. This is easily obtainable with the mastermind. A mindset that is more advance in time to a circumstance.

This is a contagious issues, I am not trying to make more devils but merely to see through wisdom in depth and in height. Philosophically as it was indoctrinated, the serpent has a connotation as being wise even being a liar. However, reasoning might suggest that the serpent wasn't a liar but an instigator of liars. The liar being the devil.

It's good to think we were copying the devil and trying to see where the serpent was in the devil. but we were not copying the devil, we were mastering the devil and observing the tactics and ideologies of the serpent in you. But you are becoming the devil and can't even display a tactic of the serpent yet to temporise the sways. What is happening is that while you were concentrating on being or copying the devil the serpent is making you into one grand devil. You never see the serpent because you were looking at the devil however reasons suggest that without the serpent there is no devil. The devil we are mastering is ourself and the serpent is the higher authority and lower authority to some, not because of wits but because of what they were sway by.

You are becoming a devil ! most people are devils ! while in some the devil dwell in them. Which is more ? those that were the devil or those that the devil dwell in ?

Now are you being wise as the serpent ? if you were you, won't you be turning into a devil or have the devil dwelling in you. is it of a force or a logic ? it is an open principle observable?

Remember while you are the devil you implement force and while you are the serpent you conceal behind an outpouring poisonous ardour of fear.

There is a gentleness of the serpent which go beyond that of the dove, but the aura of danger which breath around the serpent obscure this. This is even becoming rapidly known to even the dead conscious individual travelling through phases of life to another life.

In most cases, even the most conscious person could not improvised otherwise the instigation of the serpent which makes them the devil remain formidable; while they were trying to be wise as the serpent it would not be in this existence and this lifetime.

I there henceforth submit these as a analysis of the most world renowned worldly inter agency. The masterminding of the serpent will remain a goal achieved only of the mastermind as instigation is the driving force use by fate. Fate instigate to action in variance to projected plan.

In this prolong analytical disclosure of the nature of the devil and the serpent which has precedes the established working mindset of the devil and whomever endeavour to operate with the mind of the devil 'playing the devil'. How is it to be discovered that you might have already become the devil or being influenced by the devil ? that is a no mistake, though a total failure at being wise. Its' a make do, it spelt a defeat by the serpent. You have never grown to be as wise as the serpent in you that sway at every turn of the road, even some make do as the devil, instinctively unobjectable , they were being dominated by the serpent even the devil of others.

Most people do things unconsciously, either out of habit or through practise. There is always a basis. Functioning ethos for every action and reaction. Where some are unconsciously wise, most were consciously stupid. But what we were aiming toward is the perspectives of the conscious wise. A conscious doer.

Practically speaking in this entire content and what we will be doing is a Purely practical action. Now we have an enormous amount of philosophical insight, we have taken a giant step away from being enslaved by the devil mentality to confronting the serpent itself in us or should I stress further as the serpent in the devil. Now we play with the serpent in us and not the devil we were made to be.

This is to learn to be practically wise as the serpent which inversely you're playing the devil. Explaining this thus; while you were strenuously attempting to do what is said in this etiological composition of the common mindscape of the ruling principles (principalities) of this world, don't be such a stupid ass to neglect factual aspect of the mind which is prone to changes of all kinds. It is infectious and corruptable, this is what you are doing to other people, neglect not the fact that yours too is delicately constructed to accept or be tuned to such contagious influences. You should be doing what the serpent is doing and don't be a devil rather I should prefer that you own a devil. Well somebody has suggested that there is always an evil side to every good one; I will prefer that you have this evil but not in you. The evil that men has is what has been lured by the serpent, being ignorant of his ways he is left with the malignment of his disdainful obedience. What need do he has to abhorring this obedience after it has transpired?

Soon you should start instigating everything to your own good, beguiling most affection, emotion, and thus winning hearts. A verse in the scripture said a person that wins heart is a wise man'. On this understanding, the serpent stand as a wise, and cunning beast, while the devil become the destroyer, a tool of the serpent used for his purpose. He has a plan at hand before he lure man into murdering, beguiling will be an appropriate word to emphasis in unravelling non violence deceit incorporated I presume. Instigating, Tempting, Beguiling and Lying all fell into the brain chambers of the serpent while the destructive work fell into that of the devil; such as Thieving, killing and suffering. Own a devil and don't be a devil or be owned by the devil.

The time has come and this is the age of openness disclosure of all mysteries and knowledge and as from this time onward how hard you will find it to hide anything even your heart. Your life is taking from you and constructed for a purpose; you are a tool for a scheme designed by a brain, a mind just like the one you can develop through doing what you have been made to believe is a false doctrine. Well everyone seems to be wise nowadays that they needed to made themselves a fool for somebody sake. But consequently nobody will admit being a fool or subject to the fact of being a fool except the feeble minded. Even a fool will rage like an animal when he realised he has been done. It is obvious, you won't want to be a friend to a fool; they will definitely be shamed for it. But however, the world around you is into your personal life to control. And it's only an idiot that will pity a fool. When the serpent is taking many for a penny of foolishness and making a devil of most feeble minds and simple beings.

When everyone is able to identify who is a fool and who is not it is rear, hardly in occurrence for you to witness a fool in argument over intelligence but most probably in rages. But through an introspective perception of this present time, an ethos that has falling upon man claimed a lot of certainty from the intelligence mindscapes. Or presumably, most of the ones we often walk in before has been locked and reserved in another chamber of our mind. Apparently many will leave theirs at some place unknown where a lot is suggested to have been left at your various points of confusion. This lead to the hypnotic suggestion that the wakening of the computer cause so much confusion to few and dented the mind and intelligence of few. However this isn't a good excuses; where it's meant to be for advance it should not be a cause for retardation . but it does breed dull looking faces, which makes them looks like they have lost their appetite for life.

What comes next to education to claim the intelligence of the educated is a good thinker, it will wrestle with the mind of the educated and might prevail if it is of a good initiative. A good thought with motivation implemented properly has the ability to go beyond the standard of the educated mindsets foreseeable. Judging from past experiences and inventions; the present education standards were set from the works of good thinkers.

Thinking is something we are used to doing, and the lest of it the faster and profitable you are likely to be. Depending on what you are thinking about but by some bizarre nature some people's thinking is done for them; while some will pay some a lot more than a days pay on stuffs that will assist the thinking for them. Devils don't think ! they were prompt by the serpent and the killing instinct within them. The surviving, acceptance and ruling instinct. Generated from desolation, rejection, and hatred. Their goal is to be accepted and to rule. apparently it's is very correct to state that the serpent is there thought chamber. Anyway, since you will never catch the serpent in the devil it is hard for you to acknowledge how they arrived at the position found.

Apart from thinking, premeditated acts is the a tool of the serpent although it is generated from reasonable thoughts and observation. Both instigation, beguiling and lying were acts seriously nourished and often premeditated before presenting them.

In short to play the devil, there is need for you to be a peaceful delicate non-thinker but instinctive active. This is the key to mitigating the risk of failure, being red-handedly incapacitated and in another form, the risk of conformation, addiction and adaptation. By this you can build up and follow up on a strategy; an action which the reaction is determined by the principle invested; and thus be wise as the serpent and never be used. which means you can afford not being the devil. Acting by a philosophy is investing success into every action.

Most could have guess out what playing the devil involve, but for the advantage of many whom has not, the principle is based upon using people to motivate people and get what you want and not be used. Manipulation and being manipulated; corrupting or being corrupted is choices you must make.

Most people has been down this road before which they call playing God, when they were actually the devil. Don't wait till you were identified as the devil know what you were doing. What is the devil to man and what is man to the devil; same as asking what is God to man and what is man to God? The devil is the man and control the world man lives in and God ask man to reject the devil and take control of things rather than leaving it for the devil or otherwise following the tracks of the devil, which is falling for the tricks of the serpent.

In his life time hardly could a man ever achieve playing God; without deceiving one, lying to one and still remains on top as God, presuming that is where God is meant to be. But in our own way we are the gods of our own life and should be that the lord of our own decision. God does not sin, man sin and is it possible to be the devil and not sin?

Everything sensibly judged and observed through the eyes of principles and the laws which means you have the ability to excel in thought above the reach of the law. Although the law never stop being amended, that is because they can not think and see everything through at a time. And what the heck? They were meant to create fear and control. Of what ? Consequently What is it that needs to be control? Simple. As a matter of fact; it is not the world you were living in, but it is the people that is living in that world you were living in. To control you and to control me!

Logically the law could be wrestled but human sensibility and leadership suggest that it is only a fool that will say there is no need for the law. Devils are chronic of the law.

The obvious apparent inclination of the devils acts are crimes, sins and punishment of errors. This is where their wisdom is established and euphonium.

But is it possible to be the devil or play the devil and not sin or commit any crime otherwise ? This presently still remains as an hypothesis but on another phase of this study we shall look into establishing this hypothesis as a proven theory practicable and it's possibility.

Another insight I will want to discuss and open up on this observation is the possibility of playing the devil and not tell a lie simply being yourself. Or the Serpent and not tell a lie? The voicing of not telling a lie sound more like old preacher sermon however how far could an ordinary person go without telling a lie and what will it get him?

As we all has the capability to chose to murder, thieve and not to, it is a choice and a good one to consider. Although it is soiled upon most hearts the simple law of nature and human conscience "thou shall not kill" this is what considering although you are not going to be saving the whole world which in any existence nobody has ever achieve doing so: who can save the world? Who will dear endeavour to venture into saving the world. Every one ever to embark on such ventures end up killing most of the people dwelling in the world; even Jesus end up killing three third of the entire world population in his attempt.

If there should be magic in deceit, beguiling, alluring and temptation I suppose, and most should recognise that the magic come from the lie within. The delusion, confusion and off course most often curiosity that would confront the victim of the deceiver from the lie told is what gives way to his purpose. Like the enigma held within the sighting of darkness.

Lie will bring all this including confusion and when you can not analyse the truth from the lie told you will be opt to give in, with people that don’t give in easily they will loose both ways. They argue and conflicted, so they lost the person and probably most often the price except they were physically stronger. But most ancient philosophy will tell you that wisdom is better than strength. When you are cheated by someone and you accept it as a defeat you win yourself a friend, the only angle left taking care, is not to be defeated on the same trick twice.

When you are cheated by someone and you accept it as a defeat you win yourself a friend the only angle left taking care of is not to be defeated on the same trick twice.

Many con masters are good liars, which is hard to penetrate; you will need a few heads to tackle their lies. But what makes the difference in their lies is how it was told and when it was told. Foolishness is merely in most cases a blind angle (sight); where you fail to reckon with or diminishes it's importance unnecessarily. If any is able to reason and play you out at this angle you will be caught in a foolishness so underestimation is never a good proper attitude to display.

We have observe lie from a direct insinuation and it's purposes. This is to deceive and win or otherwise escape the clutches of the present danger. Why this lies were never successful is because it is not told on a blind spot, on curiosity, on foolishness, on need and on urgency. A lie is meant to act on the subject predilection.

The man whom come to become the devil first lied but his lies were without reasonability – without the knowledge of the person he was lying to, and he did to his ruin. A blind liar.

When I was growing up, I have was told a very common sense which is to ‘tell a lie that will cover your heels’-

What stop me from lying or even thinking about it was because I could not tell one without getting caught in. ‘one that can cover my heels’ and somehow by an intuitive concept I could not tell one again . then I learnt the wisdom which existed without the lie.

What makes people lie often was the earnest need to escape that impossible situation they have called upon themselves. Their only escape will be to lie; most ended up being known as poor liars, petty liars, stinky liar, and blind liars.

People tends to leave them alone because of their stinks, and the poverty of their lies. Poor Stinky liars. Where others were being chased about for the curiosity, darkness of their lies they were at flee from and send away, left alone they were 'vagabond’

Present inclination will suggest that there are different kinds of lies, staging from the person urgent reasonability at displaying themselves as reasonable normal individual; a little white lie now and then will soon escalate.

Where a liar will start lying right from the beginning of confronting him, even when they do tell the truth they won’t be believed.

There is a lot of difference in reserving the lie to use as the confusionist, delusion or curiosity than using it as a defence. When the lie is the least, and last , it is prompt to confuse, delude and be a cause of curiosity.

In all to all, I suppose playing the devil is more to becoming the devil- To mastermind the devil you will need to play as the serpent and with a few good mind you will even master the serpent and prevail him at his own tricks. Running away is not victory it's being cautious.

And the last note; ‘ you don’t need to look green before you can play the devil’.

Fate and Destiny:

“ The Man is beyond which is not seen”

What is ever wrong than fate? It is not about successful aims but more about eking out; surviving when all hope seems to have been lost. Our fate is the ideas we indulge in, the forces of fate will observe the man from the idea which is his mirrored image. Life bind destiny to the heels of the man, fate she set free and allow to roam about returning every other season, nature at the crack of down has endows his gifts and the man knows not, await the season of fate. Paul Brunton express a similar view in his doctrine on fate, but yet he emphasis the imposing will and mans' submissive fatality and of destiny he relate it to the man in search of destiny whence it has always been with him. Of his most fate related view in his book this I like most; “He clanks the earth in iron chain, each link stamped with the word “Destiny”. But because he neither sees nor hears his chains, he imagines that he walks where he wishes and as far as he wishes”.

The man is the oar of these forces, he has the driving mechanism if he knows himself. What he his doing and this forces, of fate and destiny will be submissive to his dictation. Fate does not necessary impose his will but it does to end the man unnecessary search after destiny. Thus if fate was to be put into a circumstantial self will, man should be less overwhelmed and horridly submit to its will except in such cases when the influence is requisitive. The result of recompense in the laws of consequences and the moral justification of the man would be reveal in his destiny and the work of his fate. Man would tend to renounce destiny at the imposition of fate. However if he knowns that “every self -created suffering and every self accepted evil is an avoidable one” The man is responsible for the moral justification he accepted and the philosophical perception he held for from these are his ideas and his fate.

The good the man created would not be for him neither would it work for him but the benefit of the good is to him is made to certain honour and worth. Should the moral justice of the man be right therefore his life would have been less unfavourable. Observance like these is profitable, true is that “the same man who is responsible for our mistakes is likewise responsible for our misfortunes” PB.

A life that is conducted under a moral injustice is at the peril of various retribution. At the time he chose to negate from such injustice he would be visited with recompense of his act to chose otherwise. Man is not entirely rule by a moral justice, there has to exist an edge of gain over that which is rule. To recompense or compensate the man with the right justification he has to submit not to the law of consequences but to the philosophical law of which he observe. He is without a philosophy and lack of motives for his action him that is caught by the law of consequence.

“Philosophy teaches us a wiser course than mere fatalism, a truer one than mere faith in free will. It teaches us than even when the stars in the firmament appear to work against us, the stars of worthy ideals will always work for us. It liberate us from anxieties about our horoscope because it gives us certitudes that the right cause we set going must have right effects. It gives us life's ship, sail and rudder, port and map, we need not drift”.

Eventually when his own shall return to him, he would discover that he knows nothing and has nothing that is his own all else were borrowed to him. He has no good in himself but the good fate of others he dwell on and on their arms they bear him even at the risk of their own life.

Should prophecies come to pass, we would ask him if he was not warned in advance to the prophecy. It is not of his own fate but the consequence of the fate of others at will to influence him. If he is caught by the law of consequences it is assumed that he is not observing any philosophy.

The proxy influences of the present need not be conscious of its will, for the force he exercise is towards the good and not the person with the good.

Suppose 'earth' was a woman she would be meretricious and caprice like the sphinx, immulating early her ignoramus youngs; then when she sees his strength she would flee to a safe haven. Then how could he not be the author of his own fate.

The present weakness is due to lack of intimacy; caught in the clutches of destiny and fate, to rest thence he would give in to diverse imposed fate of others which would fix him to an unwilling destiny.

At the next septenary; when the season of fate is matured, he would be visited by his fate, he would not be giving an option except which is imposed on by fate.

A septenary is that chronocrator, the rule of time over the destiny of man, turning up at interjectory times of life. Each septenary are time observed as different ages of maturity.

At the turn of the season, whence the force of fate come to bear on him, he shall fall into a 'deeper oasis', his strives and toil would be banked and not noticed by the force of fate until a good pasture. For the force of fate will war against endless strives.

Fate would give him a means to survive.

He is marred and spoiled by them as their fate is knotted in web to him. For him to rise they must believe in him, and having his destiny in his hand, he is alone without intimacy or friendship.

When his friends assume rule over him, he's gone away from them but their fate which has been knot to his own make them wrestle with. He could not form new relationship different from their image unless the fate web is broken.

If he tries at another relationship it would be broken by the mere will of theirs because they have not abnegated from their emotion baring loss of a friend.

They would cast their image on every new contact and relationship he formed, he would think he's misrepresenting another person for someone he knew beforehand but what he is actually experiencing is the result of a combine fate, the force of their fate working through the emotion of that former person.

He would be recompensed or compensated for past moral justice, his life depends on his acceptance and justification of their moral acts.

In between strives and toil, fate only seeks to survive.

Destiny of the man make him to strive and toil.

At his success they would grow weaker but after they must have spoi him they rest content and submissive, either he succeed of nor fail.

He is wasted that strives and toil in season of fate.

PartIII

THE FOOL WITHIN

This is really mind blowing, very deep reasoning that will jolt more mind into realisation but some few might be confused beyond reasonable of thing still existing within his person. Conscious not of the instant a person committed a grave act against it's natural normal life's mindset. When he's not going higher on the level of intelligence and mindset in any act and situation or purposely acting fool to dissuade, deceive or trap, but suddenly discover it's act isn’t of it's normal aptitude, if at this point the subject does not realise that there has been foolishness in his act then this subject should at this point be known to have crossed beyond actual conscious realisation of himself and in most cases beyond recovering of the pass mindset echelon.

There is a basic occurrence that depreciate the value of a person in any place of the society. And the tendency of being born with this type of syndrome is next to nil. Although lot of explanation might be giving for it however the one we were actually recognising with this subject is foolishness. Most will almost kill themselves for being so foolish to do such a thing he willingly allowed, while another person would merely look it over and submit to that degree of best achievability. While some will be hoping for luck to take over and some will even pray for miracle. Many will boldly state there is no way they will go beyond themselves or could achieve more result than that. First of all, what is noticeable in this person is submissiveness, the enthusiasm in a no no. What more this is from within, it isn’t an external forces acting on the person as of yet to the time of his consciousness. Said the person is building a place for the rats to crawl in.

Making a person a fool is an act of external forces infesting upon such mistakes and errors committed nonchalantly. Conscious or unconscious is not relevant to the person perception, looking to implement upon the errors.

While in high school, during any class we often finishes with a pile of laugh. This is from taking a piss on anyone misjudgement, mistakes and errors and the person will look a complete fool to the whole class, some do result in fights after school hours. This is how real world is and if you were not doing it somebody is doing it without the laugh. And there were other forces beyond the physical that act upon every mistakes humans made to appreciate on such person. They will feed mostly on the failures and work out more failures. Concentrate on the single error to implement more errors. Man don’t often act this way one each other but this type of events manifest everyday of our lives. Some people are fast in finding errors in people than others to get out of their clutches, you have to be a very lovely advocate.

-To exploit the foolish part of an individual in real life situation is quite liberal, very simple, if you know the tactical means to evirate the person egoism in no time have him deserving the good, your fool in no time evincive that no other alternative is available.

-The first thing to do is search for the mistake.

-Judge the mistake to his normal life; has the person gone higher or below ?

-In both ways, unconscious errors will be caught from his absurd unwitted judgement.

-The next thing to do is act on the mistake or error; feeding in more ability to err.

-This could be repeated until you are able to build a sufficient level of errors for the person.

-Then you will have your confident of having a fool.

There isn't a known veracity of any account of the subject not acting in variance to the plan suggested, a foolish person is seeminly very capricious to anything secretive.

The basic strategies are: Discovering, implementing, infesting and controlling.

Why is this possible in any person is for the simple generally believed etiological concept accepted by all that; ‘no man is above a mistake’

Can you reason with the statement and placed it in comparison to what has been discussed earlier. Citing the reasoning of today as believed, you will say ‘yes’ there is reasonable ground to admit that ‘No man is above a mistake’.

Reasonably it is a right perception proved by general acceptability, however you being right has by mine ideological concept placed you within my twisting grip.

“Mistake has no master” But I will advice master your mistakes.

Mistakes results in error and they does brought about disappointment or at least disgrace, just like a acting fool .

The ideology is set on the philosophy that the mistakes which result in error when accumulated will result in foolishness. And if non is above a mistake, that means non is above foolishness, and any can be made foolish for a purpose. To correct another person mistake is pure generosity and not virtuous, to quote from Machiavelli in the Prince; “ Many men were better at not making mistakes themselves than to correct them in others”

To understand this better; we reason out ambiguously as in why? How?, When?, and Where?

Why will ask why is mistake termed as foolishness?
How will ask How is one mistake taken as foolishness?
When will ask When is a mistake taken in to be foolishness?
Where will ask where is a mistake known as foolishness?

This ambiguity is provoking in the more sense that its a question only unwitted and baffled mind will ask, even argue about just for the mere puzzle of the event which precede the action. Unrealistic criticism is obstructive and is not vouched not to emancipate. Acceptably it is baffling to his ego whereas on the same account a thoughtful individual will ponder upon it even quizzically.

Mistake is the same as error though inversely positioned to each other. Based on the acceptability that mistake result into error; it isn’t an error yet until the mistake is achieved that is made public. And etceteras, the error will proceed into disappointment and on an unsociable ground a disgrace and shame. This would emerge from animosity not from sociable atmosphere. Shame as high as at this capacity is not kept in closure but vented to public. Anyone that discovers his own foolishness and vent it out to public knowing is grace and not shamed.

One mistake will normally not bring about a foolishness but the concurrent result of the same mistake. This makes an accumulation of errors to the other person on the other side of the mirror and this thus brings about foolishness.

When this error is noticed by an opposing party; in an antagonistic atmosphere of course , by one with prejudictive judgement, this mistake or error will be visited, ministered upon overwhelmingly against ones ability of resistance. As a result it will provoke anger and definitely make foolish, except when one is able to sway the issue or consult his vice because amid many vices, virtue is grievously adhere to by any man might in the end reduce to loss with tears. Adducing to a philosophical view of Niccolo Machiavelli in the Prince;

“The fact is that a man who wants to act virtuously in every way necessarily comes to grief among so many who are not virtuous”

Where you stand at no option of an alternative ground, when faced with insulting verbal provocation and slurred foolishly because of an error or otherwise a misfortune. A man could not overcome the overwhelming power infested into his mistake, to remove the unfriendly effect of it from plunging you down into a complete fully bred fool. Because as a reasoning emerged that a person taken precisely at the height of a mistake is barn to be either; when not confused will be confounded And having made one mistake could be forced to make others. This is important as to the determinate ethnic which profess that; ' Man must either be won over or destroy'.

On the psychological ground of these reasoning; with a consecutive sequence of the error the fool within is apparently revealing.

Supposedly you have been thinking about what is the foolish within, I don’t believe something of this nature as a simple ideology placed within mistakes and error when it is not enlightening enough it cost more to eliminate.

In other observation, where we sighted a blind spot in one person and infested upon it, if he can not prevent these, he will obviously pay for his foolishness. The blind spot in you is a targeted point obliged to foolishness. Not while it remains but when it is infested on and used against you. And a blind spot is often the target of the antibiosis of an ethos or the antagonistic self, bearing on the ethnics that ones one mistake is made another can be forced upon it.

From the on start, this essay has stated a provocative phrases such as; “foolishness lies in the heart of man but rod of correction will rid it off” although it is also a theologically observance nevertheless, it does apply to the idea of a foolishness within, which is based upon concurrent mistake.

What has been discussed earlier as ways of detecting of and making the fool, is part of what we should aim to achieve in ‘Strategic Prowess’ (SP)

Strategic Prowess involves the implementation of a structured mind evaluation test aimed at searching for the fool within. It dealt with the ability, efficiency ,willingness, and power to achieve the aims laid down in strategic orders of discovering the fool within. This also require the need to recognize opportunities when they present themselves. Apparently this could be observed from the Blind Spot of the subject.

Lack of knowledge or totally unwise and in most cases unwillingness might have a trace.

Facial features and countenance / expression, display and changes.

Dress code that match with the immediate atmosphere or background, both colour and mode.

Hearing and sight impaired.

Choice of word, pronunciation, intonation, pitch in sound, speed in word, sudden changes or stress all is noticeable in strategic proneness.

Hereby is an hypothesis to be observed and proved-

-To obtain dominion over another, there need to be a percentage of foolishness in the other person seeking a dominion upon.

-To make a person subject to you in authority you need to make the person realise your proneness to detect the foolishness in him. And believe your worth.

-There is need to make the person realise his handicap which anonate a weakness in the mind or in strength.

-And to obtain this position of power, there is a need to search for the fool within the other person.

-Man has the capacity and potential to make the other dependant upon him by logically agreed potentials.

Many people is trying to obtain dominion as an advantage over the other party at a time in progression. This is purposeful to ones own good venture. Most will search for something as a potential leverage to establish rule or dominion by. This is the mind of most purposeful individual, which means people around you were being made fool at will to your preserved purpose at times whence mutual exchange remain unequivocally adaptable. Because among gross vice and wits a virtuous person will often come to loss. Virtue is not wit.

There is a law which existed totally and completely independent on it's own. It is a law which is exercised at will without regard of person. This is the law of the Ethos (Spiritual laws).

The ethos is made to be free to any individual with the love of it. According to Fredrick Nieztchen advocation to the treatment for greatness in a person as he said is the love of fate. Willing to exercise the influences of it's dominating powers. However the ethos possesses what could be termed as the will to rule at all cost and this is often achieved through every wrong step taken by a person or in rear cases and of course, mostly frequent in the present days, it is achieved by rebellious display on the strength and ability of the individual. There is a leverage on the Strategic Prowess which existed within the ethos. And man is made foolishness of what he could not see nor acknowledged at will. The ethos is obdurately unresponsive to command or control but to emotion applied on a subject. A witted course venerated from one person to another this the ethos would frequently evoke.

We are not searching to establish rule by substance but we are being made fool or purposefully descending into foolishness to obtain substance. which is a huge price to pay for a token which could be gotten by pretending fool and taken the wise in their own contrite.

We are not to search to establishing rule by substance neither are were we to become fool or permit to be made fool to obtain substance; instead we rather pretends to fool to obtain substance and still keep our sake. The fool within is the accumulated errors or mistakes made in past effort and visitable by any introspective and interjectory aimful person. The man is actually not a fool by his effort but his mistake revisited reward him with foolishness.

PHOBIAS

This is a projection of the innermost being influenced by participating external condition. It is an extension of the turmoil, the incapacity and the anticipation of the being. Uncertainty is realistically prompted by an unduly mistake committed and a doubtful forecast of a successive task.

Misjudgement is first a psychological then a physical constraint of the being, it is at great length an important initial catalyse to initiate error into an active life. In most cases, it is a constraint bearing results and the result of the restriction it influences often produces unpleasantly, an eventual bewilderment.

Fear is one psychological phenomenal which could not exist on its own accord without the influences of the physical clauses which were similarly quoted as the fear factors. Examples ranges from likes of fear confronted in other people; this is on the basis of intimidation, prejudice or discriminations, the results of the person inferiority and unwillingness to accept a lesser or lower strata.

Most rear cases of phobia that is emphasised upon in here has one logical solution and this is evolved around the principles of stratification.

Fear is subjected to a phase of human psychological, physical and conscious failure. And it need to be breed through another phase of encounter with a tediously provoking and disappointing reality issues; and yet while it could be spooned as a residue of restricted expression of oneself and the ability display on potentate wilfulness.-

In a case of a young man involved in a terrible car accident when he was just at the top of his youthful ovation. The accident resulted in the lost of his entire lower part of his body; causing some minor injuries to the back and an internal wound. He was able to pull through after years of medical attention. Five years of hospital treatments records before he could gain his feet back on crouches and his back to sit upright. This young man came out of hospital and within a year of home-sit he went back behind the wheels, to drive again.

In most cases, you would have expected this typical type of person to abstain from driving for life or otherwise to be nursing a phobic associated with cars and driving, if he does develop such symptoms which is psychologically relevant to such prolong victims of severe car accident victims. It does affect them for a prolong period and most unfortunately a life time. However few cases have arise, made to exist which the victims were immune to such psychological defects. And people of such immunity would not submit to a threat placed on them by the first accident except if there is another related occurrence of a car accident.

What is noticed in this cases to have develop into a phobia from such occurrence is more than just a neuroses defect but there is quite a load of external inferences of the physical defect. which is a proven evidence of perturbation. Upon such victims, to have developed a psychological defect arising from a phobia confronted becomes a life treating issue and this and forth any other self developed life strategies might fail such people even with medical assistance.

The reason for this could be traced back to how their phobia was developed and few will be discovered to have had a psychological symptoms inured with fear before they ever confronted the real fear of their life and it is this pre-existing fear which make tedious the outcome of the confronted fear factor.

Confronting a fear factor which is often known as “confronting your fear” as practised by most physiotherapist, often does not prove as the best applicable means of solution to the fears which has embedded itself into ones life; by the mind, body, spirit and soul. The resulting consequences of this practises will definitely result in lack or malfunctioning or a complete dead of any psychological aspect of the individual mind which might be involve with the fear factor. A fear is meant to be feared and the prevention of the fear is to stay away from any encounter of the fear factor. On other thought; what you have determined to confront does not actually result from a fear factor but a delinquency resulting from inadequate background knowledge of the subject in question.

What does 'I can’t do' create in you as a person ?

This sort of fear which has got the capacity and free chance to reside in you as mean pessimist is most often a rob away of pride or dignity. This will reside in a person as a the form of grieve which later might turn into self rejection and this will grow into a phobia which the person will be victimised by.

People tends to improvise reasons for failure and be made to believe that this is a right cause of action. Admittedly this is a devastation that has been set into motion by one’s inability, therefore the resulting action is not to put blame upon any other person but the person is meant to think wisely and take the available assistance offered. Not wanting to fail is a resulting phobia associated with it failing in the past; what should be acknowledged is that a person is liable under certain condition warranted to fail. But as the old opportunist and determinist ethic rambles that 'the greatest failure is failing to attempt.' He can't do because he had phobic symptoms to fail.

Failure should be accepted as a cause due to certain mistakes either circumstantial or psychological. It is sure to be accepted and treated as cause for self examination.

Apart from the phobia related to people and failure, there are more prominent, rear cases of phobia in man such as associated with; Law, Spending Money, handling large cash or coming into contact with huge money, Poverty, cheating mistakes and rejection. Briefly they could be examined and explained so that we could acknowledge their virulent possibilities .

Financial Phobia:

There is a recent media publication done on this on the internet, (www.msn.co.uk/money.htm)

It came up in a recent research done by one of the online bank – Egg. They sited a psychological and physiological dysfunctional syndrome in a large percentage of the population and this is termed as financial phobia.

Being one of the recently discovered rear symptoms of the fear syndrome. Researchers predicted a significant increase in the number of sufferers. The report contains a detail estimate of sufferers in Britain, and it is believed to link to a genuine physical and emotional condition that immobilised people causing disinterest apprehension when faced with the prospect of managing money. And quoting; “it is not as a result of laziness”.

A pert on the back is not solving the problem; the lazy and idle syndromes have been looked into in the progress of this composition and if we could draw attention to this again, it is more relevant to the fool syndromes and doting on the age ranges associated with this, it is philosophically a threat to the enlightened mind. How it could be possible? Quoting from this observation :

“The highest level of the financial phobia , the report shows are currently younger age groups; 30 percent of 16-24years old and a quarter (22 percent) of 30 years old are financial phobias. Compared to 11 percent of over 65 year olds.

Please these are hay days of enlightenment, advance technology and vase knowledge on subject touching every aspect of our daily lives bric a bric from tot to grey days. There is sufficient resources to learn the pros and cons of every oblique non responsive standing problem arising in our every day to day activities, the finances being the prominent among the few that ponder our care and often belittle our sufficiency.

Financial phobia is said to generate first from opening a suitable bank account for the trifling possessions, disdainful of the mundane financial facilities available not without reason though little it might be its still display the inherent fear that is still in question.

In the article the honourable Dr. Brendan Burchell create a good spirit from his vote of confidence to the victims; “Financial phobias can be intelligent people and achievers in most areas of their lives, they are not irresponsible feckless. They have become entwined in this psychological syndrome which made them to deal inefficiently with their personal finance. However I believe the cause of this syndrome could be avoided”

While the doctors statement remain sound encouragement and unambiguous judgement which curtail no prejudice in any sense of the factual psychological impediment that is bale in within this less than fathomable fear syndromes. It's yet a pedantic relativity of the jurisdiction in examination. Ensued out of it is a natural error in judgement of the lives bound within this croaking infectious syndrome otherwise it's a mistake in the making.

Financial phobia is now an accustomed term collectively applied to all money related fathoms such as is common to man by way of exiguous preconceptive reason in the like of handling large cash, fear of poverty, fear of spending and overspending. All which impede the life of its victims being merely a derogative boring hindrance to life.

As to the psychological effect of the fear, most of which render the victims financially dis- functioning, demobilised and physically ill just as in the other fear syndromes. Laying it right down to the core, anything worth of its fear represent a product of a mistake in the making. misconception, misjudgement and of course erroneous enlightenment of the victim is beneficiary to others of elite mind.

Rejection Phobia:

“ Desires of the heart is blinded to reason”

What other phenomenon provoke anger, jealousy or envy that jolt the ego within any sensitive individual as repulsive of oneself as the aura of rejection. The psychological impact of rejection on the mind has got a paralysing hold on the intellect allowing it to impede the intelligence drastically to be replaced with that of an idiot but in frank statement it gives the look of a nit-wit.

An intelligent egoistic mind would not submit to the idea of a rejection because the intelligent ego would not fathom the mere on-look of rejection. Its procurement challenge the intelligent mind compelling his ego into an unfathomable submission should prove impossible, to him its a hard nut to crush, it is unwarranted by the level of the mind in question.

This is the basic everyday life occurrence confronted by most individual, it questioned the ego of the elite and provoked the intellectual reasoning. Observing this phenomenon in everyday life with the explicit involvement of the ethos describe not the natural occurrence of the mindset but describe the roaming infested crocking that infiltrated the unintelligent mind.

Any ego which spurn rejection on a standpoint of its observation progresses on the belief and acknowledgement of its own supremacy and dominant upon the participating body in confrontation. This of course has the tendency of recognition by the participating body. It should observe not the person of the body otherwise it would be embale within the opposition mindset supriority of itself. Because a repressed negative conception of oneself and impression of the past experience will entail to affect and influence the present and it accumulate like a lay of unhatched eggs, where care is not taking it will aggravate as “failure has a nasty way of creeping up on a man”.

In cases of this nature whence a prevailing means of getting by is in the question of subjugating and obedience to a need which of course ensued as a weak point in the psychological operating environment. And a vasalsitude beneficiary to an opportunist.

It comes in handy having a ready speedy standpoint, witty ill conceive antagonistic mind against rejection. In act to observe the tendency of rejection is to loose focus on own competency to achieve a successful outcome. it is not a prevention against bewilderment which afore hand should have been left mitigated. This derivative delegate between choice and chances.

Rejection emancipate as a realistic and spreading virus in our daily lives, although it might not be regarded as a cause of phobic syndrome in some other psychological and physical nature. But it never seems to ensue to prevail at many turns in life as a predominate stigma in the way of many successes. No more or less phenomena attitude could be imputed into its reality as a constant prevailing maligning antibiosis that disable the being and it is seen in its place as the cause of many failure accumulated by the malignity of time. Although rejection might have a psychological and physical sit to its existence, yet it never seize to bewilder the person while other reap the benefit, one rejected has often prove beneficiary to another.

Treating rejection and avoiding the phobia it foster at every encounter is first view through a psychological mindset, in a physiotherapist term, mitigating rejection is to observe an event in terms of its capacity of rejection than in terms of its success. Contemplating rejection might seems unwanted realistic negative attitude to adhere to toward an opportunity however, without creating an atmosphere of rejection by an ill disposition but actually considering its every opportunity to prevail has a high possibility of winning the lossing edge. It is highly advisable not to ignore the possibility of its emancipation than to be rewarded with bewilderment.

“Possessing realistic personal rules can prevent you from oppressing yourself with exaggerated fears about rejection” And “Predicting gain as well as risk can assist you in taking the risk that may bring you the gain” - Richard Nelson

In philosophy there is this natural ethos known as the reality in the order of thought, which matches an equivalent physical reality-

“ What the mind can conceive and believe the mind can do it” - Napoleon Hill

Relating this to the principle afore held on the idea conceived in the mind about successful outcome and possibility of rejection . Obtaining a successful outcome should be more than an idea but should be conceived Psychologically a natural reality which is equivalent to the physical reality. Success is individually inimitable when it is more natural than when it is in abstract.

Often a crises de foo, is hard to beat which create a gulf between how one should think and how one does think. That man who neglect what is actually done for what is expected learn the way to self destruction and not self preservation. This evoke a concrete fact about life, its precariousness and facing the rejections that comes with it. You can either bluff your way out of it or you can allow it to oppress you. Life is conceived in forms according to individual perception, to one as a game to another as a tale.

The tales of life were told by idiots' says Nietzchan.

Thought is the foundation upon which all else is built by man, “the man who develops an idea that can work and follow it with an action will turn failure into success”. In exception to this is a hollow sphere that tell the difference between how one should live and how one actually lived, aspect of Napoleon Hill teaches.

“The gulf between how one should live and how one does live is so wide that a man who neglects what is actually done for what should have been done learns the way to self destruction rather than self preservation”

Rejection has a greater tendency to occur in any life, for man's life is liable to changes, as circumstances prescribed for the mere nature of man is more the less a fickle nature. 'Man is a creation of circumstances' Machiavelli observed however, Masterminding this circumstances has comes from knowing the basic fact. One is a weak figure on its own to stand however, having not a tendency to divide itself or multiply itself and becomes two. Also, Two is a strong figure on its own, they can abide on themselves and even multiply- it is divisible by one and can divide any figure, which interpret in the sense that it can grow.

The form the first rejection took will appear to be complacent varied not far from expectation,in event natural disturbance is cowardly reasoned out and as a result, unknowingly bale in emotional prerogative. The first love is tarnished like a stained fleece, leaving a loosing edge open for another to occur either by chance or by force depending on the mental attitude conveyed with the last. The first pre active love is most often the killing ground for other future actions once that one has been conflicted, by sequence of the circumstantial nature of man the prevailing actions will be impede by the emotion conflict of the first. It is liable to be forced if not mastermind.

Effort lied on the first should be efficacious on the next and others when the emotional conflict of the first is not allowed to transcend to the next and precession actions. Re-occurrence should be avoided at all cost to avoid spanning as the bytes by bytes spawning of Trojan virus.................

Other things vary in place of rejection that destroy the potential of oneself but waiting for it to emancipate, the sheer anticipation before the try again and fractional response are a conditional based situation. Most of this accumulate into fears, it becomes your vulnerability as its not possible that you would always hold all aces, life doesn't go that way to fall into one person lap otherwise before you know you have a host of rebellious foes to confront even your best friend. The way it goes is that they will want to see you struggle, sweet , win some and loose some what comfort them most whatever their apparition is your emotion of pain or rage when at lost. The hate come when you give up or persist to loose when the more you win against all odds the more respect you derive, why not persist to win? Most often the hen do sweat but the feather will not allow it to show, your effort is not recognise and it seems like a miracle to them. The world does not come about in a day by miracle but by knowledge, even the miracle is subjected to the esoteric knowledge, the only miracle is not knowing how.

A free thinker has the ability to overcome stressful situation which could to lead into fear and further held him captive. likewise a determined person might eventually get what the heart yern for. Determination was in an instant like a miracle whereas perseverance is bearing shame and pain for a course. The initiation is to know that a wise man does not always seems wise at all time if you are not foolish then you will pretend to be, the glory is not to be caught been foolish 'one most know to colour its attitude as time permit like the advice given to the young Prince by Machiavelli, an adept to strategy. A thoughtful person has the ability to analyse his problem to the least bit of stumblin' rock, which a strategic person will improvise on on impromptu. Most often people achieve more by going on an iota of thought in the mind with a great determination than a two hundred gigabytes memory. “A person that develop an idea and follow it up with an action will soon turn failure into success” not failing is far more than trying and taking chances; If you did not grow repulsive to anything that intimidate your chances for success you will not achieve that success.

Cheat Phobia

'I'il I fear not, what man can do to me'

Nature toils takes its course and cause on man and often man is left in subjective servitude

of a protagonist. For nature to take its course might be regarded as in fate and fail depicted allegorically as nature because man being a creature of circumstances is not liable to much choices but for that that is forced upon it. One of the key to success is doing what is natural to you, that is what comes easy by nature of its knowledge or its experience. So nature is a cheat just like destiny is a hoax.

Cheating is meant to be done only by man with limited control over it but as fate will have believe that nature has the best in stall for us just as destiny is meant to be adhere to as the peaceful guild. However curiosity avail to seek out expectation and choice which might not be made available to the mere programmed entity. what seems to avail is the factual essence that man do not stumble on nature as you will on destiny.

The greatest cheat in the existence of man is the cause of nature which in byte size could be termed as destiny and this is worth its fear. It isn't guaranteed as it is out of your jurisdiction of control. Man is meant to fear what he does not know and can't control not the fictitious believe that what you know not can not hurt you, which only is to maintain an innocent observance to the nature to all things. What lies in the capricious nature of man to prompt such passive------ inertial provocative fright? Is it phenomenal or an ignominious perdition of our circumstantial nature. Accounting for such malignity cause of time as life; death; birth; growing up; growing old etcetera. A number of these were feared by man unconditionally leaving the person with limited or abject lost of control.

Nature cheat man; Man cheat Man; and dog eat shit who cares ? Why the monumental grudge against the rest of mankind, is it because you can't find anyone you can pick a fight with. Cheat somebody then. It always a relief when you realise you can not be wiser than what the nature of your life is. We are only human but in nature we are varied and kinds which defray from nationality or custom. The philosophy that indoctrine man to renegade tradition and custom was not so profane as though. Once nature was discovered by the stoic philosophies, we realised that in man we tends to adduce to equality but in nature we are unequal. Then you will adduce not to self righteousness except that you are an unperceived foolishness.

Don't you feel any empathy for others? It hurts so much that I can not object to sympathisers but who is blameworthy ? Is nature blameworthy, or the physical philosophy that place mankinds on a neutral ground of equality or the ruling ethos? You are a kind of men, and one in a widely dispersed nature. Cheating started in the cosmic, it was first established in the godhead otherwise nature won't be a cheat to man. But aren't you asking for too much? Why look to reap where you sow not ?

Cheating is a dilemma in almost every kind of relationship ensued among every living and breathing entity. Man has coloured it and proclaim it as vice, that justifies its resulting mundane saddened victims as victims of wickedness but it never makes them holier than them whatsoever. Unfortunately this world will still remain in its pang and pain the cheat and the cheater. Its one kind of manoeuvring that will be damn hard to eradicate, it exist in the godhead it will only go unnoticed. Suppose we could impose the blame on the tutelate of the habitual nature.

Failure resulting from a cheat is not blameworthy of the person, its scrupulously innocent deduction assumed by most unfortunate simple minded individual. In relationship, it carries the shameful weight of a betrayal which is quite understandable based upon the formality of the trust adduced into the relationship. The reality is that you can't continue the relationship again with a betrayal but that would not prevent its reoccurrences, what would prevent it is you and not alienation. It would eat you away, the best out of you perhaps should you dabble with it. Would they be blameworthy of being plain naturally, being a circumstantial creature of the mundane type? However changing the common ground of perception and reaction to exotic is not for the mundane type of fallible being. It requires you.

When you reject a person because of his cheat, it resolve not the emotion and impaired mental attitude. This will be carried into another relationship and is more than likely to regenerate but by a different means which could prove more devastating than the formal. The same way the formal is able to gravitate in his act when left alone just like a chicken will not change its lay until it has hatch.

Cheating because of its origination it has a way of coming to those that fears it, sound a ringing bell like saying;“ you've been expecting me ? The bell rings in the head like a wayward man and while you were on the ballistic flip flap of “I just knew, I just knew” that next to the best unmelodious rhymes you can foster. The truth is transparent enough, what you fear do visit you in the end. Unneeded pointless fearing cheat, when the fear alone does nothing of prevention, instead it reveal rather a vulnerability. Fear is not erroneous while it remain a precautionary.

“fearlessness is unnatural and does not belong to man because man is a natural being and with every new experience and new environment nature protects you from potential danger by alerting you through a shade of the emotion of fear”.

Premonitions is what fear is meant to be, of prejudice, antagonism, pessimism and at times disdainfulness which is often more revealing than the others. All these viceries can go bye unrecognised in form of cheating, an abstract form will be more demanding. Cheating goes hand in hand with authority and the ruling head often explore a great deal of that. However unfortunately we rejected such authority over us when noticed and most definitely every onslaught of cheating the man do reject . On a realistic vital base it is not meant to be noticed, it is part off the dirty secrets kept within the heart . And phenomenally this happen to be the most secrets kept by man but as said earlier, it existed then in the cosmic and in the godhead.

Could we be at least a bit open minded about this ? Haven't you realised that the secret you kept to yourself is a cheating on another person whom should have it? Most renowned knowledge of cheat is experienced in relationship and business contacts but our concentration is at where we lay the most emphasis that is where we experience the most pain. It does not make you right just as the other person is not deserving of the empathy.

Mistake Phobia:

'A stitch in season save a whole rip'

Such a woeful regret ! The soulful rejection of oneself, every high hopes downcast and expectation reduced to a solitude mourn. With most unanticipated surly turn of event, as you observe the helm to this misfortune, you remember the little stitch that exploit the entire outlook. This mishap could not be amended again to meet this time in season, it is next to a wasted effort with hand thrown up in the air in surrender, you would wish luck had takes its toil – that might bring in a smile, an applaud but unfortunate mistake forfeited that bliss and the joy isn't as complete as might have been held in expectation – nothing , and nothing could replace the foremost anticipated expectation , that foreseen glory.

Life make amendment to the mistakes made because the new day grow more than the previous day except for the error that remain in history. Although history could make excuse for the mistake made in the past but in life mistake is no excuse for the error created and each day should not procure with the next on the same erroneous aptitude. Should it be otherwise it ensued as the fool within which is as devastating as ignorance. Both end in the same predestination but life do award its benefit to the achievers of any efforts.

Where knowledge abide errors makes foolish in comparison to ignorance which is not, again its' liable to be made foolish. Ignorance is not yet a failure until both exterminate in life, both the knowing, failure and the ignorance die and rest in the grave what live after that is the mistake and the glory as appraised in history. History is it that makes name for the man.

At an intermediary high time in the next future it keeps coming back into the mind, still a dejection, the hopeless downcast still maintain a statutory stance as fresh as the time it was made until it has been amended, it remain a malady. And it deepens as time goes over it, how long would it be cultivated? Would you allow the devastative tenor of its time ?

Some unfortunately carries on for a life time and life after, while most is quickly and easily amended before it has chance to live as error. The life span of the mistake makes it an error but once amended pre its span, it is insignificant. It is the mistake that became insignificant but the emotion and the physical mistake of the first is not insignificant Should it be allowed to come into the present, it portent undutiful to be efficacious to reproduce itself. The tendency for the freshly accrued emotion to replace the foremost input to a plus hundred percent fold without emphamatory.

More easily perceived by ones logic apt to the contentment and resolution and probably a peace of mind of, is the verification of not being a failure after all without is the fool within.

Just as it exist that the secret of a cheat is meant to last the duration of the life span, so also is the duration of some mistake is for a life time and most a life time after and so forth the pain and grudges is left with others. A secrets ends with the grave depth but mistake do live after the grave. Men dies and goes to his grave, he rot away but his infallibility, those inimitable offal mistake he had cultivated lives with his soul. Death is the place creation hides its secret in, filled with treasures life does not allow. When death hide him, a culprit from the shame he merited, it comes as a relief and living a soiled epitome; the mistake is no pain at all, he only live ones, for his mistake.

However pedantic it may ensued, it is mandatory that a person master his mistake so as not to live it again. But by the analytical understanding of the ignominy imposed, a person might be liable to esteem far beyond life, beyond myths and lies, which he had lived, and beyond the ability of making the same mistake again. A mistake made twice is no more a mistake but an habit, its like a sin committed twice, to him its' not a sin. Most people will live to pay for the mistake they made while others cover it with death. They pay in life after from the unmitigated recountable narration of history of the mistake. This explain the philosophical reasoning that the soul that earn a mistake will loath itself. The fear is probably the viruleousness of its belief, the infallible philosophy of some days exist even though it is assumed to be blindly said, most people still believe that mistake has no master. It remains unavoidable and incontrovertible to them, probably that gullible innocence did save them from grievous mistake as they were not the master of their own actions.

Psychological – Philosophical therapy for phobia involve with mistakes is mostly recognised in the logical phase than the physical or empirical. As it was said in relative to cheat, Mistake too is of a cosmic propagation, the cosmic entities makes use of it for its domination. It is a cosmic occurrence and the cosmic war ceaselessly to rule over the mistake a person makes. Cannally is the man as he is brought into servitude because of certain imperfection and he grudge against both humanity and his kin. Likewise as the man is lied in jeopardy of his inevitable mistakes so also is the ethos that benefit him. The mistakes which is caused by variable symptoms will in the end result in uncontrollable phobia that could eventually breed into unneeded failure as the Goethe would say 'Your fear will visit you'.

In foolishness mistake makes itself a home, when not intimidated it build a palace increasing and garnished it if it pleases, it abides in the non-forbidden errors vicheled by every chances endeavoured. Each day it grows with the day as forced and emerged as a winner from the blind spot – 'A fathom of the dark side'. Mistake feeds upon the unconsciousness which is its passage from where it accrued glories to itself. Same as failure it has a nasty way of creeping up on someone. In the long run one would learn that it never keeps the glory to itself but another take it, someone very close to you, someone innocent, cunny and witty, a mastermind. Mistake is a failure, at least on the long run goes without an applaud, when it is not initially worth to be admitted as failure and similarly unfavourable quality that could be devastating to the person.

It come as a relief to reduce one foolishness to insignificance and release the stressful agitation and anticipation of successful outcome before the next. Admitting to ones foolishness and revealing it into the spotlight could be induced to be the best approach though it will make a person gullible among others yet the person will be blameless from any other mistakes that ensued. Unmitigated mistakes happen to be unnoticed as most occurred to have been with others kept in the secluded darkness of reserved ignominy. As the dark secret were most unfriendly and do procure an inhabitation that yield way to expansion or exploit of further mistakes. Its an unpleasantly dangerous condition hedged on a forbidden wiseness.

Law Phobia:

“A people that is accustomed to being under a rule will hardly endeavour to remain free should they by some eventuality be free” - Niccollo Machiavelli.

There is an obvious truth which any person could relate with in the country that has moved from being ruled by a person or council to one which is ruled by a law. Emergence of a society found itself brought up from the cradle by delegated people or a person until fault is found in them and they could not be trusted on their loyalty. Not the delegates to discover that holding down a ruling post in a country is tenacious however the commonalty of the society discovered their inertia fear to have trust them with their loyalty.

What result to placate the tension as a plausible solution saw the enactment of the law that act as the governing body. The society reveals itself to be gullible only by the constitution and fraught by the threat of relegating such an in extenso power to a person or delegate. They were also brought under the power of the constitution that which they embody; as a result of this it reduces the sheer tendency of tyranny. As the reagent of men will be prone from virtue to vice in animus if and when not constrain by such thing as a constitution.

It is known that by the unequivocable mandatory of a principle to any man that profess himself as a wise man and as such as befitting as a rule. So it is not disappointing even revealing it is to appease the society that they have limited flexibility of own their opinion but were guided under strict scrutiny while they fell at some time if not by a pinch under the pedantic gaze of the law. Sufficing is the fact that the commonalty of the society have adduce to such liberty that they felt threatened not again by the person or delegates in rule but by the strength of justice enabled under the jurisdiction.

More accommodating it become, as it ensue that the law plaudit should pledge their strengths with the law while on the other hand the ebullient of the misconception, the injustice, and threat of the law became the portion of the naïve bourgeoisies of the society.

This should in no means be a chip off the strenuous emphasis presented, suggesting a corrosive concave dent marked in the law on account of each injustice it carried out to any naive person under its jurisdiction. The simplicity of the heart allowed by the law could not be wrestled and even the foolishness of any person that ignorantly entrusted its life to the law with negligent cowardice. Whence the truth of the law of course the fears which reside in the mindset that is rooted in the general believe of which it venerate unscrupulous equality in justice, standardized unique uniformity that is without impiety.

To many as such as possess unrealistic ethics, if they were not caved in by the law which supplement for their ignoramus, they will ensue to be physically and psychologically crocked in every aspect surrounding their lives for the deity fear of the requital. It’s realistic to suggest that the law exact one don of pedantic moralistic system, which in accordance to political philosophy of men like Machiavelli this is only possible through the virtue of one man or the legislator but not that belonging to the populace. However the truth of the law exist only in a jurisdictory system.

A deduction from these is sighted in the a free society, the constitution is held in fear than a society under the despotic rule or monarch whom they reverence with their lives. It did ensue that the people tends to revere an act passed because they fear the person in rule and not the body of the law. If it suffice that the body of rule over the society is virtuous the populace will only endeavour to be for the virtue of the rule over them and should this rule be usurped or the leader deceased the next will be met with an hostile populace in anticipation of what will be their fate. The populace is does corrupted or instructed in justice because of the rule over them.

An idea that the law is believed to act as a justification for the weak and innocent as they will trust in it as their anchor of justice. Where the strong will possess with power the weak will merely oblige to vassalage, whence some might not obtain the sound perception of justice as a whole except to what is pronounced in the law such that could be swayed by any kind of wind; their feeble mind is best left alone to whatever doctrine they have adduced to.

“You don't preach against a false doctrine except to disturbed the feeble minds” Harriet Robin speak the unflattered truth.

With such pedagogue structured system exerted by the law people needs to learn the simple principle that man must possess to own even the law need possessing and not be handled with such negligent cowardice that emancipate from the fear of requital. One should made effort and not assume to the role of a sheep being led before the sheerer. Law phobia could thence be acclaimed to certain circumstantial naivety than just a mundane fear.

PartIV

Being feared:

“The bond of love is one which men, wretched creature that they are, break when it is to their advantage to do so But fear is strengthen by a dread of punishment which is always effective “

Machiavelli; Prince: s97

A child life is embale with an amount of fear which they did not paved way through neither do they understand its sources but the only one that they acknowledge is the fear infringe with pain. These unreasonable inane act of physical assault impinge on them; though they despise it and abhor the perpetrator, though by their fauna their innocence render them helpless they were still until well understood a victim to their fear.

In proximity of themselves; the little wondering mind finds all the answer to most of its problems at the mouth of the parent. Imprimis they were bold towards the parent to ask of anything which trouble the mind until the passive fear they observe toward the parent is triggered and made active by assault otherwise constant piety benefits denied. It would not be disappointing that it should suffice that their desires at this early period be contingent in time and their progenitorial hereditary with their parent, depending on what side of coin they turn to or the depth of time they emerge from be a result of their fear.

All that are in extremis unimportant rationality to what hold ground at hand since their ad init fauna and flora had impotent them from fighting through this fear barear impress upon them by assault or the imitable fallibility of the parent towards piety care. Of course this emotion could be a juxtaposition of the insinuated inertial fear of the parent and the child need not be told again.

In due time a prudent child will learn how to fruastrate one side of his coin with the other as a result to reduce the fear of one in excelsis or fickelness to its need. Cutting inbetween is its means of making both side at hand to favour itself in times of need. It would ask both side of the parent, and should the condition warrant it, alternatively its at a loss of options, rear improvisation is the grand parent.

This is the initial repulse to expugn its fear and vassalage in extenso by eleminating the conpulsary in toto immutable need of one side of the parent to another. Early the child has learn that man should only trust what it can control, before it could actually acknowledge the factual effect of its need being a course to its fear; its need would make it vulnerable in except to its physical weakness in strenght and the psycological weakness is an impediment unaccounted for.

And one more other thing he grew to acknowledge is the emotion of fear being a natural knell impressed upon man to alart it of a possible danger depending upon the sensitivity height of the person in question. It would suffice that it is necessary for a man to devide his chances within two possible immutable advocate that might exist upon itself but remaining vunerable and vassal to one is virtuous but it promise no fortune.

As could be seen in the venerating potent of infringeing upon the quotient of fear impressed upon oneself, likewise it is in ones will and favourable to have such vindictable retribution potent within oneself to impugn on any that infringe or caper with the quota of fear impressed.

In considering the fear impressed at the point whence ones realising its vunerability and inferiority to the other, this fear could be impugn or compel and is not need held capricious but made efficacious with the same vindictable retribution potent within oneself. It is a factual reality that if by chance or purpose it should free itself eventually it would return.

By their fauna men has been known to initiate rule over themselve or it is often forced upon them by purpose or mistake admited to be at their inevitable. That is intricately reasonable for man to elect a rule over himself at will in every new environment that he will not come to suffer for the lack of it did eliminate the purposeful vassalage it might be placed or held unto.

As it is impossible for a man accustomed to being under rule to abide as free man if by eventuality it should be free, it is relevant and favourable to himself that he should chose one in every new environment that it might not suffer harm of a compulsary vassalage.and it is evident that one rule chosen by oneself by choice is more favourable unto one opinion and choice than the one enforced upon it which coul not be evicated from.

To be feared could be aduced from being indispensable, unpredictable but unquestionably constannt in details; it did induce a wit and favourability either towards vice or for virtue. But a man that retribute both and impute no favour for impingemnt on his person is held in more

significancy and would be loved and feared. Being feared is more of a quality in use and nothing else is in comparison.

****A treacherous person is the implement of its own self importance ............................................... repulsive to both world, and often in repressive of the attempt......

Confussion or conviction.

“A place in the subconscious is confusing as a truth in the right place is convicting”

The reality is variable in accordance with the accustomed State of the mind, when the reality in the mind is equal and proportionate to the physical reality of the person. A variant in the reality of the mind to that of the physical reality will create a disturbance that could call confusion. From the reality of the mind the emotion generate its ordinance of the body and introduced to form a co-ordination that secures the essence with a salient peaceful ambience. The nature of the body or its ambience tends to be disorientated when there is a defect in synchronization of the body in relativeness to the reality of the mind or the assumed reality of the mind. This is temporarily, determined by the present environment or the memory of which the mind or mental attitude is generated from. When the mind is synchronised with the emotion of the body the nature of the person tends to be in good form and likewise his world will be right so if the nature of the person is right, the person is right and likewise his world will be right.

What differentiate confusion from conviction is the epitome of right and wrong emanating from its ambience. Confusion could be configured under what could be termed as a 3-D nature which are; Distortion, Disillusion, Deceiving. A defective nature as this will often procure a defective life and the man is wrong, the only reason it would work is where there is a collaboration in exact or similar trait in nature. “Screw to Screw, false to false”

There is a passive intriguing fondness in two diverse nature mending up, supposing each is in understanding of the nature of the other but in most cases one will tend to be vassal to the other. There is an unlikely serene association should both tends to associate on the same level of independence, passivity of one will make the next subjective. In terms of vice and virtue, in a relationship both could not be vice and virtue, but both could be virtue and not vice. It is outright precarious when both are vice

Vice will not yield way to fortune except with avarice, its rather frustrated than to give chance to conviction that is the purchaser of virtues. Through a phase of a contrite emotional alertness the fauna is made conscious of a wrong whence virtue will earn itself fortune. Should it heed to this warning of conviction which in event to vice its rather intimidating to reckon with, at the instant such apprehension will be rebel with. A man of vice experience an intrusion that in progression will invite further provocation from the person, he should not and will not congrue to the simple mind of the emotion rouse with conviction. As a snarl before the snare, its pierced through like with a double edge sword, by its cause, its presented to the mercy of the slayer. Reasons like this nature make the truth a precariously fickle scheme to practice in everyday life, to abide by man is seen inventing the white lies. Conviction should be practice as an act of speech learnt and use at will as it becomes of the noble.

A moment of truth should dawn by means consciousness authoring of the nature of man, after a sin or a wrong act. Every act of sin committed could not be accounted to a person as sin, not a wrong action by its authoring but only becomes a sin because there is the consciousness of an alternative option to take in action. It becomes wrong to the person because its convicted of it. What further implicate the sin indictment is adduced as the physical apprehension and the emotion phase of conviction inflicted on the person. It is right to say somebody knows no sin again, by its fauna, it is assumed guiltless of any act of sin that means, for every conscious action propagated the person is not accountable to any wrong should it be wrong vista face until he's conscious of its wrongs.

Experiencing a tender supplication for the wrong action done from the event of its conviction does not as a result be adduced as a right. While it makes no amend to the wrong although it benefit the person because it rejuvenates from the sinful nature and does replenishing the person back into a previous order of life – its actual self. By all means at the permissible time a carefree intrusion on the person should be cultivated as it becomes expedient of the nature to bring into existence a dawn -on occurrence while conviction takes its toil. If the nature is right it should not fawn when there is a conviction, reckon the initial throbbing pang as not a connotation to a virtue that which a person of vice will conclusively admit as an intrusion from the simplicity of the mind. Should the instant emotion be taken in as alertness to a danger it will be measured up with an equal determination towards prospective aim. For the resulting provocation of the vice, it does not allow the free expressive truth and gives reason to the white lies. The truth is convicting like the vice of the simple minded individual. Words like this phrase is quite intriguing when observing different perception taken when it comes to seeing the truth as it is;

“Only enemies Speaks the truth friends and lovers lie endlessly caught in the web of duty” -STEPHEN KING.

“We lie for two reason – to make a gain or avoid a pain – fortunately, most people feel a sense of guilt, remorse or unease when they lie, and most find it impossible to hide. It then becomes possible for the other person to work out weather they're being told the truth or lied to. With a little practice, it's easy to recognise the behavioural signals, and learn how to decode them” ALAN PEASE.

Every ego knows that that the truth is convicting and should know that whom tells it knell to a mistake and a passive vulnerability, Man will defer from confronting you with the absolute truth, as the retribution will hurt more than the crucifixion.

Bewilderment of Fool

“There is no secure knowledge of anything outside an individual own mindset and his own thoughts and desire are all that can guide his actions”- Thomas Hobbes 1588-1679

from the ordinarily perception of the being, the aspiration seems quicken ordinarily by the conceptual tendency of the being right, encore of ethereally observance because the probability of it successes is oblique, non conceptual until the active part of the reality of the mind is fervently indulged in action. Upon all else, thought is the foundation on which the man is built. The thought being the man in mind; Napoleon was quite observant as to what will project the action of a man; like an ideas, an inkling that occur in the mind, which on must often is ambiguous, afflicted with a crises de foi, of the physical self and the environment deviations. A conception of such ambiguity as he made aware of the fact that believing in the mental reality, not the mere conception will work as; “what the mind can conceive and believe, the mind can do it.”

From all walks of man, man reveal the ignominy made by the commonality of people, of those that were led by, while they were being led astray from light dimness to dullness, with various destructive falls and shameful acts. More than what could be accountable for, devastated into subjection, and taught from end means principles, made for the benefit of certain less fortunate individual, meant for the destruction of others, others were denied of the liberation of such principles. The leader will lead into vassal subjection not into sovereignty of such as permissible by the malignity of time, never has it ensue as an aberrant of moral tactic, in spite of that, for a leader to assume a tutelage as deserving of the discipleship of people, true grace is giving to the people under such an influence for they will be led into leadership and not into servitude as such as warranted for a leader whom want to rule over a people of free opinion. For in a society of free will people, when being capricious in their ways a leader confront insecurity of his role which as it turns out is a shadow of itself and disposition. True authority secure a position, not vice versa, for it is easy for a fool to rule a free society, while the society be cognisant, than a wise leader over a corrupted people; as his wisdom will verge toward virtue while the folly will verge on vice. And as the society is not in respect of folly or wisdom, vice or virtue, but in accordance to whom is advantageous as benefactor to their immediate needs, the material principles. However, a leader should not be motivated by mere insatiable needs but by purpose that will meet every substantial inadequacies, with each dependencies view in terms of its necessary dependency or need warrant dependency.

Reasons as such as expressed by Thomas Hobbes could be adduced being relevant to the core of a bewilder person or personality. “As a man's perception of the physical world is in itself utterly unreliable guide as to what there is in the world, so there is not a possibility of a direct approach to moral realities”; but as he had point out that “no man could be said objectively to be mistaken in any sincere belief of his own best interest, but in most situation there is far greater uncertainty” as to what his perception was of the situation, as such, his interest is not mistaken and could not be subject to ambiguity but his perception. “for all our sense experiences may be wholly illusory, in the way we perceive it in relation to the environment and the reason being more preponderate in the way perception operate” with the subject of our interest being under the same illusory perceptive tendency, mistake can not but issue out of an action.

“The real history of consciousness start with one’s first lie” quote from Poet Joseph Brodsky(1979:32), one’s perception could be reckon with in terms of the consciousness of the being. There would be ground to accept the perception of a person as right if there is a ground to belief in general consciousness. It’s right to accept a realistic perception as near conscious enough to prove all things abstract under normal condition, however looking in the perspective line of one’s perception the likely tendency of that existing beyond the horizon of your realistic perception will not prove the virtue of your own intelligence. That in track leads back to Thomas Hobbes(1588-1679) understanding of the individual mind or skull, but mindset is a right terminology used in place , “Outside an individual mindset there is no ground of a secure knowledge of anything, his own thought and desires are all that could guild his actions”.

An equivocal reference was made to lie being the cause of the conscious mind or being, the ambivalent Phrase imperil more our conception of right and wrong. It create this azure of cresis de foi, then you are in jeopardy of what to believe about yourself or the other person, quite very much an irrelevant opinion of oneself should one assume to be truthful, virtuous or even accept the right or wrong perspective of one’s perception should it be proven right that the consciousness is actually triggered by a first lie. Being unable to vouch of the practical accuracy of the statement in a real sense is of no comfort to anyone. Just as well prove that there is no definite ground to believe there is a wrong or right in virtue or vice of anyone just as long as they were applied with a rational reason. As Hobbes has said; “ Speech has something in it like a spider’s web and by contextual of words tender and delicate wits are ensnared and stopped; but strong wits break easily through them” ( Elements of Philosophy;1839:36).

In a practical actuality sense of the lie, according to Jackall (1980:52-53) it is a distrust of intangible issues of value which threaten to disrupt the achievement of goals. If the lie does in any sense not defile the person or the goal, then the issue of a right to a life or self defence could be adapted from Hobbes; that all men is the judge of what is right of what would preserve his life and that he conceive as right that he has to do. The question of what the intention behind the lie is not actually relevant because of the end result is to preserve his life, so should it be intended to deceive, protect, elusive or evasive, even justification he is more or less judged on the accuracy or falsity of the matter. However all being said, most rational individual would not tell lies on a daily basis but will eschew the possibility, and a cause of being caught in a lie. The truth of it all is that it does not make anyone proud of himself when caught, and few will even glory at not being reprehended. A liar is know on the frequency of him telling his lies and not on the occasional basis. but one whom makes a smallest amount of lie go a long way is the best liar- Samuel Butler(1964:149- The way of all flesh-Ernest Pontifix).

In interpersonal relationship lie surface far often than we will like to admit, look at it this way neither of the person in a conversation or relationship lied to each other both sides of the coin is as plain as it was minted. That's interpersonally , unfortunately on the personal perspective is not seemingly appetible as of the previous; when the object of the interest does not correspond to the common sense or reason – but spurn by a desire or a tick of idea we assume deceitfully- a lie that need be told the self. When Hobbes reason that its at the point when our interest is in conflict with our principle that our moral quality seems to ensue,

at the point we are torn between the two alternatives – our principles and our interest, at this point in turn the moral apprehension and principle would be deployed, out is the quality to be revealed. The closer thing to reason allowed to make a person avert from a principle or moral knowledge is the emotion of desire; moral knowledge will instil a desire more and guild to fulfilling it rather than wrestle against. Thus, an inherent belief in the ethos of the principle is like the drive to meet with destiny, all we have ever desire is that destiny that make a fulfilling life, Strategy and tactics are for life unexpectedness.

Subtlety of lie is meant for an expected end, but the wary of the water should know that lie is an epitome of vice and in it exist the propensity of forming a different nature from the initial while truth knell to virtue that's sowed for the harvest.

The lie we permit ourselves eventually hurts more than the truth we had refrain from, fearing the hurt of the next person or more potent yourself, considering the vindication wroughted except you tell the truth and run. Just as well as “self deception being the only thing likely to create a semblance of truthfulness”- Arendt 1972 - it could be assumed as the closest to direct verbal fallacy just as much as we intended to remain in association and perhaps for the sake of politesse. We then have need to take Arendt conclusion that self -deception has becomes an indispensable tool in the trade of image making and not that it was purposed to fulfilling a necessary obligation that the open mindedness of truth will not permit. A double personality is made with more successes a person achieve with lie or deception, while ones consciousness still remain. A person is true in his own way, for a lie is first by opinion then forceful, should a man say so and know of it let him bear the vindication of man of choosing a way precarious to the means, even as a truth known and say shall bear the repercussion of his own means end.

In the modeling of wit, deceit lurk in dark phases of most of the unconscious deeds, chances might be allowed for one to show oneself truthful but once known as deceitful the chances will be withdrawn. The underworld trend search after deceit for wisdom; wisdom is known by the amount of secret it could seal up within and the number of truth it could reveal. However it appeared more ambiguous considering the possibility that the secret sealed up is actually lies and the truth revealed is nothing truth but a bored fallacy. In event that the kept secret of the heart is the truth unwittily held back that person should reckon himself a deceiver but should you held the lies back hidden within you and told the truth the person has no cause to know a lie. What I tell you three times is true to you – Carroll lewis; Three is sceptical, it would not agree easily like two would agree.

these leading to the generalisation that it’s not as we perceive it but it’s as we desires it. As it has been stated earlier that the emotion of desire of a person is blinded to reason, It lack reason in itself, but potent to possessing a means without the need of other reason.

PartV

Birth of man is of wisdom

Wisdom was giving birth to the same moment a man was giving birth to but his nature warrant a movement to search the new world he came to know. A question of wisdom will be why man search for wisdom or lack wisdom ?

The avarice of man will seek wisdom out before his endeavours differentiating between successes. It is a suggestion that wisdom will not stay in a place where he's not in application, knowledge is reputed to such man that sought out his own wisdom in season.

Wisdom is acknowledge not at work, in effort it is lost of value, in vision it is but a dreamer thus word has its value that wisdom is known by its products. History has records of his losses and values and we need not search for wisdom again.

That is totally and completely doubtful to the question of each person need and his avariousness. Environment might prescribe the tendency to sought out a mean of wisdom as it applies to knowledge even as it becomes the wisdom endowed that the world around is practising. Need might prescribe a wisdom however a need to live is reason enough of need of a wisdom. The wisdom of man is prone to vice as it need not be learned but tender like virtue which not maintain will see its grey days. What is profitable to any man of vice or virtue is not left to ordinary speculation. Is virtue enough for happiness? Greatness has never been measured by mere virtue of a man, as far as it goes, history has not account of it.

Wisdom of men has learnt to preserve men of true virtue from the rampart proneness to vice man has been know with, true test of the virtue will be blessing to the avarice of man. Friedrich Nietzche philosophy saw greatness in a man as a cause for madness or pretence of madness with a love for the ethos. Suppose there exist a tangible relevance with man been a being of circumstances by nature taught by Machiaveli.

Any cause could award greatness to a man just as the same as both phenomenon is in perspective; the circumstances is available and your madness is prevalent, once the opportunity present itself there is a cause for a man of outstanding opinion to ensue.

Need of a life from choosable progressive boisterous cores practiced warrant the tentative search of wisdom to implement a fore known knowledge, proairesis of life work in hand with an inherent wisdom. Choice, taste, style, distinctiveness and originality instil by consciousness makes a little difference great difference to go a long way should wisdom be inculcated. What seems like an establishing node issuing from the ability to think, which in itself is a search of wisdom endowed within the entity of the person. Possession of a knowledge will permit an influx of the wisdom.

Logic suffice with the mandatory search for wisdom as to the acknowledged influx of wisdom, we are like traveller otherwise an envoy on call to a mission and in other perspective a sojourner as befitting for each orientative commissioning or fated for disposition assumably . But there is reason to believe it is disposed off as a call or an earnest desire as to needed purpose -left with needed supplies and hurried off to a destiny not annouced to us beforehand- the best needed supply to meet every obstacle met with the capriciousness of time a man could have in his possession is wisdom.. Some dispense with, some with beauty and other came empty handed because his coming is to meet with a call, with an earnest desire of the host, his toll and weal has been laid into perspective.

Assuming that the initial stage of life with men were of truth, perfect and without a sin, waiting in expectation is the world , dictating a phenomenal transaction into the world – “coming to a destiny not announced beforehand” - As by the beconing, the man drift through days and eons that lasted ninety days in reality. As closer as he get; by virtue of the natural law his transit into the ethereal world is through the flesh before he could assume an entity of the flesh. “And the spirit becomes flesh “ encapsulate himself with the flesh and dwells as man. The flesh that early writer has named as “the old man” and a corruption.

The old man has discovered a way to generate the little gods and this are his wisdom, the man, the flesh but his most precious of it all which remain indestructible is the spirit within the man; looks like some things afterall find their way back to him. Hence the flesh remains an indistuctible ductile god-like senace ambeint being.

A seed sow to the grounnd discover the soil by its own will according to its dispensed knowledge and by the essence of this wit it began its germination into life, fully grown that as pertaining to care should it receive little to nothing, on good soil it will produce, whence somebody will rejoice for its existence. The glory of the plant is certainly without a doubtful mind in its product and the gladdness its able to produce to the expectation of the people. One joy is that of the planter, the harvester is more in comparison proximity with him because by the reason of to much harvest the labour might be employed, these happy bodies receive their prosperity. Profitable was their efforts and product of their soil and employment to meet the need of the population however the initial glory still comes to be the last received, the glory of the seed. Nature sow his seed in words, restored in the body of a philosophy, fauna and flora is these philosophy and could not be inverted as philosophy being in nature but its in the body of this philosophy, the combining form of the present life and situation.

The force of life and the foes of the future, are a productive functionality that minimise the repatriator fear, discovering a good ground to the germinated philosophy hence comes in the body of a fully grown mental aptitude. The worth issued forth from the done hence after the glory returns to the doing philosophy. You are the philosophy at work, progressing from one stage to the other, from amateurish to adroitness and tutelage until the outreach of your knowledge like the single seed sowed solely will in the eventuality of its germination spreading his knowledge by the eating.

Observe these things in solitude commonly exercised , a lone seed, a Talent, a Giant, a god, a destroyer and an ignoramus; semblance of truth, sincerity and meaning ensue when a fool even being himself, sat in solitude will show reason for his life. Liberty to life is not often given, though deserving one, there is a need to demand and possess one. It is certain this property will exist on their own and need be employed or petitioned to assist in the stream of life for their added nascent subsistence. “Invasion of liberty which thwart the personal development of human individual philosophy and personal property withheld the right of a life from most , they have no right to possess a life of their own likewise the right to beget a child which they could by any chance claim ownership of. As a resulting conclusion, any one whom does not recognise the philosophy in a child and need to develop should be denied possession and the right to beget a child.

On most occasion animals were often driven out of the society, their presence will preside over other endeavours of man till their welfare be sorted as to a life applicable to that of the wild; in this chaos exist their dominion and will to revert the affairs of a society, becoming dominant is insignificantly an avarice resulting from denial of desiderate necessary needs.

Giants is worthy of his reverence as to his strength, reverberating a natural image of a god or a demi-god, surrounded by the host of spirit devoted to his call, the burden of his heart being far from himself but the care of the little world around him which being taken wasteful advantage of, rendered inactive his most profound ability.

The society in a microscope is a philosophical enactment, in within exist a web of idealist and philosophist, in difference to that it is a chaotic lost of meaning jabbering – this is a nature as common to all other nature that is not in lack of its entity. A society is known to be guided by virtue of the adroitness to the leader philosophy and the only thing without a philosophy in itself but needs are the animal. As it turns out of rapacity no man has a right to show his kindness to a man of the same device like himself.

“A seed never lacks a population to feed likewise is the nature in itself until it has adopt a body”

Deeds are flames that is promoted to secure an ends, but a person is more profitable because of his property as the deed is done to his own purposeful ends but the property is a measure of his profitability. If at a time a man realise that his help meet is with woman and the man also understand this, he would cut short wondering about. A wonder, both are fickle and unstable, but one should judge by quality that manifested itself profitable to ones means. In acts, a man has need to perceive another in terms of reason of purpose and his action is measured likewise, worth for worth, such a person will be blameless of any man. These are sound wits to be possessed of however man as fickle as they are in both existence, trust is limited to ones wits, but a man that act in accordance to the nature adduced to a person will show good wit and earn success . Now success ensued as a measure of wits in relativity to purpose for this reason success is measured in ratio of a man's capacity of achievable ability.

Audacity to be right or wrong isn't in any opinion, and majority worth nothing in wit but for the strength it could obtain. By the ways of man whom their weakness cause them to seek help and assistance from other man, what it connote is in the authority of the possessor, because whom you help is not indebted to you of anything, it is a free gift like the air and goes with the wind however the simplicity of man and weakness of their need will subject them often to the giver, but most will call it the need not written law of nature. That issued out that a man will be well adviced to flee from vagueness in his charity.

With profitability truth will delay in profit than lie will,its only readily beneficiary to one person, not that man does not like truth but it sank too deep within any man; for the depth of truth lays in the wake of man's life, most often it ebb out of imperfections that man should be defiled by it. Truth is always in the beginning but lie is as a discovery of man, invented for his meet with his own purpose.

Condemnation of the poor

“ The property of the poor is his condemnation”

Part of the confusion of history left untamed, touching judgment of justice the historical people and their lives as acknowledged in their courage and delightful successes, both were recognised in this people by anyone visiting history and will pay to see such in a man of his days. Beauty and strength men will treasure but the witless lagging of the common untamed part of the society that has left in it bit and piece of history will be despised. It is the least to rise out of the past, seems like its still buried in the grime residue like the memory lurking in the darkness of the heart. And it will warrant most clear thinking individual to reason out that from attempt to preserve the history, peripherals of society falling into history of the industrial economy is maintained in their state. And as often as seen in people that are active in delaying the prospective aims of the nouveau economy, they were retained in the currently emerging history.

The poor has only one religion and that is his need , the need is not the entirely his condemnation but the religiousness attached by him to need condemn him. As it worth of its stock , the act of condemnation as practised ensued out from religion and such as that that practise a religion comes about a condemnation. Religiousness of personal property bring about the condemnation of the lack of such property in others and a cause to denial the right of equality in others. A right is granted to a desire freely as to those unfortunate, whom has not possess it afore hand but has this right would be in denial and its fundamental to anyone whom desire deprive another of a life. This is human and natural, as a desire need no consent from anyone and what it is appeal of, is subject to his own quality. As a productive met in a nature, its quality will not desire above its authority this is recognised and honored in the society of people.

The nature of the property of the individual has to be blameworthy for what worth his life obtained and its public esteem. Either forced or learnt his state is a reward paid off his property and the need of consent to utilise a personal quality. As it will ensue that there is not a man whom will liberally consent to a quality in another and a reason to be highly esteem and authoritative than himself by any degree of his perception of a right to equality. But as each man will, personally or by the nature of the power instil in his quality he could force his will on another whom if not unaware is unchalent, otherwise willinly complied.

Society has a cause to hold the remain of certain of his member in history with such as posses a quality denial of liberty of any other society. Such member of a society as have opposed to a right of liberty of a personal property in others - Religion by way of its servitude has posses the authority to retain in service as such as of good fate, likewise is the role played by each person in the society exact semblance to those as requested by the virtue of their quality, those of offensive personal quality,and regression of the moral affairs and industriliasation.

By knowledge we are to know that nature grant not in extreme certain liberty to people by virtue of their quality either owned , learned or grafted into it, this quality is the wealth of the people and much as maintained it, honour it in himself and in others were favoured .

Generation Trend of the peasantry is for only three generation, common to the compulsory rule of the father, temporary for the initial stage of a child's life, strong behaviour trait from the father will be passed over to the child; but old habit is hard tosoon reed off. A grown child will soon develop his own philosophy probably, as he should have or learn and make right the wrongs of the past, his next generation will live beyond the limitation of the previous and resulting of this, is the liberty of choices; liberty to wealth and to own life that could be obtained in the elite world that could be called Alfresco life. They have right in the society towards their own property to a life and right to beget and there is no need requested of their extinction from the society, the civil world is incomplete without their existence.

Excepting the proliferate of the generation trait occurring by nature, by a principle which forbid them from their natural course should not be left to the society as a must in civilization, to do would denial the worth a person assume of own nature which is the quality of the being; as the nature of the being is the quality of the self and of it is derive the worth of the being. What is of no worth is which rule is instil upon, a worthy person would rule his own in respect to his worth as man believe he is worthy of his self. The cause ensue of nature has no need of rule by another but by that same nature which circumscribe the self, for nature assume tutelage of his own.

A person would not be an entirely free of the nation, his quality of life is that which is ascribed by the authority over him, as no man is of any worth on his own but the worth which is ascribed to him. The worth of any person in a nation is not of any property he own but of his dedication to the society and maintaining a nation of people that takes pride in the dedication led to their nation than individual gain. Of this, more is the glory of the popular in the nation than the burgeon egalitarian seeking merely his own glory and worth from the popular.

On occasion would you find among the fold one sheep that is a Black Sheep ( Anointed one, Lost one, Free Being) and another of a willful obedience, while the fold is kept with a strong rod that restrain them to obedience, either be it of folly or wit of the one that wade the rod. They need less be circumscribed by any law again but that which has restrained them to obedience as it is being observed. Generation trend come by way of this means, of a strong restrain of the Paternal dominion to direct the child to the ways which he devices. The black sheep, being of a capricious nature will be exempted from the proliferate of generation trend. A man would delight himself with the task before him, to direct his fold in the witty path, contentment is the shield of the poor, which in other way could be said that avarice is the welt of the youth. The avarice of the olden is an obstructive vice, and a yoke of which means he looses the right of worth to rule himself.

The Society; A saviour or a condemner?

“It is that that is made by man, is of man and its reality is the life of man”

Stratification is in nature of the being in any society of the choice; nature meaning naturally occurring property of the society. Need of purpose is to great extent distinction in personal property has naturally by the moral significance curtail the society into stratified levels with nature of the quality held in perspective. Relevance in stratified society is not abstruse more like the significant practice that has ensued in the society, thus condemnation might exist while the society is less stratified. A purposely denial of right of life and liberty of purpose will be prevalent. There will be need to request consent of another for the right of use of own property. The society will be oppressive to the rights of man while morals decayed drastically. And more of life will be in demand from the lives of less fortunate individual that has been been extinct from the society.

Where rule is in demand to live among the society, atrocity of the animal kingdom demand a power of its own nature -“Beati monoculi in regione caecorum au royaume” ( In the kingdom of the blind a one-eyed man is king). Levels of society should be maintained for the liberty and rights of man. Every man in a society has a need to amend his life to the morale and life style of the society he lives in. And any occasion where this is not use appropraitely there is need for antagonism resulting into denial of various liberty and rights within the society.

Whence language and racial issue is no longer biased among men the other pontitative barriers is the stratification of society..

People from the low social level neighbourhood will possess a purpose from history of the neighbourhood and lives of the people retained in the society as a pride to retain the pride and morale of the society. This neighbourhood would generate expense of greatness in the lives of the people that survive it as strive promote greatness. Social quality of people from such areas often predominate over whatever task fate has in store for them. The philosophy of neighbourhood as such is distinctively different, a different world and morals affairs which will later breed history. Where there is a lack of a beginning in any person, the meaning and purpose of such a person will detoriorate. Whence there is no beginning, the end is as close as the beginning. The philosophy of the society being a law determines the lives of a person more than the insignificant personal philosophy at war with. Civil class will be in great demand where the stratification is less than adequate to provide for such a demand of society philosophy.

People from a neighbourhood span with enterprenuers personality will hardly come to any offence as to the liberty or right of a man should his neighbourhood be habited by bourgeoisies of the working class and he would the more denial them of the right of equal property. And as of a principle, such a society will breed the likes of itself. Prescribing a right of liberty to a civil man living in such a neighbourhood, lacking in the society property should designate the awkwardness of him living in the neighbourhood without meeting the standerd of the society.

A form of language acquainted to a society is in tune with the nature of the property of the society ; In a society filled with mathematician, the command and terms used will defer to that of the Post man in his neighbourhood. Use of personal quality is authorised and less in request among a society of equal property. A musician or young students will appeared awkward should he take up resident in a neighbourhood deffer to that of his own equal quality, most likely will eventually come to grieve. The nature of all man demand equality and found it rather oppressive whence there is no degree of recognition shed to him as a being in his own right and worth.

Let not any man should have a chip on his shoulder when entering a society of unequal quality or that lower to his own and should he decide to reside in this neighbourhood he should realise that every man is right in his own house. A man is not permitted the judgement of right or wrong on what he had obtain freely. What right is possessed of anyone to love or hate another? Individual judgement is faulty and untrustworthy on the issue of this judgement of good and bad, wrong and right and love and hate; thus to speak that, right to love or hate is not possessed of any man without his authority, as no rational person has it in his mind to love or hate a person until he is within his jurisdiction of personal space.

The only recognisable judgement is only that of the state in accordance with his law. All other is an oppression of humanity and contrary to right of man is for a man to appoint himself as a judge in terms of God. For God judge no man, it is man that award judgement accordingly as he perceive right within himself; meaning any man is only permitted to judge another according to his own virtue. Judgement of another man is not to be spelt liberally without the consent of the person being judged, as a result equality is given even in judgement and any offence against the right of any man is withheld. No other thing suggest a man is not equal to the next man except for his quality and the society of residence. So saying that of his own nature, a man is not inferior to another man.

By right any person deprived of a right of residence in a society on the purpose of his property will by right be giving liberty to reside in another society that is approving of his property and to know this will save a lot of grievance, a right of liberty to a personal life and choice of sexual promiscuity is only permitted in certain society because their quality could not be a common appeal. Most society is likely to eliminate sexual cruelty and any manifestation of individualism were not permitted in province because the society is only establish on the basis of interpersonal relationship so is the benefit of that society and the state achievable.

A free nation must condone equality in every aspect of the human life, to respect the worth of every man as a living individual, as doing this is to the knowing that the act of any man is intend to earn his own profit, and affirm likewise that to a person, he deserve no more worth than what is giving for profit or need be ascribed any except for that which is earn in profit.

Everything a man will posses is within his society, moving out to possess other property deserve a move away from the society, this is one of the law of nature, as a result people are reckon equal within their society and no need of inherent disablement of a personal quality. Quality present in each person would be measured by his property which is easily perceived from typicality, existing in the society he habit within. Anyone could observe likewise, if it does not exist within a man certain quality with the number of people dwelling within his home. However any society could demand such and such property as a mean but it is still not inherently imperative to anyone personal property that is in requisite to any society. But for the safety of lives and rights of every man to be respected, every man should be able to find a society meet for his own personal property. A society is composed of the life of any man, imperative to his requirement, the absence of this represent a need for change in the person in terms of the society of his residence.

The bottom line is the met of a personal need from a society, the nature of all man, emit with a certain prevelent quality that embrace the society where his need and live-hood is met within the society. Individualism is merely a quality which ensued out from a person with different property incongruent as possessed of the society.

A rational man will adhere to making history of his past more in proximity to the present as every act is done for the present in purchase of the future. Whence there is a limit to joy in the glory of the dying days than that of the living days.

DOUBTS IN USE:

The only war man ever fought is freedom, freedom of lives, of opinion,of justice, of property,judgement and of rights vary according to arising needs. In short, man is never reed of reason of freedom.

Difference between success and failure most likely might result from a trifle shift of opinion, as to take second thought on the agenda and certain procrastination.

Doubt is a cautious act of prudence which result of what in otherwise should have been an emotion of fear as to warn against perpetual danger. Failure in a person to acquire a desire would not favour the person to own up to the will-power of possession,

of owning a power of possession, in result of the countenance therein is need cause of an approach with a cautious act of prudence.

Doubtful employment of experience is deu paid to a renowed prudent which as often as in need observe the knowledge of the truth of a fact. Prudent is from experience of a knowledge or the expertises of employement. Constantly it would reason in the known and the certain possible outcome, thus to think of all skaits and call to hand possible skills. An enormouse improvement is made on the dragnet progressive state of reaching the fact of the affair. A cognitive secred truth in doubt is with the sal atticum means of observing the affair at hand despite the purposeful state of confussion it propagate before extracting the posteriori truth and priori truth of the purpose at hand.

A generally held believe is in the prospect of work. That is to say work is the providence of man. All that a man deserve he would earn by work and nor war. In work there is no war or need to suffer because by the work he /she does he /she is sufficient. Whatever a person earn from work is believe to belong to no other person and no other could lay claim to it. There is no value of worth laid to the work of a man all are a value of the man and the only worth is the worth of his product or otherwise his wages.

The truth of a fact unwritten is in practice,further is the reality of a truth projective to the revelation of more unknown truth accordingly. Thus the emperical fact on a truth, live up to a truth and it will adduce to more truth. Any act of weakness or lapse in virtue entertain by the doubtful employement of affairs and of a fact will adduce to knowledge of the truth with more thought it would nagate from the benefit of a fact. The fact is the emperical principle or philosophy suitable for the purpose at hand, the conviction of which does not merely denounce prudences but also add to wit which variably acquire the benefit of an action. It is a wit against odds, said proper in the words of Horace; “invita Minerva, sapere aude”-Horace. (Against the-will of Minerva, dare to be wise).

About Friend

“Friendship is our greatest invention “- Dorothy Rowe.

A Philosophy is never a lie of his ends. A friend is the reality of an enemy, it occurs that its what nature induce to prevent from the intimidating vices of an enemy; meaning friends are a means to the times of fear. Where there is friendship there is no want of an enemy, and readily at hand is an help meet whence the enemy draw closer than friends however should any man act unwisely on this account he would be taken for all his worth and left for all his worth.

Demand for friendship is to release from man a timidity of possible future and while in the process we lost sight of most things and concentrate more on the intending purpose of which loyalty, trust and respect will be a promotion of the acquiescence.

“friendship which is bought with money and not with greatness and nobility of mind is paid for, but it does not last and it yields nothing” - Machiavelli

friendship is mainly know of his loyalty and could not be compromised has its really not on to yourself only but on the next person; this suggesting that the limit an enemy could venture toward inhabit a strict adhering tenendum. On most cases its an acceptability not equality, not authoritative but each person having its input and commitment to the friendship. Dorothy Rowe must portrait the right image of what and what a friend is, simple in her own words: “Perhaps the greatest contrast between friendship and enmities is that friendships are often difficult to establish and always hard to maintain, while enmity are easy to established and simple to maintain. Friendships always involve trying to understand another person and, in opening yourself to that person, making yourself vulnerable. Enmity always involves turning the enemy into an object which requires no understanding and, in closing yourself off from the person, making yourself aggressive and strong”

By no reason issuing out from rational mind should a person make lame of the words of an enemy, most often its like the spoken words of an oracle. Words have force beyond the limit of a person and a person that honor his words should have no regret whatsoever. As it turns out,of what an enemy is could be truthful than you and his aims are apparently feasible. Why does it appears that friendships are weakened by loyalty more than being strenghtened, which is what govern the total output the alternative could mount up? Men are not liberal with their loyalty to each other, they tends to fear the enemy not seen more than the friend seen. Perhaps should by this reason known that friends comes earlier than an enemy man will learn the ways of loyalty more than self preservation and pretension.

The errors of friendship is what has been curtail from the age of man and what custom has embraced insolently, an immorality,covetous, and a cause of dispute, emerging of non- philosophical individuals. Referring to passage from of Machiavelli moral wisdom to the prince; “All prince must abstain from the property of others because men soon forget the death of their father than the loss of their patrimony”. What is good for a prince is good for anyone that think himself worthy, because personal possessions with friendship would not relate reasonably together and they''ll soon path way

In regard of themselves a gulf has been left unworthily amid man, irrational timidity, unaccountable strict reference and by observance of the fickle nature of man we forget that friendship was invented of man to strenghten man in their ways and thus remove most tendency of failure, timidity of betrayal from what is known as false friends which could in other words be reckon as infiltration of the enemy, is never friend initially that is not a friend again. Man in freight of impeding danger they risk loosing a friend more than to risk falling for the enemy; they fear the friend they never made or about to make and the arms of an enemy seems more pleasing than the charity of a friend. Being close-up to an enemy will definitely open up unknowing to deception of enemies.

Forsake your friends and your enemies will leave you in peace however should the enemy win your friend over forsake your life. Send a friend to the enemy and he would come back to you, but should you go yourself, and be hasty with the enemy, you will grieve him less than you will a friend. It is better to neglect an enemy than to neglect a friend for as the common say, enemies you know but friends you don't know. What happens is that a friends life is of own choice because being friend does not mean having a similar life; as far away as your friends life is from yours the better is the relationship. Competition, antagonism and prejudice would be enshroud if you live a different lives, unrealistic view reside with those that abhor a friend for the choice of life and for the principle whence he had not another opinion to change. And by an hiding reason, infiltration will often tries to be similar, more than a friend will admire to keep a life of own choice. Friends that have everything in similar will soon have all worths apart.

Will a man merely sold off his loyalty for penitence, and men should hate a friend whom betrayed him more than his enemy whence it was not a friend that made himself to be a friend because; a treacher is the implement of his own importance never to be found with the virtue of one that forsake a friend, he will uphold the integrity of a friend. A question arise weather a friend should seek advice from a friend as often as need arise. Advices are choice treasure and a man should know where to seek this treasure. Some man by the principle they abide by has object totally to advices from any man; some will take the advice of a stranger than that of a friend; some consult mediums and some had the counsel of special people in the society because a wisdom of the weary young man is to have in every new environment a person of good wits and reputable worth to act has his advisor. The blinds often need guilds, as they were not able to manage on their own, friend that advices you is for he has your good intention in mind but anyone that lacks a word of advice for this same friend as often as it is given him will soon loss his value and place as a friend and should by all means take this friend as a guild.

Now concerning principles which a man need adopt as necessary measure against his life. A horse is a man's best friend yet we put bridle in his mouth that he might obey us, the horse is possessed with strength of wits and muled into something that will obey us likewise a person is free and strong in his own right. Man possess to own, so man also has to be possessed to belong and trusted like we do an horse when the bridle is on. You win a friend and destroy a problem, other alternative to this will sell you out less than a man's worth. One certainty that still persist to mitigate the risk of ones life is that “ man need be won over or destroy” but as it ensue that man is hardly won over at all than they will yield to the benefactor of their needs. Even then they still need be possessed with strength because contrary to the nature of man, the will to willingly submit to another man knowing that all authority is counselled of man is lacking.. Equality is one specific will trait of man it is in competition that rank is authorised. Its only an idiot that will trust a horse without his bridle likewise it is imperative that a man trust only in what he could control. The point is that a man that needs to love should prepare to grieve, for love is been said is “a bond of which man, wretched creatures that they are, break when it is to their advantages to do so” Machiavelli was damn outright strict in his opinion on love, more like his other views. With love he had said that men were prone to offend more the one he love than the one he fear as fear carries the dread of vindication.

By its look from this perspective one will agree that within friend there is need to be a sense of fear not only of love and loyalty which a man could do away with easily when it seems not to promote his worth. Another issue is a mistake in friends; reason will tell you that correcting mistakes in a friend is a mistake in you; however, a man should strengthen himself from the mistakes of others so with reason that it is good to correct the mistake of a friend as often as he applied his heart to it, if he should remain with you, you have win him, if not.

Either he fall or he rise man is a co-author of his own fate, people have itching ears and imprudent to embrace pleasant words; destructive principle is easy to come bye for a plunderer, they will adhere to it as it's easy to abide bye. Devastation by harm is revelling but that of principle eat like a serpent through a broken hedge. Meaning, by the prudence and strength a person is steadfast in his own principle should he fall it is of its wit, thus the strength of a man is known by his stand, he is uphold or destroyed. Once a friend display weakness in Philosophy, such is a maid that laughs, it would be obnoxious levity not to correct his mistake.

Tradition has known the esteem of a man when he could purchase what he needed for his own happiness. You could not judge of it has being of virtuous worth because it portrays a self importance more than the love and benefit of humanity. Promoting reverence of oneself is more than winning man over but they need to have been bought for a price. In tradition slaves were bought, and also in other tradition woman are bought for wife; because it is only man that marries, woman has never leave her father's home. It thus appears that the woman prompt up the reason for the male to create wealth.

Men adroitness were bought or contracted , in this exist an agreement that only recognise the exchange of currency for its worth. Here there is nobility and reverence, for the man which purchased a man for a price for the benefit to his happiness acclaim to no equality. This is a contracted relationship, there is no trust in it whatsoever only left to what is cover under the deed of contract.

Since man has need to compete with the rest of mankind for what appeal to him, even at times with a nature he is yet familiar with. A man whom come bye what he need easily has no need to wrestle as in terms of woman. A man should have no need to wrestle for wealth if he comes bye woman easily. Power and nobility is quality of a man. Attempting to attain to this honor, was the effort forged towards averting from servitude and maintain an equality with the common authority of men he adduce to the security he could obtain from mutual beneficiary. All relationship issued of man is set upon a course based on mutual beneficiary and supposedly, with the putative civilisation all relationship should foster a mutual beneficiary and anything averse of these would in regard of themselves promote usery. Man can not be won over, they could only be destroyed or used, to escape from this weakness, a man has the right to contract himself or maintain a mutual beneficiary in all course. Among friendship, this purpose is served and anyone seeing other rights apart of this will soon lost his friend.

Friends share the company of one another, infest and invest upon the influences of each other as made available of its efficacy. Friend made from a higher level than oneself is soon made equal to oneself, if not it would suffer for its lack. Pessimistic friendship do exist when the friendship is only promoted for the money or in other way, there is uneven distribution of influences and efficiency. These pessimistic friends will tends to usery of his friend with his clothes and other borrowings, you will be forced into generosity, instead buy for a pessimistic friend what you will borrow him and suffer him not to thrive while you can provide, rule by property and desert willingly. Borrowings and promises a man should not permit of a friend.

A person should be used in all regards with his self portrait, his availability and adroitness, has he had set upon tending to the happiness of others. To intrude beyond these giving space will be intruding upon his private space and the right of man. And as it befitting any man could apply himself to any disposition for the benefit of oneself or that of mankind. This clause friends should be weary of and know what disposition his friend is and not intrude upon his rights and loss a friend to an enemy because of such friends were giving away to the enemy.

If the need should arise that a friend must be possessed or purchased with a strength of force, it should not be jeopardise, to do this is one would have cause to pay with one's life. Known is that a passive force either of wit or any other would fail in days when it is needed. Since a liberty of choice to take up force is not allowed of anyone but it must be applied constantly till all ends are gained. It may work out that one would have no need to his own force because another force is potent on behalf of one, this could be ancestorial force or that of a tutelage these are of confidential favor and one will need not really on the forces obtainable from a friend. More has come to ruin and a few servile when they relied only on friends, to avoid this a young man has need of a guild in every new environment. Judgement of a guild must then be critically scrutinized because upon it one's life depends.

Early stage of friendship should not be left on forlorn but its expedient that one applied it to learn of one's principle and only tends to disassociate as the awareness of each grows. Such a trifle devotion is worthy of a person for such that fail to defray would jeopardise the life and the friendship. At a time one might have need to look to a friend as a non juggernaut body and could malign the more juggernaut trajectory bodies which persist to stay. Endure to learn a friend and persist progressively that you might win him

At the time should you have keep equality with a friend and it seize, one might tends to seek another friend, to do this is wrong as the emotion and disappointment of the last would inflict the next as need do make servile of a man's potentials however, should one seek instead the company of the woman or man; for food and sex both add to life passion then in except the pursuit of knowledge which uses either as purpose.

When diligent observance is paid to the prospect and benefit of friendship after all has been look into worthless it seems that one should be friend when you have acted in anticipation of feud or betray. That you secure your life in regard to that of a friend, irrelevant it appeared because your friendship is not on common courtesy and trust and the reason of being a friend might become pointless. If one should be at a point that to trust the words of the enemy more than a friends' one would realise that better is prevention than many prescribed cure and the loyalty of a friend is worth of earn.

A rash judgement is inconclusive to lay panopy of the benefits a friend could derive from another, as highly circumscribed is the line then between a friend and an enemy, it could not be neglected as such that do will be vindicated and defray with his life.

Of one is the knowing fact that an enemy would not take from you a voluntary submission because it offers no glory but a friend whom sees the weakness of the other would voluntarily submit to his friend for the prospect and benefit of the friend that by his submission he would make the friend stronger. Of a pecularity that could not but occur in certain cases as relay above and your submission is taken for weakness, and the friend should turn pessimistic and deploy to gratify own self with your property and demand unworthy servitude, this were signs of one to betray, an enemy and should be treated as such. Because any friend that look to the property of a friend and use without humbleness of heart would not think nothing of it if the friend should not possess it again.

Compulsory Submission – Likely is that will of a man to rebel than to have himself subdeued only a weak man is subdue because it is made a necessity to him. With a friend he should be entreated with the demand for a compulsory submission because he could not care for himself. For after a period of voluntary submission to strengthen him for a prospect he ensued invalid, to win such person compulsory submission should be made but as man whom is tends to rebel should this be the resulting action there is need to assume force against. To have an enemy in one's camp and free him, in most witty precepts it would not be called ignominious but to have a friend that turn enemy and free that one such mistakes will be paid for. As a measure, never make a friend turn enemy unless its well cloaked to rout.

A benefit is in other man and assuming the life of another, such as a friend, if one should know in advance that one possess not the potential to succeed in one's own. This follows a deliberation on weather its right or not to adduce to the taste and life-style and principle of a friend. A trait is predominant in being friend, similarities between each other quality is rarely circumscribed but might defer greatly in principle and practice. In this regard it knowly remain passive in one so as to be active in the other. Not a life prescribed by a friend but that which is endowed upon, as a friend would not instruct you the more that you can be superior to himself when you were not beforehand should he do otherwise, what he lacks in pride would he reap for a regret. To adopt you would need to possess and this request that you remain dominant in the relationship and defray not its worth to continue.

Finally, be in contrary to what had been declare by Machiavelli that man could not be absolute wicked or absolute virtuous, on this regard they could not except he could conform to foolishness or pretend foolish in so far as in vengeance, fanaticism and avengeance are yet to disparage and of this nature of things man would act foolish and perniciously but as in the wisdom of man, on this account they were soon to contrite and bygone with loyalty by mere forgiveness. Similitude to this acts we could further deduce in so far as to rational thinking that for a person to excel prosperously and be severally wicked, he would need be conform or pretend foolish. These the wise often do with madness when in search for greatness, that by the foolishness of their acts they would invade all fronts. And when it could be paid for, known in fact is that the foolish would often find means to do wicked.

Charity

“If you want to acquire a reputation for generosity therefore, you have to be ostentatiously lavish” - Niccollo Machiavelli.(Prince)

'God luxury' is charity of man, possess in minimal amount and you will be awkwardly frustrated and a bountiful will make you feeble. Investment is often in miniature as the sovereign Lord often dispense on man, wealth from it man desires accordingly of their own wit.

Charity is wealth, as the alms to the penurious man leads to more poverty and the charity of the rich makes more riches. That's to express likewise that a man that is fast to obtain alms will soon pay with his inheritance. For soon man will request in return his worth for his free gifts giving.

Mercy is offered to stranger knowing it could not be recall, for man, worthless creature that they were are soon to betray one that do them a free deeds and rob him off any glory he might seems to take out of it. To recall that done to a stranger is not demeanour to man when need be. With what has been written so far, and know thus that man is a circumstantial being and hardly of purpose, they were need motivated and that anyone that obtain mercy from one knows it is a debt but should anyone think otherwise let it be at his own peril.

Shame is dishonoring and inevitable whence one goes about on mercy hunt, the cowardice of the person will create for him hateret after dishonour. It intend to decay efficiency of the person. At the onslaught of shame a person would be prone to represse and act irrationally but prudence should prevail. When confronting shame it should not be repressed, attempt to temporise it which will be like a lame act, so your best bet is to publicise it and never keep it quit to one self. Shame will result in ruin for man soon loose their senses quick to join in ridicule and laugh than to incur repulsion on himself.

A benefactor will purchase the life of the people in return for honor and reverence which is deserving as his mercy deeds is done to those that are in need of it. Hardly will a benefactor be denial of a soul to purchase as man were often in servitude for the need sake and one that release them from such a servitude is to be highly praised.

A gift is given to obtain favor, to him that gives has rights to favor, but nothing compulsory the receiver to a must favor than the human decency of rationality of himself. However in office favor is often required unduly, when this favor is sort by gifts contrary to industrial principles, it is at the givers peril when received by all means should not be favored.

Social principle of man derive from us a sense of rational humanity and the ability to enforce when the opportunity is available but the industrial principle is closely guided against personal enforcement.

Generosity is a good virtue not often bestowed to all men, those that does it should have no need to inconvenience themselves, it is right to let people know when it will, saying this thus, affirmation in decision is requested for people do take benefit of your generosity liberally. And a generous man might be forced into piety that will compulsory him which is prominent, afterwards will lead to regrets and ruin. Generosity done when people is not in need of it or demand of it should be done ostentatiously.

Charity is benefit to those able to obtain it, and a person that gives has remove a right from any man they had offered this benefit the right is that of equality. They would not be able to acclaim any right of equality until this benefit is repaid . However there is other charity which is chastity, the receiver has a right to obtain without any loss of right or favor. Because it exist within the bond of love and blood. These are charity done to brother, Sister, father, mother, son and daughter, wife and husband including other relatives. However the far the kin distance is the nearer the authority is imposed in the charity offered. This are necessary charity; pleasant and above all honorable.

Charity is a means and not a cause, any one that important it as a cause will be grieved and disappointed. A cause efficacious in charity is where the authority is in existence and the benefit could be extended in bit by bit as in the infallible act of the state offering to the populence.

What is obtained of man should be keep at owners discretion as wont is the desire of man that a gift giving be treasured as this will incur more gift to be giving of man for this reason, man is a keeper of his own goods. As a need must arise that man has to possess to own, forfeiting this will mean to own what belongs not to the person. Deriving a possession has to be desired and fostered by means of certain forces which is either of man or of the spirit. As a compromise between force that is in application, these need must be keep, for what is purchased with faith must be keep with faith because the desire of one flesh is less potent within. What is possessed with the wit of a man must also be keep with the same wit, failure to display similar wit will result in loss of the possession and that of work must be keep by work, money will possess and own but money will maintain its possession.

Reason why any man would need to keep what he earn of faith with money is to loss possession of that he has own. Likewise it is lost what has been own with wit if the wit should be replaced with any other force. Such are expedient that a will of the possession which transient from one node of force would be displaced of its existence should that node be removed. That one that need to loose what he has own has no need to suffer himself but to withdraw that node of his possession. Two thing could happen; one is that the possession should not make effort to keep what he has loss to do this would be to wear himself out and eventually bear more loss. The second is more like the first but there is ordination that one knows when he has loss what he own not.

You could not have possession of a thing should that possession is available for the take by somebody else but whatever is free is mine. Of this knowing a tendency to assume autonomy of a possession is prevalent in any person as the being is desiderate of what to call his own.

PartVI

ACTS:

I endeavour to eschew that man is apt to mistake but quick to judgement, it bears more on than the deterioration from the mere conception of any sense of perfection. A futile endeavour is that of perfection in man and a complete deterioration in his quality is tardy to come. Crest in between limitation on perfection and deterioration in quality we discover a stable status to acclaim to ourselves. It is right what a philosopher has written that ”what is possible in our moral affairs is less sharply circumscribed than we suppose, for however much we had been degraded in society we still remain capable of self improvement”.

A misconception it is, if a person should suppose mistake is easy to detect in character, if there's a reason for it a man will not possess his own a right of judgement. When in practice the outcome of an event or experiment the mistake identified before it is chanced to judgement such as are prevalent and known as “practical mistake”. An adroit will most likely notice a mistake in progress before it ripen, if he should correct this mistake he would preserve the end result of the event however , in certain instance a mistake could be left purposefully, because it is not pernicious to the person but will draw in the novice to teaching such a mistake could be counted to be functioning or 'functional mistake'. A person familiar with the bible will remember the verse in James which says “if anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man,able to keep his whole body in check.” Excess mistake went un notice at the mouth that man made in their speech. When there is room for correction we try to correct it, that is if we could not stand up to it. In so much unfortunate situation, we were caught in between the mishmash of chatters and felt like the ground would open up and we should enter just for the wrong word we had uttered . Other account is the monument of faith put into a word you utter to somebody that should you fail to stand up to it such would never be counted as a man worthy of honor . A word is the honor of a man this is which compromise a honorable man deserving of his honor to keep is word and never depart from it . Mistake by the mouth of word is count as a “pathological mistake”. In here the three faulty situation is a perfidious term to the honor of a person. Others still could be adduce to pathological mistake such that are prevalent in everyday spoken words and very common when displaying any crises when the speaker tried to hide such moods from the observers.

In the events of life what could be achieved is limit more or less by event of mistake which could have been mitigated at the earlier stage ad avo to the propagation of it. What has been said previously on mistake and its ruins is not as a result of the person but mistake is initiated into an event occurring of the same purpose that it has not been mitigated.

A customary affinity that ensue out of mistake imply that your own mistake should serve other person purpose, of this come an intricate quality of the noble in that he is able to discern mistake and the quality of character. And would be able to make work for another the mistake of one person

There is no risk in a mistake and one mistake is not less potent than the next and the concurrent is the same as the previous in its potency because if the first is acted upon its result is the same or more as when the person concurrent it.

A person that act on one mistake would often be counted as rash in judgement but one that make one mistake to run concurrently would be reputed as wise. But in war, one mistake is a ruin, for the second is foolishness and he that routs is neither the wise.

Most often the intermediate pause between noticing a mistake and making use of it and to amend on it is very crucial to you as a person as the mistakes in life are tardy to come. It helps more for honoring when a person is distinct with a quality of character he is at favor for it. However unreliable is the virtue of a man when it could be freely expressed, and that it should not be render to stress, to do would be objective for a realistic person experiencing a realistic trail would of the trail draw out a realistic benefit.

Opportunity makes a mere man an hero, but he is a creature of circumstances and wont is man that he soon seal opportunity. A weal of opportunity is noble, to know man is a requisite quality as he that will seal an opportunity do not need to teel. An opportunity that meets the teal is what is deserving of this reason a noble need be versatile.

“Circumstances means nothing – One create the circumstances of one's life through pure will”- Paiva.

Man has been generalise as a creation of circumstances whence the weak in excess fall necessarily to their need while the strong could possess with their strength, the many that were imbue with a possessive instinct. What transcend that which is delineate from circumstances is that if a man should refuse to create his own circumstances for his life the circumstances would create you and you would be more or less in exiguous the person met of you. As it has been compromised that be it he that calls into existence a circumstances by which the creature of circumstances were drawn into even the opportunist, by the doing, a noble would converge circumstances and confer to opportunities.

A rational man in his own mind would assume to be equal and as such demand respect, that is as far as demand not more and not less. But to a noble, respect is what people gives when they think he deserve the respect and remove when he deserve it not, however reverence and honor is endowed which issued out of fear and not of mere love which they could infringe on at will. “fear carries a threat of punishment but love man infringe at will, for love they say covers a multitude of sin” even as Machiavelli knowingly generalised that “fear comes with the awareness of a repacaution as in punishment when wronged”. But rather than fear alone it is pleasant that one confer love and fear and defray a sin against ones person, be it virtuous nor vice perfidiously, that you might be perficient in judgement of the people [ Another Person].

ACT OF RULE:

Act of rule is the consequences whereby a person is assume to be under authority of one that is precedent of, that provide for him, and that is able to save his life. And it is also a consequence that one is said to obtain authority and be able to instil it over another. Thus the act of rule is the rule by and of, one to the other or many. One that has rule over a person and provide for him, whereof is able to save his life has a Right of Dominion over the person and all that is. The question of who and who, when and what commensurate the establishment of a rule of one to the other(s), that is in effect to every man to dispise rule over itself is subtential enough to prescribe a necessary consequency that call to active the rule over anyone by anyone he has assume equal with by nature or by property.

Dominion of the rule, either eccelestical or temporal should not be a matter of either of opinion nor fact, because to all knowledge of rule, it is eccelestical first before it is made temporal, but all knowledge of rule either eccelestical nor temporal has need of knowledge of the flesh to be established, or be made aware in the flesh as to its establishment. Formation of rule is eccelestical first without the knowledge of the flesh, but its foundation is laid in the flesh. No rule is a rule that man knows not of its purpose and acts.

Kings (Monarchy) have been acclaim to sit in the sit of gods;its irrevocability is triffling compare to the power its endowed with to save and to destroy a life. But every other rule of man is revocable by whom its enacted over or by another, its temporal and open to influences of consequences, often call by fortune. It proves that all rule of man is assume from untamed consequences; changeable with time by fortune or by devastation. The state of fortune is less capricious to that of rule but we could observe the believe in the essence that, fortune has rule than power, thus we endow with a consequential power of rule.

Act of rule play a role, deciphering the circumstances whence a rule constrict the desire, Need and the objectives allowed to him that is subdue under the rule of one, and many. And, a possible consequence that might result from it.

Consequences that claim the rule, in which a person assume the right of rule and another person lost the right of rule. And,
Cause of justice.

'Every man has a promise of obedience, to him, in whose power it is to save him.'-Hobbes.

When a right is loss due to an antecedent convenant of a voluntary act, it conduce to the desire but is unable to fulfill. Injustice done is acclaim as circumstential, it is not subtential enough and so reason could not be counted as injustice per say because there is no apt or disposition to do wrong or injury to the convenant. Such that a man should not trust in that which he could not control, which indefinately remain obscure to him. The damage done in contract is one deserving loss of right and it could possible have been avoided, if he had trusted only in what he can control. In all things that man do voluntarily, benevolence is without compulsion, it is done of free will and by the nature his right is not forfeited. But should he sworn by an oat he is bound by fear and power of the oath. No convenant is bounding without a word of oath. To inflict injury to a oath is injustice

Right is loss on a voluntary act that is intentionally denialled with the disposition to do injury. There is no need for a voluntary act to be convenanted, to do this and later denail or incure a aptitude to do wrong would be inflicting injury on a trust. To inflict injury to a trust is injustice.

Competition are done with only one aim, may the best man win. But a challenger knows a right is loss should he loss and a right is gained should he win. Failure is indignity. Evidently the worth is prized. However should there result injury or injustice, there is enough reason to loss right to whomever the injury or injustice is done. Indignity can not be promoted, to do so is injustice.

To convenant a voluntary act is ignorance. Because very perfidy is injurious and cause for lose of right. Injury is loss of right but in injustice rule is loss.

They will have need to take of what you have and of it give unto you, of this same they use, and give out. It assume a rule one that possesses and it is faithfulness to oneself, however to possess is not a cause of depositing or make abounding but its intended to benefit oneself only, use and disperse to others. Should occassion arise that a possessor would need to give of what belong to him, he would loose his right of possession. Because him that possess has not and could own neither that which he possess, that he might have is the need to possess. One that obstruct and hinder a progress is more value than one that possess because he make available for another that which is not his own and another can possess. Of what only abound is anyone to give out, but the possessor gives out of what he possesses. And of what is withheld and stored up is what is possessed and taken away. And only one that take away from the current is known as the robber but one that takes away from what is stored take from what abound and accessesible. To possess is to own, one that posesses will evidently have what is possessed and after it could not be owned. To possess is not to own, one that possesses will own not as the will of the possessor is invariably constricted with that of the possesed, of this reason a possessor will need to destroy inventually that which is possesed should he need to own. The possessor loss right and in injustice he loss rule.

When a possesed voluntarily give in to the possesseor; that one has convenant with the possessor, for he would not give up the will of the self but willingly yield to the possessor, thus becoming the mentor of both wills. Both his self and that of the possessor. Because their will is mutually in consistent to what is the desire. And to each other. A possessor will have no will in itself but in the possessed, and when it is voluntarily in subject to it, it would have no will of it own but that of the possessed.

The convenant convenanted by an act of voluntary submission is only broken whence there is found a fault in the possessor, and or when the possessor regain fully his own will.

In deteriorating cases when the possesed disagree wilfully with the possessor, on this account only will the possesed loss the will of the self to the possessor. By no slightest of chance would a possessor not obtain that which it has possesed, that is the desire of the possessor, invested in the object of its desire and it would not burn out until it have that which it sought to possessed. The possessor's will is dominary but highly constricted to that of the posssession. Has that which once share the same body, is at once, bound to the same desire. The possesed has the right of rule.

In many possession the possessor are suburdinate to but it necessarily does not condition them to submission. The posessed should assume soveraignity of the lot, any possession that extend over the lot, more than one is dignifying and should be appreciated. However possessive will tend more to destruction except whom is possessed assume soveraignity of numerous and submission by figure. To chose among a few or numerous would only lend to destruction ( i.e. obstruce force let to gain control) by one or by the whole. Force can not be curbed with force, it is violence and more violence and, destruction. Every entity reward the state of soverignity. To chose from a number or multitude is a respectful act, which should be rewardable but in choosing you lend to the choosen one and to the odd or multitude yield a cause. Unity of many is virtue, the many could not unite, and in unity they are statant but in act they do not unite, like a haze of dust, as in the act of many there is vice and injustice. Therefore, many would loss their right, and in injustice would loss rule.

The production of knowledge request effort and wit, need of choice between necessity; all this an irresolute person would do not, that though he possess wit, he is need to be forced to make choices.

A fool is not without strenght which could be used, except that he lack wit for the workings of his strenght; because strenght is vice, without wit it will do no good. But an absolute irresolute person (weak person) is useful in extent of pleasure; that is to say, a person whom is weak would serve for best pleasure should he be daint. Appropraitely an irresolute person need to daint to have right himself and when engaged he would loss right of rule.

The intention is inconclusive for justice, whence the intention could probably be withheld and forestall the action intended, it could not however be judged. Every action is incomplete when the intention is in judgement. And whence the intention is withdraw the preceeding action is feigned as it is not intended and by reasone the action is not carried out but when it is, it is done without the will of the actor. The intention is the author of the acts. The action is feigned because the authority is not of the self again. The intention is presently potent in the act but could not be accountable for justice as it is not the end. What is applicable for justice is pragmatic and true, the intention is neither. Whence the intention is known, the act could only be concluded by force or by crook; intention is then in anticipation.

Self destructive, incontinent, ill- disposed and other maladies requesting the care of another has invariably, with the consequence loss right of rule to self. A person that do not, perceive or willful of, what is basic requesite of man and of his society is habitually insane and has loss rule.

A person that listen to voices he recognise not do err and could not reason right. The judgement is false and the obedience and reason is that of an insane person. A person will reason right by what he knows as every thinking and reasoning is founded on a knowledge. Ideas are torches to knowledge.

A person whom his conduct was from time good and saw fit to purposefully turn bad, his error would be more purnishable than one whom was bad before hand and turn good. One that does this would loss every benefit and rights previleged when he was good and in his new role he could not rule. One that do bad from time could not be withheld from his right and rule, but should he turn around to do good he loss both right and rule.

One final core node on the act of rule embody what designate to those under rule a Need, objectives and priorities. With the increase in property of people there is an increase in quality; where this is not honour it is sort by the power that the quality of property could confer. It come to be that the common whom fall under rule of such and the arm of the power, would be in denial of the quality of property. Personal rule exercise devastating ethos, to rule out every possibility of equality with one that come to be under his jurisdiction of power. In the attempt to achieve this result there is possibility that would lead to cause injury or injustice. when this ensue its a stautue against the right of any man by the law of which it is convayed. People that fall under such authority of rule were designated their need and objectives by the power of the rule and that they would have to make out by force and by wits is a necessary condition for man. Every rule enacted has condition to distaste and renounce all tendency of crookedness from under its power. The cause of injury renown every right of rule and the cause of injustice renowns the rule.

Paternall Dominion.

Dominion is acquired by two ways; By Generation, and by conquest. The right of Dominion by Generation, is that, which the parent hath over his children; and is called PATERNALL. And is not so derived from the Generation, as if therefore the parent had Dominion over his child because he begat him; but from the Childs consent, either expressed or by other sufficient arguments declared . Pertarnal Dominion is generally observed by the father or the mother or whomever has dominion over the parent has dominion over the children also and the children children by way of succession. Where this pertarnal dominion generate from could extend away from the immediate family and be enacted on whomever the family or the parent of the child is under his dominion.

If the Mother be the father subject, the child is in the fathers power: and if the father be the Mother subject, the child is subject to the Mother; because the father also is her subject.

He that hath the Dominion over the child; hath Dominion also over the children of the child; and over their childrens children. For he that hath Dominion over the person of a man, hath Dominion over all that is his; without which, Dominion were but a Title, without the effect.

“The Right of Succession to Paternall Dominion, Proceedeth in the same manner, as doth the Right of Succession to Monarchy. Dominion acquired by conquest, or Victory in war, is that which some writers call DESPOTICALL, which signifieth a Lord, or Master, and is the Dominion of the Master over his Servant. And the Dominion is then acquired by the victor, when the Vanquished, to avoid the present stroke of death, make convenant either in expression of words, or by other sufficient signes of the will, that so long as his life, and the liberty of his body is allowed him, the victor shall have the use thereof, at his pleasure. And after such Covenant made, the Vanquished is a SERVANT, and not before: for by the word servant(whether it be derived from Servire, to Serve, or From Servare, to Save, which I leave to Grammarians to dispute) is not meant a Captive, which is kept in prison, or bonds, till the owner of him that took him, or bought him of one that did, shall consider what to do with him:(for such men, commonly called Slaves,) have no obligation at all; but may break their bonds, or the prison; and kill, or carry away captive their Master, justly:) but one, that being taken , hath corporall liberty allowed him; and upon promise not to run away, nor to do violence to his Master, is trusted by him.” - --- Hobbes..( leviathan)

“The master of the servant. Is Master also of all that he hath; and may exact the use thereof; that is to say, of his goods, of his labour, of his Servants, and of his children, as often as he think fit.--Hobbes.

Stupidness is not of any man but of that which dwell in the man, same is foolishness which knows no man but that which it dwell in. The possessor is not above that which he possess, for the will of the possessor is to make claim of the desire and this will is highly constraint by that which it possess and for him to own it need be dominant, as need for a possessor that has to own has to destroy that which to own. A possessor is in obedience to his desire, knowing is the worth of that which is desired to be of itself. Desire is a worth which is ascribe by the anyone desired and that desire it, on own self it worth nothing. Nothing is possessed of wisdom, because it owns not and rules not, in this manner all things were possessed out of absurd folly, this is that a person has need to be foolish or pretend to be foolish if he is to possess. A person has the rule of that which he own, in the same manner has that which is possessed rule over the one which possess it. Man is a wisdom. A person has his worth of that which he is worthy of, in that he earn his worth and giving as he deserve and he need not made claim to it because it is subject to him. All thing could be possessed of the worth ascribed to it by that which desire it, as nothing could give itself a worth but that which is giving by the one that desire it.

To preserve the society, the life of the people is need less circumscribed of what they should have in their possession as giving to quality. The life of the people in the society is of an intrinsic priority to preserve the greatness of the nation; as too free a people are the more they tends to verge off from the love of the nation to the love of the self and too constraint they seems to be, they would despise the rule of the nation and married the custom of another nation. Of these reason, preserving the nation is more than the value placed on individual life, as one that serve the nation with his life save a multitude of people and generations. A person should not be an entirely free of the nation, his quality of life is that which is ascribed by the authority, as no man is of any worth on his own but the worth which is ascribed to him. The worth of any person in a nation is not of any property he own but of his dedication to the society and maintaining a nation of people that takes pride in their nation than individual glory. Of this, more is the glory of the popular in the nation than the burgeon egalitarian seeking of own glory and worth from the popular.

A free nation must condone equality in every aspect of the human life, to respect the worth of every man as a living individual, as doing this is to the knowing that the act of any man is intend to earn his own profit, and affirm likewise that to a person, he deserve no more worth than what is giving for profit or need may not be ascribed to anyone except for that which he would earn as in profit.

Exempting the proliferate of the generation trait occurring by nature by a principle which forbid them from their natural course should not be left to the society as a must in civilization, to do would denial the worth a person assume of own nature which is the quality of the being; as the nature of the being is the quality of the self and of it is derive the worth of the being. What is of no worth is which rule is instil upon, a worthy person would rule his own in respect to his worth as man believe he is worthy of his self. The cause ensue of nature has no need of rule by another but by that same nature which circumscribe the self, for nature assume tutelage of his own.

On occassion you would find among the fold one sheep that is a Black Sheep ( Anointed one, Lost one, Free Being) and another of a willful obedient, while the fold is kept with a strong rod that restrain them to obedience, either be it of folly or wit of the one that wade the rod. They need less be circumscribed by any law again but that which has restrained them to obedience. Generation trend come by way of this means, of a strong restrain of the Paternal dominion to direct the child to the ways which he devices. The black sheep, being of a capricious nature will be exempted from the proliferate of the generation trend. A man would relinquish his leal dreams to his progeny when they are of age, delighting himself henceforth with the task before him, to direct his fold in the witty path. Contentment is the shield of the poor, which in other way could be said that avarice is the welt of the youth. The avarice of the olden is an obstructive vice, and a yoke of which means he loose the right of worth, to rule himself.

“Ceremony is the handmaid to power” Robert Ludlum.

Publicity is the threshold of honesty, at the public front line many mighty has fallen not being able to risk the publicity of the secret deeds. Attempting to evade the public scrutiny he make mistake that disennoble him, he is not shamed for the secret deeds and failed not of this reason but his shame and effacement is of his annulment of publicity, not being able to handle the rash honesty demanded by the publicity forced on himself. The republic could force publicity on anyone, to withhold publicity would be aiding dishonesty and unlawfullness. Should there be a need to avail from the publicity, it could not be advantageous as it is more often forced on person avoiding it more than the publicity seekers. Publicity is the lean of power, effort to avoid it is a cause to mistakes and effacement, the weak will fall in the public eye whence the brutal truth of a profligate life would often bring the public in his saddles. Publicity would destroy the weak heart, yet not the irresolute but as publicity is a lawful violence, “the only solution to violent is more violent”- ( Robert Ludlum); however it would veer to profit the noble and the profligate.

At the on start, violence do not intend to harm, purposeful is the force which could not justify the injury done. Fraught with the purpose to achieve, it would loom on more profitability ends if and when it is temporised. The person with the initial cause to do violence is disencumber from the need to temporised has he need less cause for profit for the aim is self centred; as a result, the victim is of no other will but to act with more violence but if he should be encumber with a more need to profit he would need to temporise. In violence there is cause to do injustice, being of unpremeditated nature, it could only be temporised if and when it could be forestall. However it is most often times, not a fore warned act, and any attempt to temporised would result into injury and not to any profit.

Avarice of man lure him into many violence and vices which result into a heap of injustice, disparaging and disennoblement. That a noble person should live on lustre plans is never a lofty agenda but one planned out as would be accustomed with every intent. Good deeds is for a benevolent but a moral act is to a noble which could be role model. Because him that do good deeds need not have good manners as good deeds blinded those that is done unto and ostentatious was it, that it would lift up the heart of him that do it, eventually he is praised because, a good deed avail many moral sin.

“Contempt of little helps, and hindrances, is Magnanimity”- ( Hobbes); Of a virtue only do one give of his ability, this quality to give is not bestow to many man and a few would not give at will except they were forced. This is not generosity, it is only generosity because it is the virtue of the one that accept. A person that contempt little helps, to himself alone is he generous and this is known as malignity; he is lemming and of evil disposition, has no good will of another except himself but a generouse person will force favor.

What makes a man a fool defer not from his day to day activities, the do and dont's, the allowable and the disallows. The opinion on matters and perception is of individual quality which is let varie as the varience of nature permit.

To the child the man stand at a loss because the paternal dominion enacted, which is in exigences gives him a dominating will, as to a child. A potent will abide thus in man of which he would extend this dominion to a life time, of this the fathers rule is disdain, yet accommodated.

Partanal rule is temporal that the child as a result is giving chances to own will and mind, not able to do this will result in rebellion to the parent rule. While the father assume the god, the child is under an oppression, should he release his rule his position would be wanting and to countinue he might save the child and himself; by wit and muscle, as the passion of the man in the child will not be fulfilled. Easily forfited is the direct pertarnal rule of the parent on the child which is temporal until he is self sufficient but the indirect dominion the parent has by way of the child inability to care for himself or the parent inability to care for his family will extend in succession from one generation to generation of the child.

The arisen question of the position of the father to the child is without the consent of the child just in the same way the position of the child to the father is without the consent of the father. Every sovereignty is subject to his people except in judgement; who should obey who more is a requisite to known authority, but in every dominion the obedience to the authority is highly constricted by that of whom the authority is issue to. In the home the father would need to obey the child more than he should request the child to obey him. A man is the god and author of his own life; guardian over the authority of the child is the father and most writers of morals demand that this rule be temporal.

This is one consequences difference from that expressed above. As a god like father need not heed to any obedience but for his own. Act of rule demand more of the rule of the parent as an order in the paternal dominion, in regard to certain consequences. The act of rule is the consequences of dependance and infallible of which a person is said to have no further right to rule himself. Being incapable to rule himself, his right goes to him that could save or destroy his life; “And whomever that rule over a man, rule over everything that he has”.

A child born outside the matrimony, in a far land or giving up to adoption will spend the years thinking about the father or mother whom should have been the mother or the father; the need to know which is in every human a cause to desiderate of, in that for the knowing only, it would not earn either the need to belong, the child would not make the father or mother his and neither they.

A cause for man to own, is a cause to destroy, it is impossible to own one without destroying what that one is and that which was not own before could not be own by any other way; to own man must destroy. To possess is to deprive the entity its own liberty and self will, even other possible possessor are confronted with this war because any entity subjected to the will of one possessor is accessible to another that wishes.

In terms of a child, where possible he would be included in the inheritance, because by the knowing is an acknowledgement of begotten, although of moral principle he own not the child neither could the child. As a child would need to own the parent that is call his own and not merely belong to a family. As nobility is to have not a reproach.

A leader reason in three ways; first is to instruction, second to correction and thirdly, to judgement. Rarely do the leader tends to observation as it occurs that it is he that is being observed, because observation is giving to time. A father that would guard would need to know whom he guard, and be no blind leader of the blind after his own heart. To reason that the child could not reason right is implying that the child has no conception of a desire, wish, and emotions, of which the wit and attitude is portrayed and that is a blind reasone. To suggest that a child is limited in experience to choose but likewise is the desire, wish and the emotion, so saying that to correct a child's decision is insufficient, but to provide for the future of that decision is doing more than enough.

The passion of the father need not to be lord on but lure in, as most will chose by counsel and not by govern. But the passion is powerful enough to live, except to know whom it bears on. Following this is the knowledge that man is first a creation of nature then of circumstances. Nature makes us to desire what is of ourself but circumstances makes us to chose what is necessary and instructed. As the will of the self, is exilient to choose in circumstances, eximious and highly circumscribed it is.

The best thing father ever do right is to provide; a witty lore, is do what you do right the best way that makes it right. To provide for the present necessity is to do what you do right, to provide for the future is to do what you do right the best. And to provide for the future of every decision is to do what you do right the best, in ways that makes it right. Of this the sovereign is the subject.

One that is disinure of the present would oversee to the future, for to know that the present is master to the future is left to the ones that care for the little things. The future exist on its own. And, Life only exist in the present.

The concluding part of the question is of the counsel of the father, do one deceive in counsel than rule and steer with a strong arm? Or the deceit walk in freely of choice from the desires, wits of choose, and the philosophical mindset. Emotions of the young incur a great grief; to avoid this many parent deceive the child, is that not a lie in counsel for truth knows no bound.

An irrisolute child is independent of the parent; will tarry at decision and need be forced to take one. Hardly would the child go astray for the will is that of the parent apparently less provision will be made on to the child's regard as the father is of the opinion to make providence for his own decision.

The man is a principle man known as father, by fauna of this chooses, he would question success and be ambiguose of failure.

The father god:

An ideal of what is perpetually refer to as the father god, by defination of what it is, in respect to assiduous understanding of, and reverence of the godhead. An office of the father distinguish him as an advocate of the children's right. In the right order of reasone, there should be no other occupation of the father defiant of this reasone. The father god is then, dependant of this understanding, an extent of this office of the father and his dominion over the child. A temporary dominion is exerted by the father, of which the child must comply with and renounce at the later age. A father god is seen from this perception of dominion and the likely, obscurity of it proceeding on after.

Of this the father god is acknowledged as the man whom immolate the self; to do this by reasone and thought and the action which he implement to procure the benefit of what the child is.

The sceptre fall from one whom his child look in the eye: and dishonored.

From introspective reasone, to immolate the self, will save another his life but the eager to save the self (himself) would be a requisite to sacrifice one thing or another. The father to the child is the father god, whom emanate from the reverence of the child.

It is unlikely, impossible for a child to abnegate the authority of the father that ensue beneficiary and is in accord with himself, but one that is not, he would of him err. The possition of the child is imperative to that which the father assume. Supposing both were of the same mind, this being higly unlikely, there would be no cause for war.

The child is a fresh new spring of good. His self, is more important to his portrayed image except it would assume the image of the father. Whence this Will of the self, is not honor the child would reasone into self destruction. All will conceive of the self, need be honoured as to avoid derogatory emotion from errupting.

Knowing the child is by deducing a “general definition” in words of his good, without which a definite perception of the child is imposible. The person of the child is what is known by the giving name, which is answered of most appellation. Supposing this knowledge of the child is important and means to avert the tendecy of reasoning into self destruction. Praise is ease to give to the person whom the good is known; and the wise would err not with praise. The cause to do wrong is merely not giving to man to perceive, it is impossible for him to do wrong when he is good, he is either good or really good. From this reasone we know that, there is no cause for error in a man except for the cause of a woman.

They that consider the spirit shall not prosper, for of the spirit proceed every sinful act, wickedness and suffering thus it was written “the spirits suffer, lust, thirst but lack” in that the flesh lives, the desires of the flesh could be fulfilled, but without the flesh the spirit can do no thing. This is our joy, that we know that of the flesh proceed the spirit and vise visa, that there be no spirit without a flesh, and they live not but for the will of the flesh. So the spirit seeks a flesh of which it could abide wherefore it calls the body of the flesh its temple. It could not will itself but of that which will it and of which it proceeds from. If the will of the spirit be fulfilled in the flesh, it is because it has no other medium that it desires of to fulfill that which it desires; in this the flesh is greater than the spirit for the will and thought of the spirit is insufficient to be fulfilled without the flesh desire it. If the spirit do work and trust in the flesh and the flesh do work and trust not in the spirit, which is more than the other? The flesh is more and can do all things. Not of the spirit that wills, and desire but of the flesh that can do which is able.

Every incorporeal bodies lives by appointment and work likewise to fulfill thus that is assign to them. Non could be free of its nature and the will to fulfill, for as the will so likewise is the act not being weak to relinquish the act or be forced to the will of another. Of this is the reason that he that consider the incorporeal shall not prosper. Anyone that will a thing and consider the incorporeal is made in efficacy to do what he will.

Let the spirit desires the flesh and the flesh desire its own, of this nature all things were done.

The flesh is incapable to desire a wickedness without the spirit, but of the flesh the truth of the spirit is known. All things that proceed of the spirit remains in the spirit for it could not be acknowledged in the flesh but of the spirit itself is it acknowledged. But that of the flesh live with the flesh and let non fear for as the flesh perishes likewise do the spirit perishes and decay. But life is giving to each if they should abide on each, without the flesh there be no spirit and can not abide on its own. For there is hope for him that is link with the living.

Of no spirit shall a man's life be taken as the entrance of one spirit gives to the flesh a life of its own and the entrance of another privilege to the flesh a life of its own. Who knows not that of the blood is the life of the flesh and ones it remains the flesh lives of itself. But the flesh could live of both should the spirit remain. Man take the life of another and drain the blood away but the spirit he could not take away.

Why do man think and see it be in vision or in dream because the incorporeal man dwells among it , likewise of the desire of man, he desire and obtain that which he desire this is because his desire abide within that which he desires. This things are not seen, but we know they exist because they are and live. What is felt lives and proceed from another as from a desire or wish, even be it the will to do, all this are incorporeal and proceed of the man and not the spirit itself.

How could a person desire a thing and at the same time withheld that thing from another if is not that he possess the thing, this is so because one that ask for a thing is more generouse than one that has it. But he that gives do for his own benefit,

Influential Portrait and Self Portrait.

Portrait of a person is a denotation of the inward thought observe incharge of a person which connote honor or reproach. Portrait is the picture of a person observe by another and himself, often it is kept in a wallet or hanged on the wall; thus a picture of a person as observed in a portrait is condition to the emotion and perception held incharge of the person by the observer hence there is tendency to demour its grace or applaude a beauty which could not be seen by others. This does not mean a lie of perception but it is of the thoughts of the heart of the observer coming out in words and action.

According to Hobbes; “But the inward thoughts of man which appeare outward in their words and actions, this are signs of Honouring” it could be concluded that to honour come from the individual understanding of the person, that is to be deserve of honor is of the opinion of man and not of an excellence, value and quality of the person. To put it directly in Hobbes words; “A man may value himself as much as he will but he would not worth more than the worth people value him” which is quite conclusive, being the manner of equality man observe in themselve. By right no man is of more value than the other and for this reason, there is no reason in man of which he would honor another except there is power in it that could save his life. This belittle any honor possess of any man; seeming to pass like a dew set till noon, as honour does not add up to nobility for all which ensue of nobility is constrict by power.

Influence is friendliness. What is to be known as being influential annonate the esteem adduce to a person by a people; of more people than he could account to, more than he reckon with and less in that reckon with him. So to say significantly, in such words that influence is fidelity obtain from man to serve on purpose. On occasion there is need of leverage and reward and promises accounted to amount for the purpose to serve, such is a Commitment as it could be seen there is a sense of faithlessless or perfidy. While that ensue from fidelity is done by my faith in the honesty of the person, and anything more than this is of Loyalty. And this is assign to a possition of worth of the person and the office of humbleness.

Of this purposeful reasone, surfice the understanding we obtain as the Influential Portrait of any man to be a degree of his esteem, at heart and the fidelity let to him by people. By possession of power shall not rule be established, but by the possession of the people all rule shall be affirm.

A man is value than the next or others by the result of no work except for the influential portrait of his. From nature of quality as in these; Fear, Trust, loyalty, Truth, and nobility of which without the work of, the ubiquiuios man would seize to worth the value of his endowment. Any one can reason otherwise but whom that do would have need to consider a non determine uneventual prospect of the action. With the beliving that as a man reasone, of the same he act as it has been written with understanding that has the man reasone in his heart so is he.

Still observing the thrive that come from influences and portraite of the man; having might he could come to rule, and rule not except by the might of the people, of which means every rule is established. He could trust in the loyalty of the people less than he would in his own power; as the writer Hobbes describe power in terms of its purpose in man to possess goods; “Power of a man is his present means, to obtain some future apparent Good” - “The greatest of human power, is that which compounded of the power of most men, united by consent in one man” in every consequency of the rule of man , it's of the highest potency when he need to rule or be he in rule to make the people his power. Apparent similarity of these convince the reasone enough. 'A people without a head and a people with a head and no power are but a crowd' it is absurd wit for anyone to expect in a crowd a reason for understanding as by no reason can the crowd unite, only do by act and not by reasone. It is a working evident that it is giving that with power the man should wrest all things except for his loyalty. One that teaches a man command his loyalty, as in nature to teach, and any one that reason of this will do reason into no error.

Self Portrait:

The self portrait is the idea that recorgnise the self, the knowledge of the self as in saying that; the self is me, and me is what is important, because without me there is no you, i can do nothing .

A good perspective of the self or philosophy will adore the essence of the idea of the self in me of which all other entity were made alive. The fact is that nothing seems to live should i live not, that is; Nothing is, if i was not, but for the knowledge of the fact that i am, they are, what they are is what i see them to be, they are what they are because i see them to be and could be nothing else except i see them to be.

The essence of the being is a causation for all other being to be, admire what is shared in common with other entyties which were made to be because he is. The self is domain, it could not be subject to any for the self all is subjected being that the will of the self subject nothing but all thing it will . With the self there is no justice, or virtue, nor righteousness that is eminent to it, for the right of these authority is the authority of the self, giving because it is. Without the self there exist no virtue and with the self every virtue are redoundable. As the self is not, every other entity is subject to nil.

At heart a man reason out what he is and what he is is what he would portrait himself to be. What makes him to be what he is is insubtential, as this is the man whom need no care because he is; another that is care for him; the self is whom call for care.

A man is define by what he has because what he is is the self which is. The self is alone, but the man can not exist alone, to do is to be with himself. The self cannot be reveal all at once, thus the man is the epitome of the self. Should the self display wisdom, possess Riches, or virtues, of these the man is call by and not of any other thing not seen or known. The self is whom is.

A man reasone in himself and call himself the 'bread of life', another he call a stone, and multitude he call by the light, these are allegorical and it depict a form of Self Portrait. Detail of this is that he reason and see himself to be what he calls himself, would he put value on this and what is the worth of it if he should? In the writing of Hobbes he reason that; “For let a man rate himself at the highest value he can; yet his true value is no more than it is esteemed by others” no man is worth more than he is value by others. This has been said before hand, on it we could conclude likewise that a man's worth, of himself it is irrevocable, denied it might be, but what prove all worth shall proof it.

Separation of the soul from the body has been streached to an absurd extreem, the different word used to express one thing and same. The soul of the man by which the man is distictively clarify as a living soul is what is called the self which is. What is seen or known to be is what is. The idea of the human soul exiting the body at death and immigratte to other part of the earth or the heavens, such as happen in dreams is the self which is. The body is not different from the soul, and nothing dwells within but what the self is. The nature of the self could be observe to be a physical nature which is of the flesh. This is what the man is, the self which is the living soul, should anything abnegate the body at death it has to be the self which is; and he do not except with all himself. Except it is possessed of other man which is not himself and as a result of his death it has to abnegate it. Thus the man is rob of his soul and definitely his life.

The soul is what has been define as the spiritual part of the man. Is the incorporael part of man, of which nature belongs the Thought faculty and Word spoken. The man is called by the name of himself, what he is, and what he do; what he is is the self, of which is the virtue of his good and bad, above himself there is no virtue and without the self he is not and could be nothing but that which he is call by. Virtue is power of the self and knowledge the principle, to possess knowledge of the virtues is understanding the moral ends of what is really good.

Natural Providence:

Natural providence is a “need precocious”of which by its way precarious to obtain. A preoccupation of will, that one's will either leal or crook is a welt; tardy to let to another except it is forced,making use of power Natural or Instrumental;-(Natural and instrumantal power is define likewise by Hobbes; “Natural Power is the eminence of the faculties of the body,or mind:as extraordinary Strength,form,prudence, Talent,Eloquence,Liberality,Nobility. Istrumental Power are those which is acquire by these in use, or by fortune; they are means and instrumental to acquire more as in Riches, Reputation and Friendships.)

By ways of obtainance, the principle of utiliterailism is quite a facination and advantageous as it purpose only for the use of, without the reckon of beauty and pleasantness, but as the age grows, it is becoming more retrospective in use except for those who will, 'Celui qui veut, peut'.

An ideal which suffice, that every need is obtainable by means practical, this is true, thus all is obtainable by work. For a practical man would earn all his worth by his own ability, overcoming the obtructive will's of others. As the commonality believe, work is the providence of every man's need, all that man deserve would be earn from his work. By the work he/she do, he /she is known and no other claim could be lay to that which is earn from work by anyone, to the earner it belongs, of it is the value of worth of them that do work, and this is profitable. Because nothing tames folly than work.

In work there is no war, or need to suffer from the bellicose of the adventures (Opportunist), either by leal or by crook, the man deserve every desires purposed fulfilled; He that would have all that he desire, do need to teal and not teel; “for they do nothing else, that will have every of their passions, as it comes to bear sway in them, to be taken for the right reason, and that in their own controversies; betraying their want of right reason,by the claim they lay to it”. (Hobbes-leviathan)

We would like to believe that there is no consequences to arise which a man would not have a means to a type of life he desired and purpose. Desires of any man and its precociousness is seen to leen more on purposefulness and in this essence you can not abnegate the importance of a mental aptitude.

Pratical wisdom:

“Aristotle emphasis, however, deliberate execellence does not mean simply a disposition to be always correct in one's calculation of means to any moral end. The excellence is not a mere technical excellence in calculation. The person whose conception is not of what is really good but only of the apparent good, may possess the disposition to be right in calculating the means to realise this apparent good. But he will not have phronesis. For by deliberative excellence Aristotle means excellence in calculating the means to realising what is really good.”

“Apparent good” is the goodness of character of a person and by 'deliberative excellence', it means the person with the of knowledge of the good. This goes with Socratic conclussion that; “the knowledge of the good is a sufficient condition of possessing each and all of the virtues”. In saying this is believing that the person with the knowledge of the good will possess the practical wisdom(phronesis) to correctly assess what is really good. This is deliberative excellence, of whom is able to accuratelly calculate a means to the aim. Virtue of possessing phronesis, is the excellece of character of the person, whom has the knowledge of the aim.

To know what is right to do and not the wrong is the disposition to possess “Apparent good”.

To know what is right to do and what is wrong to do is a sufficeint and necessary condition to do right, such is giving to “Deliberative excellence” needed to do “Real good”

To know what is right and wrong but lack the will to do is known as irresolute. Weakness of character

To know what is wrong without knowledge of what is right to do is known as “Bad”

To pay a bad deed with a bad deed is having disposition to be Bad

To pay a bad deed with a good deed is having disposition for “Real good”

To pay a bad deed with many good deed is to be Servient.

To do many good deed when not ask is Malignment

To pay a good deed with a bad deed is to be “Absolute Evil”

Do a good, ask a bullion.

Authority is good without wicked disposition

Exploitation is abuse of authority; it is Prostration.

To be useful is good and aimful; as all things that is useful is good. (utility).

To request a good deed is to Honour.

To request a bad deed is Loyalty.

Accepting is conssesus; a gift or whatever.

Rejecting is to Dishonour.

Evil man will seek authority or destroy.

It is involuntary of action; either use nor use.

To act is motivated by external compulsion of need, demand, necessity and the force of man.

To force an evil man is requisition for resultant force.

Attention: To neglect an evil man is prostrate.

To use an evil man is to forestall other motivation; it is foresighting.

To conclude; evil man is better put to use than left alone.

Those that think of you, would tarry in thought(mind). Because, what they were without word in their thoughts is nothing but a dense cloud that would lumbered extortionatly over you. This is also true; A tumurous issues will tarry in the thought.

Political authority, law and power, the annulment of physical warfare, all this are dependance were originate from certain philosophy of needs to be met and power. That there is truth in the reason that for the needs of man to be met they result to warfare, law and authourity, how woeful is the man that he is servient to his need til senile days.

The past is not important should it be able to endagerd the present, and the reality of the present is important should it see into the future

In stray wonder by the moment,of the train of thought and loom larges, to be perturbed by less diversity of things epigenous .... to solicitate in minature or magnitude of folly of man and wisdom of act. But such thought and travailing do not and will not seize to materalise in volume of words and epeolatry of writers.

An intrigue and dismalty is this old age days of wisdom, the world is filled with deeds like ashes left in the fireplace, even as the dust in number. When man work he tread the high places with the feet. To call by name, or simply by nature of the existence in the instinctive node of the phenomena. By He/She, as the person of the personal self details a certain undersdtanding of wisdom in the individual being.

However a deep truth is found in the mysterious nature of wisdom discover in the self, rather than name by a name that is phonetically suitable, that is fitting for He/ She, going on the believe that there is only two of a kind. Howbeit, in musing and reasone, reckon it could just as well have been the 'third kind'. Considering the nature of the self as to be the mirror image of the third kind, which quite absurdly is the emacipating self, if it were to be fully revealed i might as well seize the audacity, of the nature i conceive as a man among other man and acclaim the full divinity of the name'wisdom' just like the truth, which assume a form in the self, by the conviction of one. But these are ephemera,immolatory and consequential. It is an inspiringly awe that a man should accalim the entire divine nature of the truth to himself, suppose a bit priggish but marvelous and then there is Love, Courage, faith, Hope, and above all wisdom.

How lame could a claim be when there is no worth in a claim except in purgatory, knowledge and conviction of the truth. Because he speaks the truth and convinced of it; he is the truth and by the power of the virtue of miracles and healing; he is power and by the virtue of teaching with wisdom; he is wisdom. He could be all things by virtue of the conviction that he is. The self is, when he is convicted that he is. Thus the self is invariably conjoining into whole the virtues, of these the self is.

“Man is the measure of all things”

Either it is wisdom nor love, Charity, Compassion, Truth, Courage, Kindness, Councelling and Intrepidity and faithfulness. In consistence, they are all measure of worth and profliteration of the self.

Virtue is power.

The virtue of possessing wisdom is the necessary and sufficient condition to be wise, loving, compassionate, truthful, courageous, councelling and more in the measure of the worth. Wisdom is virtue and the condition of possessing any one of the virtue is the condition sufficient to possess all other virtues. Virtue is adequately or moderate in use of and in congrue with external compulsions.

Virtue is a measure of worth of the self but it is not a necessary condition of the self neither a condition of worth of the self. But the condition of the self in possession of a virtue is a necessary and sufficient condition of worth of the self. Like in saying that you are not powerful until a condition necessitate the use of the power.

Let's be more intimate with the truth, as we would discover that the condition of being truthful profliterate unto other virtues like love, kindness, compassionate,boldness and charity of which without not there is no sin. The apparent nature of these virtue renown them as apparent virtues and thus tended to apparent goods.

Wisdom is absolute virtue, and a condition of possessing wisdom is the necessary and sufficient condition of being wise, courageous,truthful,councelling and compassionate. Courage is by Socrates a moral value significant of directing to a noble or good end, and belongs only to those whom understand the moral end to which it is properly directed.

The first apparent virtues would be directed to what is good and apparent, of this ensue the philosophical wisdom (sophia). While the latter is adept to possessing what is really good and deliberate, of this is the excellence of character that possesses (phronesis) practical wisdom.

“By Aristotle's conception; the execellence is a morally praiseworthy execellence which reason correctly with regard to what is really good; and so to have phronesis is to have the excellence of character which yield a right conception of the good”.

Both share a common cumulative ground that is incongrous with external compulsion, however having advantage over the other is what necessarily request the knowledge of the good and a ground to do right or wrong.

How be it a controverse arouse on the relapse apt to do right or wrong; why need to do wrong if the good is worthy enough, because to do wrong is to be bad, this ordinarily is not an accepted good, a wrong does not make a good. What is admitable is knowing that a good man can not and should not do wrong. By Socrates; A good man is a person who is able to deliberatively and intentionally do right or wrong. On this principle lies all other principle of good and bad , and mostly profound deliberative execellence of Aristotle.

Does a good man necessarily need to do wrong?

By all means, a necessary condition that warrant a good man to do wrong is a necessary condition that he is not a good man. But a good man can do wrong and not do bad, because doing wrong merely state a condition of not doing right of his own will, to do wrong is to act against one's will. And to do bad is to act evil.

However the same condition does not permit a bad man to do wrong and not be bad.

In any condition that a good man do wrong he is only not doing good, but doing wrong because he refrain from action. Therefore, a good man can not do wrong because he would not act voluntarily against what he knows or believe to be right.

For a good man the condition for doing wrong and not be bad does not permit a bad man to do wrong and not be bad. Because a bad man is one that do wrong voluntarily against what he belives to be right. Thus a good man is right by acting right and wrong by refraining to act; and this does not necessitate him to act wrong by doing what is wrong.

Adducing to the Socratic conviction that only a good man can deliberatively and intentionally do what is right or wrong; this could be deducted by condition necessary for a deliberative action of a good man and this condition is satisfied by the knowledge of the good used in calculating the aim.

Supposing a certain good man is imploy by a begger at the door of his house for a ounce of food and drink and something for his journey. Assuming he denail to admit the beggar in or give care and another good man was imploy for the same care; so having more than enough he yielded and give care. It could be deduced that both did the same and equal benefit, if the reason the first resist was because he did not have enough, by this he did no wrong. However, if the later should further his care and cloth, and house the beggar, he has done more deliberately. The aim is believed to be good by the means of the good he chose to calculate the aim.

Thus deliberative act of the good man is the use of moral knowledge of the good as means of calculating what is really good. Aristotle calls it an excellence of character which allows a right conception of the good. By excellence of character the deliberative act of the good man allow him to do more than the scope of ordinary goodness and belief.

In between the deliberative act (Phronesis) of a good man and the apparent act (sophia) there is the niche for a moderation act (Sophrosune). Moderation is sufficiency of good used in calculating a means to the aim. It did not necessarily requisite the knowledge of the good or excellence of character however adequacy of moral knowledge is used in calculating the aim.

Sophrosune is an art of measurement of sufficency of good with the knowledge of the aim – which is by large different from Aphrosune, known as Folly, but a preffrered opposite to it.

Folly (Aphrosune) is a kind of virtue, expressing weakness of will and right conviction (Pistis) of belief.

Folly is vice;

It is characterised by a disposition to do wrong as resulting of invariably weakness of will from lack of conviction of moral knowledge. Whence folly would fail, vice would act.

Convictions of belief and of morals are necessary condition of doing what is right or wrong. More like saying that what you are convinced of as the right morals to act on, nothing would invalidate that action except for waekness of will. Weakness in belief invalidate an action.

A strong conviction would congrue with knowledge and the belief of a fact; which could be proven by the action only.

“A strong conviction belongs to knowledge and only a weak conviction to belief” Thus to say, what do not a conviction knowledge would not do.

Is the same, agreeing in opinion that what is done on a belief is done in weakness of will- to the belief belongs not knowledge of the aim but knowledge of the good. “To act on a belief is the varifiability of a truth”.

A strong belief is enough conviction for action but a weak conviction is not a belief, it congree to weak belief and thus weakness of will. With the right conviction folly would do wrong.

By Aristotle; “Strenght of conviction is a criterion for distinguishing weak-willed action from other moral actions. Weak- willed action is condition only to lack of moral knowledge and thus acting without knowledge of the aim.

Upon that a weak conviction is not a belief but a weakness of will; not believeing is thus a conviction sufficient enough of action. Conviction is knowledge enough.

Strenght of conviction is a criterion for action; a weak conviction is adduce to a no belief, thence, a no belief is a conviction strong enough for action.

“Conviction is not sufficient to distinguish knowledge from belief; but it is at least a necessary condition for possessing moral knowledge”

Relative to folly; identifying the necessary condition for the weak will, which is the invalidity of an action from the weakness of conviction of a fact in result it invalidate the moral knowledge.

It could be asked for affirmation if or not a folly has the right conviction of a belief or knowledge ?

Folly is weakness of will.

Weakness in conviction of a fact and a belief is incongrous with weak – will which is involuntary of action except when indulged by external compulsions.

If there is a weakness of will, could there possibly be the aptitude to do what is right or wrong?

In weakness of will it is impossible to do what is right or wrong, weak will is involuntary of action and thence the ability to do what is right or wrong is determined by the external compulsions.

Weakness of will is relatively agreeing with inadequacy of moral knowledge and thus the knowledge of an aim; it has, by compulsion to act against its will and when it did chose what is right it would be against its will. An irresolute person would always act against his will or not act at all.

Vice is involuntary of action thus remaining incongruent with external compulsion.

Knowledge of the good is essential to do what is right; thus acting without knowledge of the good is acting wrongly in opposite to what is good. Wickedness is ignorance of the good.

By doing what is right or wrong denotes apprehension of knowledge of the good. And to do what is right against ones own will is to do wrong entirely. Because it only reveal two things (1) lack in knowledge of the good (2) lack in knowledge of the aim.

By Socratic doctrine of moral knowledge; “No one would act contrary to what he belives to be right ; this follow that, No one would know what is right and do what is wrong”.

Of this we know that him that do wrong do it voluntarily because he knows or believe it is right.

By Socrates “if a person does what is in fact wrong and is acting voluntarily, he is invariably doing what he belives to be right, and that if a person does what is right and is acting voluntarily, he is invariably doing what he knows or believe to be right. Thus in all voluntary moral action, a person is doing what he knows or believes to be right. If he should act contrary to what he either knows or believes to be right then his action is involuntary”.

Involuntary action is ignorance.

And doing wrong is acting involuntarily, and it is acting in ignorance of what is right and his action is without a conviction. Cowardice is ignorance.

Coward is fear of what is “really good” and confident of what he can do.

Fear is by socrates define as an expectation of what is bad.

So coward is in fear of what is “really good”.

Wickedness is voluntary.

To act voluntarily contrary to what is knowledge of the good and knowledge of the aim is acting incongrous with the external compulsions. This does in fact of principle act not against what he believes or know to be right.

Vice is wickedness.

It is rather impossible to discern the action of any one without a moral knowledge. To be virtuous warrant the moral knowledge to act incongruently with every external compulsion; as the force of man, are habitually influential to both the good and the bad.

Thus “man is the measure of all things” Protagoras.

“The kind of lie that worries me is the 'noble lie'. The lie spread for higher purpose. The sacrifice of small men for larger ends.” “ The liars who lie in the interest of greater goods, or what they decree to be that greater good.” - Ludlum

Every rational entity would at certain precession assume control and possess what is necessary in need to save his life. With the disposition to possesss what is essential for his /her life, they have right to act accordinly to what he /she believe is conduce to what would save or destroy his/her life.

Destroy or Save his life: To save because of the 'will of the self'; will- power echo with demand to be saved. And reason for the destruction of the self is because of the 'will of purpose'. By purpose of the heart the self realise the worth of the self and honor, being what is purposed. Destiny await for the purposeful will of the continent purposes.

Less could be add to this account in which folly persistently bode occurences, as a insight, to the man nothing would tame folly more than work. Work will thrive and with intent zeal of purpose there then is nothing done without work spent. As far as this goes observed there is no error to be found in man.

“How dreadful knowledge of the truth can be,

when there is no knowledge in the truth”.- Sophocles Oedipus Rex.

Moral justice

“With the greatest personality and gifted intellect, come the potential

and desire for high office,command,power and prestige” ---Cicero.

Occasion do occur which is invariable, denying truth, portraying timerity that would saw fit to impediment another progress except for it own. This trajectory influence is a moral conduct actively implied or otherwise disposited on premeditated issue. The active force displayed is aimed at a target, purposeful and efficacious to impediment and dissable every other functioning motives or operating active mind, thus encapsulating all in this new ideal of its own. Moral justice, is then this alternate mind or attitude which is not devoid of reason, but is an ability to justify the portraying moral attitude by its influences and the expedition at hand. Personal justification may be held at varience as prejudice; but justice base on what is right, what is good and what is plausible, is free, i should say, from other personal prejudice.

'Pragmatism is the truth concerning truth'; a 'Moral Attitude' is a pragmatical truth, perceptual or conceptual, which has a conformity to reality and purpose and an expediency that condoning to prosperity.

Moral justice is then a pragmatic truth,in constant, varifying the moral attitude in practice. Its emperical truth, nobility and the working potential. The justice according to its deed, aims,needs,efort and necessity is an emperical revelation and not only on its courtesy of pleasantness.

BIBLOGRAPHY

Leviathan (1951) - Thomas Hobbes.

Leviathan -Student Study – HOBBES Edited by Richard Tuck

The Discourses - Niccolo Machiavelli

A pack of Lies - J.A. Barnes

Gain the Power of Positive Thought ( The Key To Success) – Gilbert Oakley

PRINCESSA - HARRIET RUBIN

The Psychology of Interpersonal Perception – Perry R. Hinton.

Human Relationship Skills – Richard Nelson-Jones

Success Through a Positive Mental Attitude – Napoleon Hill and W. Clement Stone

DREAMS – Stephen Brook

PRINCE --- Niccolo Machiavelli

I Thought we'd never speak again --- Laura Davis

Jung – The Anima ( Relationship Factor)

Interpersonal Relationship-- Diana Dwyer.

Desmond Morris:

Intimate Behaviour (1971) –

Zolar:

Mastermind Consciousness –

Dorothy Rowe:

Friends And Enemies (Our need to love and hate) –

Micheal Foucault The care of the self –

Robert Blackburn Right of citizen-- Edited By

Norman Gulley Philosophy of Socrates –

William James Selected Writings ---

Robert Ludlum The Janson Directive ---

Paul Brunton: The EGO : From birth to rebirth.

Dr. Paul Hauck: How to Love and be Loved.- SHELDON PRESS, LONDON(1983).

“Was error fulminated over and over

old Heresies condemned in ages past

by cure and time recovered from the blast

This said with ease, but never can be proved.”

The church her old foundation has removed

and built new doctrines on unstable sands;

judge that, ye winds and rains; you proved her, yet she stands.

Those ancient doctrines change on her for new

shew when, and how, and from what hands they grew

we claim no power when Heresies grow bold

to coin new faith, but still declare the old.

How else could that obscene disease be purged

when controverted texts are vainly urged

To prove tradition new, there's somewhat more

Required than saying that was not used before.

John Dryden 1952.

Get Hooked

Tuesday 15 January 2008

NOBLE (Unedited)

Introduction

THE FOOL WITHIN

PHOBIAS

Facebook Badge

My Blog List

About Me

Labels

Blog Archive

LINKS

what is your subject interest?

Frequent visitors

Books Library

My Blog List

Get Hooked

Tuesday 15 January 2008

NOBLE (Unedited)

Introduction

THE FOOL WITHIN

PHOBIAS

Facebook Badge

My Blog List

About Me

Labels

Blog Archive

LINKS

what is your subject interest?

Frequent visitors

Subscribe To

Books Library

My Blog List