Contravention of the law, a crash course in lawform
There exist many forms of law in our modern world. You may think of them as the layers in a pyramid, with the lowest form of law being the most widely believed in by man at large and the most commonly enforced. This most common form of law is called "Statute Law". It is literally the policy of the company you work for, example: "Canada". Statute law is the law of politics (policy) and is set up to make money for the company, example "United States", through fines and penalties. You are only subject to this type of law if you subject yourself to it. It is voluntary and without merit of it's own. This form is public policy.
The next layer of the pyramid is the law of contract, or "Admiralty Law". This is merchant law and is very, very ancient with recorded examples dating back to the Phoenicians, the great seafaring merchants. Basically in this form of law anything a person allows you to do to them (without putting the person under duress of any kind) is admissible because they have accepted (usually tacitly) your offer to contract. To clarify: if a person makes you an offer and you do or say nothing then you will have agreed to it, this is tacit acceptance. To clarify even further: there is no right or wrong in Admiralty, which lawform do you think makes wars legal? You can do anything you want as long as you get the other parties agreement. This type of law is used to enforce "Statute Law" and is how things like torture and indefinite detention without charge and all kinds of other seemingly "immoral" laws are created and enforced legally. This form of law is private policy and both of the preceding forms of law are the law of man.
What is a man? The Merriam-Webster online dictionaries third and fourth meaning for the word man are as follows:
3
a : a feudal tenant : vassal b : an adult male servant c plural : the working force as distinguished from the employer and usually the management
4
a : one of the distinctive objects moved by each player in various board games b : one of the players on a team
Keep these definitions in mind the next time you hear the phrase "be a man" or "man up" or some similar such machismo. All you're doing is being a good slave. Slaves are who the first two lawforms apply to.
The final form in law is "Natural Law" or the law of equity. This form is tricky for many because we live in such an insanely inequitable world (slave world) and thusly have virtually no concept of it. I'm going to use an example: a man plants a field of crops, tends to them and harvests them. The field is "owned" by another man. Who's crops are they? They belong to the man who actually paid for their existence with only thing that has any value, the time of his life. The land "owned by another" has actually become the "property" of the man who cared for it. Why? Because he is the only one to have contributed anything of value. He has "equitable title" so to speak.
There is much, much more to this. In non-linear dynamics, which is the mathematical study of super-complex systems, there is the idea of the attractor field. This idea posits that if you do something for a what we would call a "good" reason, than you will attract more "power" than if you do something for a "bad" reason. To take this beyond the reach of such pitiful human concepts of good and bad we will use a physical example. If one were to have a number of differently sized magnets and randomly cast them into a system (a vibrating box for example) the small (weakest) magnets will align their orientation to the orientation of the largest (most powerful) magnetic system. Magnetism is powered by the subtle underlying energy interactions that make up physical space, thus a high powered magnet is the most in line with what the underlying make up of nature has deemed to be the "best" for achieving magnetic force. Humans didn't make this assertion, nature did and it is intrinsic to physical reality. We can act in ways that are the most in line with what the underlying nature of our environment dictates and when we do, our "power attractor" will be higher than weaker systems who are trying to "fight" the underlying nature.
The nature of the man who grew the crops is that he grew them, who else can claim they did if they didn't? King Solomon, when confronted with two women who each claimed to be the mother of an infant, said "cut the child in two and each one may have half", one women was okay with this and the other withdrew and said that she would rather see the child with the other woman than cut in half; King Solomon granted custody of the infant to the woman who withdrew because even if she was not the mother she was equitably the infants mother. Love, it seems, is the driving force in equity and thusly in nature. This can actually be proven scientifically but I digress, as, if you don't understand this and require proof then I am not talking to you.
Contravention of Morality, or, know thyself
Merriam-Webster's online dictionary definition of "moral":
1
a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical ;moral judgments; b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior moral poem; c : conforming to a standard of right behavior d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment moral obligation; e : capable of right and wrong action moral agent;
2
3
: perceptual or psychological rather than tangible or practical in nature or effect moral victory> <moral support&
Tangible morality, or practical morality is simply trying to do what one believes is right based on a testable "right" or "wrong". I use this idea (tangible morality) only avoid the limiting pitfall of definition three. "Right", "wrong", "good" and "bad" are merely terms we use to describe power attractors. This is why hate is "wrong" (weak attractor) or why love is "good" (strong attractor). We are merely referencing power attractor fields in a super complex system (reality). There is no real opinion about it or interpretation left to the individual. We can, using certain types of electrical sensors, establish quickly if a given situation is "right" or "wrong" by measuring certain aspects of it's harmonic exclusivity or ability to phase conjugate. This simply means that systems which are limiting to growth and expansion are "bad" and systems which are inclusive to growth and encourage complex expression are "good" and that this is measurable. We ourselves actually posses the equipment to measure these effects ourselves, as part of our physiology. Unfortunately all of our "hu-men" can only think with one hemisphere of their brain and so practical demonstrations of math and electromagnetism are required to get it into their sadly malfunctioning heads. Again, I am not talking to those people, I'm elucidating the inextricable interconnectedness between perception, action, the natural world and the world of man.
So morality, in essence, is natural law. Which means that practical morality as I have defined it is the highest form of law and power in nature.
Cheating...
 |
| This cat is cheating.... somehow. |
Man B is intelligent and health conscious, he eats well and exercises and likes to look the part. He does not compete at any sport and likes to learn about physiology as it pertains to his hobby of weight training. For him to take steroids can be either right or wrong, let's see how:
- he uses steroids in a practical, no nonsense way, to boost his immune function and increase his returns in the gym, he manages his use and side effects with intelligence and a judicious application of the physiology he has learned and learns a good deal about how the body works, sounds good right? Maybe not, what if:
- instead of taking steroids, he pursues his intellectual interest in physiology and researches how the body makes, distributes and mitigates the natural steroid hormones used for it's correct and natural function. Through his research he finds and connects an interesting and unusual series of facts that lead him to be able to produce a supplement that is cheaper and easier to use than steroids that boosts the bodies natural hormones instead of replacing them and mitigates the effects of hormonal side effects by increasing the efficiency and sensory capacity of the bodies natural systems, leading to a revolution in the way hormonal problems are treated. Thusly he is able to expand his love of health and his intellectual pursuits to help other enthusiasts. This is perhaps the closest to "right", given the "practical morality" idea.
None of these examples are right or wrong. The right or wrong of a situation has to do with what we primitively call "love". Man A loves football, if steroids help him love football, then it is good, a net gain in systemic love. If on the other hand he feels like a "mega douchebag cheater" then it's bad, a net decrease in systemic love. Remember that, in this case, "love" is a systemically positive electromagnetic function of interfering waveforms.
Where is this all going? You can do anything you want as long as you love it enough, and, if you do then the universe will help you achieve it. Why do you think it made you? Why do you think that the universe spent billions of years of it's own time and resources putting you together? Given the fact that the only way the universe can exist as a super complex, self mediating system is with love, it made you because it loves you. For you to exist in nature as a supercomplex, self mediating system is to love yourself.
Make yourself into a fractal of the total system and you will create a "free" energy machine.
Perhaps most importantly, you will not need the energies others try to sell to you and you be able to power your own person.
