Origin Of Knowledge
Physical Evolution of the Human Soul
In their book, The Self and Its Brain: An Argument for Interactionism, Karl Popper and John Eccles presented two origins of the Self. Eccles presented the scientific method applied to the senses and the nervous system and to the partitioning of the human brain into areas of specialization. The image above shows the relative volume of the cortex used for the various senses of the composite nervous system. From the map it is fairly clear that the brain is an adaptive organ and it will adapt according to need and potential. Thus, the human tongue occupies a place all to itself in the cortex separate from the body. Although it is ironic that the tongue is located opposite to the toes, both organs serve special needs and have enlarged presence in the cortex volume as primary input and output; balance and taste, kicking and screaming. The map above is based upon actual measurements from records of brain damage that allowed for the discernment of the body map on the cortex. This map is the result of scientific procedures. We must be careful in identifying that the map represents the culmination of a purposeful self; kicking and screaming. Popper argues for interactionism as a "self determined" process resulting from the "self" matching sense experiences with recorded material within what is the self identity, or learned memory. This may be one of the most important of all considerations regarding the supposed creation of knowledge in humans.
The theologians say that the self is given of the father, as the Son of God is begotten of the Father of God. These are not separate entities, but one that intends and the other that is begotten of intent at the initiation of all creative processes. However, the Son of God is not made by the Father of God because it represents the Self Cognition of the Divine Intent and intent without cognition is simply chaos, for which theologians conclude that the Divine Intent cannot intend what it does not intend. The Son is begotten of the Father at the instant of self creation, whether God or man. As shown below, this begottenness is the relevant aspect which Popper denies. But, first consider the means and process of all creative intent.
From our toes to our tongue we are in the midst of a begotten process. The process is the gift of life. The Word and God are separate and yet they are One, for intent at the Divine Level cannot be intent not to intend. It is this cognition that is the Word. Consciousness enters the Son of Man and conscious intent can be what is not intended in man. The reason why human intent can be what is not intended is the consequence of the Original Sin, or mistaking first origins; the metaphor of Adam failing to fulfill the self rationalizing intent that was given to Adam by God. That is to say, man receives the gift of rational identity by processing the sense experience, whether personal or evolutionary, into self identity.
The Original Sin is the rationalization that the Creator of All is capable of intending what it does not intend; ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. It was this action that Adam had been warned in the dialog before Eve was fabricated from the defense structure of Adam's vital organs, i.e., a rib. This rib origin of a woman in man means that the potential for damage to the physical self is received as the intent of emotion, i.e., woman. But, as Adam revealed, his emotions were that of becoming afraid because he had come to know good and evil. The idea that ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil came from the intuition of man, which is Eve, the mother of all living, Adam had no intuition until he lost the protection of his vital organs and became afraid of the potential of death.
Now, during the first six days God created all things, and after each period of enlightenment, God said it was good. At no time did God become afraid and at no time did God do what God did not intend to do, thus, God never created evil or fear. Rather, because of man's first sin the false expectation appearing real came to man as the Original Fear. For a man conceived by God the fear accepted by man was against the guidance of God, but not against the intent of God, because God gave man freedom of intent and the power of the name. Man could intend what man did not intend while naming what man had sensed. Whether human intent is true intent or the false intent that is the fear associated with nakedness and vulnerability, will be judged, not by God, but by man at the end of days. The end of days represents the end of periods of self enlightenment by man when he becomes the Light of the World. In this way, as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. In short, Adamist Man is the rationalizing aspect that believes in the names given to all experiences. The Mother of All Living is that intuitive power to discern what has not been revealed or named. Thus, Adam could not identify with Eve because he had no comprehensive knowledge of Woman; Adam did not know a Woman. Adam was a virgin as Man.
With that introduction, consider the matchmaking by Karl Popper and the failure of Popper to come to the End of Days of his own fear guided self; survival instinct. The fact that Popper is guided by fear is revealed in the process by which Popper identifies the most fundamental question in any mortal mind, "What Does Knowledge Start From?"
The Self and Its Brain: An Argument for Interactionism
Dialogue I, pp 429-430
Karl Popper: . . . I do not, of course, want to deny that the senses are immensely important, and, as you have mentioned, this will be particularly true if an adult is suddenly placed in completely new surroundings. But even here I would wish to claim that we would first make a hypothesis as to where we were, and then try to test that hypothesis. In other words, we would use a trial and error, a making-and-matching, process: a process of conjecture and refutation. This is why I think that the old story that the senses are primary in learning is wrong (especially in learning something new, i. e. in discovering). I believe that, in learning, hypotheses have a primary role; that making comes before matching. The senses have two roles: first, they challenge us to make our hypotheses; second, they help us to match our hypotheses - by assisting in the process of refutation, or selection.
John Eccles: Yes, I agree of course that we are never presented with a clean slate with no past experiences, no past understandings on which to interpret a fresh lot of sensory data. What I was trying to say was that, when we are confronted with new sensory data, then that is primary to the interpretations. I admit that the interpretations are built upon all of our experiences, inborn and learned, but, on the other hand, I think we have to say that in any one instance we are all the time acting on the basis of the immense information input from our sense organs - interpreting it, rejecting it, modifying it, correlating it. I have immediately to say all this depends upon a brain which has learnt the whole wonderfully subtle means of sensory interpretation from the past. You say that we are always trying to make before matching. In making and matching are we trying to get our sensory experience related to and matched with earlier sensory experiences? Is that what you mean?
Karl Popper: I shall try to formulate this again, since it is important; I think it contains one of the key elements of my epistemology. I can, perhaps, put it like this. There are no sensory "data". Rather, there is an incoming challenge from the sensed world which then puts the brain, or ourselves, to work on it, to try to interpret it. Thus, at first, there are no data: there is, rather, a challenge to do something; namely, to interpret. Then we try to match the so-called sense data. I say "so-called" because I don't think there are sense "data". What most people hold to be a simple sense "datum" is in fact the outcome of a most elaborate process. Nothing is directly "given" to us: perception is arrived at only as a result of many steps involving interaction between the stimuli which reach the senses, the interpreting apparatus of the senses, and the structure of the brain. So, while the term "sense datum" suggests primacy in the first step, I would suggest that, before I can realize what is a sense datum for me (before it is ever "given" to me), there are a hundred steps of give and take which result from the challenge presented to our senses and our brain.
My epistemology arises in the following way. I try to show first what one would expect to happen on more or less logical grounds and then suggest that things actually do happen like this in reality. All I have learned from you about the brain supports the view that this is really the case. I have, for example, learned that there are certain cells which react only to inclined lines of light, or only to edges or something like that (chapter E2, Fig. 6). This we take it, is the result of evolution; in the course of evolution, perhaps, there emerged the theory that there are inclined lines of light and parallel lines, and that the distance between these lines was somehow important for our interpretation of visual challenges.
In the words "There are no sensory 'data'," Popper has committed the "original sin" of negative intent. To understand the mistake we have to also acknowledge the "original sin" echoes in his proclamation as "self" made man. "Nothing is directly 'given' to us: perception is arrived at only as a result of many steps involving interaction between the stimuli which reach the senses, the interpreting apparatus of the senses, and the structure of the brain." Popper denies John 1:2 "The same was in the beginning with God." In other words by denial of the existence of "Divine Intent" within the sensory "data", Popper has "made" a being that was not of Divine Intent but of self intent. This was the same error made by Adam when he attempted the first rationalization of intuition, Eve.
The task given to Adam was to "name all beings" and that included his emotions, Eve, and the serpent in the garden with which Eve was in closer touch than Adam. That serpent would be intuition. Being a rationalist---giver of names---Adam could not intuit the meanings because until he failed to identify the emotion of false expectations appearing real (FEAR), Adam knew only God and the creation of God. Adam had no alternative source for divination of intent other than the rationalizing process that became a make and match self identifying path. The making of matches of sensory data, that was not real data according to Popper, was an impossibility to Popper. It was impossible because Popper had denied that the sensory "data" was "given" by God to Popper. Since Popper had no means to make a match for God's omniscience, Popper could only match what was self identity within himself. In this way, Popper proclaimed his "theory" regarding the Origins of Knowledge and consumed his own tale. Consumption of one's own tale is the meaning of the fabricated beast called an ouroborus. The ouroborus is the path of all self rationalizing action. Intuition, on the other hand, is "given" a tale with no name. As a result, Eve gives birth to fear, which Adam could not comprehend and the Word of Eve's Serpent became the rationalization of the ouroborus of Adam.
Adam and Popper were both men in which conception was occurring though neither had known a woman. Contrast this with the New Eve as the Virgin Mary receives the Immaculate Conception and is born of the Divine Man-Child directly from the Divine Father to be the Mother of God. Eccles said, "we are never presented with a clean slate with no past experiences, no past understandings on which to interpret a fresh lot of sensory data." When Eccles thus denied the virgin state of his cognition, it was consumed by the dragon that revolves as an ouroborus. Having consumed his own tale, Popper made Eccles vulnerable to recognition and doing the same thing. This is the word made flesh in darkness, for though they recognized they did not comprehend.
It should be very clear that before any Book of Life can be written, there must be a quality of life that is "given." It is this quality that the New Testament represents as the Word that became flesh as the Son of Man. The Word was the Divine Cognition present at the instant of Divine Intent when Father and Son were One in God. If the Divine Cognition was not present at the instant of Divine Intent, then Divine Intent was not simply unknowable by man, but unknown by God. To accept that premise is to deny Divine Omniscience and deny God. Divine Omniscience is the "data" that Popper says does not exist before the self (ego) makes a match. The denial comes as the Original Sin when the rationalizing man has the intuition (serpent) that inspires fear within the man's knowledge base (matchable memory). Once the mind of man resorts to self divining fear, then man has gone insane and has a "nervous breakdown." What man needs to do is come back to the senses and allow the communication process to fulfill itself in a "sense based" way. The Virgin Mary was conceived and did conceive the Son of God simultaneously without the Original Sin of Negative Intent, for she was in the presence of Divine Cognitive Intent at the Immaculate Conception before the mal-intent of man was conceived. The mystery of this dual conception has been carried in the annals of human mystery religions from the very first cognition of man. It is the intuitive ontological origin where Divine Conception establishes the precedent of Being. The precedent could not have been what was not intended, nor could it have had a beginning, for it is the order of Eternal Life.
So, in accordance with the making of matches, what does man do to protect the rising ego that was seeded by the intent that conceived fear? Man creates a self that is the Eighth King of Revelation 17:9-11.
9And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. 10And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. 11And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.
The seven heads are the names of the Seven Spirits of God that are the rational identity of the place of the woman (feelings), and there are only seven places to place a rational identity (head) in the mountains of the woman (intuition). When man rationalizes the Fear of God and then rejects the Begotten Truth of the Creator, man creates a "beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition" for there is no place for mal-intent in the Kingdom of Heaven, or on the Earth within it that was formless and void before the Light of God revealed cognition of creation.
Popper cycles his "learned" identity based upon personal experience and evolutionary experience without acknowledging that "New Intent" may be involved in his own lack of knowledge. By his interpretation process he binds his brain to his self. In that way, the self has a brain, rather than the brain being served by a self. The brain came before self. Popper is seeking his own identity without acknowledging the message of John 1:15-18 from the book of the “New Intent.”
15John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me. 16And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. 17For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. 18No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
The evidence that mortal life is a learning experience is everywhere and in particular in the religions of man. The most difficult learning experience for rationalizing man is to judge the self made identity for what it is; a beast of self desire driven to consume the child of reason and deny common sense.
Popper’s interactionism is disguised scientific reductionism driven by blind desire for reason as the primordial intent. In this way a quality can be “made” to “match” what has not been sensed as mortal immaculate conception but as self righteousness. Popper’s conjuring process is not erroneous, rather it is the subjective error that rules. It was his subjective reductionism of external Primordial Intent and denial of the Virgin Birth of the Son of God that stripped his senses of the “data” that they were intended to carry toward a mortal conception that would restore Immaculate Conception. He was naked and without swaddling cloths.
He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
Man talks the self into existence and believes that the beast of self existence is self made.
This is the epistemology of Karl Popper and all academic philosophers.
For them the soul revolves around the creations of the tongue, which imparts the literal self.
In this way the word becomes flesh without cognition of God or True Self.
Struggling for rational solutions man slows the process of communication to lonesome self talk, in a never ending process.
Da Vinci acknowledged that man was rational and irrational and he personally found the means to creative life in accordance with Mark 12:17. And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.
The Hellenistic Age reproduced the means to overcome the self righteousness of rational perception. The "Tale of Righteousness" must witness the Master of the Plow (Truth Seeking) to ride the "Tail of Rightness." Righteousness is the offspring of the tongue of the lioness, while rightness is going along for the ride in the Virgin’s Conception. Through the three centuries of the Hellenistic Age Western Civilization struggled with the intent to be rational and live in accordance with the Rule of Law. Ultimately they failed to find the path before the Rule of Law bound the Son of God to the edicts of Moses and Caesar. As the Roman Civilization decayed the wisdom of the Hellenistic Age was restored in the admission that man must give unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to give unto God that which is God’s. This admission never came to Karl Popper, and apparently John Eccles succumbed to the ways of the serpent he received from Karl Popper in the garden of Interactionism. Eccles was a man of sensation who was beguiled by the bound intuition in the logos of Popper.
Karl Popper's epistemology is naive and born of "rationalized self desire" having no basis for existence beyond self talk. He speaks of a process of making and matching and fails to comprehend that his process is a repression of mismatching what is self made in flawed scientific reductionism. For this reason the Son of God is Begotten, not Made. Mortals do not create cognition, for cognition comes at the End of Days in the Journey to Truth. The Truth was Given at First Light when the Earth was void and without form.
Once the errors of the self made man become acceptable, then the Dawn of Man arrives. As man matures in the acceptance of the "Gift of Self", man becomes cognizant of Divine Intent, and then man is the Light of the World; "to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." To be rational is not forbidden, but it carries a difficult burden when Truth is a spirit floating in and out of the clouds of consciousness of the senses.
In The Self and its Brain, Karl Popper was repressing the serpents of his own desire not to have negative outcomes. As a result, like all rationalizing academics he fails the most important test of the mind. That is the test that comes on Judgment Day. If a man cannot judge his own liberalizing rational action as fantasizing a utopia of a self made man, then the man has poor judgment and is just a beast of ill defined emotion consuming its own tale. Eventually after enough cycles of cognition and relapse the Truth is seen in the Cloud from whence it comes and goes. Knowing this simple truth regarding the End of Days man becomes a true judge of the self, then the brain finds its self and that self is the Son of God, which is the Cognition of Truth. In the Promised Land of promissory materialism and in the Promised Wind of self rationalization there exists Abundant Sensation regarding the Omniscient Being who brought the Promised Wine from the Life Giving Water. The perception of these promises is the mismatch for which self made man has no rational comprehension. The promises exist when satisfaction is not perceived. Yet, satisfaction was given at the First Light when God said, "It is good." Thus, man was conceived in the sin of Divine Mal-Intent. Making and Matching is a conceiving process that fails to listen to the Divine Intent. The sin was not God’s, it was Man’s.
The enlightenment process is demonstrated in the teaching aid of Toowoomba. On March 25, 1982, Marilyn Pye of Queensland was told while attending a psychic channeling session that a "golden pyramid" existed ninety miles north of Cairns, Australia. Within five weeks, Marilyn had sold her home, walked out of a newly opened business and had retained the help of a well-known New York psychic, Bryce Bond, to help her unlock the secret of these pyramids which, at first, Australian archaeologists even refused to acknowledge the mere existence of. Responding to nationwide media coverage, Marilyn was lead to the town of Toowoomba, Queensland, where a strange basalt crystal rock was unearthed beneath 24 feet of soil. Quite easily it was determined that this stone and its peculiar writing was not the work of aboriginal natives, though legends of the local tribes do tell of not one, but two "golden pyramids" in the near vicinity of this remarkable scientific find.
Did Marilyn Pye create a self, or did the Universal Being lead her to find what would become a new self? And of that new self, was it a matter of make and match, or was the artifact of her fame given to her because she had the desire that knew self? Marilyn Pye and Karl Popper are on opposite ends of the psychic spectra of man. Yet, while he found what he knew to be true, she found what no one knew to be true. And yet, the ROC is self evident and it was not a teaching aid of kangaroos or the psyche of She who knew the Name of God.
The message on the Toowoomba ROC is a very very simple one. It tells of the Dawn of Man when he can rise above the cloud of self judgment and be a witness to The All. There are no words on the Toowoomba ROC, because Common Sense overrules any rational edict of mind.
16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. 18And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. 21And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Karl Popper did not receive the benefit of "an help meet" and he died wondering, "What Does Knowledge Start From?" The Self and Its Brain: An Argument for Interactionism is simply the evidence that man desires to be God without any Precedential Being. As such, knowledge comes from what man makes of it, rather than what is begotten of Divine Intent. The Rule of Law is based upon precedents “Made by Man” and not “Begotten of the Father.”
12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
John 1:18 reveals to those who do not get lost in a search for an acceptable self that the search ends when man accepts what only God can give. Then man becomes One within God.
18No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Hand of the Eighth King
THE SELF DELUSION OR THE GOD DELUSION
All Biblical quotations are from the King Names Version.