#202E: How the official science ignorantly eliminates God from the definition of „morality”, thus causing deaths of people, demolition of cities, destruction of nature, etc. (in English – po polsku ponizej)

Motto: „Without learning the truth there is NO progress.”

If we, people, „give a life” to any new thing, then we always require this thing is displaying some level of „obedience” towards us. For example, when we build a new car, we require from it to be „obedient” towards orders of its driver. A new computer must be obedient to its user and programmer. Etc., etc. In turn, if something refuses to be „obedient” – as this sometimes is the case with e.g. prototypes of badly designed military airplanes of new types, the outcome is always a catastrophe which causes a lot of evil, while in the consequences of which this „disobedient” product must be destroyed while its chance to „receive a life” must be taken away from it. If we thoroughly consider the above regularity, then it turns out that this „requirement of obedience” towards own „creator” is a kind of universal „law of nature”. In fact it spreads its validity onto everything that receives a „life” from a creator. And so, for example we already have films of the type „Terminator” – which reveal the vastness of evil that „disobedient robots” can bring to the humanity. From rich countries we already know consequences of immoral actions of undisciplined children which typically are symbols of the lack of „obedience” towards their parents – for more details see item #J2.4 from the web page named „morals.htm”. Etc., etc. So if this requirement of „obedience” towards a given „creator” is the manifestation of action of some universal „law of nature”, then, of course, this law must let itself to be known to people much earlier, and thus it received some well-known name already a long time ago. So if we search under what name we all know this universal law, then it turns out that in present times this name spells „morality”. This is why the so-called „totaliztic science”, which researches our reality from the philosophical approach called „a priori”, defines „morality”, amongst others, in the following manner: „morality is the level of ‚obedience’ with which an inferior ‚intellect’ fulfils commands and requirements of an intellect superior for it that gave to it some form of a new life”. Because in the „physical world” there is a whole hierarchy of various „inferior intellects” which receive from someone a new form of life, the „totaliztic science” distinguishes a number of different „moralities”. For example every robot that received the so-called „artificial intelligence” is to display a „morality of the robot”. Every son is to manifest towards his parents a „morality of the son”, while every daughter – a „morality of the daughter”. Wives after getting married receive a new kind of life from their husbands – thus they display to them later „moralities of wives”. In turn every living person also displays towards God the unique for this person primary „morality” (this one is defined as the „obedience” of that person towards commandments and requirements of God). The web page named „morals.htm” presents views of the new „totaliztic science” on all such most vital categories of morality.

B1. Two basic models of our universe, i.e. (1) the model of the „atheistic orthodox science” to-date (i.e. the universe occurred by an accident and is ruled by accidents) and (2) the model of the new „totaliztic science” (i.e. that the universe was created on purpose and is ruled by superiorly intelligent God):

From the everyday life we know, that if we want to learn thoroughly about something, then we must „look at it” from at least two different „directions” or from two so-called „approaches”. This is because looking from just a single direction (approach) we see „at the most” a half of this something. For example, looking at some building just from the front, we still do NOT know what is on the back of it. On the other hand, our official science (frequently called also the „atheistic orthodox science”) on everything that surrounds us looks just from a single and always the same approach, by philosophers called „a posteriori” means „from effects to causes”. This means, that such a science learns „at the most” a half of truth on that something. In order to learn also that „still missing second half of truth”, people would need to officially acknowledge also completely different science, which would be „competitive” towards that „atheistic orthodox science” to-date, and which would look at everything from a completely opposite approach by philosophers called „a priori” means „from the cause to effects” or „from God understood as the most primary ’cause’ of everything, to the surrounding reality that represents ‚effects’ of actions of that God”. In fact, since 1985 exists already just such a new science which is researching the reality from that opposite „a priori” approach. It is called the „totaliztic science” and it really is „competitive” towards official science to-date, i.e. „competitive” towards that science which we learn in schools and on universities and which some call „atheistic orthodox science”. (Notice that the world „competitive” is written here in „quotes” because in fact both these sciences mutually complement each other and both are in service of humanity – although, as so far, the new „totaliztic science” was forced to act almost in „conspiracy” because representatives of that old „atheistic orthodox science” which so-far held the absolute „monopole for knowledge” persecute it viciously, sabotage it, fight out, criticise and „close its mouths” on all possible ways available to them, i.e. they do with it exactly what is known from e.g. economics that holders of „monopoles” always do to their „competition”.) The philosophical and scientific foundations of this new „totaliztic science” are described in items #F1 to #F3 of a separate web page named „god_exists.htm”. These foundations are based on the so-far ignored by the official science the „theory of everything” called the „Concept of Dipolar Gravity”. This is because that theory has proven formally that „God does exist” – and thus it undermined the truth of so-called „Occam’s razor” which provides philosophical foundations for the old „atheistic orthodox science” to-date.

Each one amongst both above sciences forms its own model of our universe that is unique for it. For example, the model of the official human science to-date is based on the so-called „theory of big bang” and „expanding universe”. In turn the model of the new „totaliztic science” is based on the everlasting existence of always moving liquid called the „counter-matter” which displays attributes of a „liquid computer” and in which with the elapse of time evolved a self-aware program that us people call God, and that later created from this counter-matter the entire separate physical world and man. But in order to NOT stretch the patience of the reader, I am NOT going to describe here these models nor prove why the model of the „atheistic orthodox science” to-date is erroneous while the model of the new „totaliztic science” is correct. I only inform here, that about the „Big Bang” or about the „Occam’s razor” that form foundations of that old model of the official science one can read in internet – because there is in there a huge number of publications on these subjects. In turn about the „intelligent counter-matter” and about the „model of the universe” that result from the existence of it, most comprehensively one can learn from the volume 1 of my newest monograph [1/5] – which is disseminated in internet free of charge, and which is a kind of „official textbook” for the „totaliztic science”.

Both above mutually „competitive” sciences, and also justifications why only one model of the universe that they created is the correct one, are already presented on a number of totaliztic web pages – for example see item #C1 of the web page named „telekinetics.htm”, item #A2.6 of the web page named „totalizm.htm”, items #F1 to #F3 of the web page named „god_exists.htm”, item #A4 of the web page named „god_proof.htm”, item #C5 of the web page named „bible.htm”, item #B1 of the web page named „tornado.htm”, item #J2 of the web page named „pajak_jan_uk.htm”, item #A2 of the web page named „healing.htm”, subsection H10 from volume 4 of monograph [1/5], and descriptions from several further web pages and publications of totalizm. So there is no need to again elaborate these here.

B2. How the old „atheistic orthodox science” to-date defines „morality” in the universe that come to existence by an accident and is ruled by accidents:

In the „Oxford English Dictionary” (1 volume, Oxford University Press, Oxford OK2 6DP, UK, 2007, ISBN 978-0-19-920687-2) – which is considered to be one amongst most authoritative dictionaries in the world, on page 1835, under the word „morality” is provided the following definition of „morality”: „the doctrine or branch of knowledge that deals with right and wrong conduct and with duty and responsibilities; moral philosophy; ethics; moral principles or rules”. The publishing of the above definition in that authoritative dictionary means, that it is a kind of „standard” for the old „atheistic orthodox science” to-date. Although some academic textbook or some lecturers may add or take away various less significant words from the above definition, generally this definition is a full representation of what „morality” is considered to be by the old „atheistic orthodox science” to-date.

The most vital attribute of the above definition of morality is that according to it „morality” is „an idea introduced by people”. This means, that according to it supposedly: (a) „morality” does NOT originate from anything else than people (e.g. „morality” does NOT originate from God nor from „laws of nature”), (b) „morality” does NOT have independent from people „standards of morally correct behaviours”, (c) do NOT exist any „phenomena of nature” that would indicate or confirm which behaviours of people are morally correct and which are immoral, and (d) no-one independently from people „guards morality” nor makes sure that people actually behave morally, e.g. through serving to them „rewards” for „moral behaviour” and „punishments” for „immorality”. In other words, because according to this definition supposedly „people invented morality”, this definition contains also a suggestion, that as time elapses, people (e.g. „politicians”) will be able to „invent also for themselves” a completely different „morality”. For example, instead of becoming increasingly perfect through fighting out their vices and temptations, in that „new morality” – which people can „invent” for themselves and introduce to life in the future, they simply are to „sanction” these vices and temptations and announce that following them is already „moral” (instead of previous being „immoral”). This seems to happen already now. For example, already now countries exist which banned parents from disciplining their children (and even makes this disciplining punishable) – as this is explained in item #B5.1 from the web page named „will.htm” while is commented in sub-item #J2.4 from the web page named „morals.htm”. Furthermore, there are coutries which introduced also the law regarding „civil unions” in which it is allowed that homosexuals can „marry” each other – in spite that e.g. the Bible quite clearly bans practicing homosexuality (for examples of this bans from the Bible see item #B5 on the web page named „seismograph.htm” or item #B2.1 on the web page named „mozajski_uk.htm”). In turn e.g. internet has public orums which persuade people to marital unfaithfulness – in spite that this unfaithfulness is banned by 7th God’s commandment. The above persuades to undertake serious analyses, whether the definition of „morality” which is disseminated by the old „atheistic orthodox science” to-date is actually correct, or is rather highly wrong and misleading for people.

B3. Whether the definition and understanding of morality disseminated by the old „atheistic orthodox science” to-date are agreeable with the reality in which we live, and thus correct, or rather mislead us because they reveal to us at the most a „half of truth”:

If the „accidental” character of morality, imprinted into the definition and understanding of morality disseminated by the old „atheistic orthodox science” to-date were agreeable with the reality in which we live, then attributes which this „morality” would need to display in our universe would also be ruled by „accidents”. In other words, in such a universe that originates from an „accident” and is ruled by „accidents”, morality would display following attributes:

1. The work of such an „accidental morality” would NOT be governed by any regularities or laws. Thus e.g. the same actions would completely at random show different moral classifications. There would be no uniform moral rules and principles that could be applied to all human actions and situations. There could NOT exist any standards of morality. There would also be NO indicators of morally correct behaviours, such as „moral field”, „moral energy” or „moral laws” – discovered only recently by the philosophy of totalizm and described more comprehensively on a separate web page named „totalizm.htm” and also in sub-items #C4 from the web page „morals.htm”. Of course, there would also be NO way that such subjects as „ethics” or „philosophy” could be formulated and lectured.

2. „Morality” ruled by accidents would NOT support the development by people of the understanding and models of „justice”, „honesty”, etc. This is because how one could develop and define these concepts when the same behaviours would have accidental and each time completely different moral meanings. Thus people would NOT know what these concepts actually mean. Also, people would NOT be able to be either right and just or honest, etc.

3. People affected by outcomes of such „accidental morality” would NOT have „conscience”, „proverbs”, „folk wisdom”, „moral tradition”, etc. After all, these features are based on the repetitive rules which govern over morality and which humans noticed, and the existence of which was detected by generations of people that lived on the Earth.

On the other hand, when one analyses the universe in which we live, then it turns out that this universe displays a complete opposition to attributes of „accidental morality” listed above that would need to exist in the universe ruled by accidents. This leads to the final conclusion, that „model of ‚morality’ created and ruled by ‚accidents’, which was developed and disseminated by the old so-called ‚atheistic orthodox science’ to-date is NOT at all agreeable with the reality in which we live”. So in order to learn a different model of „morality” which more correctly reflects our reality, we need to learn the model developed and disseminated by the new „totaliztic science”.

B4. What we should know about this „reversed approach” to morality of the new „totaliztic science”, and why it reveals the „missing second half of truth”:

As it is explained by item B1 above, the new „totaliztic science” researches the reality around us from the opposite approach by philosophers called „a priori”, means „from the cause to effects”. In this approach everything, thus also „morality”, is defined as originating from the „superior cause”, means from God. Only that opposite to the existing religions, new „totaliztic science” is aware of the fact that God does NOT support laziness and stupidity, therefore in spite that in holy books, such as the Bible, He gave to people „starters of the knowledge” about morality, actually He expects that people with their own effort and objective research find out by themselves what really „morality” is, and how one should lead a moral life. Therefore, the new „totaliztic science” does NOT wait – as this was so-far done by religions, until God gives to people for free the entire knowledge about morality, without the need for people to laboriously work out this knowledge by themselves, but this science starts to objectively and intensely research „morality and God” and earns the knowledge about morality with own effort and own contribution of work. In turn, all knowledge that it managed to establish on the subject of morality and principles of moral living, this new „totaliztic science” explains in the „philosophy of totalizm” and the „philosophy of parasitism” that it created and developed. The most vital aspects of this knowledge are summarised here on this web page.

B5. How the new „totaliztic science” defines „morality” in the universe intentionally created and intelligently ruled by superior God:

Motto: „People stubbornly ignore morality enforced by God, God restlessly illustrates to people that NO-ONE is allowed to ignore morality.”

The new „totaliztic science” recommends to use the following definition of „morality”: ‚morality is the „level of obedience” with which a given „intellect” fulfils commandments and requirements imposed onto humans by God, which commandments and requirements are unambiguously expressed by God with the aid of various „standards of morality” (such as the Bible, the human organ called „conscience”, etc.) and with the aid of numerous ‚indicators of morally correct behaviours’ (such as the „moral field”, „moral energy”, „moral laws”, etc.), and which actual fulfilment by people is judged by God and „rewarded” or „punished” with an iron consequence – while manners of fulfilment of these commandments and requirements are revealed to us by two modern philosophies called the „philosophy of totalizm” and the „philosophy of parasitism” – which taken together teach people truly „moral” principles of leading their lives’.

Of course, the above definition – as every human finding, can also be expressed with the use of various other words or sentences. A part of these sentences perhaps can improve it even more and allow to express with it the essence of „morality” even better. Furthermore, this definition is too long for us to be able to remember it in its entirety and repeat it for the everyday use. Therefore, for our own use, or for discussing it with other people, one can benefit from simplified versions of that definition, e.g. from the one stated here in the introduction to this post, or the one discussed in item #A1 of the separate web page named „totalizm.htm”. Such a simplified version of the above complete definition reflect the essence of it already in e.g. the following formulation „in the world ruled by God, morality should be understand as the strictness with which someone fulfils God’s commandments in the everyday life” (or in the formulation presented in the introduction to this post). But the addition to such simplified versions of this definition should be our understanding that in order to „persuade” to people the obedience of „morality”, God created and gave to people various standards and indicators of moral behaviours (e.g. conscience, Bible, moral field, etc.), and also that God consistently uses „rewards” and severe „punishments” to reinforce moral behaviours in people – only that in order to not break our „free will” this reinforcing He carries out highly „discretely” and with the fulfilment of so-called „canon of ambiguity” (described, amongst others, in item #C4.1 of the web page „morals.htm”).

The above definition is immensely important. After all, it informs quite clearly that „morality” is formulated by God and that God makes sure that people obey it pedantically (and do NOT ignore it). On the other hand, the error of a too-light, unserious, and misleading treatment of „morality” by the official human science to-date, which the science still failed to repair, causes that the humanity currently is in the situation of a „war with God” about „morality”. In turn, how „wars with God” typically finish, this is described in item #G2 on the web page named „prophecies.htm”. Therefore, in present times, our civilisation pays for ignoring the enforcement of morality with immense suffering and deaths of numerous people punished for being immoral, and also pays with the devastation of nature, cities, and social lives, which were treated too lightly by decision makers that believed in the impunity of their immoral actions. Thus, in the vital interest of every person lies now to repeat this definition of morality to his or her close ones, and thus to gradually restore moral behaviours to our civilisation. In turn, the restoration of morality has the potential to return harmony, peace, and prosperity to the humanity.

The correctness of the above definition of „morality” is confirmed by a number of various facts and phenomena. Each one amongst these facts and phenomena contradicts also the correctness of the to-date definition of „morality” (i.e. the one from item B2 above) – disseminated by the official human science. Therefore, the entire „part #C” of the web page named „morals.htm” is devoted to the presentation of the most vital examples from the large body of evidence which documents that the definition provided here is absolutely correct, and documents that God really enforces moral behaviours of people.

* * *

This post represents adaptation of items #B1 to #B5 from the totaliztic web page named „morals.htm” (updated on 25 June 2011, or later). Thus, reading the above descriptions would be even more effective from that web page „morals.htm” than from this post, as on the web page are working all (green) links to other related web pages with additional explanations, it is printed in colour, it is supported with illustrations, the content of it is updated regularly, etc. The latest update of the web page „morals.htm” can be viewed, amongst others, at addresses:
http://energia.sl.pl/morals.htm or alias: http://naj.zs.pl (which always links to the most important amongst current updates)
Notice that every above web site contains all totaliztic web pages, including pages „text_1_5.htm” with free copies of monograph [1/5] which is an „official textbook” of the „totaliztic science”. But I would recommend to download this [1/5] from the address http://energia.sl.pl/text_1_5.htm where this monograph is updated the most frequently.

It is also worth to know, that almost each new topic that I am researching with „a priori” approach of the new „totaliztic science”, including this one, is repeated on all mirror blogs of totalizm still in existence (the above topic is repeated in there as the post number #202E). In past there were 5 such blogs. At the moment only two blogs of totalizm still remain undeleted by adversaries of the new „totaliztic science” and the moral philosophy of totalizm. These can be viewed at following internet addresses:
https://totalizm.wordpress.com or alias: http://blog.zs.pl
It is also worth to have look in there at related posts, e.g. at posts number #201E, #200E, #195E, #171E and #151E – which also discuss incompetence and errors of the old official science in solving the most burning problems of our present civilisation.

With the totaliztic salute,
Jan Pajak


%d bloggers like this: