@AlphDoti, I don't look at my conversation with @symbols as a monologue. In fact, I'm most grateful that our conversation took the path that it did. Thank you for the 'unzipping' @symbols.

You raise some interesting points @AlphDoti.

1. Is perfect goodness possible in a community, or society?

Let's take the example of our short conversation with @symbols. While one may not be so wrong to think that we were enjoying ourselves, it's also clear that there exists some who didn't find it enjoyable. Can goodness be standardized?

2. How are ethical systems to be compared, and evaluated?

You have mentioned the ills that mark the Western worldview, and as I was reading them I asked about what about the evil among Muslims? Traditional Africa?

Can one form of evil claim righteousness over the other?

How can Man triumph over evil? Should he even try to overcome evil?

3. How are people to interact, in and with ethical, and philosophical systems. For example, what happens when Europe converts to Islam? Or Russians adopt an African worldview? How is this possible?

How westernized is the African? What are the outcomes of westernization?

Ethical systems then it seems to me, are to be evaluated by:

1. How much variety in human expression they can accommodate?

2. How communalistic, and holistic they are

3. How powerful and resourceful each individual is, on average.

4. How evil is understood and dealt with, and how human life is valued.

5. How goodness is expressed and experienced.

Looking at these yardsticks I find the traditional African system as the system of choice.

Yes, you can. That's the case at most times.

Meaning is possible only in being.

Being is structured, and has control mechanisms.

Meaning then is about how control mechanisms work, and how incoming data and information are interpreted in relation to being.

Frequency range limitations.

Please elaborate.

Yes. That's inference. Even the radio receiver makes inferences.

Animism. The Universe, 'God' are alive.

Yes. Meaning is alive.

@symbols,

The ultimate meaning can't be uttered.

But, at the altar, where ultimate being is contemplated we have many meanings, depending on what we perceive along the way.

All being is one. Despite variety, we're all united in ultimate meaning, the way.

There's evil. But it's all about being. Only the way matters. The way overcomes evil.

Why did the Pharaoh go after Moses and the Children of Israel? Egyptian tradition was one of accepting new divinities, if they were proven. Moses and Aaron gave their proof, but wanted no more of Egypt; that is, the children of Israel, of the way, wanted only to contemplate, and speak of the ultimate. There were to be no other meanings. Only the Meaning.

They had to be released, the Children of Israel. But their departure left a big problem; what would remain of Egypt, now that their snakes, wisdom of the altar, had been swallowed? On what word could the Pharaoh rule?

They wanted to make 'Mose' Pharaoh. An impossibility. For the Children of Israel were exclusive. They had to be buried in the sea.

But, these Prophets of Israel met obstacles on their way that needed utterance of the unutterable, and in their utterance the Children of Israel, went back to the days of multiple meaning, 'gods'. And thus their captivities, and Prophets rising to remind them of the way, the ultimate.

This was, and still is, a powerful truth, for there's no other way but of the altar. But in utterance there must be multiplicity of meaning. Divinities.

He who names the way, must seek to conquer the lands of the 'heathens'. Blood shall always be on his hands, yet he himself shall always breed heathens in his heart, Like Eli and his sons.

There's no archaeological evidence for the Exodus. It's very unlikely for it to be there. Yet it happened, at the altar.

The Jew and the Gentile refused to be family, even though they knew they had one father. Christ's consciousness hit Saul and made him Paul. For in being a persecutor of Christ, he was also a student. And when he saw the inherent weakness of the Jewish position and was struck by light, for indeed he'd lived in a dark world.

By his embrace of Christ consciousness Paul retained his quest for ultimate meaning, even though now the Gospel was for both the Jew and Gentile. It was a unifying spirit, which an emperor to be would so welcome. And as Constantine pondered his political moves, at the altar, he looked up to the ultimate and saw the Cross drawn on the clouds.

The fathers of the Church, in seeking to utter the unutterable founded heresies and killings and promptly went against Christ consciousness.

The reformation failed miserably. Now, even though a common father is proclaimed, brother has turned against brother.

Mohammed, the Prophet, in following Moses and the Children of Israel in their quest for ultimate utters the unutterable, and must conquer the barbarians, make them utter his words, live his word, for it's the truth of the altar. And even now, many enlist as soldiers in the holy war against the infidel.

But look at the traditions of the Afrikana, everyone could name. There was no Scripture, manual, to follow, and when one spoke, he was embraced. Giving and sharing was the order of the day.

No one wanted to rule the whole world. And he who ruled, ruled with Christ consciousness.

Thank you too. And you're most welcome.

Ideas form the foundations of bodies politic certainly. But to write truthfully one must be in the 'grapply' of politics daily, and everywhere.