I am going to discuss my personal views about someone who is very important to me; Merleau-Ponty.  From my first recollection, I did not like Ponty. The fact is those feelings guaranteed me an automatic ‘F’.  I can tell that I have made progress in my opinion since – as evidence by my erasure of comments in the margins of his greatest work: Eye and Mind.

So I cleaned up my copy of his essay. Merleau-Ponty who was a French Philosopher wrote about the Master French painter Cezanne.  After Ponty passed away in the early sixties, his works were translated into English.  The translator, Carleton Dallery used a number of writing styles to achieve an effective and purposeful study for the English speaking scholar to learn about Cezanne.  The consequences for my strong feelings against Merleau-Ponty at that first reading are not outside of the realm of possibilities for any reader.  It might be the case that Carleton Dallery at the expense of being perceived as not knowing a certain detail about Cezanne, embedded a critical idea which does not come to fruition in order to affect the reader with strong feelings.  Not however, but particularly for Ponty, space has taken on a kind of identity.  I have had difficulty overcoming my initial opinion and further hold by some fault of my own I have come up short on wits.  Thus I must reason I had at that time the condition about which I have already talked about a necessity for agreement.  This is in keeping with my latter readings, and I want to reassure Dick Tracy that I like Maurice Merleau-Ponty and that I understand his essay; I admit it is a great work.

You are a fool! So, you say you like Maurice Merleau-Ponty, but you have changed. Why you don’t convict him for your disposition?

Well, I will tell you, my friend, Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s English translation has as a remedy something called a Rhinoplasty. This is a Plastic Surgery correcting the Septum from deviation. These were his last words, ‘you have your whole life ahead of you.’ I got a Rhinoplasty. It has been the single most enlightening procedure of my Life.

If you are able to sustain a frame of mind on that of a person whose fingers are stubby, you will learn. There are a number of builds that are available to muse with; all of which raises your social status. I am telling you this because there is a reason that a Dominant Gene results in a Conscience. The Dominant Genes of this particular type in a person who has one from each parent, results in a disorder, called Phocomelia, and which causes a birth defect of the arms and hands. Phocomelia literally means Flippers. The genetic disposition, I am calling a Disorder, includes the making of the Conscience where there is only one Dominant Gene of which it is the same type. Here the Idea is that you get your genes from your parents. This is a normal condition to have one, or to have both Recessive. The infamous Luke Sky-walker was Recessive-Recessive; “Use the Force Luke”. And this very issue which sadly Maurice Merleau-Ponty did not correctly develop for some reason, is a Distinguishing component of socialization.

When the Philosopher says existentially NO!; it is to be a distinguishing threshold in which we enlightened the path to Fame. For example you would not want a person with a conscience to read the news or write lyrics for an album unless the person were able to overcome the present with new material. What you have said about my acceptance of Maurice Merleau-Ponty is probably a thought disorder.

To make this situation which I have built in thought whole, I just want to mention that there is another reading of David Hume. His thoughts mostly have been about the good of determination. But if you needed an advocate for your applied distinguishing activity, which I have said is Genetic, Hume has the correct thinking for a free minded person of a general nature to be an advocate. So, on the basis that this issue is Genetic, I conclude that there will be NO changes in the thinking process – no fear. I say this and I expect you to believe that you are who you are ever since conception. Now, haven’t I been a nuisance, a person should not have Fear? And haven’t I just given you a good reason to teach Hume even though his works only seem to fit with a certain type of a person?

If for some reason, the little friendship that Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Jean-Paul Sartre had while the editors of the magazine in France the prejudice against Maurice Merleau-Ponty still went without address, his reason is there really is something to see: and I am referring to Phenomenology. Maurice Merleau-Ponty would have been the president of that little organization of Cosmonauts.

Now, I have a little bit of house keeping to do for Maurice Merleau-Ponty that I haven’t addressed elsewhere. While Maurice Merleau-Ponty had a driver which never came to fruition. I have mentioned it earlier, there is a confusion about which gene he is referring to. Let me say that when I was referring to a Dominant Gene, it is conceivable the inherited dominant gene for conscience could have come from either parent and not just the Father. Though he did not speak of it, he was all the while referring to another Gene; it was a driver to get a person to have strong feelings. In the Philosophical work Eye and Mind, which he is best known for and which he sort of built a little engine “see,” Maurice Merleau-Ponty, though I do not believe it today, there is a tendency to confuse the gene for sex with the gene for conscience.  Recall that Maurice Merleau-Ponty mostly ignored the prompting from Sartre about the Genetic issue. So, when the prejudicial perspective that Sartre would have prompted him about in their years together came up, Maurice Merleau-Ponty probably extended his most highest held belief, to see, in the instance that it is restricted to that of the spirit of the Father. In the case of the Fathers Gene, the Genetic issue is in regards to the twenty-third Chromosome determining a person’s sex. In a remedy, from the religious point of view involving the Holy Trinity, after thoughts (God willing), the Father could have a high degree of influence over his children’s cognitive abilities. Here I want to mention that this is as much a disparity as that of the twenty-second Chromosome which determines conscience. So, even though I have been square about a Distinguishing social issue, the presiding gene, I have had to bring into the discussion a matter of articulation of Maurice Merleau-Pontys emphasis as having a gene that could inconceivably been inherited from the Mother as well as from the Father. It is the Holy Trinity case the Philosopher Spinoza had as a good Catholic. Maurice Merleau-Ponty merely cast into time for a collection of intelligent substance with which seeing would be the basis of a Phenomenology without the context involving the gene for sexual orientation.

I seem to have uncovered a matter of confusion.  If you wish to think about this issue look at XVR and Comments to XVR