“As night does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there’s a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness.”

— US Supreme Court Justice, William O. Douglas.

Some Moral Dilemmas [friesian.com]

I am going to discuss these dilemmas. I read almost every one. I think the moral aspect, like choosing correctly in a terrible situation, is weighed in two different ways. What should the person do if they choose by the dictates of their conscience. And the other way of choosing is by what internal feeling choosing that which fits.

It is so important to have subtly about your thoughts. Lots of times they turn out to be irrational. Besides, without these ideas having fitness, they would end up like strands at the end of a rope. This brings me to my question, how is a decision ethical or moral when it is popular. These examples could not have a moral outcome as evidence by their popularity. Even if the choice is popular, that doesn’t make it ethical or even true. It just means that it has suitability.

But, for those whose decisions are based on their self governing feelings and fitness, they will probably continue on; and it is every one’s responsibility to reinforce them for following their inner path. The trouble starts eventually because the ethics or morals yeilds a hidden “NO”, the trouble starts when decisions are required to fit; fewer morals and lesser ethics and still popular. Is that obvious? I do not feel very good. I just feel that I haven’t had a chance to find out to what degree these dilemmas are resolving. How much bandwidth have I used? Iterations and iterations — tertiary issues and still it is all new. Finely I think it is a quality. A decision and then the resultant equivalencies. If it is a mistake then the success will wane. If it is a mistake the heart will harden.

I do not think there is such a thing as a moral. The ethics are a muddle too. So, if you know which one of these you tend to do; would you do me the favor of talking and reserve your action until the popluarity aspect has run a full course and the fitness part firms up likewise.

THE BRONZE SPHERE: Although mentioned briefly in Platonic Philosophy there has been times when the Bronze Sphere has been needed. Modern Historical iterations like the Geminate Constraint in Linguistics reaffirms it’s existence. I believe that the Bronze Sphere is a function to bring down motion of language/speech like a gear changing in slower time than regular talking. It is possible that it releases children of the expectations in motion to simpler action linguistically.

Sam Pache and the Black Ships. I think CARL is Japanese. He would have been the piece to the puzzle surrounding the mystery of the missing Turtle Fishermen. Really though I think the main factor to the enigma of this story is about the appearance of the Bronze Sphere. If you have had any Socratic Philosophical training you would have heard of it. Prior to the mentioning of the Bronze Sphere in Socratic philosophy there were cosmological explanations in reference to Turtle Shells. It was asked then what was underneath the turtle shell when it became a model for earth? The response quite well known was, “That’s easy; it’s Turtle shells all the way down.”