A Philosophy for All Living Beings (the NEW Part 2)

“Like social workers, people from all backgrounds, all races, all nationalities, all physiologies, all psychological types, all social communities, and all spiuritual communities, or lack of any acceptance of all or any above states and biologies of being, may choose for themselves what they want to believe, or even not choose to make a choice. All reactions are welcome, and all choices are acceptable. There is no right or wrong. There only is.” (quoted from the end of Part 4, or the real Part 1)

But, is that true just for humans? I must ask you, Do you really thing we are the only beings who count in our portion of reality? What about the whale, we know not it has sentience–or consciousness. What about the orangutan, possibly humanity’s closest relative? You will give me those, maybe, but certainly nothing else! Why not? Our scientists appear to have proven that the octopus, that alien creature that lives in the sea, with eight legs just like a spider, can have some sort of sentience. One octopus can watch a fellow octopus find its way through a complicated maze, making all kinds of mistakes, until she completes the maze, just once. The second octopus seemed to know she was in a maze, because she kept fighting to get out. Now put the first octopus in a second maze exactly the same as the one the second octopus went through. How many mistakes do you think he makes before he escapes the maze? Ten? Twenty? Thirty? How about, not one? He watched the other octopus just once, making all kinds of mistakes, yet he zipped through the maze like he had done it a hundred times. Will this count as sentience for you. The first octopus had not only to learn what a maze was, but also learn how to escape it, by watching his fellow octopus find her way. I don’t know exactly what that says, but it sure says something. Most adult humans would not  remember the correct way through a maze by watching one other human try and try again to get out. Are octopi smarter than humans? Apparently, at least at mazing running.

But, is sentience really a requirement to know how to live, how to be alive. Please allow me to take you on a long ride backwards in history. So far back the only history we can read are the fossils that tell us what life was like, say, 4 billion years ago. Can you even think that far back? 4 billion years is a long, long, long, long, lllooonnnnggggg time ago. The earth was still being formed, it was mostly water, and the crust of the earth was so thin that the heat from the center of the earth probably boiled the water in some places. And in that ocean, so old we called it primordial, or basically “existing at or from the beginning of time,” (Well, actually, it missed the beginning of time AND the beginning of the universe, which has been mearsured at 13.772 billion years, give or take 60 million, or any portion thereof.)  we will just say our planet, Earth, had been around only half-a-billion years when living beings began to show up. But, decendants of those early one-celled lifeforms are still around today. They live deep in cold oceans, yet even deeper in warm oceans, but where they live doesn’t matter. New lives are forming every day somewhere on Earth. And they can trace their biology back to the very first one-celled beings that came before them. In fact, every living being on Earth can trace its ancestry back to those unicellular beings who came to life (we do not know how) 4 billion years ago. But how is not important to this philosophy, but who is!

The first unicellular beings had no real building blocks of life, no DNA for certain, but probably no RNA either. Yet through the next 500-or-so million years they learned how to make RNA and DNA, and they were happy little beings. Without going into the history of one-celled lifeforms, allow me to say eventually they became two-celled lifeforms, then three-celled lifeforms, and so on until they can now be as large as hundreds of quadrillions of cells in one lifeform, the blue whale, which is not even the biggest lifeform on Earth. No one knows how many cells are in the largest lifeform, a fungus growing in Western Oregan and British Columbia. We humans are so much smaller than either of these humungous behemoths at an average of only 37.2 billion cells.

But are you seeing what I am seeing? Every living being on Earth has one physical thing in common: From smallest to largest, all lifeforms are made up of cells, the very same cells that lived in the primordial ocean 4 billion years ago. I think that is amazing! Do you?

But let’s look at this sameness a little closer, because now we know all lifeforms, no matter who, no matter what, no matter how, are all related. I always say, never believe anything I say, unless it works for you. But this is the one exception to that insistance, please believe me when I say, “We are ALL related!” Because we are. It may not seem like it, especially if you believe humans are the superior form of life on this planet, which  may or may not be (I do not think we are) true, but then so is every other species of life, be it viral, bacterial, plant, animal, or something we have not yet discovered or labelled. When we get right down to basics, “We Are One.”

And this is why I say, the philosophy I believe in is “A Philosophy For All Living Beings.” We are all made of exactly the same stuff as formed the first types of life on this young planet about 4 billion years ago. That same stuff still makes all of us up today.

A Philosophy for All Living Beings (The NEW Part 1)

From the time the term came into my mind, “A PHILOSOPHY FOR ALL LIVING BEINGS,” upon which I posted 3 entries on my blog during February of 2018, I was completely dissatisfied with my writings, they were not a dissertation on my philosophy, but turned out to be more of a “How To…” discussion on to to become a self-aware, self-actuated or self-powered, spiritual being, providing you were human, and able to read English. These posts were so bad (as they did not relate to my philosophy hardly at all, though they were decent renditions of what they really turned out to be) that I developed a writer’s block that lasted many months. Where did I go so wrong? I might not be a talkative person, although that is in the process of changing, but when I pick up a pen, or sit at a keyboard, I usually have so much to say I cannot keep focus on what I am trying to write about, even as in this very minute. I love to explain, and even more I love to digress. And digression led me away from my original purpose in Part 1 of my earlier attempt. So now, if I may be so rude as to repeat myself, I am going to quote a few of the paragraphs I wrote in Part 1 while I was still trying to stay on focus, then go on from there. My sincerest apologies…

Sanity is a condition of life that LOCKS us inside a universal (or should I say, at this time, planet-wide?) shared concept of what reality is. Insanity, in its turn, appears to mean something like unable to live in that shared reality that sane people exist in. But unsanity, as I use it, means able to go beyond the shared planet-wide concept of reality without losing that concept of reality. “I feel like I am unsane because I can see through the veil of reality while still being able to live in that shared reality without making other people think I am insane, or unable to cope with that reality in some way. As I see myself, and the reality around me, I am not locked into that reality, but able to transcend it whenever I see or feel the need. Therefore I am more than sane, I am unsane.” To wit, I am unsane enough to believe I can write a philosophy for all living beings….

“…I did not start out to discover a philosophy for all living beings, because to even have had that concept before I stumbled onto it would have been insane, even to me. All I was looking for was something I could live with, a thought or idea or maybe even a purpose about my life, or for my life. You might say I was adrift in a sea of concepts, all handed down to me from the people whom I thought understood the world into which I had been born. Yes, I believed what I was told, for maybe the first 10 years of my life.” But then I started to grow up…

And lastly, “Reality on Earth is many things, but is not always the same for all people as one would think it would have to be if there was nothing beyond reality.” — rawgod (Feb. 2018)

But there is something beyond our shared concept of reality, at least in my opinion. In fact, I have experienced things, drug-induced, to be truthful, under the influence of LSD, that turned out to be very similar to Near Death Experiences (NDEs), only my experiences were not induced by life threatening accidents, or even intential suicide attempts, or Out-Of-Body (OBE) events, they were induced by taking LSD caused by my hope to discover if there was anything beyond our shared concept of reality–beyond sanity.

If you care to stop reading right here, that is your choice, I will not hate you for it, but I am going to keep on writing, even if nobody but me reads my words. Please remember, however, everything I am about to say is “in my opinion,” or “from my personal experience,” or arrived at through long consideration by my mind or by my spiritual self. To go on…

There is life beyond the reality we see around us every day. Mostly, no one gets to see this other Reality-Beyond-Our-Reality (RBOR), or (“arbour,” also “arbor” like a group of leafy trees designed to create a shelter), or (a place to rest unseen due to blocking of penetrating vision–rawgod) except those who have died in this perceived shared reality we call life on Earth. “Death is the ultimate trip,” hippies were wont to say back in the 1960s, but even we did not see how close we were to RBOR. Close, but yet so far, because for most living beings in the after-death, a return to life is barely an infinite blink away. But, what can occur during that infinite blink!

The body dies, and the mind detaches from it. A door opens inside the mind, and as mind dies the spirit flies through the the door. A tunnel leads the way to a shining welcome. There are no eyes and yet the sense of music of the spheres. There are no ears, yet notes and chords are brought to notice with more colours than are in the rainbow. There is no nose, and yet the communication of telepathy . There is no mouth but yet the warmth of sharing. There is no skin but yet the beauty of being. There is no me, but yet there now is us. A movie reel (real?) starts and runs from birth to death, yet no judgment hammers the view. Then all is all there is, yet is becomes, and life is formed and sent to start anew. A womb or egg or seed or spore or splitting by mitosis is chosen, spirit is set in life, and reality closes the door, and us is back to me…

Poetic, don’t you think, in every sense of the word. But this is death in my experience, or as close as I could come without dying, and bringing back with me things I did not know were attached. It has taken me 50 years and more to move from delight to insanity to fear to confusion to maybe to possibility to finally a sense of undertanding. But understanding is not yet complete, and may never be, unless I live another 50 years or more. There is so much beyond the capacity of even spirit to hold while on this realm, this plane of mainly physical being. Social workers, of which I once was one, now retired, have a word for life on earth, biophysicalpsychlogicalsocialspiritualbeing. Not all social workers ascribe to this or similar views of life, but that depends on many factors, including the willingness or unwillingness to understand life as a spiritual experience. Like social workers, people from all backgrounds, all races, all nationalities, all physiologies, all psychological types, all social communities, and all spiuritual communities, or lack of any acceptance of all or any above states and biologies of being, may choose for themselves what they want to believe, or even not choose to make a choice. All reactions are welcome, and all choices are acceptable. There is no right or wrong. There only is.


How much can be said about life? Apparently a lot, because life actually exists, as an objective something-or-other, but very few people ever even think about it. A being is born, it grows, it dies. What else needs to be known?

My personal idea is, everything about life needs to be known. But let us spend a moment please to look at what we know. A sperm invades a egg, or pollen is somehow deposited on a pistil, or a cell splits in half after duplicating itself, or however a life comes into being on our plane of existence. All of these are biological processes. But we have already discussed how life seems to be something differing from biology alone. As the number of cells increases, as in multi-celled beings, DNA works to design what type of cell any particular cell should be: skin cells, blood cells, brain cells, etc. etc. etc. Meanwhile, in one-celled beings, it is not just the number of cells that increases, it is also the number of beings that increases. What does this sound like to you? Is the increase in cells that make up one-celled beings really any different from the increase in cells that make up a multi-celled being? Are we still not talking about creating cells? Are we still not talking about creating living beings? Are we still not talking about creating life? Of course we are, only, creating is a loaded word, thanks to some religions. But it is equally as loaded, from the other direction, thanks to the concept of evolution. This post, though, it not about the creation debate.

Evolution tells us, through the fossils that are found, that the only beings that inhabited the primal oceans of 4 billion years ago were one-celled beings. Each being had a life all its own. And each cell took care of all the life processes, finding energy to maintain life, and expelling useless leftovers. This is how one-celled beings still live today.

For millions of years life never changed. But something happened–I do not know what–and one being stayed tied to another being when it should have split off, and this was the start of evolution. Life discovered it could live better if two cells worked together. One cell could find food for both, while the second cell excreted waste for both. This was also the start of cooperation, and possibly even compassion. Each of the cells had a stake in keeping both cells alive, so it makes sense that at some point each cell learned to care about the other cell, and possibly even love each other. But now I am being anthropocentrtic, assigning human qualities to non-human beings. Or am I? Maybe I am being anti-anthropocentric. Maybe I am assigning cellular qualities to human beings. My question is, why shouldn’t I do that? Why shouln’t we feel love, or compassion, why shouldn’t we know how to share, given that these are things our cells are doing,  and ultimately our cells are us.

What the hell am I talking about? Our cells are just biological bits of living matter, they aren’t living beings in their own right. Aren’t they? Weren’t they living beings 4 million years ago? How much have they changed in that length of time? Not much, really. They are still one-celled beings, just that now they are more specialized than they were then. More specialized does not mean that they are not still alive, they are, we know that, science shows us that. Please note, science is not telling us our cells are alive, they are showing us our cells are alive. We only need look through a microscope to see they are alive. But what does that mean to us?

Some mathematician has figured out our bodies contain about 37 trillion cells, using an average sized human adult body as its sample. I presume he or she measured the amount of space an average cell occupies, and how much it weighs, then compared that to how much space the sample body occupies, and how much the sample body weighs. Comparing weight to space, the result would be the average number of cells the sample body would contain.

But wait, that is not all there is to our bodies. There is more. Our bodies also contain other living beings, called bacteria. These beings are not attached to us, but live a symbiotic, or shared, relationship with us. We depend on each other to live. And guess how many of these living but separate beings are living inside our bodies, mainly working to help us be healthy humans. The answer, though I cannot tell you how this answer was arrived at, is approximstely 40 trillion beings. So, to make up our bodies, and keep them healthy, takes almost 80 trillion lives to give us one life. I won’t even try to figure out how many living beings it takes to make up the human population of earth, but if you are wondering, our present human population for the world is thought to be over 7 billion people, increasing by more than 1 million people every year. That’s a whole helluva lot of lives for the earth to support, and this is NOT even taking all the animal, plant, insect, and other types of beings alive on this planet. How many lives is that on our planet? How many lives in our universe? The mind boggles.

But, let’s bring this back to human lives for now, and look at things from a different angle. Our bodies work together to allow us to live. It takes, if you will allow me, all kinds of “races” of cells to function together to keep us alive. There are “skin” cells, “brain” cells, ” muscle” cells, “bood” cells, and so on to make one complete human being. These different types of cells, like different “races,” do not hate each other, they don’t fight each other, they cooperate, in order that everyone can live. Now, use a similar analogy to look at nations of cells. There are cells in the brain, and head. There are cells in the lungs snd chest. There are heart cells, stomach cells, leg cells, even finger and toe cells. How many other “nations” would you like to suggest? All these nations work together to help us live healthy and happy lives. I could go on, right down to individual cells, the people inside us… But I think you get the picture. To make us humans function as we should, individuals of all nations and races cooperate to allow us to live. Well, are we not the individuals of nations and races that inhabit this earth? Can we not learn from our own bodies how to work together, to share with each other, in order to make our world work.

Why are we always so at odds with each other that we are threatening to end our own existences when we could be working together to make our world function properly. Our bodies can teach us much, if only we would listen to them.


The following is a back and forth dialogue carried on between two Word Press bloggers. I am the pony, I respond to the dog’s writings. Who the dog is does not matter, though regular readers may realize which blogger I am referencing. The who does not matter, it is the ideas expressed that are important. The originals have been proofread for ease of reading, but because I am such a bad typist I will probably not catch them all. My one promise is to do my best to not take passages out of context. I will try to keep this series as close to honest as I can. It started with this from the original post:

DOG The question [is] simple and innocuous enough: is a child born with an innate sense of God, or in a broader sense, the numinous? I suppose the question was custom-made to being hijacked mostly by atheists, and I should have been a bit more wary to even try to wade on the shore of that stream. The water was acid on my bare feet.

I’ve never liked atheism. I tried it for a few years and I found it to be a dead religion, devoid of awe, beyond short-lived awareness of pretty sunsets, flowers and waterfalls, perhaps the enjoyment of sex; devoid of joy, since true joy can only be known on that spiritual plane atheists abhor and denigrate every chance they get.

Essentially, you are born to die. You can be no more than a superior intelligent animal and all accomplishments are but the results of a pointless evolution which cannot lead anywhere since there is no continuity beyond a mindless material level. There is no purpose to life beyond propagating itself, again, for no purpose. Though atheism denies “luck”, that being a spooky goddess we do not speak of in fear of losing our atheist badge, in its philosophy everything is happen-chance.

Self-professed atheism is a recent phenomenon, at least in the Western White Christian World, stemming mostly from deliberately misinterpreted works of Charles Darwin and his speculations on species adaptation which he called natural evolution.

So began our conversation. It was not directed to me personally, but when I read it, I had a need to respond. The following begins my response:

PONY “It is naysayer time, and I say “Nay!” to you. I am a SPIRITUAL ATHEIST. I do not believe in any god, or any super-being of any kind. Children are NOT born with any idea of a god within them. All gods or super-beings are human inventions, and can only be sustained by authoritarian brainwashing. I know. I was brainwashed as a child. But my mind was too strong to allow that brainwashing to persist as I grew older, and became able to think for myself. I undid that brainwashing, and now I am free to look for myself.
You can call atheism a religion all you want, but it is not contiguous one atheist to the next. Yes, many atheists deny the existence of a spirit, but NOT ALL ATHEISTS DENY SPIRITUALITY! There are a good number of us around, but we are not a group. We don’t need others to give us our strength. We find that strength wherever we can, and from my experience, most of us find it in ourselves. But that is our choice, and no one else’s.
I would love to see a religion, any religion, make that claim for itself. None can. Religion can only be learned from outside the self. Nothing is innate, except breathing and eating. And both of those are biological processes. They do not come from the mind.
You talk about evolution, and how it is a progressive sequence of being. We started out on earth as one-celled creatures. Did those creatures believe in a god? Not impossible, but highly unlikely. One-celled beings became two-celled beings. Did they believe in a god? Again, highly unlikely. Two-celled beings became three-celled beings became ten-celled beings became 37.2 billion-celled beings (the number of cells in an average adult human being). When did gods come into the picture? The cells that make up our bodies today are identical to the cells that existed 4 billion years ago, give-or-take a few 100 million. When did gods appear? We don’t know about other species, but for humans gods first appeared when early humanoids learned about fear. First they feared nature, and tried to placate it. Then someone invented gods, and taught others to fear those gods to the inventor’s favour. The rest is history.

But, spirit is a whole nother matter. One-celled beings had a connection to each other, and that connection was life, or spirit. Every being from those first one-celled beings have had that same connection–life, and that life is spirit. Today, our 37.2 billion cells have life, and they have spirit. Through them we have life, and we have spirit. Every living being everywhere on our plane of existence has life, and every living being anywhere has spirit. Spirit is what connects every one of us to every other one of us. Not just humans to humans, or sentient beings to sentient beings. All brings to all beings! Life is connected to life!

DOG Hey rawgod, good response. So, as with religionists, there are many different kinds of atheists. However, one reacts or responds to the most vocal and “stick-together” types who form self-supporting groups on social media, for example, using the same pattern of demagoguery as their estranged brothers in the faith.

PONY “If you only take note of the loud-mouths, you cannot understand the essence of a thing. That would be like only listening to Trump on what it takes to be an American. Would that be a good thing to base your knowledge on? I would bet that if you give an honest answer, it would be an outright, absolute “NO!” So why would you do that with atheists? Believing Trump would be the easy way out, but truth is seldom easy to come by.”

DOG “Why would I listen to demagogue atheists and not the rank and file? Because, as in all other “isms” only the loud-mouths are heard. The rest go on about their lives mostly unaware of what they believe, or not, and most of their thoughts have already been formed by those very same demagogues. If you’re looking to dialogue, you can’t respond to something that doesn’t express an opinion.

PONY “I am asking you to respond to me, as the only representative of my brand of spiritual atheism. I have no knowledge of what others are saying about their brand of atheism, nor can ANYBODY BUT ME say anything about my brand of atheism. If you want to respond to those others, please do not make me appear to be part of them.”

DOG “You claim to be a spiritual atheist, which would be a total contradiction if I didn’t make the effort to understand that you do not reject some sort of “spirit” world or connection for yourself, but you definitely reject the idea of a particular male God as a super-being who created all things out of nothing and who demands abject servitude, worship and desires to be prayed to even if he never deigns reply/respond to any such prayers. So you are also a kinda-sorta agnostic-atheist, picking and choosing what fits, what doesn’t? A lot of atheists would take strong exception to that, I think, based on my own experiences with Neo-Darwinians.

PONY ‘Do I pick and choose what fits and what doesn’t? Definitely not. I look inside myself to see what is there. No super-being is inside me, nor is there any reason to believe there is a super-being outside of me. The truth of this matter, for me, is there is no reason to even consider there is a super-being anywhere. As long as I look only inside myself to see what is there, I see nothing to even suggest looking to see if there is a super-being anywhere. Such are the stuff of comic magazines and religious organizations. Even as I said to you in my above comment, there is no god in a new-born baby until some authority figure puts it there.

[Newly added–To start, there is no conflict between atheism and spirituality. Atheism is merely a lack of belief in a god or gods or pantheons of gods. Spirituality, as I use it, and as Wikipedia defines it, is centered on the “deepest values and meanings by which people live.And the deepest value by which I live is the spiritual connection between all living beings. And if by spirit world you are talking about angels, ghosts, and demons, yes, I do not believe that spirit world exists. But if you are talking about a plane of existence outside known reality, though NOT in any religious way, then that I do accept, and, of necessity, believe in a spiritual world. As for any super-being, deity, or theity, as I just said, there is no reason to even think there is such a one.]

DOG Like me, you were brought up to believe in a “super being” who knows all, sees all and is much more likely to punish than to reward. Like me, you rejected that concept but unlike me, it would seem you did not pursue the reasoning why any sane person (85% of the world’s population believes in this character, worships it, sacrifices to it and stakes its future upon its dubious mercy-are they all automatically certifiable, and we 15% the only possibly sane on this world?) would continue the charade.

PONY Ah, but I did take a good, long, hard look at those 85% who believe in some type of deity or otherwise super-being. You probably won’t see that in my writing because I didn’t find anything there to give me a foothold to remain believing in deities. It (the concept) does not exist IN MY PHILOSOPHY, so why bother with it. But what I did do is realize that those who follow deist or theist religions, or even those who deny the religion but keep the theity or deities, are merely on a different part of the spiritual journey that is life. To understand religion, or belief in gods, you must believe in them yourself. You must be a part of that community. I was born a part of that community. But a time came when that community ceased to function for me, so I threw it away. But, did I throw all babies out with the bathwater? Not right away. I looked into other Abrahamic religions like Judaism, Mohammedanism, and the many other branches of Christianity, into non-Abrahamic religions such as voodoo, witchery, druidism, devil-worship, and so on.” 

DOG I [began] unravelling the reasons for man to insist on having a god. It came down to [the] realization that “god”, while not a super being, does exist. Therein lies the rub. Denial is fine and dandy, and that is what atheism is.

PONY [Newly added–Atheism is not “Denial,” to deny something would be to give it value, or credence. Theism is based on a fallacy. Atheism does not consider the fallacy.]

DOG [Atheism] doesn’t seek to unravel the cause of belief in a god, it just wants to bury the concept within a purely materialistic life. Declaring something non-existent because I can’t prove scientifically that it exists is childish. What constitutes evidence? On this world, it’s whatever those in power decide is evidence. The rest of us just better shut up if we disagree, or pay the price for being mavericks. Denying the existence of something because it is determined that the “something” doesn’t live up to certain claims made for it is an error. That thing still exists, it just doesn’t perform according to our beliefs about it. Someone could claim that a “Smart car” can pull a trailer of hay bales normally assigned to a semi. Saying that the Smart car doesn’t exist when it fails to deliver is faulty reasoning. So… God exists, outside the propaganda. What is god then? Apart from the dubious claims made by 85% of the population, from observation and study of non-approved research, we can deduce that “god” was/is an alien character, or a group of alien characters, who once lived on this world. We can deduce that Homo Sapiens are not a product of evolution, but indeed the result of a deliberate act of “vandalism” perpetrated upon a humanoid species that once lived here; the cloning of a slave race to serve the aliens. We can deduce this by looking at the many constructs that continue to baffle and intrigue and over which so much ridiculous speculation and pronouncements have been made. Of course if we want to remain either proper fundamentalist religious people, or fundamentalist Neo-Darwinians, we can mock and denigrate all observations, and all recorded research that has gone into unravelling our pre-historical but relatively recent past. We can also mock and denigrate anyone who has taken the trouble to “travel” into the past and into the future and taken a serious look at the social workings of the universe and not just those of one insignificant little world on the edge of nowhere.

As I have stated before, I have done such travelling. Through one NDE, I encountered entities/beings/aliens who had interesting things to teach about universal happenings. For example, the existence of Time Lords. On earth (‘Oh Please! Pure fantasy!) such ideas are immediately confined to looney bin thinking. But I was taught a truly neat way through the denials based on lack of information and mostly deliberate mis, and dis, information and misdirection, and that is, “Believe all things, believe IN nothing.” That which rules sentient worlds chooses to hide, and for good reasons. Another good source of information is the very book that portends to speak for God: the Judeo-Christian writings themselves. The more truth you can put in a lie, the more effective will be the lie. The Bible is a massive piece of lying propaganda but the reason it remains the number one best seller is how much truth is used to cement the lie. So, I went into it looking to find how the cement was used. Here’s a very telling quote from a letter to the Ephesians:

“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”

So, who are “rulers, authorities, powers”? What are spiritual forces of evil in heavenly realms? I know what the intent of the statement is, but what if I choose to follow the bouncing ball in a different direction than the writer expected? What happens if I discover, not what he hoped I would deduce, but the actual truth behind his words? Trouble! God is a Time Lord. Time Lords are spiritual forces of evil outside of Earthian awareness. Ergo why organized religions always, without fail, promote evil while disguising themselves as fronts for a benevolent “super being” as you call it. To properly engage the history of Time Lord control of this universe would mean developing an entirely new cosmology, a little beyond my abilities at the moment and beside, I doubt that I’d get anywhere with it for obvious reasons.

All that may seem off topic but not to me. I like foundations to any claim. I like evidence, not necessarily of a physical nature. I need to KNOW.  You state/claim there is no “god in a new-born baby until some authority figure puts it there” and you could not be more, and crucially in error. It is not a living super-being entity that is present (not in the new born actually, but in the foetus hence, and note: the totally irrational religious fundamentalist doctrine of protecting the unborn!) That is what the Teachers explained is in fact the soul implant; the controlling apparatus that determines what a pseudo-human will accept as truth, and what it will automatically reject. Apart from that however, there is also the spirit aspect that accompanies life. That is the thing even the Time Lords could not remove from their sentient slaves. No spirit, no life.

That much I know so far.

PONY [Newly added–All fine for you, and those who have the same and/or similar experiences. But most people on this world, I would venture less than 1% of 1% of the world’s population, have any such experience to go on.]

But, [for myself, returning to my previous comment] I found no resonance in other Western or African religions with what was in my heart and mind, and especially my spirit. So I turned to Eastern religions and philosophies, and almost immediately discovered there some very attractive theories, particularly the theory of reincarnation.
As I just wrote in a comment to someone else, I had already concluded that Abrahamic religions were impossible to live without committing their brand of sin at least once in an entire lifetime, so [as a child] I postulated practice lives, where a human could live over and over in an attempt to learn how to live the perfect life. But when I broke away from the religion that I was spoonfed as a child, I forgot all about practice lives… Until I discovered reincarnation. That was exactly what I had been looking to find in Occidental religions, but never could find.

At that time the biggest Oriental religions were Buddhism, Hinduism, and Zen Buddhism. Regretfully, I somehow missed Jainism, but not finding it then probably meant my move beyond Tibetan Buddhism, the style of Buddhism I finally chose to follow, may have taken longer to arrive at. Now, please do not think I didn’t give TiBu a good chance, because I did. I studied under a rinpoche, one of those who were at a level next below to the Dalai Lama, spiritual leader of all Tibetans. He was an excellent teacher, and I learned a lot about life from him. I daresay my spiritual consciousness lifted itself many levels under his care. But one day I found the chink in the armour of TiBu, and the rinpoche and I had a horrible argument in front of his other acolytes, and I could not stay in his presence. There was a thing I believed that he did not, nor did 10,000 years of his predecessors. Not even the Bhudda left any words to say it that I could find, if even he considered it noteworthy. At last I was on my own, and I was able to shine with my own inner light. I was over religions, over deities, over most earthly philosophies but my own. And I was not lonely.

DOG [A requote] “Denial is fine and dandy, and that is what atheism is. It doesn’t seek to unravel the cause of belief in a god, it just wants to unravel the cause of belief in a god, it just wants to bury the concept of god within a purely materialistic life.”

PONY “Is this question for real? It shows absolutely no understanding of the concept of atheism. It is equivalent to Trump saying the Democrats are the reason for separating immigrant children from their parents. But I will answer it anyway.
Atheism is not about a convenient choice to ignore the concept of god in order to have fun without consequences in this particular lifetime. Okay, maybe it is for some, I cannot speak for them. Most atheists I know started out as religious, but turned away because their minds or spirits were not fulfilled by either what religion had to offer, or a god had to offer. Most are atheists because they fought the long hard battle, and came out of it standing alone. They started as an army of 1, and they ended as an army of 1. They looked at the millions around them they had massacred in effigy, and they stood proud, unafraid, relieved, and a little fatigued. But they stood victorious.
However, as many religious victors would have done after winning great battles, they did not pillage, rape, and plunder. Atheists walked to the bottom of the mound of (figurative) dead theists, and then slept the sleep of the weary. There was no rejoicing, no bending of their conciousnesses, possibly not even a smile. But it was over. For some…

DOG [A requote] “We can deduce that Homo Sapiens [as a species] is not a product of evolution, but indeed a result of a deliberate act of “vandalism” perpetrated upon a humanoid species that once lived here.”

PONY “You can deduce that, a few myths and some totally amazing bits of architecture might even support that deduction, but fossil records put the lie to the statement that evolution did not cause Homo Sapiens to appear on this earth. The thing is, I could have an easier time proving that Jesus did not spend 40 years in the desert, but he did spend a lot of time learning at the feet of buddhist teachers in India, or Persia, IF HE DID INDEED EXIST. The clues, if you care to look, are many. Most don’t want to look at them. But, yes, I for one have looked (indirectly) at Stonehenge, and the Pyramids, and a lot of other such constructions, and while the feats were definitely unworldly, they were still within the realm of human capability. Further, if such constructions were designed by alien engineers, why did they use such crude building blocks? Surely, with their technology, they could have sliced mountainous rocks into mirror-smooth blocks that fit perfectly together. The building blocks of said architecture show evidence of being made with crude contemporary tools. Were the aliens so cruel as to make their slaves take years to do what they could have done in minutes? This does not fit, for me.”

Thus ends part one of my conversation with my fellow blogger. Hopefully I will get the next part done soon, and hopefully I can throw in an analysis. Till then, keep on keeping on…



Life! What is it? We all know inside of us what life feels like, what it does for us, we would not be alive without it. But what is life? Can life even be known? The best dictionary definition I can find reads: The condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction,  functional activity, and continuous change preceding death. Does that definition work for you? It does not work for me, especially since it does not refer to the situation of coming into being through splitting of cells (mitosis), growing from a spore, growing from a seed, breaking out of an egg. or even a cocoon, live birth, and/or cloning, (the last being done in laboratories, not naturally, though we don’t know yet for sure if clones will produce real and conscious life). However, while I agree with the above sense of the definition of life more or less wholeheartedly, I find it descriptive,  but not definitive. To me it describes what we can do with life, but it does not get to the roots of what life actually is. This inability to express what life is instead of what it does is probably why I have spent most of my life from the time I was born until this very moment as I write this post to try to discover if I can better define what life is, or if it is even possible to define it using the English language, which is my mother tongue,  and the only language I can use with any confidence.

Why am I wasting my life chasing this very elusive knowledge? Because I need to know. And why am I not doing my work in a laboratory, like a true scientist? Because I believe life is not natural to our earthly plane of existence, and science can only describe that which is natural to the earth, or, in larger terms, what is natural to our universe…


I cannot say that I fully understand biological life, but I really don’t have to. We have scientists who do all that work for me, and people who put that knowledge on the internet, and all I have to do to read it is ask the right question. But is biological life the full story of life on earth? In the universe? Or in the cosmos? The cosmos? What do I mean when I say the cosmos? Wikipedia describes the cosmos as the universe, and says it is orderly. I disagree with their concept, but I can do that, because I am approaching the cosmos through a philosophical viewpoint. So, when I use the word cosmos, this is what I mean: All places or non-places where life can and does exist, including the universe in which for sure biological life exists, as it does on earth, but also places where non-biological, possibly energy-based life can and does exist. As to an orderly cosmos, I prefer to think of the cosmos as a place where order and chaos exist simultaneously hand-in-metaphorical-hand. In other words, everything–everywhere. The universe, in its turn, is a place where physical (biological) life does exist, but where spiritual life co-exists with the physical. Physical life within the universe presents itself as orderly, the result of biological evolution. Chaos exists here too in the fact there is no order by which we can predict what evolution can or will create. Evolution follows a random course, searching without consciousness, most probably for a perfect lifeform. Humans are not it!

I also mentioned spiritual life above, by which l mean the connection of all living beings, one to all other beings, by virtue of the life inside them, and whatever that life is. And, going back to the start of this essay, this is the life I am searching to define. Not biological life, but spiritual life. IMO, spiritual life also includes the force that makes our bodies move to our direction. Spiritual life is the driver that compels biological life to be born, to act, to propogate, and to try to find purpose before dying. And it not only causes change, it requires us to change. It takes our experiences, displays them to us, and asks, “What now?”

Looking at spiritual life from another direction, there seems to be no way to measure spiritual life, its weight is negligible, if not zero. It has no measurable energy, although there is the possibility that it is married to our brain waves. One of the problems, though, is that we humans like to believe we are the most highly developed species on earth. And we base this belief only on ourselves. We have no way of knowing otherwise, because we have no way of communicating with most other species, and knowing exactly what they think of us. I, personally, am glad we cannot communicate with them. But i also wish we could!

Being a cat lover, who presently lives with 5 cats, I can see how intelligent they are, but I cannot always recognize their feline intelligence. I can understand where their human-type intelligence connects with mine: I have one cat who loves to bring me toys, most of which I am not supposed to touch. But one particular toy I am not only supposed to touch, I am supposed to throw it, so she can fetch it. She plays this game until she tires of it, at which time she hides the toy until she is ready to play Fetch again. But another cat likes to have me groom him, which is definitely a cat comfort action. He starts by jumping on a counter and making head-butt motions to me. If I bend my face down to his, he starts with a head-butt, then licks my mustache and goatee. When first he did this I thought he was grooming me, but his following actions decried this idea. He would turn his face to one side or the other and wait. If I did nothing he would give me a pissed-off look and leave. But, if I reciprocated his efforts, he started to purr. The more I washed his face and head with my whiskers which he would keep moistened, the louder he would purr, and the longer he would stay. Generally he does this at least once a day. Grooming is a feline comfort action, those cats who like each other groom each other often, while those that are stand-offish groom only themselves, and are groomed only by themselves. If anyone ever tells me cats are not intelligent, I disabuse them of that thought. But is this really feline intelligence I am seeing? I think it is. And that is why I believe cats, and all animals on land or in the sea, have spirits. But cats have been around people for millennia, so maybe they are displaying learned behaviours, though I do not think so.

What about fish, bugs, plants, and microbes? Do they have spirits too? I have no way to answer that but this: Evolution tells us we started as one-celled beings over 4 billion years, give or take, and those one-celled beings evolved into everything else, including us. We have spirits, I’m very sure of that. Is there any doubt all living beings should also have spirits? By human standards that does not seem possible. But we do not know how to see by bug standards, plant standards, or even microbe standards. Until we can, or absolutely cannot, I am not going to deny them what I know I have, because they are our distant ancestors. I would welcome them into our community of living beings, but I have no such right. They were here first. If anyone should be doing the welcoming, it should be them.

End of part one

Learning How to be Unsane

But enough about obstacles. I have told you what the major obstacles are, but I now need you to discover the rest on your own. The thing is, I really don’t want to tell you anything at all, my only purpose in writing this work is to have it act as a guide, not to act as a How to Change manual. I want it to be more of a “This is My Experiencework that you might be able to use to help you through the changes you are about to go through. This is definitely NOT a Bible for Change.

You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him or her drink!

Probably at some point in your life you have heard the above adage or saying, or one similar to it. I want to take this moment to remind you, no one led you to this work (unless someone connected to you in some way suggested you come, but that certainly was not me), you basically led yourself here. But even so, however you got here, no one, including me, can make you read what is here, or force you to use anything you read here. This change, if you decide to go through with it, is wholly up to you, and how that change happens for you is completely and absolutely up to you.

Just a short while back I suggested authority figures will be an obstacle against making this change. I even suggested to you that God, being the Ultimate Authority Figure, would be an obstacle. Now I need to change that statement. Since you are still reading this, and didn’t stop reading it when I wrote the above piece on obstacles, I know now that you are serious about making a change, or at least seriously contemplating making a change. So, if you believe in God, and find that after you make the change you still believe in God, I’m not going to tell you that you are wrong. I may not have said this in so many words before this, but as you go through this change, you may find you believe things inside yourself that did not originate inside you. That does not mean they are wrong. Some people actually know what they are talking about. And here is the point I tell you that while the concept of God, or any supreme being or force, does not work for me, it is up to you to decide what does or doesn’t work for you. Only you can know what works for you. No one, absolutely no one, has the right to tell you that you are wrong about anything.

Somewhere in the course of reading this work, you probably also asked yourself, “If this change is so hard to make, and so potentially life-changing, why should I bother trying to make it? Do not let me answer that for you. My opinion is that if you (the horse) are here (at the water), and looking for help (wanting to quench your thirst), why not drink? That is the simple response, but does it help you decide to drink? I hope it isn’t that simple for you, although if you are ready it might be. But if you still aren’t sure, what is it that you might decide to not make the change that keeps you from doing it? First question: Is the water safe to drink, and am I being truthful when I say I believe it is? My response is: I have absolutely no vested interest in what you decide to do. I am not asking you for money, so I don’t want to steal from you. I am not asking you to become a follower, a cult member, or anything like that, so I don’t want to force you into anything. I am not asking you to do anything at all that you don’t decide to do on your own. In fact, I really only want to help you do this if you decide to do this for yourself. There is no should here, or no must. This is totally up to you. And to take that idea one step farther, I don’t want to tell you or anyone why to change or what to change into. My only role in this whole process, if you will allow me to change the allegory, is to be the midwife as you give birth to the new you. There is nothing else I can or want to do. On the off chance that there is a second question, I would prefer you ask it either in a comment, or directly to me (gewcolo@gmail.com) if you prefer privacy.

Here, I think, is a good time to back up a little in this work. Another question you are probably asking in some shape or form is: What has all this to do with all living beings? Everything I have said so far pertains to human beings, to people, and no one can read this but people. And you have hit the nail directly on the head with a huge hammer. I mentioned above that there are trillions of billions of millions of living beings on this planet alone, what about them? Most of them can’t think, or read, or write, or even know. They aren’t even aware they are alive… Are they?

Have you ever asked an ant if it is aware of its own existence? Absurd. There is no way for an amoeba to know it is alive. Or even a _______? I’ll let you fill in the blank. I am not going to insult your intelligence by saying I talk with bugs, or plants, or most animals. But neither am I going to insult their intelligence, or whatever it is that they use to direct their daily lives. I have no illusion that I am a member of the most intelligent species of beings in existence. Because I do not know how to communicate with a living being does not mean it does not communicate with itself, or others of its kind. My basis for this belief is a simple one, all of us are alive. All of us share this wondrous thing called life. And there is no reason for me to believe I am special, or people are special. Or to put that another way, I believe every living being is special, because every living being has life.

If I had my druthers, I would have called this philosophy A Philosophy of Life, but that name is already taken. I wracked my brain to come up with a name that could describe what I feel inside of me, and communicate that feeling to you, or anyone else capable of using this method of communication. Nothing fit, until one day I woke up with the name on the tip of my lips, A Philosophy for All Living Beings. Where it came from, I cannot tell you. I assume it came from my dream mind, or my subconcious mind, or maybe my unsane mind, but it really doesn’t matter where it came from. It works for me, and as far as I know, no one has ever used it before.

So, to quickly describe why I think this philosophy works for all living beings, it is because most living beings already know who they are, and how to live their lives. It might not seem thus to us, but we have no way of knowing what being a different species of life feels like to that particular species of life, or that any being within any species feels about being a living being. I wrote a verse of poetry one day, which seems to be very appropriate here. In the about to be quoted verse, I was writing about dinosaurs:

their brains were the size of peas

we are told

but the size of the brain

does not reflect

the expanse of the mind

(The entire poem can be read at https://rawgod.tripod.com/RealAdvice/id3.htm if you are interested. Look to the left side of the page. Please copy and paste if link does not work. )

This also refers to humans. No one knows what we are truly capable of. But for this work, I would like to re-write that sentence as: No one knows what you are truly capable of… At least, not yet…

So, to show you, through words, how I became unsane, you must leave this website. Go to: http://rawgod.tripod.com/4StepProgram/index.htm   (

why the hell can’t you be like other
she groused
bring home the bacon
rot in front of the tee vee
fuck me once in a while to keep
me happy
why the hell do you want to talk

she looked at me as if she wished
she had a rolling pin in her hand
i think she would have used it
on me

i sat immobile
cool as a cucumber
contemplating her complaint

what she really wanted
what i could never give her
was simple understanding

i had never been able to understand
nor could she ever understand me
it was what we shared in common

sure we were good together
there was no woman in the world i
more than her
and although she may not say
the same about me
she had few grievances against me
our life was good together
as long as i didn’t try to talk to her

really talk, i mean
not the daily bullshit
how are the kids honey
what’s for dinner dear
did you have a good day at the
(neither one of us worked in an office)
we could play those roles without
so we stopped trying

for her that was all she wanted back
for me it was far from enough

i wanted to understand
who are we
why are we here
how did we get where we are
what are we supposed to be doing
where are we going from here
are we going anywhere from here

so i tried talking to her
sometimes over breakfast
(which we so seldom shared)
sometimes at supper
but usually late at night
after we had made love…

those were the times i thought
when we were closest to each other
when we were closest to her god
(whoever or whatever that god
might be)
there was no better time
for communicating

all she ever wanted to do
was to lie in the afterglow
and glow

that was what she did best
glowing after sex
her body still covered with a soft
sheen of sweat
her skin still alive with the blush of
warmth emanating from her entire
joy looking out from the spirit
behind her eyes
she wanted no more than that

this saddened me
i wanted to give her everything i had
inside of me
the essence of me
but i was allowed to give her nothing
for that was all she would take

how can two people exist in such a
everything was so good
on the surface
but beneath there was no substance
no meat on the marital bones

was i wrong to want more
was she wrong to want less
than me

i divorced her you know
after i had promised to live with her
all the days of my life
i left her
not for someone new
(i don’t know that any woman could
replace her)
i left her for me
because i needed someone to talk to
in the long lonely hours
after midnight

i talk now to myself
sometimes i wish i could still talk to

up here in the northlands
where polar bears roam the tundra
and ptarmigan roost
i think back to the leather-winged
the brontosauri
and the tyrannosauri rex
and i wonder
did thoughts like these
drive those poor fellows to extinction

their brains were the size of peas
we are told
but the size of the brain
does not reflect
the expanse of the mind

if it did i would never have left her
we could have been happy
except for my thoughts
my questions
my unending search for answers

i gaze into the cloudless sky
and i see it there above me
the pterodactyc ptarmigan
so awkwardly graceful
so powerful
yet so weak
it does not belong here

i fear that neither do i

  copy and paste if link does not work. )

There you will find an OVERVIEW of the process which I used to change myself, with an index on the right side to take you to how I actually went through the process I discovered. If you try it, I wish you luck becoming the REAL YOU! If you don’t, I hope you bookmark that page for when you decide to discover the Real You. You will decide to try, at some point. I can almost guarantee it. You’ve come this far, have you not? Why not just see if it works…