Modern psychology has given humanity invaluable insight into parenting and what makes a good parent as opposed to what bad parenting is. Fortunately, in my life, I didn’t have to suffer bad parenting although I wouldn’t say I was raised by good parenting. It was a working-class English ethos with not much consideration to higher education or finer upper neo-cortex sensibilities. But this post isn’t about me. Just a note though on the kids I lived with when living out on the streets between 1979 and 1986. I was out there as one of the three groups of spiritualists: the ‘spiritual quester’ as I gave away what I owned in ’79 to go on this spiritual investigation and it’s been one hell of an interesting 40-years, but I digress. The point, though, was the difference between me and all those screwed up traumatized kids was bad parenting! Overwhelmingly, most of the kids I talked to out there shared stories of being traumatized and beaten or otherwise by their parents and I’ll note here that very many of them shared stories of religious abuse. It’s, in part, why I view childhood religious indoctrination as a type of child abuse.

I would say that prior to modernity and the knowledge it entailed there was a basic understanding of common sense within the parenting model–sadly, and perhaps somewhat tragically this common-sense notion disappears when the lens gets shifted to religion and God.

But first I think it’s reasonable to focus on the failures of modernity and the education model or lack thereof when it comes to one of the most important areas of human life. We, as a society, put 16-year olds through all kinds of hoops just to get a driver’s license but the same 16-year old has no restrictions or qualifications when bringing offspring into the world–it’s an anything-goes, model when it comes to Darwinian drives. Hell, to rub salt into the wound, the nanny welfare state pays these kids to bring dysfunction into the world! Now I’m not saying every young person who brings a child into the world is a bad parent–some of them are obviously great parents but this doesn’t disqualify my larger societal points. Any move or development into a healthy post-postmodern society will have to deal with a new education model for parenting. This would be a part of the education within The Four Pillars of a new sustainable integrated model for civilization.

This brings us to the argument for poor design. The psychology of humans combined with the length of helplessness within the human animal causes incredible and near unlimited dysfunction and failure. It could be argued that if humans were designed to be this way by malevolent archons then this prolonged helplessness was one of the primary engineering devices of control–a most definite negative intention.

Western theism specifically has to become a contortionist or redefine the notion of what good is when it comes to the issue of parenting. I don’t accept the redefining of good-by western theism when it comes to their apology for God and its poor design choices and often abominable behavior when analyzed by any rational standard. Good parents don’t set up offspring against offspring in a millennia-old struggle of death, blood, and violence! Only an evil God would do such a thing and this is the Gnostic position. A GOOD God doesn’t punish anyone forever for not getting it right in one life–only an evil God would do such a thing and this is the Gnostic position. A good parent whether human or God doesn’t need or demand worship, only an evil God would ask for such a thing and this is the Gnostic position. I’ll link here my fave atheist YouTuber, underlings, who clearly and succinctly deconstructs the western theistic notion of heaven and concludes rationally and rightfully that this version of heaven is really a hell! Only an evil God would offer up this version of ‘heaven’ and this is the Gnostic position. I could go on and on here but these points suffice (or should) when arguing this case.

I’ll note here that we do get into religious efficacy arguments as they pertain to how society should be structured and this is an important and worthwhile discussion but I sit squarely in the Secular Humanist model for society and believe religion to be an adult only area of inquiry. If it were up to me I’d make it so the inquiry into God and reality would begin at around university age and as an elective. I am in no way advocating for the abolishment of religion or religiosity but rather I’m arguing that religionists not be allowed societal power. Once again I see this as a compromise between the idealists and the materialists in much the same way that my Four Pillars are a compromise between The Marxists and Capitalism.

I should note as I often do that for this model to work Secular Humanism would have to function at incredibly high levels of reason, logic, and integrity. This can’t happen under the present neoliberal corporate oligarchy as far as I can see.

That’s all for the moment:)

This is for those who like their angus beefy!

Some of you may know that I hold the western philosophical tradition in hi-esteem. In part, it’s one of the reasons why I don’t give eastern philosophy a ‘free pass’ as is the case with many western spiritualists–Wilber included. Yes, traditions like Jainism and Charvaka have long-held that God doesn’t exist so the western New Age gambit of cherry-picking Vedanta (non-duality) as a spiritual fact is duplicitous and dishonest from a philosophical position. A note here would be that such positions are solely a matter of faith–it then comes down to whether faith-based claims are inherently *irrational and illogical which renders certain faith-based claims as near impossible or delusional. It may be that there are certain stages of faith as delineated by Fowler and that certain faith-based claims are merely childish and co-relational to psychological cognitive development–if this were true, and I believe it is– it would then be reasonable to ask if childish faith-based believers should be given political power and control over society? And I would argue definitely not!

Within the western philosophical tradition is The Analytical School. I respect this tradition for its tenacity at laying the groundwork for logical thought and fallacy, etc., but I am not a fan of this schools dismissal of all metaphysical claims (similar to The Jains)–God, although I think I do understand why they hold this position–I just don’t agree with it. There should be room given for honest metaphysical inquiry framed within a speculative context.

Let’s now introduce a perspective on God that is rarely considered and that is the possibility that God, if it exists (in this universe), is evil. This is the Gnostic view–or, the primary gnostic view as there are diverse metaphysical claims within this tradition. The first issue here would be that this God if it existed, is a very limited God compared to traditional Omni notions of God. But in arguing for this perspective we have to back up a bit and consider some religious and cosmological truisms. The worlds religious traditions couldn’t be more contradictory and this argues for a deceptive God more than an Omni type God who should have been able to make reality known in a clear, non-confusing way–it’s a fact that not only are religions cross-culturally contradictory (and couldn’t be more so) but most religious writings are internally contradictory let alone absurd–and we’ll get to that issue.

Let’s consider what might be called, The Apple Of My Eye, argument. Let’s consider parenting as an analogy. What kind of parent sets offspring against offspring in a bitter and bloody millennia age struggle to the death? Clearly and without equivocation: only an evil God would do such a thing! Now what kind of parent says that it’s children are the central focus of its attention and then creates the conditions for them to commit endless murder and rape against each other? Clearly and again without equivocation: an inept God as if we replace the word God with a parent the argument becomes conclusive.  If we then expand the family analogy to the greater living conditions we then get this antimonial family dynamics being played out against the background of a place where life has to eat life to survive; where the foundational mode of existence is that the universe is actively trying to take your life away! Clearly, then, this is not a good situation from any reasonable analysis and further is a justifiable argument for nihilism if we do live in a material only universe. Kind of a pukey situation, eh?

We need to explore the idea of prison here for a moment as it becomes relevant to the larger context. In the Netflix series Narco, Pablo Escobar at one point agrees to go to prison; one where his living conditions were probably 80% better than most people alive today. The point being, that no matter how posh the conditions of the prison he created for himself the fact remained that he was still a prisoner–he couldn’t just up and leave and go to other countries. Similarly, if the gnostic version of reality is true, I would then concede that there are some truly beautiful experiences to be had within this matrix but in the larger context, this would still be a prison no matter how posh. Interestingly enough, and using HBO’s Westworld to flesh this idea out further; the demiurge (Anthony Hopkins character), by the second season has programmed all the clones/bots to engage in a real-time war against each other and the archons who created them. This goes to the twisted mind of the demiurge whose ‘fake’ creation becomes all too real and wherein everybody is played against everybody for the amusement of the twisted mind/s of the creator/s–this is the type of Gnosticism I subscribe to and I’d argue it’s a profoundly more coherent version of theism, but we need to flesh that out with an example.

Let’s take one example: the geneticist, Francis Collins. This is a man who headed the human genome project so he’s of no intellectual idiocy! And yet, when it comes to religion it seems that he is! Let’s assume his conversion to Evangelical Christianity was sincere and that he had a profound experience with Christ. This is obviously a ubiquitous experience as billions throughout history have had some epiphany with God and Christ, but what becomes really problematic is Mr. Collins’  lack of critical thinking and deconstructing of his own experience. Does he really believe the absurdity of one strike and you’re tormented forever proposition? Why can’t he apply the faculties of reason and logic to this issue? When gazed upon from that lens one would have to concede that spiritual crime and punishment isn’t in itself irrational. This would lead any Christian’s who’ve thought about this particular issue to become a universalist (of some type) and many have–the point is that Collins is suffering cognitive dissonance when it comes to his conversion and this is just one example; deconstruct further and one could say that the Krishna hypothesis (the avatar theory) is a more coherent version of Christianity and the Christ experience  compared to strict evangelicalism; deconstruct further still and one may arrive at a Gnostic view of the Kristos!

*Note: the ‘higher’ up the ladder of faith the less and less faith becomes attached with irrationality and illogical propositions, but God claims are still faith and Ken Wilber is practicing faith and religion albeit at a very advanced level. But, even this level of faith can be problematic if it gets played out in the ‘How Shall We Live’ domain and The Philosopher King becomes equally dangerous as the stakes are higher when complexity is calculated in and misjudgments based on untenable faith declarations cause serious damage! The third-way politics of Bush/ Blair as Integral is evidence enough of this concern.

I’ll explore the possibility of what and who the ‘true god’ of existence is in another post in the future.

A note here on The Jains: they might be considered some of the first post-metaphysicians. Although true that their philosophy is sympathetic to modern materialism it doesn’t automatically make Jainism the truth.
I have a unique conspiracy that the chief archons of the demiurge moved shop to Chi-na which was east of Eden. It’s here where they’ve ‘managed’ civilization. China is the longest running civilization in history. They did build that wall; they’ve also quietly become the largest demographic on earth and will become the primary economic players in the near future. The demiurge also predicted the 200-million march against Jerusalem and it’s one hell of a prediction coming from antiquity. The Great Dragon!





This discussion delves into the pros and cons of religion. The first thing I would say is there is a major distinction between religion and the existence of God. If God doesn’t exist then the argument, it seems to me, distills into a strange type of ‘delusional Darwinism’! In a Godless universe, religion, then, according to Jones, is a net positive even if the beliefs that instantiate the culture are metaphysically delusional. To me, this is a bizarre position to hold but I’d concede it could be the case.

My thinking here is that a Secular Society premised on the best use of logic, reason, and a secular law should be the overarching superstructure of society. Within the superstructure of secular society, people would be free to practice their religious belief but their belief wouldn’t be allowed the force of law when it comes to issues like bigotry, gender, sexual preference, etc. A secular society would be framed around the idea that all people are of worth and have the same legal rights and protections. Under that umbrella is where religiosity would live and have its being.

This idea, as far as I can see, would prevent theocracy–Sharia; The Noahide Laws, etc…At what point do we concede that The Scarlett Letter isn’t a good template for a society–shaming people based on various and sundry ghost stories.

The idea of a secular society is recent within the last 100 or so years and the idea, generally, has given more people a better quality of life than any other system as far as I can see.  Why we would want to go back to institutional religion as power and politics is something that I’m just not getting. There have to be hidden agendas here as I can’t see this is just about data–and yes, data can be skewed and interpreted in almost unlimited ways when someone has a hidden bias. Would anyone like to trip over to conspiracy lane?

Once again, I see this debate as another example of why humanity needs a new academy dedicated solely to the unbiased cross-cultural study of the worlds spiritual history and traditions.

A note: Jones’s intrinsic religion isn’t incompatible with a secular humanist superstructure. The superstructure would simply prevent abuse based on intrinsic bigotry, etc..

FWIW: I fall into the tiny category of number 3-in Jones’ religiosity map: a quest religiosity so I have a rather unique perspective on the whole bloody mess. But, it appears I’m not alone as The Freemasons, Jesuits, and a cabal of Jewish people are also ‘questers’ and I believe they have a plan! And always have! And that makes religion extraordinarily dangerous, but that once again is conspiracy lane.



Now come on boys and girls; ladies and gentlemen, yogi and yogini–is it possible, to be honest here and not project endless bull-shit? Are you asking me? Well…Yes, I believe such a thing is possible but one would have to go about such an inquiry with the greatest skill combined with the most curious unbiased minds as humanly possible.

What we can’t do? We can’t define Enlightenment in advance and then go about having ethnic-based ‘scientific claims’ made about enlightenment! That is simply not science and that is not how science works. Science works via, hypothesis, experiment, observation, data collection, verification, or falsification, wherein experiments are demonstrable and repeatable. The experiments are then verified by different scientists all over the world and a consensus happens via repeated empirical observation that something has been verified to be true and consistent with any given hypothesis. So that’s the framework and minimum conditions which would need to be met if we are to study spiritual claims using the scientific method.

Of course, there are the soft sciences like psychology and philosophical phenomenology wherein we study the inner world of human experiences. Things like dreams and emotions and love, etc. The issue here though if we concede that honest research accurately demonstrates authentic knowledge is to not elevate interior human experience over and above empirical, ontological, metaphysical, and cosmological knowledge. In other words, this research, if done with integrity should be a vital part of human knowledge but it needs to be carefully parsed into a greater whole.

So how do we avoid faith-based gullibility, quackery, and woo-woo? Well, at this juncture along the human ‘civilizational’ trajectory I would say we need a new cross-cultural academy dedicated solely to exploring ALL spiritual claims in a controlled environment. I’ve suggested in past posts that this should be an Integral aspect of any evolving post-post-modern society which is attempting to integrate all fields of human inquiry and endeavor. Now, true, we may not get to the heart of any universal mysteries even doing this but if we don’t do something like this then the current lunacy, woo-woo, and quackery will continue to exploit and manipulate the gullible. How long is humanity going to accept such absurdities when there could be a way to ‘solve’ most spiritual claims for authenticity?

Let’s take two out of potentially thousands of claims that could be studied. Breatharianism. And here I don’t mean 40-days of fasting but rather extended indefinite claims of living biologically solely on air. The first thing that could be done is to study if it’s even physically possible! But secondly, Breatharians, if honest, should submit themselves into this new academy for study. And only after repeated demonstrable experiments should humanity make a reasonable judgment on the results. Until such a time as something like this happens, I just can’t see that these claims should be taken seriously. Now, sure, the skeptics may say that it’s already been debunked but I’m suggesting more of a systemic approach to the myriad and sundry spiritual claims of humanity as I think it’s too soon to declare us nothing but meat-puppets.

The claim that humans can be awake in deep-sleep. This is known as Causal Meditation or witness meditation and it should be able to be studied under controlled conditions. I’m not a scientist but surely scientists could find ways to test this claim under controlled conditions. The rub here, and it’s why I’m suggesting a NEW cross-cultural spiritual academy is to have scientists study this who are skeptical of the claim; it simply doesn’t work to have Buddhist science; Hindu science; Young Earth science; etc…What I’m suggesting is that humanity grows up institutionally and studies this area of life thoroughly and honestly so we can move on and truly dismiss that which is false.

Are you tired of the endless debate between religionists and scientists? Between atheists and apologists? I know I am! And I’d love for there to be a way that could ‘solve’ most of these issues in a thoughtful systemic way. This is what I’m suggesting as the cacophony of madness between all the warring factions is draining and unnecessary–well, certainly to the degree that it’s happening.

An integral branch of the new academy would be to re-explore esotericism, alchemy, Kabbalah, kundalini, gnosis, etc.,  as much of these ideas and claims are resurfacing and ‘bubbling-up’ again in late post-modernity anyway–so hey, why not shine the light of science on these claims if they are re-emerging at this point in human history…

I think one of the most intriguing aspects of this idea is who would be most adamantly opposed to such a thing happening? And then to ask why?

And, of course, I have a potential answer to that query: because not everyone here is who they appear to be. But that’s a conspiracy post:D


We should start with a definition and some context. Here is the Urban Dictionary definition.

This is a conspiracy post. There can be plenty of other posts where we can argue things like The Ontological Argument; The Transcendental Argument; The Argument from Design; etc…In other words, whether or not humans are alone here in a vast indifferent material cosmos–this post will be predicated on the belief that humans are not the only players on this earth and we can further extrapolate from this claim that there is far more going on here than the materialist will be willing to concede, although honesty has to frame these ideas a speculation.

A note here for Christian’s. Theories espoused here would only need Christian’s to consider two primary ideas: 1) that the Old Testament God was not and is not the Father of the Christ. 2) That Genesis 6 and the implications of The Nephilim Theory reverberate to this day and that the hybrid offspring of the Nephilim today control all religion with its associated deception, bullshit, and high fuckery–yes, mainstream Christianity is a part of the fuckery! Of course, there is more to it than that, but that will suffice for the moment.

I’ll add a point form list of things that I consider to be fuckery or High Fuckery at the end of this post but here are a few examples to get us started. September 11, 2001, became the day when incredibly brazen crimes were solved on the tell-lie-vision within an hour of them happening. The same could be said for The Las Vegas Shooting which was more or less solved on The Ellen Show! I don’t know what happened in Las Vegas but anyone who took any time whatsoever to look closely at all the video and pictures of the crime scene the next morning would notice one peculiar thing: there was next to zero damage! Tents in pristine condition, glass, buildings, etc., all showing zero signs of the kind of damage consistent with high-powered rifles being fired at material that is easily damaged: High Fuckery! Here is a link to what a machine gun does to concrete let alone tents. I’m not into debating this issue as picture evidence can easily be doctored today. At the time, though, I did investigate–as much as that is possible for a layperson–as much video and picture evidence as possible and saw very little physical damage to any property–certainly no damage consistent with the scale of the official narrative.

One word that is useful for describing what it is that we are living in from The Christian Gnostic perspective is the WOMB–which is translatable to Matrix. The word itself has associations with the word fuck–as in sex, or Big Bang! The Gnostic view is that we’ve been High Fuckeried into existence! Or, something like that, but it’s a useful analogy within this context–oh, Sophia, what have you done? The Gnostic view espouses as speculation that Archons–celestial beings who can take human form–control this womb or matrix. This isn’t altogether different from the previously mentioned Nephilim Theory, although, in this context, the metaphysics of religion and god are quite different compared to normative religious interpretations. Yes, it’s here you’ve been given a hint at how ‘they’ do what they do and get away with it–because ‘they’ are not what they appear to be.

I think it would be fair to say, then, that from this perspective humanity is experiencing what could accurately be described as a Mind-Fuck! To do this on the scale that is happening today requires Total Control of the human mind–Government; in coordination with a Trans-National Corporatocracy, aligned with a political structure wherein a tiny group of El-ites oversees the pyramid of civilization from its peak–this is the oligarchic plutocracy, and this indeed, is what we are living under. It’s this structure and its associations and propaganda, along with the theorized Archonic overseers who are capable of pulling off the incredible amount of High Fuckery that the earth and its people’s are experiencing today. BTW., this was happening on the night of The Las Vegas shooting at The Royal Albert Hall in London–got to love the Cult of 33! Or, not…and I definitely sit in the or not camp.

Just a note on materialism juxtaposed to my Gnostic view. Nihilism is inevitable if materialism is true–at some point everything becomes meaningless! The best we could do here if materialism is true is an existential philosophy–something like as espoused by Kierkegaard. The Gnostic view I hold although somewhat terrifying from the perspective of the dark womb ultimately offers humanity the hope of the lighted womb. We would, however, have to be honest in our speculations and not violently transgress the processes and faculties of logic and reason–it’s here where we can dismiss most normative religious claims which are dishonest, irrational, and illogical. I should also note that I’m not a fan of elevating phenomenology over and above ontology, cosmology, and metaphysics. If the yogis want to say the word science in relation to yoga and meditation then there have to be mechanisms of demonstrating, verifying, and falsifying inner claims about the nature of reality. This simply hasn’t happened to my knowledge. Has it? Let’s ask Dan Dennett, Sam Harris, or Richard Dawkins if the Yogi’s have demonstrated the burden of proof–and I say this as a theist and a believer in panpsychism–but, I frame it honestly–as speculation. Any other framing today is, you guessed it–fuckery!

The list:

-creating an endless money machine via usury which has given those at the top of the pyramid incredible advantages over everyone else–sheer high fuckery!

-911. Incredible high fuckery.

-Las Vegas shooting. Definitely fuckery! (this does not mean every episode of violence is a false flag).

-the return of religion since 911 and the dismantling of secularism. Fuckery.

-mass immigration into traditional white western cultures. Fuckery! This doesn’t mean all immigration is bad–what matters is the intent.

-the sports and entertainment EL-ite making more in a year than most working people will make in a life. Fuckery!

-unending inflation rates which will make paupers out of 90% of the population within 100-years. Fuckery. The Hunger Games isn’t the best future available.

-political correctness. Fuckery.

-The New Age Movement–or what I call The Department of Neoliberal Spiritual Propaganda. Fuckery!

-labeling all those critical of Israel as Nazi’s. Fuckery!

-the history of the Jews. Fuckery! Over 100-years of archeology and scientific knowledge about the cosmos renders the narrative in The Torah as plain wrong.

-I’ve yet to assess crypto fully but it has all the hallmarks of High Fuckery!

-Flat Earth Theory. Fuckery!

Please feel free to add anything that you consider either fuckery of High Fuckery in the comment section.