Book Concept – Title: “The Book Cover” – Philosophy on Prejudice – 8/15/2020

Appearances are the way for a human to have penetrative eyes. As in, to have the ability to see through deception. For deception only brings itself on to lacking itself as appropriate for what one sees. Why would the pauper dress as a rich person, if they were not rich? That is one example. Why would the rich person dress as a pauper, if they did not first dispose of all their funds? This is the opposite example. Deception, to the eyes, cannot be penetrated when what is first seen is never appropriate.

The book’s cover was plainness of former days. It should be believed that this had encouraged readers to not ever judge a book by its cover, by its condition, nor by its title. Titles were not very exciting. Titles such as “Les Miserables”, meaning “The Miserable” would not garner attention, during a time when “exciting” titles are better “marketable”.

An old book was a simple hardback, with perhaps a border that surrounded it from edge to edge. No painting, no other print, was ever included into the cover’s design. It was plain, with most often just a solid color for its entirety.

What this represents is that the cover to a book should not be like the cover to a person. What person wants to show themselves off, either in tattoos, or piercings, or excessive cosmetic, or avant-garde clothing, if not to even subconsciously reject anyone from knowing beyond it all? Such an outer bizarre appearance, makes another not wish to see beyond it, for it is that trust is rarely ever an ingredient. To the eyes, all one can see is the appearance, if such is so intricate. Yet, what is also intricate, if not deception? A lie is swallowed up, even to the viewer, and from this, intricacies and wonderments blossom in that viewer’s mind. Thus, what becomes of this is prejudice.

Prejudice is an obscure and wrong belief, originating entirely from ignorance, making what is believed to be seen, now an intrusion. What they see, is never within that person whom is shared prejudice. For if all they see upon the outer is ugliness, then that ugliness will remain a barrier, and it will promote prejudice. For what is beautiful, must be appropriate for what it is. Why would one disguise themselves, if to not, again, represent the lie?

Philosophy – “In the Mass Production of Minorities” – 6/7/2020

By what it refers to, the mass production of minorities, the creation of identities, is less of a focus on truth, and more of a focus on deception. By what this means, we are showing less of a focus on life and expression, and more of a focus on division. Such means, that through a focus on division, we are focusing on our identity or appearance, in our want to have it stand out more than another’s. We are not in the want to know someone else, through this upholding of our own self-worth.

In having less of a focus on expression, and more of a focus on identification or origin, we focus less on creating what can stem from an origin, and more on the creation of identities.

The mass production of people with their identities, is never going to be defined as the quality to which comes from an origin. An origin, being made up of traditions and values, cannot be mass produced without lessening the value within those traditions, and thus, stifling the quality into the mere quantity of them. To say that each person upon Earth holds their own origin, is merely negating the fact that every life to a person begins with pain, with struggle. For to live, means to have beaten the anguish and despair that held one back from life.

The mass production of minorities is merely the mass production of identities, of the pain that sources division by what “division” references. That is, division references a lack of comprehension upon how another person began. We believe we are unique, compared to them, or in contrast to them. Don’t we all have the same beginnings, like having the same endings? Is any person not simply born, or is any person not simply dead?

There is no uniqueness to a person’s identity or origin, as much as there’s always a uniqueness to a person’s expression from that origin. Such means, that there is a uniqueness to the expressiveness within life.

One cannot comprehend another without that expression, that would be related to an art form. Thus, without such comprehension, and with so much of a focus on identification, there is division.

Dialogue – “How Standards have Fallen in the Art World” – Philosophy – 2/9/2020

Q: How is it true that the way standards have “fallen” is by our today’s focus on “fear to motivate”, rather than “creativity to inspire”?

A: Standards are everything to be raised. However, when a world focuses on logic, not comprehending that when it comes to logic, love holds logic in domination, fear is soon to be the thing held. And, for fear’s sake, it will for the sake of motivation. Within motivation, work. Within inspiration, individualism. When we are motivated, we are fearful. When we express individualism, we are showing love to others, and inspiring them. What the art world lacks, is that inspiration. For in the face of incompetence in shown leadership, art does lead. And when standards fall, it is inevitably to be a focus on fear, such as how the human psychological system works. To today’s time, as something that can be immediately recognized, the issue of “stress” has become a prominent topic. Survival resonates with the feeling of fear, that “the next day” has become, as well, as prominent focus, for everyone to face. When we view logic to be unlike love, we do not focus on love. In fact, it is the scientific way to focus on everything unlike love, and everything like the details of a person. Such a focus on details is what creates a focus on division.

Q: Then, by what you say, it is to mean that “creativity” has little to do with fear, and everything to do with love?

A: When we love, we have created a satisfaction out of our lives. When we are in fear, we continually move, and we continually fight. That is dissatisfaction. The latter is how the art world is being expressed, especially through abstraction, by Nature’s display of madness. In chaotic and uncontrolled movement, that is fear. Why should the art world not be a place for escapism? Why should the art world, as well, not be a place to inspire, rather than adding more fear? An expression of fear, is a reminder of fear. And, everything about the past, to even the previous second in time, has to do with fear. For that is what the heart-beat represents, as an organ that only ever beats faster, when we feel time is being rushed. Creativity is meant to take time, on the basis of knowing that when we uplift, it is an infinite process. Though, when we decline, it is a finite process. Everything to do with fear is all about the descent from grace, to a Hell that we all know. That is what art is doing. It is expressing what we all know. Creativity is not something that we know of the artist, and the literal and objective genius is someone we find to be alien. The creator, that is, is someone who creates either an angel or a demon. Which do we find to be more alien, the angel or the demon, as this is the question. That would be the angel, of course, because “goodness” is always buried beneath the soil, and we always step on it, treating goodness as a nothingness and with denial. In a personal descent, we will say that “God” is not present, because it seems that all of love is leaving us. What is it that “God” sees with His burning gaze? I’d say that He sees what is even beneath Hell.



A Debunk – “Into Democracy and Choice” – 8/20/2019

“Does the common fool not comprehend what the ‘freedom to choose’ does to corrupt a society? That is to say that people are more prone to choosing the most comfortable of choices. That is to say that each of these choices are based solely on trust, for those things most comfortable. That is to say that the ‘freedom to choose’ is the sole cause for why ideas, in recent times, have become stagnant, that leadership is only trusted for comfort, and never for newness. That is to finally say that advantage is easily exploited, for Democracy to ever have power. The ‘freedom to choose’ makes the human without wisdom, not typically having true wisdom to comprehend choices related to intellectualism, over choices related to idiocy. This is because the human brain is more-so inclined to make a choice based on comfort, over risk, and there is no other reason.”