Final Notice

            Free Will and Objective Uncertainty

                          by Frank Hatch

                   "...too long or too short
          you may present for a
freewill offering;
            but it will not be accepted for a vow."
                       Leviticus 22:23 (NRSV)

Imperfect and Perfect:

The Final Notice website has been criticized for being "too
long"
and "too short."  Both criticisms are valid.  Indeed,
this imperfect website (per Leviticus 22:23) is
"extended or
contracted" (JPS); "superfluous or lacking" (KJV);
"ill-proportioned or stunted" (NAB).
The Final Notice
website can only qualify as a "freewill offering."  Only
Jesus Christ (the High Priest) has the Blood to offer the
perfect Vow:  
"...once for all..." (Hebrews 9:26).


Perfect or Imperfect?  How do you know?  What is your standard? What
is your empirical data? How do you trust your data? Where are your
proofs in a math sequence of postulates?  Axioms, but no proofs?

These valid questions should be asked by any
individual reading the
Final Notice website. I have emphasized individual, because the
designed incompleteness of this website addresses only functional
individuals - not groups of individuals that have become non-functional.

The function of an individual is to find the Truth.  All groups find it
convenient to short-circuit the thesis and antithesis of every synthesis
(i.e., they restrict their analysis to the finite dimensions and variables of a
Closed System). Thus, all groups avoid the paradoxes of Truth to bind
their members to a limited analysis. The function of a group is only to
maintain the group. Thus, only functional individuals can appreciate Truth.

Only functional individuals have free will. Groups only exist because
they bind their members. A member that breaks the group's binding
becomes a functional individual with free will.  (Note: A functional
individual may choose to bind himself to a particular group as an act of
free will. Such an act of free will may change the group.)

Only functional individuals can use objective uncertainty.  With a
religious chant or a political slogan, groups restrict the objective
uncertainty of their members. A member that resists restriction of
objective uncertainty becomes a functional individual trying to think
outside the group's perimeters.

Only functional individuals can use tension and stress. Groups control
the tension and stress of their members as part of the group's function of
avoiding paradoxes.  Members that resist the control of the group will
experience an increase in tension and stress; they are becoming functional
individuals.

Thus, functional individuals have free will; and they can use objective
uncertainty with the resultant tension and stress. Functional individuals
are usually in the minority of any group that has rationalized the human
situation.

Since functional individuals are commonly attacked for political or
religious heresy, such human individuals have found it prudent to seek
anonymity. Therefore, the
Final Notice website does not maintain an
email list and discourages donations. If you send a donation, I won't thank
you. Indeed, I will forget your name.

A species that uses dialectical logic can only corrupt whatever
information is given it. Thus, the
Final Notice website will remain
incomplete.  You will not be given the beginning or the end; nor can this
website provide your real name and unique purpose. [Your uniqueness
can only be found on
a white stone (Revelation 2:17).]  However, the
gaps in the
Final Notice website will provide points of contemplation to a
functional individual.

Only a functional individual can begin exploring the empirical data from
the Open System (i.e., infinite number of dimensions and variables).  All
groups (religious, philosophical, or political) are restricted to a Closed
System (i.e., finite number of dimensions and variables).

Christian:

All Christian denominations of the world must be counted among the
various Closed Systems (e.g., Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islamism,
Pantheism, Socialism, Communism, Environmentalism, Darwinism,
Fascism, Secularism, Atheism, Caodaism, Humanism, etc.).

Christian
individuals, however, are functional individuals waiting for a
promised development or growth. All Christian denominations are simply
playpens holding children with
unwashed feet (John 13:7-14). The
stewards (Luke 16:1-8) of these playpens are frequently not Christian.
Stewards tend to smile too much or scowl too much; they are interested in
status, attire, clerical traditions, money, and power. The World's stewards
are shrewder than children in playpens.

The stewards look at us with amused contempt as we try to wash each
other's feet. I've noticed that I'm frequently distracted counting dirty toes
rather than washing feet. Also, I have more than once bumped my head
on the slats of the playpen (a 3-dimensional space with a linear time
sequence).

The stewards of the various Christian denominations are well-versed in
dialectical arguments; but it is only the Christian children that are capable
of setting the arguments aside to try
to wash each other's feet. Thus,
Christians are able to repent their compromise with the World's wisdom.
The "wise" argument is never more important than love. Indeed, the faith
itself is empty without love.

However, those churches that try use a rationalized love to defend a
favorite argument will lose that argument with their truncated love; and
they will probably lose their congregation. A congregation of functional
individuals cannot be easily controlled. Such a congregation knows the
difference between rationalized love and divine love. Many Christians
can read their Bible to explore the Love of God; but, more important,
Christians have empirical data.

Since few stewards of any church are functional individuals, stewards
tend to overestimate the value of their office as they have overestimated
the value of the World's Wisdom. Stewards are clerks, lawyers, scholars,  
psychologists, and bureaucrats; but they call themselves pastors, teachers,
priests, bishops, and
fathers...  Such stewards are more concerned with
protecting the image of righteousness rather than righteousness.

For Example: pedophile priests protected by so-called "good" priests -
both covet the title of "father."  As a real father of several children, I
know what I would have done to a priest or anyone else that abused my
children. It wouldn't have been pretty, civil, or courteous. I wouldn't care
about my image of righteousness; I would satisfy my righteous rage.  Any
so-called "good" priest claiming the title of "father" should act like one;
they shouldn't be looking in the mirror to see if they looked like one.

Further Examples of World Wisdom: the rationalizing or justifying
abnormal sexual behavior, such as homosexuality and pedophilia.
Although love can forgive a repented sinner, love cannot justify a boastful
sinner.  Pride in sexual abnormality (e.g., Gay Pride) is one of the
characteristics of Hell. Hell cannot make a new pleasure; Hell can only
twist or corrupt a normal pleasure. Hell's tool for corruption is
dialectical
rationalization (Genesis 3:4).

Thus, a superficial synthesis of male and female characteristics (i.e.,
homosexuality or Gay Pride); and a synthesis of adult lust and child fear
(i.e., pedophilia or child rape), are syntheses that attack the normal
reproductive function of the human species. Both the homosexual and the
pedophile use their abnormal sexuality for recruitment not reproduction.

A more direct attack on the human species is, of course, abortion.  By
murdering an unborn child, individuals try to avoid the stress and tension
of parental responsibilities. Abortion is a successful business that attacks
the human species; but Hell is greedy for more. Hell wants food:
eternal
souls locked into a finite analysis.  
Unborn and innocent children are
useless to Hell, Hell needs a steady supply of individual souls locked into
a rationalization of murder.

Thus, Hell needs a good-neighbor euphemism. Hell needs a
planned
parenthood.
An organization that will inure an individual's conscience
over murdering a child.

Hell feeds well on the human species. A conscience can be easily
suppressed in a woman looking for an escape from tension and stress;
such women are easily flattered with an illusion of independence:
my
body, my choice.  
Curiously, in a play for sympathy, these same women
talk about their
difficult choice. But if the choice is difficult, the unborn
child is something more than a tumor or human physiochemical reaction.
All murderers should find the choice to murder difficult.  However, all
abortionists want for their conscience is money - any sympathy is
reserved for the women and their "difficult choice."

Note:  The Subjectivity of a "difficult choice" is not so far from Perfect
and
Imperfect judgments. To have a choice, you need to know the
standard.  If your "difficult choice" is made in chaos, your standard must
be outside of chaos; or you won't be able to measure or trust your
empirical data. Your empirical data are meaningless if your standard
changes with your data. To verify the validity of your standard, you must
be in constant contact with that standard. Indeed, your existence and your
standard cannot be separated:  
I AM right, I AM wrong, I AM measuring,
I AM choosing, I AM....

I AM, therefore I think* - using the Objective/Subjective thought
paradox (i.e., perceiving from the outside in and perceiving from the
inside out
simultaneously).

Subjectivity is not a problem unless your Objectivity has become an
obsession. If you short-circuit or resolve the Objective/Subjective thought
paradox, your Objectivity acquires a subjective modifier:
obsessed.  Such
obsessed Objectivity is restricted to a finite number of dimensions and
variables (i.e., Closed System).

See Objective/Subjective Thought Paradox:
Titius-Bode (Page 3); Galactic Mass (Page 4); Carpenter Tool; The Lost;
California Mayor on the Lost; Advice from Frank Hatch; F.A.Q.


* "I think, therefore I am," says Rene` Descartes in 1637 (Discourse on
the Method, Part IV).  The transposition of  his famous quote to "I AM,
therefore I think" could be improved with "I AM, therefore I think with
Free Will."  With Free Will I can think correctly or incorrectly.  If I
stumble over a
rock, the rock might say, "I am, but I don't need to think."


Frank Hatch
30 E. 33rd Ave.   #50355
Eugene, Oregon    97405
U.S.A.