W2. Bitter consequences of my searches for truth
@ Dr. Ing. Jan Pająk

W2. Bitter consequences of my searches for truth
Motto of this subsection: "It is not a dishonour to loose a fight with a powerful enemy, but it is a shame to not draw any conclusions from our defeat."

Similarly to many other people, for a long time I had no idea that there is such thing as philosophy, and that every person has one. (I.e. that everyone has his/her personal philosophy of life, which he/she utilizes in everything that he/she is doing.) Probably in the initial stage of my life, I even was not able to pronounce this difficult word "philosophy". Then I gradually started to notice that externally all people seem to be similar, but internally they all differ. Some are likeable, some are repulsive, some are humorous, some are serious. At that stage I still did not understand that all these internal differences between people are outcomes of their personal philosophies, i.e. that people differ because of the differences in principles, and in rules of behaviour, which they adopted in everything whatever they do. Then, I learned religion, studied social sciences, and even passed university exam on philosophy. But all these disciplines and learning still failed to disclose to me that the main differences between people are introduced by philosophies to which they adhere. Finally I made some important discoveries, and was forced to disseminate them amongst highly sceptical colleagues. I was also forced to travel a lot in order to earn for living. And this was at that stage that I discovered that external differences between people, such as race, origin, genetic structure, appearance, diploma i degree that they held, religion that they adopted, all these are insignificant additions, which really do not matter too much. The most important differences between people are caused by philosophies that they implement in their lives. In such a manner I empirically learned the shocking truth that philosophies do matter, and that they are the most important components of our humanity. This shocking discovery coincided with the development of a new and very important scientific theory called the Concept of Dipolar Gravity (presented here in chapters H and I). This new Concept of Dipolar Gravity postulated the existence of previously unknown type of laws, which I named the "moral laws". Because these moral laws are very "heavy handed" and they hit extremely hard everyone who disobeys them, I started to realize that I need to develop a new philosophy, which would teach people how to accommodate moral laws in their lives. I included into this new philosophy everything that I learned by that time about the importance of out personal philosophy for the outcomes of our lives. In this manner my philosophy of totalizm was born. It was founded in 1985, and subsequently disseminated in a number of publications, some of which are listed in chapter Y.
These people who just are learning about the existence of my contribution to science, may wonder why such developments were not accomplished by someone with a rich background, e.g. by some famous university professor, which holds e.g. a deanship, and who was born in a well-known family of long-standing intellectuals. Why developments, which now are turning around lives of numerous people, were formulated by Jasia of Wszewilki, a son of a mechanic and a housewife, who not long ago was grazing his mother's cows at the banks of nearby river called "Barycz". Well, the answer to this question lies in the complexity of my research. My research is so complex, and so vast internally, that it would be impossible to be formulated by just an expert in any single discipline. If one analyses this monograph, he/she soon discovers, that this my findings accumulate a huge range of theoretical knowledge, and empirical experience, which until this time were not available simultaneously to a single person in a form of a logical structure into which this knowledge is shaped now. The direction of thinking, which is disclosed by my research, is drastically different from, and on many occasion completely opposite to, directions included in the majority of to-date religions, philosophies, scientific theories, and social trends. For these reasons, my research needed to be developed continually throughout many years, while what they say needed to be based on the pedantic piecing together the whole ocean of practical observations and theoretical knowledge, which originate from several different disciplines. In order to have access to all this vast knowledge, the person who could be able to formulate my findings, needed to have a very analytical and observing approach to living, needed to lead a very dramatic ("interesting") life, full of adventures, obstacles to overcome, pain and suffering, travel, and extraordinary activities, which forced him to master perfectly numerous scientific disciplines, to live everyday life in many different countries, cultures, ideologies, religions, races, etc. If someone analytically revises the outcomes of my research, then he/she discovers that a narrow expert in only a single discipline, i.e. a type which overcrowds today universities, and which tries to influence the today science, "armchair" scientific theories, and new religions or cults, practically never would be able to formulate such highly practical and extremely effective ideas. For example, the narrow expert from, let say, philosophy, never would be able to discover and formulate these components of totalizm, which are related to physical sciences, such as moral field, moral energy, moral laws, gravity equations, totaliztic mechanics, etc. After all, the reluctance and allergy with which the experts of humanistic disciplines are treating all sciences which require the application of mathematics, measurements, units, equations, and all other tools of strict scientific thinking, is widely known. In turn an expert from a discipline other than philosophy, e.g. from any physical science, also would not be able to formulate totalizm for a simple reason that such narrow experts tend to spend whole their lives in the same environment and the same type of job. Therefore they do not have opportunity, like myself, for globetrotting and for accumulating in their minds, and then synthesising into totalizm, all these multitude of life experiences, empirical findings, and theoretical knowledge, which originally stem from a number of different disciplines, but which finally all converged into the recommendations of totalizm. (As an example, please consider the knowledge incorporated into totalizm, which originates from various: religions, ideologies, philosophies, history, folklore, politics, tourism, medicine, astronomy, physics, mechanics, etc.) Note that the same situation as with totalizm was (and is) actually with all other my discoveries, inventions, theories, and other ideas.
There are also other reasons for the high usefulness of this monograph, and for the applicability of my findings to many life situations. These are all the difficulties and toughness that I went through in my life, and the lessons from which I incorporated into this monograph. (I should mention here, that in order to make this monograph more educational, I am always trying to document in my publications the most meaningful out of numerous misadventures I went through in my life, although I also need to add that I actually made to the universal intellect the clear plea that I am prepared to experience in my life all the misadventures that are needed to improve the fate of humanity - therefore whatever affects me, is not because of the normal karma I must pay off, but because of the so-called creditory-karma described in subsection I4.5 that I volunteered to take on myself. Because of this my volunteering to misadventures, I also feel no animosity towards people and institutions, which used to oppress me and make my life miserable, although I feel a deep grudge towards evil parasites, who premeditated and manipulated onto people the dirty tricks that affect me from these institutions or these humans. Still I feel obliged to show scientific exactitude, and to report thoroughly facts about these people or institutions, even if these facts are not very nice.) From the content of this subsection it should become obvious, that my life was just one steam of constant exposures to prejudices, to the opposition against my research, to threats, attacks, scoffing, kicking out from subsequent jobs, and to many other forms of oppression and suppression. Of course, according to moral laws, the "bad does as much good, as good does bad". Thus also the tough times that I went through in my life, brought various good consequences, and could not stop me from leading a life, which is at least the same happy and fulfilled as that of other people. One of these good consequences is, that the tough times fruited with the advancement of my research. The reason is, that these thousands of difficult life situations, which I constantly needed to solve in order to keep my jobs, earn my bread, and simply to survive, and the necessity to always keep squeaky clean to not be vulnerable to all these attacks, eventuated in gradual identification and working out the ideas that constitute this monograph. This monograph is so good, because immoral people made my life so tough, and because the hard moral lessons these people constantly taught me, were all converted by my positive philosophy of living into the content of this publication.
The fast development of this monograph was mainly possible, because in the majority of institutions that I worked so far, the whole management was overtaken by people who adhere to a distinctive philosophy, which in chapter OA is called "parasitism". Amongst seven educational institutions that I worked during 19 years after I left Poland (but before I started to write this monograph), four had almost the entire management overtaken by people in the highest stage of parasitism. The remaining three, which still had management that adhered to totalizm-like personal philosophies, were relatively young institutions, which according to the philosophical lifecycles described in subsection OA8.2, were just after their totaliztic birth, and therefore still had their original totaliztic management left from that birth. Parasitism is almost a rule in old institutions. If the top manager adheres to this philosophy, he/she quickly gets rid of all middle managers who adhere to totalizm-like philosophy. He/she also does not allow a successor for the top job to be anyone other than a parasite. In turn, when a top manager adheres to a totalizm-like philosophy, he/she tolerates middle managers with parasitic philosophies, thus allowing parasitism to gradually creep into, spread, and establish itself in that institution. Therefore, in the present times of the complete lack of awareness of the existence of parasitism, according to what is described in subsection KA8, this moral disease sooner or later creeps into every old institution, and gradually takes it over. From my own experience, it is difficult to find an institution that would still be totaliztic, even that it is over 20 years old, and that it was not subjected lately to any major shake up. Of course, if it happens that I am employed by such an old institution, I always land as a subordinate of one of these parasitic bosses. In turn, when my direct superior, and a superior of my direct superior, both are adhering to parasitism, for me this means a very tough time, while for totalizm it means many new and meaningful teaching lessons.
Since I started to be aware of the existence of parasitism, I keep trying to explain the mechanism and reasons that cause parasitic bosses to always attack me at work with such a vicious fury, in spite that I am almost a "model employee": competent, well educated, hard working, polite, quiet, unimposing, and doing everything "by the book". So-far, the only explanation which I managed to come up with, is that at the subconscious level they know that I adhere to opposite philosophy that they do, and therefore they subconsciously consider me to be their biggest enemy, at which they direct the entire aggression that results from their philosophy. So they subconsciously seek any excuse to fight me out, and as soon as they find one, they use a heavy artillery to get rid of me. And sometimes they are successful. Unfortunately, the above explanations has weak spots, namely it does not explain why these superiors employed me in the first place, why they start hostilities only after around three months since my employment, and why their hostilities always coincide with other manifestations of sabotages by "evil parasites". The explanation also do not decipher how they recognize at the subconscious level that I represent a philosophy which is a decisive adversary to theirs, and thus how they realize that I am their philosophical enemy. (I personally believe that the responsibility lies in direct manipulations of "evil parasites" described in subsection KB2. However, it cannot be ruled out completely, that they recognize my philosophy either from the energy field that surrounds me, or from the type of telepathic signals that totalizm causes my brain to emit.)
The interesting observation, which I made regarding my former parasitic bosses, is that as soon as I leave a given institution, they direct their entire destructive power at a next person who adheres to totalizm, or to near-totaliztic principles, and then gradually get rid of this next person, and so on. The final moment in their career arrives usually after they get rid of all totaliztic-like people, and they turn their attacks at one of their own kind - i.e. at a parasite. This usually marks their end, because soon after they steer the pack, they are getting their medicine back from their own parasitic colleagues. Thus, in most cases that I researched, my former bosses who made my life miserable in a given institution, were kicked out not later then within around 5 to 10 years after I left.

=> W3.
Antworten to top

Gehe zu:

Benutzer, die gerade dieses Thema anschauen: 1 Gast/Gäste