Heretofore, for a relatively long time, the teaching of the mere name of “science” had often meant, for many some, an actually mistaken devotion to a notion of what had been merely “sense-certainty.”

Mankind has usually been in trouble, often in peril, as under both the original oligarchical principle of the Roman empire, and by the present continuation of that empire under the guise of the British monarchy.

In the several concluding pages of my March 11, 2013 “A New System Among Nations,” I had introduced certain essential elements which should now be considered as required reading. They are elements needed for an escape from the heretofore “standard” notion of what had been a widely accepted, but, is nonetheless, systemically wrong. The fault in that notion is, that it is, essentially, a reductionist’s popular misconception of the actually underlying principles of the human mind.

What has often been passed off to us as being our human species’ conventional view of the universe, has often been merely a literal interpretation of an experience of merely sense-perception as such. The crucially important question which that experience should have posed to mankind, is, therefore: could individual sense-perceptions be either literally true; or, to what relative degree are they merely correlatives of a quality of sensory experiences such as those associated with the distinctions of pleasure from pain? My subject-matter here, is related to the fact of the inherent error of any presumption to the effect that a particular sense-perception, as such, has an inherently “literal” meaning of “wrongness” or “rightness” on its own particular account.

“Some among you know how to keep excellent track of the fact that this is Saturday; but, just can’t seem to remember which decade this is!”

On May 1, 2013, my associates Liona Fan-Chiang and Megan Beets, presented a pair of complementary theses, which I had supplemented with some concluding summary remarks which were chiefly responsive to the set of theses: “A Question of Urgency: What is The Essence of Man in The Universe?” The presentation is made by those two and with the added, closing comment by me. Essentially, we ran out of the pre-allotted time, such that my own assigned, closing comment was foreshortened, and my response to Megan Beets contribution left without added response.

This past week-end and its immediate sequels, mark a threatened point of break-down in what has been a long wave of trans-Atlantic crisis since the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, and that of his brother, Robert. Now, in these present times, the probable outcome now awaiting the world, is the new general warfare, perhaps an human extinction, which Queen Elizabeth II’s imperial regime is currently working, overtly, to bring on very soon. Without any actual exaggeration, that is her publically stated intention: the near-extinction, or worse, of the human species.

An ugly era for the United States had begun in fact, with the election of Harry S Truman as Vice-President. That is to say, that, as a candidate, Truman was clearly suited to await the early removal of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Truman did not actually invent evil; he merely wore the shoes.

It appears currently, that in Washington, D.C., as also in the British world empire, for example, the expected practice among some high-ranking interests today, is, to bury any unwanted truth under a virtual manure-pile filled with a combination of “talking points” mixed with that pile of monetarist fraud called “quantitative easing.” After which, truth can be more readily, first muffled, and then buried: all done with the presumed assurance that no intelligent historians would be so rude as to bring the evaded subject of truth up again.

It will be important for you, as the reader, to keep in mind, that what I shall have stated in my prefatory remarks here, goes toward certain deep-rooted physical principles. These are principles which have a presently increasing relevance for the continued existence of mankind generally. I shall show this, after, first, presenting what we shall have considered in these somewhat extended, prefatory remarks.