The End of Learning: Logic and the Means of Knowledge

This is the second most important book you will ever read.

“The end then of Learning is to repair the ruines of our first Parents by regaining to know God aright, and out of that knowledge to love him, to imitate him, to be like him, as we may the neerest by possessing our souls of true vertue, which being united to the heavenly grace of faith makes up the highest perfection.” — John Milton

This book is intended to be a basic introduction to true and meaningful analysis, whether it be termed ‘science,’ ‘religion,’ ‘philosophy,’ ‘logic,’ etc., in order to aid the reader in constructing a new paradigm for understanding and interpreting reality, particularly the most pressing questions which we rational beings are all wrought with: the philosophers’ fons et origo—the natures and relationship of God and the universe, and the nature and purpose of man in relation to the universe. It is based on an esoteric but thoroughly valid understanding of mystic religion, math-based science and ancient scripture. The main argument begins by pointing out the oft-overlooked differences between the capriciously labeled ‘Gnostic’ cults and the anti-Christian cults of Gnosticism. It then goes on to authoritatively answer once and for all the most important questions posed by the world’s religions and philosophies, such as the ideas concerning original sin, free will, the problem of suffering and the origin of evil. A broad list of topics addressed includes the negative influence of secular Humanism and Luciferianism in contemporary exoteric religion, secretive government-sponsored mind-control programs and alien cover-ups, the non-validity of the classical scientific paradigm of rigorous causality, an in-depth correction of the major errors of contemporary mainstream and fringe archaeology, the relationship between substance and sense, the different types of law including natural law and natural consequence, and a general overview of the noblest of the sciences: logic, ethics and metaphysics. The most significant mistakes of men like Baruch Spinoza and Albert Einstein are thoroughly examined in light of modern science, and of the philosophical system of Gottfried W. von Leibniz, now formally known as Optimism.

The End of Learning is the first and only philosophical treatise to adequately pick up where Leibniz left off three centuries ago, and as such it is an invaluable resource for analyzing and interpreting the truths revealed by his unsurpassed genius. Although enough attention is given to debunk the illogical sophisms of Atheism and a few other equally absurd paradigms and to shed light on their historical origins, no effort is made to legitimize the self-evident truths of science and scripture. Rather the focus of the book is on pointing out the flaws in logic which prohibit us from recognizing them as such. This book is a veritable rabbit hole of truth.

The Scriptures Edition
Size: 1117 KB
Pages: 230 (12 notes)
Word Count: 128,605
Price: $21.95 (together)

KJV Edition
Size: 1051 KB
Pages: 230 (12 notes)
Word Count: 128,879
Price: $21.95 (together)

Also included in these packages (click to open):

Package #2
Lifetime Subscription

 

From the book:

Many philosophies and nearly all of the sciences have the suffix -ology attached to the end of their root labels. This common suffix comes from the Greek word for ‘speaking’ or ‘saying,’ (logia). Thus the conjunction of episteme and logos is epistemology, or the word or study of knowledge which has the literal meaning of ‘knowledge-speak.’ The concept of the the Logos (‘the Word’) is therefore the basis of all Western thought processes and as such is given a proper and, in henotheistic philosophies like Gnosticism and Christianity, even a divine status.

The Logos reveals itself in three ways: nature, discourse and subjective thought or inspiration. The neo-Platonic philosopher Plotinus said that “Knowledge has three degrees—opinion, science, illumination. The means or instrument of the first is sense; of the second, dialectic; of the third, intuition.” The study of nature may appropriately be termed ‘science,’ the study of scripture ‘bibliology’ and of subjective experience ‘mysticology’ or ‘mysticism’ since it pertains to beliefs rather than rational concepts. While any one of these three areas of study in its pure form is enough to reveal the Logos and give some amount of spiritual meaning to an individual, they do little to answer our inherent questions about the origin and purpose of our existence apart from each other.

Generally speaking, life is a natural learning process. Inspiration acts as the catalyst by giving us the will to learn, nature provides the tools and dialogue gives us the insights necessary to complete the process with interpretations of nature’s evidence. Without the guidance of scripture in science or science in mysticism and, believe it or not, mysticism in both, there is no way to discern truth from error or good from evil. Indeed, the author of error (and its byproduct of evil) loves nothing more than the pure mystic, the pure theologian or the pure scientist who rigorously focuses on only one of these areas and pays no attention to the other revelations of the Logos.

The knowledge or study of the revealed truths of the Logos may be interpreted in three dimensions as the very top of a pyramid whose corners represent the most tangible or fundamental aspects of revelation at the base. There are many branches of philosophies to choose from but we will only concern ourselves with those which are most pertinent. The reader is encouraged to remember that this is only intended as a spiritual or interpretive guidebook rather than an exact chart or categorization of subject areas.

Unlike the relatively new Western model of science which is particularistic, ancient scientific models are holistic. In other words, we compartmentalize our areas of study, whereas the ancients (like Plotinus and, incidentally, the writers of the Bible) believed they were studying all truths when they observed any singular aspect of truth. In this sense there are no such things as independent fields of science; they are all codependent and interrelated with each other. The reason behind this can be understood as long as we remember that science is derived from philosophy and it does not exist without human imagination or inspiration.

No matter how complex and detailed our specific knowledge becomes we cannot hope to understand the meaning or purpose behind the three forms of revelation without a holistic approach to studying their relationships. All categorical methods of learning produce limited answers and usually add complexity to the questions they address by failing to address causes. However, by understanding the relationships we can move down the line from one form of revelation to the next and produce new sciences efficiently and purposefully. For example, mathematical functions do not provide hypotheses, which are the heart of scientific inquiry, so scientists must incorporate aspects of philosophy into math to make it logical, otherwise it serves no purpose at all. In the same way physics needs teleology to become whole.

Logic, ethics and metaphysics are therefore the noblest sciences because they go straight to the heart of the matter of our existence and purpose without neglecting the truths provided by the different forms of revelation. These are the sciences which ask why as well as how and give practical and fulfilling results to anyone bold enough to believe the ill-reputed truth. Even these results must be compared with one another for a complete understanding and validation of the sciences which contribute to them as the overall goals.

Every successful philosopher or scientist knows this. (‘Scientist’ in this context is not to be confused with ‘scientific materialist’ or ‘technician’ as science is an applied philosophy, not a natural mechanism.) When asked why he still believed in astrology Newton replied, “I have studied these things—you have not.” Similarly, Einstein is famous for saying “I want to know God’s thoughts. The rest are just details.”

From the book:

The writers of Genesis and John clearly believed that matter and khaos pre-existed light and order and that all created matter is a product of God’s spoken light quantization process, which is a theory far beyond the unenlightening math of Einstein yet reduced to such simplistic terms that anyone with the will can understand it. Einstein’s mistake was that he didn’t think the answer to his “really big” question could be so simple that the writer(s) of Genesis could have penned it three and a half millennia earlier. He supposedly wanted to know how God created the world but threw out the scientific method when the facts conflicted with his preconceived and illogical perceptions of God which, incidentally, where those of Spinoza’s non-interventionist whom Leibniz took such great care to refute. As we have already seen, errors in reason and assumptions based on disinformation build on each other until they render a person’s entire paradigm illogical, and nowhere is this more evident than in the denial and misinterpretation of Biblical truths which are equivalent to scientific fallacy.

In light of the first chapter, is it any wonder that the Word is spoken, revealed to the world’s greatest modern, inspired and unaccepting scientists and also written in black and white for all to see, and yet still disbelieved? Buddhist cosmology expounds way beyond the Biblical one as well, directing us to the actual intonations whence light is created or emanated, should scientists ever decide to take advantage of the truths contained therein. (There are several such physicists who have recently published their theories, including but not limited to Fritjof Capra, Ram Mohan, Michael Talbot, Richard L. Thompson and Fred Alan Wolf.) In time the Vedic cycles may eventually prove even more useful than Gnostic literature for understanding our cosmological origins, but we still have a long way to go in understanding the wisdom of the Bible.

Like Buddhist literature, although it is useful as a scientific (mechanistic) and historical treatise the Bible was written to present us with an account of truth far more meaningful than categorical scientific surveys. Even if it is viewed objectively as a scientific textbook, the only plausible explanations for its accuracy are either that it is the product of supernatural or even divine inspiration (gnosis), that the first writers had access to scientific knowledge equivalent to and probably surpassing our own, or that they just got lucky where other ancient and modern philosophers and scientists have failed or chosen not to venture (random probability). In truth, both of the first two suppositions are plausible and probably accurate, insomuch as if any supernatural agent revealed these truths it would have to have had a base of knowledge which exceeded ours.

Supernaturalism is itself an inherent necessity and inevitability wherever the laws of science are violated, and it would be more accurately termed ‘extra-’ or ‘hyper-’ naturalism. The probabilism and inexplicability of quantum mechanics is one such area where no “natural” (i.e., three-dimensional, mathematical) explanation will ever suffice. Given that he believed the cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and noblest motive for scientific research, it is truly remarkable that Einstein failed to see God in the electron which Feynman says “does anything it likes . . . goes in any direction at any speed, forward or backward in time, however it likes.”

Unlike any object in Newtonian physics it is impossible to know an electron’s position and momentum at the same time. But that’s not the absurdity of quantum physics; what the human mind has difficulty conceptualizing regarding the elementary particles is the apparently random decision to emit properties of both particles and waves. By 1925 Werner Heisenberg had defined the particle-wave duality as ‘matrix mechanics’ in order to dissociate subatomic physics from classical mechanics. Not much has happened empirically since then, although theorizing has produced spectacular results which have incalculably increased our technological capabilities. After a century of rigorous experiments the predictions of quantum mechanics have never been disproved, and the only place where scientists agree that it may fail is where one tries to conceive of the universe as a whole with gravitational forces at work (e.g., the systems of Newton, Einstein, Spinoza, etc.—classical mechanics).

But now that we have sufficiently discredited scientific materialism, and therefore traditional, mechanical conceptualizations of the universe, it is worthwhile to point out how the truths of quantum physics have been responsible for the apparent truths of classical mechanics, since the former are true and the latter are logical. First of all, it must be adequately realized that the natural contradictions between classical mechanics and quantum mechanics are not in the details of force and motion but in the paradigms of naturalism and supernaturalism. Like any other form of materialism, the philosophy of naturalism exists so that we are averted from asking the right questions (what it is, why it happens and who is responsible for it, etc., as opposed to how it works) which inevitably give us deeper insight into human spirituality and show Satan’s deprivations.

Secondly, it is assumed that there is no plausible alternative to supernatural causation in the paradigm of quantum physics, but this truth has not yet gained universal acceptance. Foolish though it may be, there are still a few physicists out there that are looking for a mathematical explanation for the mysteries of science. We do not consider that an answer has yet to be found because it’s impossible, given our current state of understanding. When a higher level of understanding is introduced then we will have cause to digress to worrying about the variables rather than the function.

From the notes:

There is a passage in Josephus’ so-called Jewish Antiquities concerning Jesus which is thought to have been altered by Christians, but whether or not this is true the real nature of the misinterpretative bias is by the modern scholars, not the ancient ones, who have invented the Jewish identity of out nothing. The actual title is Ioudaike Archaiologia which means ‘Archaeologia Judaica’ or ‘History of [the Judaean culture].’ Similarly, his Peri tou Ioudaikou polemou is called The Jewish War but actually means ‘About the War in Judaea.’ I have discussed the invention of the Jewish race elsewhere.

Table of Contents