Important: If you reached this web page via a link, other than to the Home page, you must go to the HOME PAGE to acknowledge the rules of the domain.

Back to Intequinism                          

Painting Marquard Dirk Pienaar

Intequisms: Accounting of ideas

by Marquard Dirk Pienaar

Published from Centurion, South Africa by Africahead.

Moiom cc transacting as Africahead,

25 Crystal Springs,

10 Lemon Wood Street,


South Africa.

Published during February 2014.  Available for fair use. Critique can be addressed to the author by e-mail.

Cover page and text copyrights © 2014 Marquard Dirk Pienaar, all rights reserved.


Chapter 1: Pre-thesis

Chapter 2: Introduction / Contextualisation

Chapter 3: Anthropomorphic trust

Chapter 4: Creators and change

Chapter 5: Existence of God

Chapter 6: Accounting of ideas a solution

List of references


1: a   b   c   d   e   f   g   h   i   j   k   l   m   n   o   p   q   r   s   t   u   v   w   x   y   z
2: a   b   c   d   e   f   g   h   i   j   k   l   m   n   o   p   q   r   s    u   v   w   x   y   z
3: a

Chapter 1: Pre-thesis

1a] The purpose of this pre-thesis is to give an understanding to readers of where this work originates from according to the philosophy of Vollenhoven1, who wrote that pre-theses make works clearer. Pre-theses influence outputs substantially and stating ones' subjectivities contributes to objectivities. Author's pre-thesis is a view of reality with regard to histories and current circumstances about creativities. The work, which follows author's pre-thesis, is an attempt to support his pre-thesis academically with references. This pre-thesis uses few references because the later work will support the views with references.

1b] Philosophical views can be categorized in basically two categories; they are honest and functionalist (instrumentalist) views. Honesties are equated with prioritized correspondence and instrumentalist (functionalist) views are equated with prioritized coherence. Other categories of philosophy can then be tabled as follows:

Table 1: Two categories of philosophy



Prioritized correspondence Prioritized coherence
Empiricism, idealism
Nominalism ("anti-realism")


"Continental philosophy"4

"Analytical philosophy"
Kantian deontology as most influential reference point. Consequentialism,pragmatism, utilitarianism, instrumentalism, functionalism.

1c] The top categories are honesties and functional deceits. Deceits are irrational4.1 because generally, when functionalisms are acceptable, deceits become pragmatic issues.

Circumstances with regard to creativities are best understood by viewing a struggle between creators and anti-creators. Creators are honest and anti-creators deceive due to instrumentalist beliefs. Creativities are results of true pre-knowledge in minds, which form new creativities logically as times go on. True pre-knowledge can be regarded as components in minds, which correspond to components of material. New actualities can therefore be created from true pre-knowledge. We are all dependent on creativities and good control depends on controlling creativities. Numbers of people simply overpowered honest creators and appropriated their creativities. The overpowered are referred to generally as 'gods', which author calls theon to make distinctions in time. Theon thus refers to creators of the past, except Jesus of Nazareth and other followers of God who where gods in today's understanding. The circumstances became entrenched in religion. In Christianity for example, phenomena of 'the Creator', who are sacrificed for the benefit of groups, was a progression to a more sustainable world in the sense that more creativities were allowed to support larger populations. Laws as well, started to support individual creators against groups. Creators however, still do not have long lifespans, because "the mob" still makes it very difficult to make a living, when staying honest. Caiaphas syndromes5, which originate partly in functionalist monotheism cause accusations that honest people regard themselves as 'God', 'Son of God', 'Mother of God' or Father of God. Caiaphas syndromes are also results of academic theories, which have functionalist use in medical, religious and intelligence (security) fields. Manic people, for example, are accused of believing they are 'One' by presupposing the existence of the belief at manic people. The false generalised presupposition then cause identifications of threats, which do not exist. False identifications of threats lead to elimination of good creativities, which would have benefitted societies if not eliminated.

1d] Mania is an effect of the struggle between the honest and deceivers. Children are formed as deceiving or honest during early childhood. These formations become parts of families and their cultures. Many believe mania is a genetic condition. Author postulates however that mania ('bipolar disorder') is a result of cultures and upbringings, which emphasize honesties, within other cultures, and which promote deceits as method of survival. Author's opinion is based on experience because he has been 'manic' and experienced, societal reactions to 'mania', as exaggerated and partly superstitious. Different types of people under the description 'manic people' are almost as many as under the description 'normal people', therefore the category 'manic' is false, because the category relates more to functionalism for deceivers, than correspondences for all.

The circumstances require that the words "God", "a god", "a goddess", "gods", "goddesses", 'god' and 'goddess' should not be separated totally in meaning. The words "gods" and "goddesses" are therefore not used by author to refer to theon, as is practice currently, because "gods" and "goddesses" are used to refer to honest men and honest dames by author. A god is an honest man and a goddess is an honest dame. It makes not sense to refer with 'god' or 'goddess' and a lower case 'g' in singular form, because singular 'god' or singular 'goddess' exists not, a god, and a goddess, and gods and goddesses, being parts of God, however can exist. God with a capital G is logos, plus all gods and all goddesses. Logos is a metaphysical partly unexplainable concept, because it includes metaphysical powers, which cause miracles, science cannot explain currently. Logos and Kant's noumena are therefore related.

Chapter 2: Introduction / Contextualisation


1e] "Ideas" in this work are initial ideas, which are good for all. Ideas in question are creative ideas, because such ideas enlarge pools of wealth and are therefore not destructive in nature, except for replacing older creativities. Accounting of ideas rejects Aristotle's statement in De anima (1986: 140; 406b) that something, which is good for self, cannot be good for another.

Plato, possibly a descendant of Poseidon6 perhaps argued against changes, during his time, because he was descended from theon, who's powers were questioned due to new realizations about realities. Socrates for example did not honour immaterial traditional theon, which was partly the reason he was sentenced to suicide. Socrates did not swear by Zeus's name but in the name of the dog.7 Plato regarded souls, which move things to be immaterial theon and he agreed with Thales that everything was full of theon.8 Plato used the word "θεῶν" ('gods', "theó̱n")9 in the Laws at 899b where Plato might have quoted Thales. The quotation was derived by implication from Aristotle; "A dictum of Thales: Aristot. Soul 411 a 7 ff." 10

1f] Although other authors do not usually distinguish between corporeal and immaterial theon ('gods and/not goddesses'), author included distinctions according to euhemerism11. Wanted not to use "God" for ancients' understandings because they used other words like "neter"12, in Egypt, for example. Parmenides wrote "Περι Φυσις (On Nature)"13 ("About Physis")14. Anaximander15, who was not a vegetarian, and probably other Miletians like Thales and Anaximenes, opined we should not eat fish because fishes were human ancestors. Is there a relation between Anaximander's fish and the Christian fish symbol? According to Wilhelm von Humboldt philology enlightens history.16 Burms wrote involuntary rhyme should be regarded as infelicitous. 17 "Theon", "gods" and "goddesses", "neter", "physis" and "God" refer to very different understandings of times. When using 'gods and goddesses', for example, to refer to entities of ancient times, as well as for entities of current times, differences in time are not acknowledged.

Organizational structures have since ancient times in Egypt and Mesopotamia existed to structure societies around orders of creating. In Egypt it was called "Ma'at" usually translated as "truth" or "justice" and in Mesopotamia same concepts were called "me".18 Wisdom was needed to understand this order.19

1g] In Classic philosophy there was not a clear distinction between nature and theon with regard to order.20 Theon can be further categorized with regard to understandings about corporeality and incorporeality. Nature can be further categorized between "neter" and "physis". This discrepancy about natures of things relates to the "Anomaly of Plato?"21 and the "singularity of 'god' ", which exist today.

Early Greek philosophers for example Xenophanes, the first "real theologian", and Hesiod, Homer and Democritus started to criticize immaterial theon22 in conjunction with new scientific developments and creativities. Critiques however were dangerous. Troost opines early scholars could not directly oppose pantheism and mythology. 23 Socrates's sentences and sentence jump to mind here. Mythological corporeal theon were subject to creating orders, according to Wolters.24 Socrates told about "Ammon" who prohibited creativities of "Theuth" who lived in a Greek harbour in Egypt.25 The ancient towns of Egypt and Greece called Thebes and their mythical kings and priests relevant. According to pantheism all is cosmic "One", therefore pantheism was already an opposition to corporeal theon and priests in mythology. Ancient philosophers for example Xenophanes were logically more in line with pantheism against immaterial theon and their priests during Classic times. If Xenophanes had a true theological opinion, Christianity would have accepted his opinion. The Roman Catholic Church, which uses crosses at the top of obelisks with pharaohs' inscriptions on the obelisks, adamantly opposes pantheism and from Plato onwards, Greek philosophy influenced Christianity significantly. Heraclitus's logos also had significant influence. Troost opines reason or "logos" as defined by Heraclitus started to oppose immaterial theon of mythology.26 Logos must have also opposed priests of immaterial theon then.

1h] Troost further opines, Stoics with their doctrine about "moral natural rights" also referred to logos and this influenced Christianity before the Reformation. Protestantism did something similar with ' "theology of creation orders" ' at the beginning of the 20th century and end of the 19th century. Sophists who disregarded reason (logos), emphasized differences between what nature ["physis"] requires of us and what laws ("nomos", [neter?]) require. 27 Most sophists had democratic28 leanings against aristocrats, for example Plato. At least two human natures exist, leading and misleading. Democrats promoted immaterial theon with icons and statues and partly29 therefore Socrates, who did not swear in Zeus's name, was 'sacrificed'. Critias, Plato's uncle was one of the first who said in Sisyphus, a play, some attribute to Euripides, that politicians invented and use religion to control people.30 Sophists emphasized medical knowledge of the time about necessary actions, which could lead to punishment. Today everyone knows about this but some Christians do not respect that "the will of our Creator God makes itself known and confronts us in normative directives with authority."31

1i] The first principle of stoics was to live according to requirements of laws of "nature" [neter?]. Laws, which opposed individualism, for social order, stood in contrast to stoics.32 It seems thus that lawgivers at the time wrote laws to primarily benefit themselves and not society at large. Creativities of individualism benefit society at large with new resulting free time as result of new creativities. Stoics and sophists had cosmopolitanism in common.33 It seems sophists had belief in "physis" and stoics put their trust in "neter". It seems before democracy took over substantially, stoics, like Cronus, used "nomos" (neter?) to institute their beliefs.

Some stoics for example Seneca and Cicero, who died (not sophist nature) for their beliefs, together with Jesus, helped form the current understanding of Christianity's "God" and current reformation creating orders for physics. Troost wrote the "nature [physis and neter] of man" were used to motivate different kinds of laws. These different laws were represented by different systems for example democracy and imperialism. A few "imperatives" or universal laws were formulated, which most people could agree to, however ' "positivists" ' of the time, of whom many were sophists, opposed laws, which were not universal because "nature of man" was not a universal concept. Sophists wanted positive laws, which could be generalized as good to all people. Problem was, they did not know of criteria or did not respect criteria of universality for laws.34

1j] The "creation order", from which "creating orders" can be abstracted, currently distinguishes not sufficiently between ex nihilo creation and transcendent immanence creating. People in power naturally protect their interests, which are changed by new creativities according to Capra and Toynbee.35 Analytic philosophy of Aristotle and religions are used to monopolize new creativities through development in hands of powerful hegemons and bourgeoisies, hegemons belong to currently, as was done during history. Analytic philosophies relate to the "anomaly of Plato?" and religions to singularity of 'god'.

Histories show functional, instrumental arguments to control the effects of new creativities without considering all races of humans.

Imparting of ideas was motivated in the philosophy of Rousseau who wrote creativities are evil. He wrote: "The simplicity and solitude of man's life in this new condition, the paucity of his wants, and the implements he had invented to satisfy them, left him a great deal of leisure, which he employed to furnish himself with many conveniences unknown to his fathers: and this was the first yoke he inadvertently imposed on himself, and the first source of the evils he prepared for his descendants."36 Rousseau also wrote: ".. how do I know that a verification of titles might not leave me the legitimate king of the human race?"37 Deceiving and sophisticated language uses, referring to singularity of 'god', is instrumentalism to motivate imparting of ideas from creators.

1k] Freud's postulate about phylogenetic causal Oedipal38 effects on Christianity is partly false because sacrificial practices of Christianity relates to actual "sacrifices" of past and current creators as a means of survival due to religious hatred and appropriation of creators' ideas.

The Bill of Rights, Section 16 (1)(b) of The South African Constitution states: "Freedom of expression. 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes. … (b) freedom to receive or impart information or ideas; .." 39

The South African Labour Relations Act states in section 5: "Protection of employees and persons seeking employment … (2) … no person may do, or threaten to do, any of the following- … (c) prejudice an employee or a person seeking employment because of past, present or anticipated- … (v) disclosure of information that the employee is lawfully entitled or required to give to another person;" 40

Imparting of ideas was motivated in the philosophy of Rousseau and Thomas Aquinas who argued against creativities by humans. Rousseau wrote: "implements he had invented ... the first source of the evils"41 With his background in monotheism and Greek philosophy, Rousseau postulated creativities evil, and therefore creativities should be imparted, without compensation, to be developed for benefits of groups, whilst excluding creators in their childish states of nature. Thomas Aquinas's "God Himself Who cannot lie"42 influenced Europe by the Enlightenment and, at few, enhanced corresponding communication. Descartes's philosophy was primarily arguments to counter scepticism and deceit.43 "God, then is the first entity outside his own mind that Descartes recognizes; and God plays an essential role in the subsequent rebuilding of the edifice of science. Because God has no defects, Descartes argues, he cannot be deceitful, because fraud or deceit always depends on some defect in the deceiver. The principle that God is no deceiver is the thread that will enable Descartes to lead us out of the mazes of scepticism."44

1l] Nietzsche's book, Beyond good and evil, shows many postmodernists do not rationalize45 the necessity of "dogmatic" truths, which only children, according to them, have to comply with. Nietzsche's accusation against society who killed God in his parable, explains the circumstances partly. The state of nihilism, which the Eucharist as theodicy indoctrinated society into is a result of this illogical state of societies. Why kill God? Creative God, that solves problems are good for societies in total. Reasonings are of consequential utilitarian nature for example Caiaphas's reasoning and Aristotle's reasoning in De anima46, that the only way to gain is to disadvantage another. The reasoning can be primarily identified with methodological misleading and psychological religious oppositions to creativities. In some academic institutions priceless credibility does not exist due to deceiving methodologies of Aristotle, which has been accepted as signs of knowledge. In The metaphysics Aristotle argued against47 corresponding language. Whilst defining the word 'false' Aristotle wrote in parenthesis, when quoting a deceptive argument in the Hippias as follows: 'that the man who is able to speak false is false (and this, of course, is the man of knowledge and good sense)'48. Aristotle opposed creativities by opposing Plato's forms, which inspire to create. Aristotle wrote: "So we can do away with the business of Forms Being Established As Templates."49 Kenny wrote Aristotle "had spoken, obscurely," of an intellect, which was responsible for forming of concepts. Alexander of Aphrodisias understood this intellect as "God" and the Arab world was influenced by this belief. Christians of the time however believed that humans form concepts self.50 All philosophers can be divided between those who inspire good creativities and those who argue like Caiaphas and Aristotle against creativities. Aristotle's philosophy was descriptive and he explained well what the results of fallacies are. Aristotle wrote statements are false when statements cannot be used in processes of assembly.51

1m] "It is now commonplace to say that money is information. With the exception of Krugerrands, crumpled cab fare, and the contents of those suitcases that drug lords are refuted to carry, most of the money in the informatized world is in ones and zeros. The global money supply sloshes around the Net, as fluid as weather...However, as we increasingly buy information with money, we begin to see that buying information with other information is simple economic exchange without the necessity of converting the product into and out of currency. This is somewhat challenging for those who like clean accounting, since, information theory aside, informational exchange rates are too squishy to quantify to the decimal point."52

It seems Nietzsche was also against innovation because he wrote innovation was one of the four errors of human kind.53 This places part of Nietzsche in the same category as Rousseau and other anti-creativities philosophers.

Taylor wrote: "The first source of worry is individualism. … And these rights are generally defended by our legal systems. In principle, people are no longer sacrificed to the demands of supposedly sacred orders that transcend them. Very few people want to go back to this achievement."54 Taylor argued in his book The malaise of modernity against creativities probably because he did not realize that the negative effects of developments he argued against, are partly results of imparting of ideas, which are protected as a human right in the South African constitution, for example. Currently ideas are common property in South Africa, which has been institutionalized by the utilitarian Constitution and Labour law. John Perry Barlow, who acknowledged trading with ideas, is an author who wrote lyrics for a USA rock band called Grateful Dead. He graduated in comparative religion from Wesleyan University,55 which is a private liberal arts college56.

1n]All over the world, university campuses are offering their research facilities, and priceless academic credibility, for brands to use as they please. And in North America today, corporate research partnerships at universities are used for everything: designing new Nike skates, developing more efficient oil extraction techniques for Shell, assessing the Asian market’s stability for Disney” (Klein. 1999: 99).

Phenomena are conscious, and subconscious, for example, some humans, like "bats", think they are Ones, according to Griffiths who claims he established the phenomena in others' minds with "reasonable" certainty.57 Honest people are accused of thinking they are God, like "bats". Partly, creators, or in Griffiths mind, "the creator"58, agents and "God"59 complete Christian accounts. Griffiths wrote a Christian account includes a divine agent who is other than those offering the account. The account is a response to "the creator" who became incarnate.60 Could this be a reference to accounting of ideas, in its current occurrence i.e. the explanations of Barlow61, Griffiths62 and Klein63?

1o] "Radical transcendence as alterity"64 is a countercultural movement relating to authenticities due to notions attached to ulterior motives, identified in authenticities according to Charles Taylor in his book The Malaise of modernity. Westphal emphasized, with reference to Niebuhr65, that the "return of Christ" and by implication creators' activities should be seen as threats, which require restrictions.66 Intelligence agencies during recent times have broken the balances between securities and privacies by using modern technology irresponsibly.67 CCTV News reported that the National Security Agency of the USA accessed computers of civilians with radio wave technology even whilst the computers were not connected to the Internet.68 Aljazeera News reported that text messages were intercepted because the messages were regarded a "goldmine to exploit".69 "Sin, the opposite of trusting obedience, is the desire for autonomy, not merely as being responsible for my own actions, but also as being the one who defines my identity and sets my own agenda. The same is true when the ‘I’ is expanded to the ‘We’, the self to society." 70 From these quotations it can be questioned whether Westphal's views about creativities are dangerous to societies' independence as creative units. Sometimes theodicies are regarded as bureaucratic necessity.71 Westphal's theism acknowledges "God as creator"; God can exist without the world but the world cannot exist without God. He wrote Pantheism and atheism, which are basically the same, postulate interdependence; God cannot exist without the world and vice versa. Atheism and pantheism do not recognize "God, as personal, purposive creator".72

1p] Trakakis quoted Caputo who explained how institutionalization of deceit [consequential utilitarian reasoning] took place. " 'Debates about reason are debates conducted by university professors in journals and books, at symposia and public lectures, by men and women who aspire to tenure, promotion, and support for more research.' " According to Caputo reasoning in academia is a function of power structures, cliques and selfish interests of the people involved. Again said that universities are unduly influenced by the corporate world. 70% - 80% of academics feel this way, which makes sense in the light of power structures. Emphasis is not on quality but on quantity of research outputs.73 Universities get the same subsidy for a paper worth little and for a paper worth a lot. Deceiving methodologies ("leuenstellings") are taught to medical doctors and church ministers from where it spreads into society. A church minister recently said we have to lie to show we believe in the mercy of God. Consequential utilitarian reasoning allows misleading, to force required outcomes in the short term, without considering long-term negative effects, which "dogmatic" duties, for example honesties, aim to prohibit. The best example most of us are aware of is the consequential reasoning of Caiaphas when Jesus of Nazareth was crucified. Such decisions are based on utilitarian methodology. Was the methodology good for Israel? Author doubts it, because Israel did not exist until after the 2nd world war and the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth had an effect on Israel's non-statehood during the crusades for example. Israel was colonized frequently during its history. Without conclusively proving utilitarianism the cause, can the question be raised rhetorically, because prove cannot be gathered empirically? Machiavelly74 and Hobbes motivated consequential utilitarian reasoning in Europe, whilst motivating despotism and deceit. The future will show whether the result will be the same in Europe with loss of its autonomy. Practical issues are relevant with regard to the evils of the world.75 If we want to live honestly, Jesus of Nazareth is a good example of the practical issues which are relevant to honest lives.76

1q] In the quotations and paraphrases above four areas were identified where ideas are being imparted without compensating creators for ideas. The four areas are: (1) Christian communities through "Christian accounts"; (2) educational institutions where students' and qualified academics' ideas enter the economic system without value being ascribed to research; (3) via intelligence agencies due to restrictions on alterities; and (4) in the workplace via disloyal employees who impart employer's ideas and disloyal employers who impart employee's ideas without compensation.

Imparting is motivated by God thoughts about honesties, about being "God himself" and utilitarian consequentialism.

Basically it is today more profitable with modern technology to appropriate ideas than to create ideas. Possibly it has been the case most of the time during history because part of Greek philosophy and religion supported imparting of ideas.

Authentic individuals who Taylor degrades could cause good effects by realizing better ways of doing things. The problem of developments is not necessarily with creators but maybe with developers who impart and copy ideas, which leads to over development.

1r] During the Enlightenment, philosophers motivated that labours cause capital and property rights. Those philosophers did not sufficiently acknowledge capital, which are added with good ideas and which precede labours. Utilitarian philosophy opines that ideas should be free to develop to ensure wide use of utilitities in national or international communities without formal compensation for idea generations. Not referring to creators of ideas as deserving of remunerations during the Enlightenment is understandable because philosophers then motivated enforceable salaries and wages, which were more immediate needs. According to Child (1997:60), John Locke however recognised exponential increases in values of certain land, up to five hundred times the original value, due to "reason". The values of such changes currently falls into the pockets of owners and designers according to contracts. Logically such increases in values are, not only caused by contractual designers and owners, but also caused by creative ideas of others, for example employees, or clients on the land. An ideal is thus to keep record of the originations of such valuable changes in order that people be remunerated intequibly. Entrepreneurship is taught as functionalist belief in South Africa, although entrepreneurial businesses are very rare. (Antonites & Wordsworth, 2009). Because the rarity is not common knowledge, and because the legal system cannot control extortion of ideas, Accounting of ideas is also required to keep balance with regard to entrepreneurship.

Three hypotheses might prove links between generations of ideas and formal remunerations. Honesties; influences, which precede generations of ideas are postulated as a cause and result of efforts because it is difficult to stay honest. The argument follows thus: From wealths of nations ideas are deduced; from ideas honesties are deduced; from honesties efforts are deduced and remunerations can me motivated after efforts according to Enlightenment philosophy.

1s] The following arguments support causal connections between honesties and generations of ideas:

Table 2: Causal connection between honesties and creativities

Argument Type of proof

1. Inverse relation between memory and logic.77

Statistical induction.
2. If persons deceive a lot logically their memory power will increase and logical powers will decrease, deduced from no. 1. Deductive reasoning and inductive prediction.
3. Something can only be created from actualities. If pre-knowledge (Woodman, Sawyer & Griffin, 1993:294,301,314)78 is relevant for an invention only the persons with the pre-knowledge can make the invention. This proves that creativities do not come exclusively from a metaphysical realm. The prerequisite, knowledge, has to be present in a person's brain before something new, which uses the knowledge, can be created. Faiths enhances honesties because faiths give courages to be honest when devils influence against honesties. There is thus logically a correlation between faiths and knowledges. Deductive reasoning

4. Bentley study. Statistical study in which he divided mental activity between logic (divergent thinking and evaluative thinking) and cognition (observation and memory). His conclusion was that no correlation between cognition and creativities exists.79

Statistical induction
5. Bentley study. Deduced from no. 4, if creativities are not correlated to cognition (observations and memories) creativities are partly correlated to logic because logic is another mental activity according to the study. Faiths, which precede knowledge, causes honesties (integrities), which cause logical integrated thoughts. Deductive reasoning and exclusion.
6. When groups create together, the transfer of true pre-knowledge is necessary for progress of creative processes. Deceits hamper creative processes and honesties enhances creative processes. Predicted inductive causality
7. Equations between "the Creator" (creators) and truths in religious and philosophical literature. Actuality

8. Plato deduced from actualities backwards to the unknown. For example, a question is asked why are there many trees at several locations? Partly because there are rivers at the observed places. Why do many trees grow close to rivers? Because trees need water to grow. Why do they need water etc?80 The deductive process can only work with truths, which reduce noumena by replacing noumena with phenomena as sciences improve.


Statement of the problem

1t] Utilitarian constitutions and other laws do not motivate original creativities because imparting of ideas allows appropriation of original ideas without compensating creators. Only developments of ideas are motivated with utilitarian consequentialist reasoning and not originating of creative ideas. Developments follow originations of ideas.

"The myth of ingenuity" questions which is more profitable, innovation or imitation, favouring imitation. Societies as wholes benefit from innovations but imitators benefit to the disadvantage of innovators. If everyone start imitating because innovation is not profitable, stagnation will take place.81 Societies are sometimes ignorant of scapegoating, which is mythologized through "political and economic structures", partly due to Caiaphas syndromes, which motivate sacrifices of creators.82

Hypotheses / Central theoretical statements

Hypothesis 3

1u] Most useful ideas cannot be generated without corresponding and coherent communications after true pre-knowledge.

Premises of third hypothesis (Linking ideas with honesties)

Deductive reasoning is used retrospectively, starting with wealths of nations:

1. Wealths of nations exist. (Fact)
2. Ideas, which were developed had significant influences on wealths of nations. (Fact)
3. Theology and philosophy of this era motivated that ideas originate at a singular incorporeal Creator. (Fact)
4. Theology and philosophy of this era over-emphasised an incorporeal perfect Creator.
5. Consequentially human beings do not earn timely enforceable formalised remuneration for their ideas. (Fact)
6. Human beings' ideas, which are significant and labours, which are significant do not always originate in the same being (verb). (Fact)
7. Recordings of originations of ideas can be done separately from labours. (Unproved premise)
8. Truths and honesties cause ideas.
9. Honesties can be confirmed with honery (©2011) tests. (Unproved premise)

Hypothesis 2

1v] Corresponding and coherent communications imply efforts and endurances.

Premises of second hypothesis (Linking honesties with desert)

Deductive reasoning is used retrospectively, starting with opposing forces of religion:

1. Opposing forces of incorporeal singularity of 'god' and anthropomorphic plural corporeality of God (plural form) exist. (Fact)
2. Existentialist philosophies of the post-modern era motivate the existence of anthropomorphic creators. (Fact)
3. Post-modern philosophy has not overcome the indoctrinations of incorporeal singularity of 'god', which were up-scaled from early Christian anthropomorphism during modern philosophy and later Christianity. References to 'God' are usually in singular form. (Opinion)
4. Modern philosophy motivated a perfect 'Creator', which implies incorporeality because no corporeal human is perfect. Incorporeality of 'God' allowed humans to be more honest during the Enlightenment because accusations that they were thinking they are The messiah, were less prominent than during post-modern times. (Opinion)
5. Early and medieval Christian theology motivated a perfect singular incorporeal 'Creator' with up-scaled anthropomorphic attributes of Jesus Christ. (Deterministic fact)
6. Words of an incorporeal virtuous singular 'God' quickened a downscaled true man (creator) who was named Jesus Christ of Nazareth or Immanuel who will return. (Deterministic fact)
7. Dominant antique (classic) Greek philosophy abstracted vices and virtues of theon's beings and included only theon's virtues in an incorporeal representation; 'God', which was up-scaled from anthropomorphisms. (Fact)
8. Pre-Greek antique philosophy and theogony recorded anthropomorphic corporeal theon who broke universal laws. (Opinion)

Hypothesis 1

1w] If honesties are remunerated communications will more coherently correspond with facts. Integrations of thoughts and facts will cause improvements of human conditions.

Premises of first hypothesis

1. Remunerations enhanced labours after efforts and endurances due to Enlightenment philosophy. (Fact)
2. Remunerations for honesties will enhance corresponding and coherent communications after efforts and endurances. (Unproved premise)

If the above premises can be shown to be corresponding and coherent, then, staying honest warrants legal remuneration rights, because of the efforts, which cause good ideas and wealths of nations.

This book focuses on hypotheses 3 and 2 in order to motivate Accounting of ideas. If Accounting of ideas will be sufficiently motivated with this book and Pienaar (2012), further research could be done about hypothesis 1 and other related matters.

Chapter 3: Anthropomorphic trust



1x] Three ways of communicating—corresponding (objective), mixed (metaphorical sophisticated) and non-corresponding—are especially relevant in a globalized world because the three ways can be connected to different cultures.

Modern Western society discovered the benefits of corresponding objective communication during the Renaissance, when few individuals overcame their psychological barriers against being truthful, and being sacrificed84. Sacrifice of truthful people for example Jesus Christ by existent powers is a natural phenomenon because of the opposition, which truths, through consequential changes cause. The important change of modernism in Protestant eyes was away from metaphorical85 communication, which was the proper way of communicating during the Middle Age.86 The logos-creativities dichotomy was understood in arts of the modern age during the 1900s by accepting logos as force of change87 without undue alliances.

1y] In Gen. 1:26 of the Bible God is quoted as being plural, but at most places in the Bible singular references to God are made, similar to Aquinas's reference above. Prof. Samuelson answered88 how he thinks Gen. 1:26 should be understood. He emphasized the belief that humans are animals, made from earth. Fr. Pascual mentioned discontinuance between different types of humans, which is difficult to show scientifically, but relates to rational matters. The lecture of the gentlemen implies the discontinuance Fr. Pascual mentions, relates to evolutionary matters, which is not clearly understood yet, scientifically. Ronald Cole-Turner said Gen. 1:26, requires further investigation.89 During 1486 CE, Pico's quotation of God implies evolution in different directions90 depending on existentialist philosophical matters. Metaphorical sophisticated communications can be identified, for example metaphors like "Mother of God" and "Son of God" and "the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit". These 'metaphysical' references have not always a good effect on society currently, due to the singularity of the metaphors. Psychological barriers to honesties and creativities exist, due to superstitions about Almighty Sacrificial Singularity91. Existence of God can be debated, but existence of determinants and effects of God cannot be disputed. Debates about the deterministic, functionalist, instrumentalist effects of metaphoric language are possible. Such debates cannot happen with metaphorical sophisticated language but only about metaphors as objects. Metaphors however cannot be truthful because sophistical reference is made to subjects with Father, Mother and Son in the singular, which is not true, due to the powerlessness of singularity.

1z] Aristotle's 'golden mean'92 was the preferred position of Scholastic Christianity. Tarnas opines that Aristotle was an ancient empiricist93. Aristotle was not always objective due to him choosing 'the' mean94 as politically correct communication. Some postmodernists95 have the same inclinations with regard to metaphorical language as during the Middle Age, the time of Scholastic Christianity. A good example of this influence is Thomas Aquinas96 via Aristotle. Thomas Aquinas's "God Himself Who cannot lie"97 influenced Europe by the Enlightenment and caused wide deceit because of psychological matters relating to God thoughts and being sacrificed when being authentic. It is stated that in the middle of Eden there were two trees, one of "life" and another of "the knowledge of good and evil".98 God commanded Adam that they should not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.99 God, Eve and the devil were quoted100 as follows: the devil asked Eve if God really commanded that from none of the trees in Eden should be eaten.

Eve answered that they may not eat from only the tree in the middle of the garden; "the serpent" then answered the reason they may not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, is because then they will be like God when differentiating between good and evil. Eve then decided fruit of the tree was good for food and gaining knowledge; they ate, God disciplined them and Eve put the blame on a devil and his power of deceit.101 It seems however the negative impact of deceit to society as a whole has not been fathomed because prioritizing selves above Others-than-only-selves, with deceit, is a common occurrence. The Other is translated in Greek as anthropos.102 The Greek language can be divided into katharevousa and demotic.103 Some "religious" people even say we have to deceive to show we believe in the grace of God and they accuse honest men of thinking they are each "God Himself Who cannot lie". Logically, if deceiving methodologies are widely spread, creativities will be hampered because fewer correspondences to realities will exist. Something is false when it cannot be used in a process of assembly104. Socrates said: " 'And surely we must value truthfulness highly. For if we were right when we said just now that falsehood is no use to the gods and only useful to men as a kind of medicine, it's clearly a kind of medicine that should be entrusted to doctors and not to laymen. . . It will be for the rulers of our city, then, if anyone, to use falsehood in dealing with citizen or enemy for the good of the State; no one else must do so. And if any citizen lies to our rulers, we shall regard it as a still graver offence than it is for a patient to lie to his doctor, or for any athlete to lie to his trainer about his physical condition, or for a sailor to misrepresent to his captain any matter concerning the ship or crew, or the state of himself or his fellow-sailors.' "105 The way of intentional non-corresponding communication happens when others are misled for selves to attain a specific favourable outcome. This type of communication normally happens when an individual or a whole society106 or a common wealth benefits from deceiving, to the disadvantage of others. A single territory can have many a common wealth, which hamper creativities of the territory as a whole. The divisive influence in a mondialised world, of such communication, is understood. Accounting of ideas rejects Socrates's opinion, like Aristotle's due to the anti-creational effect of deceits, which can spread from influential people to less-influential people.

2a] When identifying causes of the different types of communication during modernity there are two important arguments, which justify actions for different ways of orientation. The arguments are of Kantian deontological107 nature and consequentialist (utilitarian) nature. Kantian deontology argues happiness should be an eventuality of ought, even if consequential happiness cannot be envisaged108. Consequentialism argues that happiness is connected to being voluntarily109 explicitly part of a common wealth with "moral holidays"110 after envisaging consequentialist happiness. The essence of the Kantian deontological argument is faith in creating by self-in-a-group and the essence of the consequentialist argument is faith in appropriating, developing, and imparting of creators' ideas. The Kantian deontological argument causes a creational enlargement of assets in territories or austerity. The consequentialist argument causes a transfer of assets from one common to another common wealth, or development. Imparting of ideas by utilitarians increases the global pool of assets to the disadvantage of creating (responsible change). Imparting of ideas remunerates not creators (creatures). Utilitarianism causes development but inhibits creating. John Stuart Mill did not address the important problem of utilitarian reasoning whereby creators can be sacrificed for the happiness of groups.111 The effect of justifying such sacrificial practices will logically be discouraging of creativities and eventual colonizing by groups who did not sacrifice creators amongst them to the same extent.

Three types of communication—corresponding communication, sophisticated112 communication and intentionally deceiving communication—have been identified.


2b] Modernity, being the time from around 1500 to current can be divided113 into different views, according to the importance of realities, present in communication. During the Enlightenment, corresponding objective communication was emphasized by for example Descartes, as part of the classical modern view, when human labour processes were significant. After the Enlightenment a period followed during which structural changes took place for example the 17th and 18th century revolutions. A period then followed during which much emphasis was placed on cultural issues. Then postmodernisms' 'meanings' continued to specifically de-emphasize realities in communication. At the following discussion section, author viewed the problem of trusting in the classical modern view, the structurally critical modern view, the culturally critical modern view, and the post-modern view.

Classical modern view

2c] An honest society or group is an idea, which does not have one descriptive word in some languages. In Afrikaans the word 'eerlikes' can refer to a group of honest people. During Greek114 antique and Egyptian115 ancient times corresponding rationalisms emerged as creative powers. Honesties were ideas, which spread from creators (creatures) to the rest of humanity. "Honesty – granted that this is our virtue, from which we cannot get free, we free spirits – well, .. may its brightness one day overspread this ageing culture and its dull, gloomy seriousness like a gilded azure mocking evening glow! … It is probable that we shall be misunderstood and taken for what we are not: but what of that! People will say: 'Their “honesty” - is their devilry and nothing more!' … Have all gods hitherto not been such devils grown holy and been rebaptized? … they say in Russia – let us see to it that through honesty we do not finally become saints and bores!"116 This quotation shows a side of Nietzsche, which places his Apollonian side in classical modernity.

With reference to Friedrich von Hayek's book The Road to Serfdom Popper explained Von Hayek's "enslavement theorem" as follows: "The road to serfdom leads to the disappearance of free and rational discussion; or, if you prefer, of the free market in ideas. But this has the most devastating effect on everybody, the so-called leaders included. It leads to a society in which empty verbiage rules the day; verbiage consisting very largely of lies issued by the leaders mainly for no purpose other than self-confirmation and self-glorification. But this marks the end of their ability to think. They themselves become the slaves of their lies, like everybody else. It is also the end of their ability to rule. They disappear even as despots.

Of course, these are also, partly, matters of individual personal talents. But I suggest that they are mainly dependent upon the temporal length of the enslavement. The acceptance of lies as the universal intellectual currency drives out truth -- just as bad money drives out good money." Popper wrote about Gorbachev who visited the West several times personally and was aware of the societal mental illness in Russia: "the rule of lies". (Shearmur, Turner 2012:405). Popper and author agree about the effects of deceits but Popper's thoughts about "the free market in ideas", however needs critical investigation.

Bad living conditions during the early Renaissance inspired oppositions against the ruling forces who became entrapped in their metaphorical sophisticated language use. The trend of being truthful (corresponding) expanded during early modernity with philosophers like Descartes who postulated God that guarantees truths. Descartes had good faith and more freedom than he would have had in the Middle Age, which encouraged his honesties. Protestantism of Martin Luther and John Calvin also brought enhancements of corresponding literal117 communications when Protestants started to transcend directly as part of God. Christians could then identify more directly with the man on the white horse of Revelation 19:11 in the Bible, who has names relating to truths.

2d] Locke's empirical opinion118 that morality and utilitarian pleasures will lead to the same, cannot be accepted with Kantian deontological morals because Kantian deontological morals is based on universal grounds and utilitarian pleasures on personal close neighbourly grounds. Aristotle was also an empiricist according to Tarnas.119 It seems thus that something of empiricism causes non-corresponding communications, possibly due to faith related rational-opposing functionalist, instrumentalist, consequentialist, pragmatism. Kant as rational philosopher questioned sophistical120 communication to enhance faiths in other honest people. Author thinks for example that metaphors like "Son of God" and "Mother of God" did not influence Kant negatively with regards to his communications. Kant did not lose sight of the importance of honesties to society. Empiricists paradoxically seem to tend towards sophisticated language, when using 'golden means'. Ones could expect that empiricists' objective approach, would keep them corresponding, but it seems, lack of good faiths and consequential uncontrollable fears, of being sacrificed, after honesties, plays a role. When empiricists generalize about choosing 'golden means', which do not always exist in words, contradictions become necessary, to express views. Contradictions cause hampering of assembling.

Structurally critical modern view

2e] Habermas121 refers to objective correspondence with the words "morality and law grounded on principles" and "rationalization" and "communicative action free from narrowly restricted contexts". There is not opportunity for society to be corresponding enough to solve serious problems because, the-honest ('eerlikes'), are kept from forming groups.122 Utilitarian metaphorical pleasures (for example mimesis), which have been institutionalized, remove creators (creatures) from societies, because of a 'numbers game', which works against honest ones. One honest person only, as part of a group, cannot be Creator or God. It takes more than one honest person to create unique techniques, resulting from corresponding objective communications, by more than one honest person, to solve post-modern problems.

The structural problems of post-modernity, which hamper sufficient solving of problems, can be found in government constitutions, which promote imparting of ideas. Territorial globally transparent patents of secularism are relevant. Patents impart ideas globally but only protect territorially, if at all. Similar structural problems, at a level of hourly enforceable wages and salaries, existed before the 17th and 18th century revolutions. Enlightenment philosophers motivated enforceable salaries, based on labour hours. Remuneration rights to ideas, which were originated self, were not a result of the Enlightenment and are currently part of a structural modernity problem to overcome.

2f] Corresponding language, or in other words, honesties, caused expansions of human knowledge and new products, after being imparted widely. Utilitarian constitutions are found in South Africa and in the United States of America for example. It was reported in the news that the intelligence agencies, which most infringes on citizens' privacies due to 'security' issues are from Isreal, the USA and the UK, countries where utilitarian philosophies are dominant. President Hollande of France stated in his speech in the parliament of Israel that Israel spends "the most" on "research and innovation".123 The constitutions of South Africa and the USA for example enforce imparting of ideas. Ideas are thus spread as widely as possible, internationally, to make utilities available as widely as possible to be used for utilitarian pleasures of humanity. Ideas, which are conceived by poor nations, are developed124 by rich nations, because they have the means to develop ideas more effectively than poor nations.

The difference between generating ideas and developing ideas can confuse, because, part of modernity is the idea of progress125 through utilitarian development. Developments however happen after imparting of ideas worked against creators (creatures) and their immediate surrounds and in favour of developers. A utilitarian argument is to blame 'authenticity'126 of individual creators (creatures) for the problems of Earth. Hannah Arendt identified this philosophy against creators (creatures) as ' "ideological transfer"127 ' of powers to groups or institutions. She philosophized that "human beings"128 will accept such transfers more readily if motivations exist for creatures to benefit more from such transfers. Deceiving and sophisticated language uses, referring to singularity and immateriality of God, are necessary for imparting of ideas. Trusts are affected negatively as well as abilities to solve129 problems.

Culturally critical modern view

2g] Members of religious institutions benefitted from utilitarian imparting of ideas and human 'sacrifice'. Patens of religion are relevant and the fear effect it has on societies. Western and Middle-Eastern religions identified honesties correctly as source of creativities. Author does not mean here ex nihilo creation, because the issue is practical creativities. Understanding God that creates ex nihilo has however been mixed into practical creativities. Honest people are accused of thinking they are God that creates ex nihilo. Honest people however, if they stay honest for long enough know that superstitious beliefs about "God Himself Who cannot lie" are false.130 Author postulates currently that due to the deep impressions, which Christianity and the Abrahamic religions have made in the West, about a "Messiah", coupled with thoughts about honesties, relating to God that creates ex nihilo, persons who deceive methodologically to enhance their own positions, believe subconsciously they can be God, who creates ex nihilo, from the Day in the future they could decide to be honest. They subconsciously believe they can be God because their minds contain many fallacies. Their thinking is thus not based on realities and consequentially they do not realize what realities are. A serious problem for society, if author's postulate is true, is those Days could be days of dying, or never, depending on how strong beliefs in redemptions only are. Society as a whole is thus disadvantaged for lifetimes. Beliefs in redemptions oppose good deeds, but not one is perfect, therefore beliefs, which include good deeds and redemption, exist. These circumstances cause significant sociological cultural problems, which hampers problem solving during postmodern times.

Western nations survived up to now by developing creativities of honest individuals without remunerating them officially. The current levels of competition in a globalized world with very large populations are however too high to survive on ideas of just a few131 creators. Creators need to be set free from Rousseau's and utilitarians' philosophies and more creators need to be encouraged to solve current problems. It can however not happen as long as the subconscious presuppositions of the 'One' only, is present. These presuppositions oppose wider honesties.

Post-modern view

2h] The bible has thirty-six132 commandments to love (not breaking laws) strangers and just two to love only ones' neighbours. Utilitarians love only people of their common wealth and do not trust Kantian deontologist universal ways. Universal honesties are a danger to utilitarian institutionalized and religious secrets. The utilitarian 'God' is the only 'Creator' and, people, when creating, are infringing on 'His' prerogative, according to utilitarian beliefs. Creatures thus have not rights to remuneration from their ideas. Utilitarians impart valuable ideas to each other, whilst trading the hard earned correspondences of creators.133 Utilitarians blame creatures' (creators') honest communication for 'devilry'134 and Kantian deontologists blame too many utilitarian moral holidays for lack of trust.

Postmodernisms show the human 'sacrifices' groups commit, because of religious hatred towards 'Ones'. Hatreds have origins in the idea of the perfect 'One' only and false religious mimetic rites. Nietzsche signed his last letters as ' "The Crucified" '135. "And let us send to the aid of our honesty136 whatever we have of devilry137 in us – our disgust at the clumsy and casual, our 'nimitur in vetitum', our adventurer's courage, our sharp and fastidious curiosity, our subtlest, most disguised, most spiritual will to power and world-overcoming which wanders avidly through all the realms of the future –"138 Nietzsche's statement that God is dead probably referred to honesties because in the parable he referred to "suns". References to the good sun and truths (Plato, 2007: 231;507a) in rationalist philosophy are prominent. Nietzsche knew of the anti-creational (irrational) effects deceits cause: "What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from all suns?"139

2i] Were gargoyles effectively formed by the struggle between deceivers and the-honest, due to the superstitious societal notion of the 'One only'? How many people have become vagrants due to the societal notion of only One honest person or no honest people at all? Author lost several jobs due to own honesties, ascribed to 'devilry'140, and was explicitly falsely accused of thinking he is Jesus Christ141, during legal proceedings. Societal victimization caused suicidal and violent thoughts of author. When author warned colleagues of the cumulative effect of victimizations, they could not be aware of, due to many isolated incidents of victimization by colleagues; author was dismissed from his university employment, after being falsely found guilty of assault. A verbal warning was falsely presented as verbal threatening. The presentation was false because the risk to all people, except maybe author, decreased after the warning and during the warning. Threatening would have increased risk during the time of 'threatening'. This postmodern heuristic incident, which relates to snapping in utilitarian societies, is still ongoing with legal proceedings. When professors claim that honest people do not exist, it definitely implies something about God thoughts, because not all professors are aware of the endlessness142 of definitions of words for definitions of words. A question can justifiably be asked whether this postmodern condition is more prevalent at academic institutions after previous recorded incidents of 'snapping' at academic institutions, especially in the USA.

Fr. Pascual mentioned in the video of the lecture mentioned in the Background section that evolution is not a science, with certainties, in all respects affirmed with finality. Darwin's last book was called The descent of man. 'Descent' is related to 'descend'. Pico's God implied evolution in different directions, depending on humans' choices and so does Revelation in the Bible. Calvinism generalizes not the direction of evolution from lower to higher forms.143 If objective truths (causing creativities) are a necessity for survival of large populations, do stresses144, caused by cultural honesties, cause descending from generation to generation? Deceits relieve own stresses relating to financial security in some instances, but what is the effect on telepathies? If humans want to know truths by inclination, a deceitful environment will enhance telepathy, according to evolution, because telepathic abilities will reveal truths, hidden, not spoken nor read. Logically, believing everything145, will slow or stop an evolutionary process of developing telepathic abilities, but isn't believing everything an impossibility, due to contradictions in thought, which can only be stopped by not thinking at all? Telepathic abilities imply less talking. Author thus postulates two reasons for descending evolution. First, stresses and, second, deceiving environments. Deceiving environments imply developing telepathic abilities because most people want to know truths. Own honesties in deceiving environments cause stress and maybe more descending evolutionary processes. Logically, but not surely, thus, honesties could cause descending evolution but on the other hand honest people live closer to their realities, due to less fallacies in own memories; less telepathic searching for truths, and therefore telepathic descending of the-honest could be less than those of deceivers. Off course; if humans can146 currently descend into animal form. If all people are descended from one or a few ancestors, the question could be asked whether the-descendants of the others, who lived at the same time as common ancestors, descended into animals, or did they go extinct?


2j] Non-cooperation between common wealths causes lack of trust and lack of coherence in a global economy due to three different ways of communication. The most important problem, causing non-cooperation and lack of trust, is intentional deceits and sophisticated communications as result of utilitarian consequentialist philosophies. The levels of correspondence (honesties) of communications to realities at a philosophical level, during modernity, gradually changed from the most to the least, starting as the most corresponding at the level of objective concrete processes of Descartes for example. Logically labour processes work more efficiently and integrated with more correspondences available inside and outside of our minds. The level of structures and institutions, which was significantly structured during the 17th and 18th century revolutions, related more to processes than to meaning and therefore correspondences were important for functioning, but not as important as at Cartesian processes. The cultural level relates more to arts, sociabilities and pleasures and therefore, political correctness and deceits, become more relevant on the way to subjective societal 'meaningful' metaphors. The second highest degree of non-correspondences is relevant at sophisticated arguments at the level of given and constructed meaning of postmodernism, because logically this level inculcates subjective politically correct communications during difficult times, similar to the final time of the Middle Age. At the level of postmodernisms' 'meaning', superstitions expect that only 'One' knows what 'the truth' is. It implies that much of the communications at the level of meaning is non-corresponding to realities of God because only 'One' knows. The highest level of non-correspondent communication is relevant at outright deceit, which existed always and was first identified at a devil who deceived Eve and partly caused humanities' problems.

The focus, which philosophy put on correspondences to realities of communication during modernity can also be compared in time as follows. Philosophies emphasized objective correspondences during classical modernity because at that time during the new epoch much more human labours were involved than today and thus corresponding communications were more relevant to ensure integrated processes. During current postmodern times less emphasis is placed on corresponding communications because economies are more mechanized and we are less dependent for our daily needs on corresponding communications. Established market mechanisms and machines cause automatic integrations currently, which do not require corresponding communications. Marx prophesized a state like that. The culturally critical time involved more correspondences to realities than during postmodernity but less than during the structurally and institutionally critical revolutionary period of the 17th and 18th centuries because of different levels of dependence on corresponding communications.

2k] Concluded that the level of dependence on corresponding communications cause different levels of trusts, which existed in societies during different times of modernity. The more dependent societies were on correspondences, the more truths existed and the more trusting there were. The more trusting there are, the more real values exist and vice versa. The 'golden mean' of Aristotle works against values when choosing means, as a generalized methodology. When the Western societal psychological barriers of God thoughts relating to 'One', against honesties have lapsed, the logical necessary correlation between honesties, dependence and creativities will be common knowledge. Western society will then enter a new time of responsible creativities as hoped for by Friedrich Nietzsche and others.

The necessity of more truths can only be realized if the plural nature of, many being part of God, is accepted widely. Having God 'in us', metaphorically, did not inspire wide enough honesties. If reference is made to being subject to God, when discussing God, definitions of God should be truthful, not metaphorical and functionalist. References to Daughters of God, Sons of God, Fathers of God and Mothers of God will have a better effect on society. The good determinants and effects of God will then be identified more truthfully.

Chapter 4: Creators and change

"Anomaly of Plato?", change and Greece

2l] Plato emphasized truths as a value but according to Karl Popper147, Plato also argued against change. There are different opinions about Plato’s reasoning. According to Tarnas, ambiguities148 exist in the understanding of Plato's work, because Plato identified creativities as good but on the other hand he identified creativities as cause of changes and not important, due to his emphases on constancy of Forms. There could have been anomaly in Plato's reasoning because he did not clearly reconcile divine constancy with changing immanence. He wanted to "arrest all change"149 according to Popper. Author do not agree fully with Popper because of uncertainties about the possible anomaly to be investigated further. Tarnas opines Platonic spirit dismisses physical reality in favour of metaphysical realizations and Hegel accepted knowledge of physical realities as results of metaphysical faith.150 Hegel's faith, influenced by Platonic spirit, countered, uncertainties of modern worlds. Tarnas stated further he is not very sure how Plato's prioritization of metaphysical forms affected natures of corporealities as divine or not.151

Popper classified Plato with Heraclitus, Comte, Mill, Lamarck and Darwin as philosophers acknowledging changes and Plato tried to stop changes.152 Popper's opinion is logical when considering the oppositions the aristocracy, who Plato was part of, experienced, due to new creativities. It seems however that Plato did not realize that immanent changes are inevitable effects of metaphysical constant truths. Author doubts Popper's statement because author thinks it was Plato's family who wanted to stop changes. Maybe Plato just warned people like Socrates. Maybe Plato wrote a "christian account" about Socrates. The uncertainty Tarnas refers to, counts in favor of Plato, unless Plato motivated misleading. Taylor and Lee mentioned a thesis about inability to prove existence of misleading, because lies do not exist. The thesis appeared in three of Plato's works.153 Logic implies, the non-existence of what lies portray, proves lies.

The more correspondent, knowledge and communications are to realities, the more useful and effective, creativities are for all. Instead of fighting change, like Popper opine Plato did, whilst ambiguously supporting transcendent truths, which cause changes, powerful people would do better, by taking part in transcendent truths and resulting changes, without worrying too much about their financial security, or about taking it all. Like a "gereformeerde dominee" said the other day: "Alles gaan na Hom."

Singularity of the "creator", change and Israel

2m] ".. but it is clear that what really lies at the basis of Leibniz's response to Malebranche, is his Neoplatonic conviction, drawing support from Genesis, that the human mind is an image or mirror of God, Leibniz cannot endorse any reply to .. that compromises this fundamental doctrine."154

Conceptions of a singular "Creator" in ambivalent realism monopolized remuneration for developments in hands of groups and the wealthy, without remunerating individual creators for valuable ideas. Current human rights are sometimes seen as "basic ethical rule of our time", which were derived from pre-Christian philosophy.155 Frankenberry identified with others the singular male immutable form of 'God' as a problem in popular religion.156 Imparting of ideas can be equated with 'sacrificing' of gods and goddesses, because creatures do not get paid for work they did when 'their' ideas are being systematically imparted and developed. Human rights as opposed to creators' (creatures') rights have to be therefore rights in development, which are expanded or limited, according to the philosophy of timely reconstruction. Atonement after 'sacrificing' others and reparations for 'sacrificing' are relevant. Constitutions of countries can be looked at in analogical religious manner, by accepting importances of constancies without unwanted rigidity, which can exclude necessary change, due to new realized157 realities according to Hart.158 In recent times "humanism" rose, which can be recognized by marginalization of rights to oppose order, which are given by new 'gods'. Alvin Plantinga called this ' "creative antirealism" '.159

Hart states that in ancient times, problems of change due to creating were known. Reformed creating orders and Thomistic eternal law were influenced by Platonic realism. Deconstructed parts of Aquinas's and Calvin's writings, legitimize change, in creation order, like Kuitert did explicitly. Dooyeweerd opined that obstructing change in creation order is pagan.160 Singularity of the "Creator" is presupposed in ambivalent realism and it seems because of that, current creating orders or in another word 'mandates', do not accept realities about creators in plural form, whilst emphasizing development. Hart identifies further reformation in the direction of laws not being final order. Love requires change to new circumstances. Constancy should not be divinized according to Hart.161 Changing for good requires constant or improved truths. Without knowing constant historical realities no change would be possible. Hart162 mentioned many relevant matters under the heading "Change". We are not in agreement about realities due to the singularity and immateriality of Hart's 'God'. He stated the absolute or immutability of God was not taken from the Bible and has its origins in Greek thinking. Hart identified immutability of God as problematic but not the singularity of 'god' as problematic. Singularity of 'god' became the dominant way of referring to his 'God' after the falling into sin in the Bible; therefore ideas are common property currently, which cannot be protected with copyrights. Trade secrets can protect intellectual creativities but not sufficiently, due to imparting of ideas, which has been institutionalized.

2n] Immutability of God, according to Hart, arose due to rejections of the temporal, as not divine. Hart's conception of singular 'god', contradicts his statement about temporal divinity, because temporal singular divinity, implies plural "gods" of times. According to Hart, constancy of the divine: implies a faith, which is "not rooted in trust in God"163. He stated, "What is true, of course, is that in any and all relationships, only Yahweh is truly God"164 and that Malachi in the Bible is often quoted to support Greek ideas of God, but the Bible as a whole shows, that change is sometimes from God. According to Hart's opinion, Greek philosophy ascribes creativities and changes to evil earthly things, and Hart wrote it is not true, because his incorporeal 'God' initiates changes and creativities according to the Bible. Ascribing creativities to "God the Creator" does not solve problems of current creation orders totally. Singularity of Hart's 'God' also monopolizes development, as part of Classic Greek philosophy did when ascribing changes to evil influences. Classic Greek philosophy and Abrahamic religions have the same effect, albeit in different ways. "In fact, one can even find God changing about firm promises" Hart wrote. This truth, which Hart identifies, supports Tarnas's opinion165 that Jesus and his followers were influenced by Greek philosophy, like Malachi was, according to Hart, because, did Jesus not say we should never swear oaths? "If virtually all of the dimensions of God's good creation play a role in our knowing God, why should God's good creature [own bold to emphasize negative influences of singularity in Hart's discourse] known as change not play such a role?"166 Hart contradicts himself here because he implies that creators ("good creature known as change") who cause changes are 'sacrificed' in Abrahamic religion and that it is not only in Classic Greek philosophy that creators are 'sacrificed', like he claims. "But what is god about God cannot be clearly and definitely said in terms of what creatures are or are not. Definitions of God or authoritative and definitive lists of God's perfections or attributes do not occur in the Bible." Author disagrees with Hart here because due to creative effects of truths, honesties make people gods and goddesses and physical parts of God. God should be defined cata- and apophatically, without letting Caiaphas syndromes take hold of societies. Exclusive, which is false, apophatic definitions, apply only after death of divinities but cataphatic definitions make God partly anthropomorphic until gods and goddesses cross boundaries of apophatic definitions. No human can however comply with perfections of some apophatic definitions and therefor such definitions have negative impacts on societies because the definitions remove Good from the world. The seven deadly sins were devised to overcome evil and to stop transgressions of apophatic definitions. All newborn children are gods and goddesses. The Bible inspires not "(theo-)logical" identities of God with the Bible's imagery of God according to Hart. Author postulates the New Testament does, with the human form of Jesus, and the Old Testament does. When Joshua told the sun167 to stop moving he was being enough to be called part of God. The same applies to lesser deeds of many who were and are changing things in the West and East for good. "In creation change is fundamental. Not only life, but even material things cannot exist except on a physical foundation that includes change. Creation's temporality, thorough as it is, makes change pervasive. And, indeed Christians have never thought of the world and anything in it as eternal and unchanging." If ' "God is immutable" ', exclusively, then it could be argued that change is evil. When they at times say ' "God does not change" ', they mean it "creatiomorph"168. Although Hart writes that change can only be recognized in relation to something stable he writes that stabilities in relation to which change is identified, are changing. That makes sense if we consider that the stabilities, he means, are truths, and, correspondences between phenomena in minds and realities in the world are becoming more accurate in time. There is nothing of reality that is absolute except as metaphor for 'God' according to Hart. Author agrees not because metaphysical truths, concepts of honesties, are divine unchanging transcendents and the result, divine immanent change. Metaphysical truths show, via honesties, where improvements in "creation order" are required. This unchanging concept causes changes and requires gods and goddesses who transcend and surpass pragmatist necessities of deceit. Lying is required by Caiaphas syndromes in order to convince others, ones are not thinking ones are "God himself" or "God Himself" or the "Mother of God" or Father of God or "Son of God". Prof. Meynell, a Roman Catholic thinker, believes ' "honest seeker" ' is not necessarily ' "apostate" ' like most Calvinists believe.169

2o] Hart argues against Greek postulates of numbers and stars being constant and therefore against part of Greek religious constancy. Numbers and stars are therefore not part of "religious trust" according to Hart. He confuses changing stars with immutable concepts of numbers. The things, which number units represent, are not constant, therefore, what mathematics represent, is not immutable. Certain characteristics of mathematics are immutable. Stars are changing but that does not mean unchanging characteristics of stars cannot be identified to be part of the transcendent.

It seems thus that although truths were important in Greek philosophy, for example in Plato's philosophy, truths were not divine in Greek thought as it is in the Bible. The problem in the Bible is that truth is there a singular concept or even a singular name. Whether reference is made to Greek plural immutable forms or Christian singular truth is however not that important, effects are the same. Effects are to monopolize the control over benefits of development. Immutability can only be predicated negatively and nothing immutable can be positively identified according to Hart. Author disagrees because concepts of honesties can be positively identified with correspondences between phenomena in minds and realities in the world. Metaphors like ' "immutability" ' and ' "absoluteness" ' can be used in a limited religious sense with regard to relative trust according to Hart. Outside of that it replaces 'god' we project to outside of the cosmos, which is our responsibility according to Hart. Bold emphasis was used to emphasize negative influences, which were identified in a lower case g, of singularity. This "responsibility" Hart postulates is not Christian courage, which contributed to good in the world. Hart had not gods and goddesses of Pre-thesis in mind; he had theon in mind, which he called 'god', mixed up with Jesus of Nazareth. He wrote such projections return via downscaling to the cosmos in "institutions, persons or acts"170 that lay down their own rules but hide their reasons behind claims of divine representation. If only one 'god' is relevant, how can we expect that institutions will be well managed? Here Hart's Caiaphas syndrome manifested. References to 'god' by Hart implies justifying 'sacrifice' of creators in Christianity, therefore a reasonable conclusion can be drawn that Hart justifies human 'sacrifice' until his Authentic One 'shall' be found, similar to notions of Charles Taylor. God have always been sacrificed and probably will be, unless ambivalent realism is acknowledged for what it is. Meddled false ideas are ideas of 'Messiah', which cause human 'sacrificing', like ideas of stability in Classic Greek philosophy seems to have done.

Finally there is something that does not make sense. It is well known that ancient Jewish methods did not emphasize creativities, except perhaps for warfare. Jewish culture was built on trading, warfare and religious blessings. Current circumstances of high debt in Greece, can be understood in the light of beliefs, which limit change and creativities. There has to be thus another philosophical doctrine in Europe and the East on which countries like Germany and Japan built their creative economies. That other doctrine, which is not treated here probably relates to true realism.


2p] What is most important, order or truths? Order relates primarily not to creativities, order relates to damaging sins, for example murder and theft, partly as result of devils' perception of 'creation order'. It is not mentioned in discourse about creating orders that constant honesties cause good creativities and prohibit being colonized. Acceptance of this reality may end the "anomaly of Plato?", and singularity of 'God' and consequential ambivalent realism. Transcendent immutability and immanent changing can then be reconciled into an acceptable framework without contradictions. It is not generally realized that elthaughts171 about "The authentic one", cause Caiaphas syndromes, due to blinding effects of using human pronouns and nouns, which refer partly to humans, when referring to singular 'God' of ambivalent realism. References to singular divine "creator" in the form of human pronouns and immanent forms are commonplace in 'creation order' discourse. It seems these singular references are so deep in societies' subconscious that it takes years of being honest and experiencing hardship, with relative dignity, before the fallacy is realized, and indoctrinated beliefs, about the return of Christ, are discarded, when ones grew up in a middle class. Misleading, which ambivalent realism requires, seems to enforce ambivalence of realism because of the dissimilarities between phenomena in minds and realities in the world, which are caused by deceiving. Singularity of 'God' cannot be reconciled with sufficient creativities to sustain current large world populations and peace, because creativities are not motivated enough by singularity of the "creator". Creators make the world a better place and creators should not be 'sacrificed' through subconscious Caiaphas syndromes, which demotivate creativities. Although Hart motivates more creativity and change he in effect motivates sacrificing of creators, due to monopolization of benefits of development at his 'God', after creatures, who brings forth ideas, have been 'sacrificed', with, for example, imparting of ideas.

Hart's opinion motivated fallacies of Classic Greek philosophy that changes are evil. Author motivated fallacies about Abrahamic incorporeal singularity as perfect and only good. These two ancient fallacies are the same fallacy of ambivalent realism currently. The two fallacies have the same effect of removing benefits of creativities and remuneration from creators in favour of powerful groups. Why not share the benefits with creators? Is it because of superstitious beliefs about taking everything?

2q] Ambivalent realism promotes the false belief that 'God himself' as human can view the totality of the cosmos as datum. 'God himself' cannot exist as one human and totality cannot be viewed with human perceptions. True realism let philosophers view the world coherently, with realizations that, to view totality as a datum is impossible. Correspondences (honesties), due to faiths in Pre-thesis God, are prioritized above coherencies because coherencies of phenomena in minds are subjectively true and correspondences of phenomena in minds are universally true. Further, coherencies are subject to correspondences, which expand coherencies. Similarly "correspondences", which are not true, block coherencies. That is why many benefit from their Caiaphas syndromes against the public they should be serving. True realism is a synthesis between rationalism and empiricism. True realism is an improvement of ambivalent realism, which is a synthesis between ancient Greek and ancient Abrahamic beliefs.

Chapter 5: Existence of God



2r] Philosophy of religion is divided into reasonings about the existence of God, with emphasis on traditional and contemporary arguments. Philosophy of religion also focuses on the roles of transcendence, immanence and culture with regard to religion.


Phenomena in minds, "God create(s)", exist. Created things exist therefore deductive reasoning proves God's existence, which precedes created things. Historical events and institutions further prove God exist(s), even if existence of deterministic effects, caused by existing functionalist phenomena in minds, only, explain God.

An important problem is whether God is/are partly human form and if so, is the human form singular or plural?


Using analytic ideas of realism, considering a wide coherent modular view of reality, whilst prioritizing correspondence, views from parts of God are given. Constancy of nature is the most coherent whole, parts know of; therefore, if different parts subscribe to prioritizing corresponding truths, different works by different parts can be combined in the most coherent whole. Beliefs that idealist minds can actually determine realities of nature, by thinking, were excluded, because such circumstances, if existing, are under control of a higher unknown power. The methodology is therefore Kantian correspondence by considering matters under human control during every day life.

Statement to solve problem

God have always been inclusive of most honest men (gods) and most honest dames (goddesses), who therefor can assemble corresponding knowledge with integrated thoughts for good use.


2s] Cosmological arguments are unacceptable because it presupposes perceiving wholes of the universe.172 Teleological arguments are useful because it acknowledges responsibilities of human parts of God, to create "utopias" for Others-than-only-selves on Earth. Human reasonings are thus postulated as important via teleological arguments, to improve our conditions. Values of truths in design arguments are important because like Aristotle stated, fallaciousness is recognized by the inability of being used in processes of assembly.173

Ontological arguments can be important if its postulate human parts of God, as parts of true realism, because then its will have similar effects as teleological arguments. It is however currently subjective174 importance, because people do not agree about their definitions of God. Ontological arguments start with definitions175 of God. Although Hudson postulates that current common empiricisms176, view 'god' as incorporeal, author agrees not with him because many authors refer to God with lower case singular 'g' without 'a' in front of 'god', which implies anthropomorphism. Clouser, used capital letters and small letters in his singular references when he used the words "transcendent Creator", "transcendent creator" and "himself" and "His".177 Swinburne gave a good example of ambivalent realisms, with regard to beliefs in 'God'. "Theism claims that God is a personal being—that is, in some sense a person. By a person I mean an individual with basic powers (to act intentionally), purposes, and beliefs."178 Swinburne stated that God is not human because having eternity is an essential property of God.179 Author posits that psychological phenomena in Swinburne's mind, which relates to singularity of 'god', pushes God away as far as he possibly can, and in effect, his philosophy, like some other realists', are against conceptions of God, which include humans as parts of God.

Van Niekerk (2005:55-61) posited that the Sociological, Freudian and Genetic theories for existence of God are not acceptable. These theories relate to studies of existing phenomena in minds and deterministic factors on humans as part of religious studies. Religious experiences, as explained by Davis (2003), which cause awe in human minds can relate to pantheism and does not always bring us closer to God.

2t] Practical issues are relevant with regard to evils of the world.180 If we want to live honestly, Jesus of Nazareth is a good example of practical issues, which are relevant to honest lives.181 This opinion by Van Niekerk confirms that the Christian definition of God is not correct because of weakness of singularity. Copan's (2007) argumentation about sacking Melians during the Peloponnesian war proves groups, and not only individuals, should fear God, when we become immoral and lazy due to misuse of creativities.

Golding's (2007) explanation of Pascal's proof of God has value because the proof presupposes eternity and afterlives, which we cannot be sure about. The proof motivates us to be good, similar to parallel universes.

That brings us to immanent things to consider with regard to God. Caiaphas syndrome took hold of people who accuse others of thinking they are The-authentic. They sometimes accuse people of suffering from 'God syndrome', which is self referentially incoherent because God is good and syndromes evil. Grote & McGeeney referred to "The God Complex"182 in a more positive sense, with us being part of creativities but the negative connotation of "complex" is still contradicting "God" in the same term. The term "God Complex" is self-referentially incoherent.

References to "transcendence is first and foremost ethical."183 Merold Westphal and Charles Taylor could be classified together with Caiaphas, and other people who belief God is totally 'Other'. "Sin, the opposite of trusting obedience, is the desire for autonomy, not merely as being responsible for my own actions, but also as being the one who defines my identity and sets my own agenda. The same is true when the ‘I’ is expanded to the ‘We’, the self to society."184 Westphal's definition of sin is false. Sins primarily transgress common and criminal law. Barth views the presence of Jesus Christ of Nazareth as an historical event, which shows the utter weakness of humanity. God transcends from beyond and when people are touched by transcendence it leads to disaster. Humans have no influence on 'God' and we live totally at 'God's' mercy. 'God' is thus totally 'Other', which brings alterity into picture. Barth conceived alterity in senses of what is beyond, totally apart from us, and can therefore not be fathomed at all.185 Cooperative thought between Nishitani of the Kyoto School's Buddhist background and post-Kantian European philosophy, especially Heidegger's thought, exists, as acknowledged by Altizer. Purposes are religious convergence between Buddhist philosophy and Christian philosophy, with emphasis on kenosis. Where Western philosophy sometimes emphasizes "Being", the Kyoto School focuses on "Nothingness".186 Transcendence "as alterity" is a condition of individuals and therefore existentialism is relevant. Alterity relates to trauma187 of individuals and notions about the "gift of death"188. Alterity escapes nihilism.189 Theodicies as bureaucratic190 practices exclude creators from societies. Jesus opined love is to follow laws we can follow, honestly, which included the law about honesties.

2u] The word "alterity" in English is not an old word. It has no synonyms in the New Oxford American Thesaurus and was defined as "alterity |ôlˈteritē| - noun formal - the state of being other or different; otherness. ORIGIN mid 17th cent.: from late Latin alteritas, from alter ‘other.’ "191 Other relevant words are "alter" with an e, which means to change and "altar" with an a, which relates to religious sacrifice and informally to marriage. Alter with "e" and altar with "a" are pronounced same, according to dictionaries192 (" |ˈôltər| "193). The Oxford dictionary of philosophy194 lists "otherness", "alienation" and "authenticity" as relevant. "Alterity" can be compared with "otherness" because the two words are adjectival nouns. Adjectival nouns do not normally identify important differences between singularity and plurality, which is a significant part of discourses with regard to alterity. When The-other is postulated as wholly incorporeal 'Other', in combination with singular corporeal "Messias", without identifying realities of plural corporeal Others-than-only-selves, problems with regard to alterities are emphasized through religious superstition.

Some theon of mythology are represented with radical alterabilities of animal and anthropomorphic character. Eventually images of theon changed into incorporeal metaphysical entities currently. In current discourse however anthropomorphic characters of "God" of realism has not disappeared completely because of metaphors like Mother, Father and Son of God, which are equated with humans, being honest according to the Bible and Thomas Aquinas.

Transcendence "as alterity" affects honest individuals because of the subject-object dichotomy195. Stoker explains this as rejection of "opposition between transcendence and immanence." 196 When subjects are honest and their object of study or belief is postulated with authentic characteristics for example honest God, then naturally, authentic subjects will have difficulty to distinguish between themselves as subjects and their object of thought, being God. Sources of transcendence "as alterity" thus relate to identifying objects of thought, we have attributes of, separate from us, whilst objects are thought of. Phenomena in minds are accepted and written about as objects in our minds. Kant identified realities of objects, being noumena outside of our minds, in forms of objects themselves, in opposition to phenomena.197 Parts of societies do not rationalize necessities of "dogmatic" truths198 with regard to correspondences to forms of noumena in the world and correspondences to phenomena in minds. Unreasonable empiricist beliefs his opinions about others' phenomena in minds are true. According to Stoker, studying God is theology. 199 Studying human being (present participle verb) is part of anthropology. Different dichotomies exist between subject and object when studying God and when studying human being. Studying God is not studying other humans' beings.

2v] Transcendence "as alterity" has its origins in difficulties due to marginalization. A metaphor about old God (devilish elders) and Lucifers (the marginalized) are relevant. Socrates who criticized music and musical Socrates are examples.200"Hence since the musical Socrates is another determination from the wise Socrates, Socrates was separated from himself." '201 There are other types of alterabilities, which could cause transcendence to a higher power because of difficulties experienced, in traditions of creators202. When "tracing transcendence"203 and "messianism"204 "God’s transcending towards us resembles the structure of transcendence as alterity in the thought of philosophers such as Levinas and even Irigaray."205 The word ' "trace" ' with regard to ' "a son of God" ' and a second coming were quoted often by Miciks (2009: 108-109) when he quoted Derrida.206 "Radical transcendence as alterity"207 is a countercultural movement relating to authenticities due to notions attached to "ulterior" motives, identified in authenticities and The-authentic, according to Charles Taylor. Epicurus's objective was to remove fears of death caused by theon, which were caused by superstitious religions. Superstitions should be avoided by scientific studies according to Epicurus. Epicureanism was based on Democritus's atomism.208 "Gratitude springs from enjoying and finding beneficial the creatures and creations around you" according to Wolterstorff.209 Weakness of singularity is often disregarded because of superstitions about supernatural alterabilities when creators are sacrificed and "enjoyed" with utilitarian210 motivations via Caiaphas syndromes. Some people transcend immanent effects of theodicies with crime, others with creativities, others by becoming despotic rulers and despotic entrepreneurs, whilst devils feed off consequences of theodicies.

Concepts of alterities act in conjunction with false, functionalist, instrumentalist notions of 'Messias', which are similar to ideas about a 2nd coming of 'Christ'. In Altizer, Spirit is antithesis of Jesus of Nazareth due to a dialectical development of Spirit from being peaceful to having wills to immanent power. The "death of God" implies death of God of beyond to become ones again, immanent in this world.211 It is illogical to call an idea, which is an antithesis of another idea, a 2nd coming. Ideas about "Christ" and 'Messiah' should not be synthesised because the ideas are very different. If the whole world ("all for One") lie functionally and say one man can be 'God', it will not make it true because of lack correspondence to reality, which is weakness of singularity. Similarly, if the whole world lie and say Kilimanjaro is an island in the Ionian Sea, it will not be true, because of non correspondence. Imagine the situation sketched in religion whereby a large number of people say one man is God and that man says he is not God. Who is correct and what is true? The individual's view, who says one man cannot be God, is true. The same applies to thoughts with regard to a "Mother of God". Miracles are isolated incidents, which were ascribed to different humans of different times at different territories, therefore miracles also do not support the idea of 'Messiah' nor the idea of "Christ". Being a majority makes not a majority functional claim true, because truths are primarily correspondences between words and realities. God with a capital "G" is a plural concept because evil cannot be overcome by singularity.


2w] Ideas of 'Messiah' and "Christ" can be annulled because of anti-creational effects it has, in conjunction with Caiaphas syndromes. If singularity of 'god' and superstitious beliefs, about supernatural assistance to good humans are annulled, the world will be a better place. Good humans will then be able to group their efforts together more readily to improve conditions. Overcoming fears of devils, which Epicurus philosophized about, should be logical conclusions for individual creators, due to effective laws, which protect good individuals, one at a time, against group sacrifices. Humans will then, before falling into sin and after being reborn, be parts of plural God. Jesus put his trust partly in laws, but societies' wishes were more important than laws during the time of his crucifixion.

Chapter 6: Accounting of ideas a solution

2x] Good ideas and labours have not always origins in the same entity. Accounting of ideas will record remuneration rights of different entities involved at improvements, by identifying ideas (creativities) and labours (developments) separately. Understanding thats partly what contribute to improvements, will contribute in a universal manner to wealths of nations.

Salaries and wages were motivated during the Enlightenment with efforts of labours, which create wealths and therefore labours deserve remunerations. Enlightenment philosophers did not motivate enforceable remuneration for intellectual creations of minds, because at the time lacks of hourly remunerations were large hurdles to overcome. According to Child (1997:60), John Locke however recognised exponential increases in values of certain land, up to five hundred times the original value, due to "reason". Accounting of ideas postulates that generations of ideas are efforts that create wealths and should therefor also be remunerated formally and such remunerations should be enforceable, not only by referring to hours of services but also to qualities. Honesties can be integrated with creativities. Christianity realized this with references to honesties and the "Creator", albeit with unreal emphasis on singularity.

Deceits oppose corresponding communications and vice versa; cause different types of capital, which are interrelated. Capitals, which relate partly to fallacies are called equities and capitals that relate to correspondences are called intequities by transparent Accounting of ideas, which ought to replace opaque accounting of ideas.

The following two figures summarise two high level types of behaviours and environments, identified in readings and experiences.

Figure 2 depicts opposing forces of determinism, existing in the same territories. People can be classified in two groups. Deceivers and The-honest (Eerlikes212). Deceivers are more proficient at developing coherent and corresponding ideas due to their networks, which can raise equities, employ labours and market products. The-honest are more proficient at envisaging coherent and corresponding ideas, due to their clear associations between forms of noumena and phenomena in minds, and literal words. False forms do not hinder associations as at minds, which must remember false forms fabricated.

2y] Figure 3 pictures a view of the two high level groups, which each represents a different type of capital. The groups interact with six production factors. The traditional four production factors are entrepreneurship, natural resources, labours and capital (equity and debt). Entrepreneurships are now divided for ideas and networks. Two new production factors; ideas and networks were identified, which are found as parts of entrepreneurships. Intequities have been traditionally included as part of equity, but have not been abstracted as phenomena and have thus not been investigated sufficiently. This new model relates equities to networks as it relates intequities to ideas. The abstractions from equity and entrepreneurship caused six production factors instead of four. Networks and ideas were entrepreneurships. Intequities and equities were abstracted from equity. Deceivers have bigger networks than The-honest and thus more power to control all six production factors. Although equity controls development of ideas, equity does not motivate idea generations due to untequible remunerations. New ideas are results of coherencies and correspondences. Can be expected thus that coherent and corresponding idea generations seize to exist, after creatures (creators) are sacrificed, which lead to colonisations. Natural conflicts between creators (The-honest creatures) and developers (deceivers) as represented in the social contract theory of Jean-Jacques Rousseau & co. cause untequible remunerations with consequential incoherent development. According to Rousseau's social contract theory creativities are evil. According to Immanuel Kant & co.'s social contract theory conflicts between developers and creators can be overcome with universal laws, which are placed above all. Rousseau & co. postulate inimical human beings in a state of nature with corporeal humans above universal laws. Kant & co. postulate humans in a state of nature who place universal laws above themselves. A good example of the philosophies' differences was the revolutionary changes in Egypt during 2013. President Morsi was democratically elected but he was placed above laws. He could sentence people without trials. Author concluded that partly because of his inhuman powers he was ousted.213 Currencies and debts are used to remunerate during the development process of networks but not used sufficiently during the generation processes of ideas. Transparent Accounting of ideas could change this and enhance sustain abilities.



List of references

Africahead. The anomaly of Plato 2. (Blog entry of ICrM©, from: on 1 October 2013)

ANTONITES, A. J. & WORDSWORTH, R.  2009.  Risk tolerance: a perspective on entrepreneurship education.  (Southern African Business Review, 13 (3), 69-85)

AQUINAS, T.  1273 CE.  Summa theologica: treatise on the theological virtues: of the act of faith, article 4: whether it is necessary to believe those things which can be proved by natural reason? (From: on 19 June 2013.)

AQUINAS, T.  2012. Summa theologiae: questions on God. (In Geskiedenis van die filosofie: studiegids vir PHIL221 PAC, pp. 227 - 241. Potchefstroom, South Africa: North-West University)

ARISTOTLE. 1986. De anima: on the soul. (London, England: Penguin)

ARISTOTLE.  2004. The metaphysics.  (London, England: Penguin)

BARLOW, J.P. 1997.  The economy of ideas: everything you know about intellectual property is wrong. (In A.D. Moore, ed. Intellectual Property: Moral, legal, and international dilemmas, part III: Information and digital technology, pp. 349-372. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield)

BENTLEY, J.C. 1966. Creativity and academic achievement. (The Journal of Educational Research, 59(6), pp. 269-272. From: /stable/27531713 accessed 24 July 2010)

BEVAN, E. ≈1938. The Greek philosophers: their triumphs and failures. (In J.A. Hammerton ed. Universal history of the world, volume 3, pp. 1451-1466. London, England: The Educational Book Co. Ltd.)

BIBLE. The holy bible, new international version. (Cape Town: International Bible Society, 3rd South African edition, 1985.)

BLACKBURN, S. 2008. Oxford dictionary of philosophy. (Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2nd edition.)

BUDGE, E.A.W. 1895. The book of the dead. (New York, New York: Dover, 1967)

BURMS, A.  2012.  Transcendence and chaos.  (In Stoker, W. & Van der Merwe, W.L. (eds.).  Culture and transcendence: a typology of transcendence, pp. 168-175. Leuven: Peeters)

CHILD, JW., 1997. The moral foundations of intangible property. (In: A.D. MOORE, ed, Intellectual Property: Moral, legal, and international dilemmas, Part I: The moral foundations of intellectual property. Lanham, Maryland, United States of America: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 57-80)

CLOUSER, R. A. 2005. The myth of religious neutrality. (Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press)

Collins English Dictionary. (Glasgow: HarperCollins, 1994 3rd edition)

Constitution Society. Discourse on the origin and foundations of inequality among men by Jean-Jacques Rousseau. (From: on 1 July 2013)

Constitution Society. The social contract: chapter II by Jean-Jacques Rousseau. (From: on 1 July 2013)

Constitution Society.  1994 to current. (From on 7 July 2013.)

COPAN, P. 2007. The moral argument. (In Meister, C. & Copan, P. eds. The Routledge companion to philosophy of religion, pp. 362-372. London: Routledge)

DAVIS, C.F. 2003. Religious experience. (In C. Taliaferro & P.J. Griffiths, eds. Philosophy of religion: an anthology, pp. 162-181. Malden, UK. Blackwell).

DOOYEWEERD, H. 1979. The Dutch national movement & the religious antithesis. (In Roots of Western culture. Toronto: Wedge, pp. 1-15.)

DYLAN, B. 1971. I shall be released. (On The essential Bob Dylan - music CD. South Africa: Columbia, 2001)

Frankenberry, N. "Feminist Philosophy of Religion", (In Edward N. Zalta. ed. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, summer 2013 edition, URL =

GOLDING, J.L. 2007. The Wager Argument. (In Meister, C. & Copan, P. eds. The Routledge companion to philosophy of religion, pp. 385-393. London: Routledge)

Goudzwaard, B. 2013.  1st Lecture of history of contemporary philosophy: FILM878. (Potchefstroom, South Africa: North-West University. 20 April 2013.)

Goudzwaard, B.  2013. 2nd Lecture of history of contemporary philosophy: FILM878. (Potchefstroom, South Africa: North-West University. 27 April 2013.)

Goudzwaard, B. & de Santa Ana, J.  2005.  Globalisation and the spirit of modernity.  (In Julio de Santa Ana ed.  Beyond idealism.  Grand Rapids, USA: Eerdmans. 2005/6 final concept. Digital file name: Article 4.pdf, from North-West University by e-mail on 26 March 2013.)

GOUDZWAARD, B. & DE SANTA ANA, J.  2006.  The modern roots of economic globalization  (In Gurney, R., Hadsell H. and Mudge L. eds.  Beyond idealism: a way ahead for ecumenical social ethics, 91-124. Grand Rapids, Michigan and Cambridge, United Kingdom: William B. Eerdmans)

GRIFFITHS, P. J. 2003. Religion. (In C. Taliaferro & P.J. Griffiths, eds. Philosophy of religion: an anthology, pp. 31-43. Malden, UK. Blackwell)

GRENZ, S.J.  1996.  A primer on postmodernism  (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans.  1996 Kindle edition)

GROTE, J. & MCGEENEY, J. 1997. Clever as serpents: business ethics and office politics. (Collegeville, Minnesota: Liturgical Press)

GRÜNBAUM, A. 2003. Psychoanalysis and Theism. (In: Taliaferro, C. & Griffiths, P.J. (eds.) 2003. Philosophy of Religion. An Anthology. Malden: Blackwell, 111-122.)

HABERMAS, J.  1991. Lecture 1: modernity's consciousness of time and its need for self-reassurance. (In Habermas, J. 1991. The philosophical discourse of modernity: twelve lectures, pp. 1-22. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press)

HALSEMA, A.  2012.  Luce Irigaray's transcendence as alterity. (In Stoker, W. & Van der Merwe, W.L. eds.  2012.  Culture and transcendence: a typology of transcendence, pp. 101-114, Leuven: Peeters)

HART, H. 1995. Creation order in our philosophical tradition: critique and refinement. (In Walsh, B.J., Hart, H. & Van der Vennen, R.E. eds. An ethos of compassion and the integrity of creation, pp. 67-96. Lanham: University Press of America)

HART, H. 1999. Notes on Dooyeweerd, reason, and order. (In Strauss, D.F.M. & Botting, M. eds. Contemporary reflections on the philosophy of Herman Dooyeweerd, pp. 125-146. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press)

HUDSON, W.D.  2003. What makes religious beliefs religious?  (In C. Taliaferro & P.J. Griffiths, eds. Philosophy of religion: an anthology, pp. 31-43. Malden, UK. Blackwell)

JAMES, W. 1907. Lecture II: what pragmatism means  (In Bowers, F. & Skrupskelis, I.K. eds.  Pragmatism by William James, pp. 27-44. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England: Harvard University Press, 1979.)

KANE, J.F. 1981. Pluralism and truth in religion: Karl Jaspers on existential truth. (Ann Arbor, Michigan: American Academy of Religion, Edward Brothers, Scholars Press, McMaster University.)

KEARNEY, R. 2011.  Anatheism: returning to God after God.  (New York, New York: Columbia University Press.  2011 paperback edition.)

KENNY, A. 2010.  A new history of Western philosophy: in four parts.  (Oxford, United Kingdom: Clarendon, Oxford University Press, 2012 paperback edition.)

KLEIN, N. 1999. No logo. (New York, New York: Picador)

MACHIAVELLI, N.  1992. The prince (New York, New York: Dover Publications)

MACKIE, J.L. 2003. Cosmological arguments. (In C. Taliaferro & P.J. Griffiths, eds. Philosophy of religion: an anthology, pp. 242-253. Malden, UK. Blackwell)

MAUTNER, T. 2005. The Penguin dictionary of philosophy. (London, England: Penguin, 2nd edition)

MELCHERT, N. 2011. The Great Conversation. Vol II. Descartes through Derrida and Quine. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 540-547.)

MIKICS, D.  2009.  Who was Jacques Derrida? An intellectual biography.  (New Haven, USA: Yale University Press)

New Oxford American Dictionary. ©2005-2009. Apple Inc. (version 2.1 (80))

NIETZSCHE, F. 2003. Beyond good and evil: prelude to a philosophy of the future. (London: Penguin, 3rd Penguin edition)

PIENAAR, M.D. 2012. Management accounting of intellectual creations. (Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Sciences, vol. 3: n 1, pp. 103-110)

PLATO. 1986.  Phaedrus.  (Wiltshire, England: Aris & Phillips Ltd.)

PLATO.  2007. The republic.  (London: Penguin)

POPPER, K.  2011. The open society and its enemies.  (London and New York: Routledge Classics)South Africa. The bill of rights. (In The South African constitution. (From:

SAMAY, S.  1971.  Reason Revisited: The philosophy of Karl Jaspers. (Dublin, Ireland: Gill and Macmillan)

Shearmur, J. and Turner, PN. eds.  2012.  Karl Popper's After The Open Society: Selected Social and Political Writings.  (London and New York: Routledge Classics, 2012 paperback)

South Africa.  Constitution.  (From: on 28 February 2013.)

South Africa.  Labour Relations Act of South Africa: act 66 of 1995. (From: on 3 May 2013.)

STOKER, W. 2012. Culture and transcendence: a typology (In Stoker, W. & Van der Merwe, W.L. eds. Culture and transcendence: a typology of transcendence, pp. 3-23, Leuven: Peeters)

Stoker, W. & Van der Merwe, W.L. eds. 2012. Culture and transcendence: a typology of transcendence. (Leuven: Peeters)

STOKER, H.G. 1970.  The philosophy of the creation idea. (Potchefstroom: North-West University)

SWINBURNE, R.  2003. God.  (In C. Taliaferro & P.J. Griffiths, eds. Philosophy of religion: an anthology, pp. 51-57. Malden, UK. Blackwell)

TARNAS, R. 1993. The passion of the western mind: understanding the ideas that have shaped our world view. (New York: Ballantine Books, 1st Ballantine Books edition)

TAYLOR, C.  1991.  The malaise of modernity.  (Toronto: Anansi)

TAYLOR, C.C.W. & LEE, M. 2012. The sophists. (The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, spring 2012 edition, Edward N. Zalta (ed.), from:

TROOST, A. 1994. The idea of creation order in Western thought. (In God's order for creation. Potchefstroom: IRS study-pamphlets No. 324. pp. 2-15)

TRAKAKIS, N. 2008. The end of philosophy of religion, pp. 1-124 (London: Continuum)

Van der BRAAK, A. 2012. Nishitani's rethinking of transcendence as trans-descendence. (In Stoker, W. & Van der Merwe, W.L. eds. Culture and transcendence: a typology of transcendence, pp. 176-186. Leuven: Peeters)

Van der KOOI, C. 2012. Struck by an arrow from beyond an impassable river: transcendence in Karl Barth's "The epistle to the Romans". (In Stoker, W. & Van der Merwe, W.L. eds. Culture and transcendence: a typology of transcendence, pp. 54-63. Leuven: Peeters)

Van der MERWE, W. 2012. Conclusion: tracing transcendence. (In Stoker, W. & Van der Merwe, W.L. eds. 2012. Culture and transcendence: a typology of transcendence, pp. 187-198. Leuven: Peeters)

Van der Walt, B.J. 2013. A Scripturally-orientated perspective on the history of Western intellectual thought: the origin and contours of and questions about the consistent problem-historical method. (In Tydskrif vir Geestewetenskappe. Planned for Sept. 2013. Digital file name: < 6. Skrifmatige perspektief op gesk vd Westerse filos denke.docx> received by e-mail on 2 June 2013 from North-West University)

Van NIEKERK, A.A. 2005. Geloof sonder sekerhede. Besinning vir eietydse gelowiges, pp. 54-75, 113-139. (Wellington: LuxVerbi)

Van TONGEREN, P. 2012. Nihilism and transcendence. (In Stoker, W. & Van der Merwe, W.L. eds. Culture and transcendence: a typology of transcendence, pp. 152-163. Leuven: Peeters)

VENTER. 2012. Leesbundel. (In Geskiedenis van die filosofie studiegids - PHIL 221 PAC. Compiled by M. Van der Walt. Potchefstroom, South-Africa: North-West University)

Venter, J.J. 2012.  Historical parts of this paper were influenced by the History of philosophy study guide (PHIL212), compiled by M. van der Walt for undergraduate studies at North-West University, South-Africa, 2012.

VERSTEEG, W. 2012. Trauma as transcendence: Beyond the limits of experience? (In Stoker, W. & Van der Merwe, W.L. eds. Culture and transcendence: a typology of transcendence, pp. 115-125. Leuven: Peeters)

Vollenhoven, D.H.Th1934.  The foundations of Calvinist thought.  (Vollenhoven Foundation ©. From: on 3 July 2013.)

Weigelt, M. ed. 2007. Immanuel Kant: critique of pure reason.  (London, England: Penguin Classics)

WESTPHAL, M. 2012. Dimensions of divine transcendence: from abstract to concrete. (In Stoker, W. & Van der Merwe, W.L. eds. Culture and transcendence: a typology of transcendence. Digital file name: STOKER VAN DER MERWE - CULTURE AND TRANCENDENCE.pdf, pp. 126-137)

WOLTERS, A.M. 1995. Creation order: a historical look at our heritage. (In Walsh, BJ., Hart, H. & Van der Vennen, R.E. eds. An ethos of compassion and the integrity of creation. Lanham: University Press of America, pp. 33-48)

WOLTERSTORFF, N. 1995. Points of unease with the creation order tradition. (In Walsh, B.J., Hart, H., VanderVennen, R.E. eds. An ethos of compassion and the integrity of creation. Lanham: University Press of America, pp. 62-66).

WOODMAN, RW, SAWYER, JE and GRIFFIN, RW. 1993. Toward a theory of organizational creativity. (The Academy of Management Review. 18(2), 293-321. From: on 26 May 2010)

Zalta, E.N. ed. 2013. Feminist philosophy of religion by Frankenberry, N. (The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, summer 2013 edition, from: on 1 October 2013.)

ZUIDERVAART, L. 2004. The great turning point: religion and rationality in Dooyeweerd's transcendental critique. (Faith and Philosophy, Jan. 2004, volume 21, number 1, pp. 65-89)


1 Van der Walt, BJ. 2013. A Scripturally-orientated perspective, 13-15.

2 An example of a functionalist statement or belief is that "God himself" gives a realist view because a man perceives the cosmos as whole before theorizing. The statement enhances theorizing by placing abstractions made, into a more coherent whole but the statement is not true because it is not possible for humans to perceive the cosmos as whole.

3 'Realism' is between quotation marks because realism is a misleading name. In philosophical discourse realism refers to prioritized coherence. Honesties and correspondence can therefore be second priority according to realist opinions.

4 'Continental philosophy' is between quotation marks because of analytic philosophies, which are present on the European continent. Territorial classifications of philosophies are not realistic because territories represent different views. Author thinks it reasonable to say that honest idealists and empiricists exist.

4.1 'Honesties' do not exclude lies under severe stress, during conditions of 'danger', because thinking takes time. Levels of danger and strain, during which non-corresponding communications take place, determine whether actions are honest and rational. Legal precedents exist, which are applicable, for example, precedents about non-pathological criminal incapacity, automatism, self-defense etc. These legal principles do not relate to corresponding communications per se, but the ideas of these legal principles can be applied to determine whether deceits are warranted or not, realizing that deceits are irrational and against social coherence. Non-corresponding functionalist communications under conditions of no stress are against social coherence.

5 Grote, J. & McGeeney, J. 1997. Clever as serpents, 57.

6 "Diogenes Laertius, in his Lives of the Philosophers, begins his account of Plato in the following way: 'Plato, an Athenian, son of Ariston and Perictione – or Potone – who traced her descent from Solon [the famous lawgiver]. . . As for Solon, he traced his descent from Neleus and Poseidon. And they say too that Ariston claimed descent from Codrus, son of Melanthus [mythical early kings of Athens], who are in their turn reported as descended from Poseidon, . . .' " (Plato. 1986. Phaedrus, 1)

7 [Socrates]: " 'In the dog's name!' " (Plato. 2007. The republic, 306; 567d. 95; 399a).

"Glaucon swears 'By Zeus', the chief Olympian god; Socrates, who always avoided such oaths, swears the oath traditionally ascribed to him, 'By the dog'." (Plato. 2007. The republic, 390; Part III, note 69.)

"The condition of cynocephaly, having the head of a dog — or of a jackal— is a widely attested mythical phenomenon existing in many different forms and contexts. … Cynocephaly was familiar to the Ancient Greeks from representations of the Egyptian gods Hapi (the son of Horus) and Anubis (the Egyptian god of the dead). The Greek word (Greek: κῠνοκέφᾰλοι) "dog-head" also identified a sacred Egyptian baboon with the face of a dog. Reports of dog-headed races can also be traced back to Greek antiquity. In the fifth century BC, the Greek physician Ctesias wrote a detailed report on the existence of cynocephali in India. Similarly, the Greek traveller Megasthenes claimed to know about dog-headed people in India who lived in the mountains, communicated through barking, wore the skins of wild animals and lived by hunting." (From: on 28 June 2013)

Some cynic philosophers, who were probably excommunicated, lived like "dogs", for example Diogenes of Sinope, who lived in a wine jar. A close correlation between Diogenes' visit to the market with a lantern and Nietzsche's parable of dead 'God' exists.

The word "cynocephaly" appears not in the Collins English Dictionary nor the New Oxford American Dictionary.

8 Kenny, A. 2010. A new history, 233.

9 Google translate

11 Mautner, T. 2005. The Penguin dictionary, 203. "euhemerism" - Euhemerus (340-270BC) developed the idea in a novel called Sacred scripture, that theon were living "kings, warriors, inventors, etc.".

12 The words "neter" ('God'), "neteru" ('gods') and "netert" ('goddess'/goddesses?) developed into the word "nature" (Budge. 1895: lxxxix, lxxxii-lxxxiii).

13 From: on 18 October 2013.

14 Translated by Google Translate on 18 October 2013.

15 Kenny, A. 2010. A new history, 12.

16 Mautner, T. 2005. The Penguin dictionary, 284.

17 Burms, A. 2012. Transcendence and chaos, 174.

18 Wolters, AM. 1995. Creation order, 34.

19 Wolters, AM. 1995. Creation order, 35.

20 Troost, A. 1994. The idea, 3.

21 Africahead. The. Copyright is claimed by a juristic person called Africahead. Author originated the description "anomaly of Plato?" as important concept of accounting of ideas.

22 Zeus punished Prometheus because he made fire available to anthropos. Did Zeus excommunicate (ostracize) Prometheus before Prometheus rebelled?

"the ostracized person was banned as a matter of precaution only; he was neither tried nor regarded as guilty" (Shearmur, Turner 2012:361).

Author thinks the practice to ostracize people are still used today by some hegemonies.

23 Troost, A. 1994. The idea, 5.

24 Wolters, AM. 1995. Creation order, 35.

25 Plato. 1986. Phaedrus, 121; 274c.

26 Troost, A. 1994. The idea, 6.

27 Troost, A. 1994. The idea, 5.

28 Mautner, T. 2005. The Penguin dictionary. 582-583. "sophist".

29 Bevan, E. ≈1938. The Greek philosophers, 1456-1457. The reason was also "corrupting the morals of young men (399B.C.)"

30 Mautner, T. 2005. The Penguin dictionary, 129. "Critias".

31 Troost, A. 1994. The idea, 6.

32 Troost, A. 1994. The idea, 6.

33 Mautner, T. 2005. The Penguin dictionary, 127. "cosmopolitanism".

34 Troost, A. 1994. The idea, 7.

35 Venter. 2012. Leesbundel, 86-87.

36 Constitution Society. Discourse on the origin and foundations of inequality among men by Rousseau. (From: on 1 July 2013.)

37 Constitution Society. The social contract: chapter II by Rousseau. (From: on 1 July 2013.)

38 Grünbaum. 2003. Psychoanalysis and Theism, 116-117.

39 South Africa, The bill of rights.

40 South Africa, Labour relations act.

41 Constitution Society. Discourse on the origin.

42 Aquinas. 1273 CE. Summa theologica.

43 Kenny, A. 2010. A new history, 588-593.

44 Kenny, A. 2010. A new history, 593.

45 Nietzsche, F. 2003. Beyond good and evil, 9,13,15,71.

46 Aristotle. 1986. De anima, 140; 406b.

47 Aristotle. 2004. The metaphysics, 149; 1024b-1025a.

48 Aristotle. 2004. The metaphysics, 149; 1025a-1025b.

49 Aristotle. 2004. The metaphysics, 195; 1034a.

50 Kenny, A. 2010. A new history, 92.

51 Aristotle. 2004. The metaphysics, 148; 1024b-1025a.

52 Barlow. 1997.  The economy of ideas: everything you know about intellectual property is wrong, 364.

53 Melchert. 2011. The great conversation. vol II. Descartes through Derrida and Quine, 542.

54 Taylor. ©1991. The malaise of modernity, 2.

57 Griffiths, PJ. 2003. Religion, 32.

58 Griffiths, PJ. 2003. Religion, 40.

59 Griffiths, PJ. 2003. Religion, 41.

60 Griffiths, PJ. 2003. Religion, 32, 40-42.

61 "It is now commonplace to say that money is information. With the exception of Krugerrands, crumpled cab fare, and the contents of those suitcases that drug lords are refuted to carry, most of the money in the informatized world is in ones and zeros. The global money supply sloshes around the Net, as fluid as weather...However, as we increasingly buy information with money, we begin to see that buying information with other information is simple economic exchange without the necessity of converting the product into and out of currency. This is somewhat challenging for those who like clean accounting, since, information theory aside, informational exchange rates are too squishy to quantify to the decimal point." (Barlow, 1997:364)

62 A Christian account includes a divine agent who is other than those offering the account. The account is a response to the 'creator' who became incarnate. Griffiths spells 'God' with a capital letter. We should direct our actions away from ourselves towards 'God' and fellow humans. Jesus of Nazareth is our example we should follow. Actions of a Christian account include worshipping, praying and using the Bible. (Griffiths, 2003:40-42.)

63All over the world, university campuses are offering their research facilities, and priceless academic credibility, for brands to use as they please. And in North America today, corporate research partnerships at universities are used for everything: designing new Nike skates, developing more efficient oil extraction techniques for Shell, assessing the Asian market’s stability for Disney,..” (Klein, 1999:99)

64 Westphal, M. 2012. Dimensions of divine, 135.

65 "Niebuhr, H.R., 1951. Christ and culture. New York, NY: Harper & Brothers." (Westphal, 2012: 136)

66 Westphal, M. 2012. Dimensions of divine, 135.

67 Interview on France 24 news channel, 17 November 2013, 10h10 (South Africa time) with Elmar Brok, German member of the European parliament and current chairman of the European parliament committee on foreign affairs. The interview was about spying by intelligence agencies, which caused the necessity of new agreements between the USA and Europe due to infringements on the European populace's privacies.

68 Channel 403, CCTV News on Top TV. 16 January 2014, 18h15, South Africa time.

69 Channel 401, Aljazeera News on Top TV. 17 January 2014, 18h00, South Africa time.

70 Westphal. M. 2012. Dimensions of divine, 128.

71 Trakakis, N. 2008. The end of philosophy of religion, 25.

72 Westphal. M. 2012. Dimensions of divine, 126-127.

73 Trakakis, N. 2008. The end of philosophy, 118.

74 Machiavelli. 1992. The prince, 45.

75 Van Niekerk. 2005. Geloof sonder sekerhede, 115.

76 Van Niekerk. 2005. Geloof sonder sekerhede, 116.

77 Pienaar, M.D. 2012. Management accounting, 105-106. Author recalls he read about an inverse relation in Time magazine around 2001-2005, but could not find the reference.

78 They referred to Damanpour (1991), Kanter (1988), Paolillo & Brown (1978) and Payne (1990).

79 Bentley, J.C. 1966. Creativity, 269-270.

80 Venter, JJ. 2012. Leesbundel, 188.

81 Grote, J. & McGeeney, J. 1997. Clever as serpents, 96-97.

82 Grote, J. & McGeeney, J. 1997. Clever as serpents, 57, 123. "Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it would be good if one man died for the people." (John 18:14 of the Bible). It seems Caiaphas's appointment was made by Romans with Israelites.

83 This premise was partly rationalized by referring to various authors who argued in the same direction. (Pienaar, 2012)

84 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 225. Tarnas wrote here how someone was sacrificed in the church, with church approval, during the Middle Age.

85 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 297. The metaphorical character was viewed as significant for new discoveries.

86 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 252.

87 Habermas, J. 1991. Lecture 1, 8.

88 ' "Beyond Intelligent Design: The Philosophies" a panel of lectures Moderated by Ronald Cole-Turner' (From: on 28 June 2013. The panel consisted of Prof. Roy Clouser (Christian philosophy), Prof. Norbert M. Samuelson (Jewish philosophy) and Fr. Rafael Pascual (Christian philosophy). Norbert Samuelson said, at 45 minutes into the video, that the Trinity of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, had its Biblical origin in the speech Moses gave to the Israelites before Moses died. Deut. 5:6 of the Bible, Dr. Samuelson recalled, gives the translation for the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.)

89 The discussion starts at 1h14 into the video mentioned at note 88.

90 Tarnas. R. 1993. The passion, 214-215.

91 "For no individual being could be believed to be a god—that is, a being with more divine power than humans [own italics to emphasize The-plural form] possess—unless it was already believed that there is a per se divine source of all other things which confers varying degrees of power upon them." (Clouser, 2005:17-18)

92 Aristotle explained his views about choosing the mean in his The Nicomachean Ethics. Choosing means as a way of decision-making has been generalized as right, for example an attorney said that in the legal world the grey position is right. Choosing means cannot be generalized as good. The well-known example of courage as the mean between two vices, cowardice and irrational bravery, makes sense, in certain respects. In some cases, means do not exist however. "We might say from Aristotle's point of view utilitarians go to excess in their application of the mean,.." (Kenny, 2010:214). Take for example warning and threatening. Receiving warnings reduce risks and are therefore good and part of labour law. Being threatened increases risks. When people generalize that the middle way should always be chosen, they do not distinguish between being warned and being threatened. They regard warnings as threats with consequential problems.

93 Tarnas. R. 1993. The passion, 291-292.

94 Aristotle did not convincingly defend the law of the excluded middle according to author. (Aristotle. 2004:107;1011b-1012b).

95 Tarnas. R. 1993. The passion, 405.

96 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 252.

98 Gen. 2:9 of the Bible.

99 Gen. 2:17 of the Bible.

100 Gen. 3:1-4 of the Bible.

101 Gen. 3: 6-13 of the Bible.

102 Kearney. R. 2011. Anatheism, 22.

103 "katharevousa |ˌkäθäˈrevoōsä| noun the purist form of modern Greek used in traditional literary writing, as opposed to the form that is spoken and used in everyday writing (called demotic). ORIGIN early 20th cent.: modern Greek, literally ‘purifying,’ feminine of kathareuōn, present active participle of Greek kathareuein ‘be pure,’ from katharos ‘pure.’ " (New Oxford American Dictionary)

104 Aristotle. 2004. The metaphysics, 148;1024b-1025a.

105 Plato. 2007. The republic, 81;389a.

106 Pienaar, MD. 2012. Management, 107.

107 Kant, I. 1781. II. Transcendental doctrine of method  (Weigelt, 2007: 571-668)

108 Kant, I.  1781. II. Transcendental doctrine of method: chapter II: the canon of pure reason: section II: of the ideal of the highest good, as a determining ground of the ultimate end of pure reason (Weigelt, 2007:635).

109 Goudzwaard, B. 2013. 2nd Lecture: the philosophy of Rousseau includes voluntary explicit group membership of a society as citizen of a city in contrast to automatic implicit citizenship of a country.

110 James, W. 1907. Lecture II, 43.

111 Kenny, A. 2010. A new history, 928.

112 Weigelt, M. 2007. Immanuel. Kant's Critique of pure reason use the term sophistical for metaphysical uncertain postulations. In that sense sophistical and sophisticated metaphors could be similar.

113 Goudzwaard, B. 2013. 1st Lecture.

114 Tarnas opined Plato was an ancient rationalist (Tarnas, 1993:291-292).

115 In Memphis, Ptah was a creator (potter) (Venter, 2012:14-19). Logically Ptah had to be objective in order to be able to create pottery artistically. Objective honesties had to be an attribute of creator theon in order to assemble mental components before components of material could be assembled.

116 Nietzsche, F. 2003. Beyond good and evil, 156.

117 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 236-237.

118 Goudzwaard, B. 2013. 2nd Lecture.

119 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 333, 291-292.

120 Weigelt, M. 2007. Immanuel. The word 'sophistical' was used in the quoted English translation of Immanuel Kant's Critique of pure reason. The meaning of the words 'sophistical' and 'sophisticated' are not generally fixed in author's mind. 'Sophistical' and 'sophisticated' relate to Sophists who were masters of rhetoric during Greek antique times. Corresponding truths were not priorities for the Sophists. A big part of Critique of pure reason is about opposing sophistical reasoning.

121 Habermas, J. 1991. Lecture 1, 1-2.

122 Habermas, J. 1991. Lecture 1, 3. Author understands the reference Habermas makes to functional stagnant ideas of modernity as the idea of, The-honest, as postulated by Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas referred to 'God' in the male singular with 'Himself' and therefore it is assumed Aquinas referred to Christ as a singular male. If Aquinas did not refer to Christ as Singular Male, he would have used a plural form when he referred to God; his reference was a functionalist, instrumentalist deceit.

123 France 24 news channel on 18 November 2013, 19h00, South Africa time.

124 Pienaar, MD. 2012. Management, 108.

126 See The malaise of modernity by Charles Taylor (1991) in which he argues authenticities should be sacrificed, in search of One Authentic Creator.

128 Goudzwaard, B. & De Santa Ana, J.  2006.  The modern roots, 8.

129 "What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from all suns?" (Tarnas, 1993:395. Tarnas quoting from "Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science, translated by W. Kaufman (New York: Random House, 1974), 181."). The word 'suns' and Latin 'sol' relates.

130"Only through singularities can we find the divine." —Spinoza' (Kearney, 2011:85). Some empirisms (parts of Empiricism) currently seem to lack a sense of individualism (authentism) and metaphysical reasoning, which according to Spinoza causes lack of true faith. Author understands this reference to Spinoza to mean that only through living as individual, can a person realize his/her own weakness and realize that God are plural form.

131 Hegel stated: "Apart from some earlier attempts, it has been reserved in the main for our epoch to vindicate, at least in theory, the human ownership of treasures formerly squandered on heaven; but what age will have the strength to validate this right in practice and make itself their possessor?" (Habermas, 1991:17-18)

132 Kearney, R. 2011. Anatheism, 21.

133 Pienaar, MD. 2012. Management, 108.

134 Nietzsche, F. 2003. Beyond good and evil, 156.

135 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 395.

136 Commentators on Nietzsche wrote he conflicted with inner Apollonian and Dionysian influences. This quote of Nietzsche and the previous at classical modernity were separated to demonstrate the two opposing forces, which Habermas identifies in modernity and postmodernity (Habermas, 1991:5). It seems the history of Plato and Dionysus, the tyrant of Syracuse, influenced Nietzsche.

"Socrates: And of the divine kind we distinguished four parts, belonging to four gods, taking the madness of the seer as Apollo's inspiration, that of the mystic rites as Dionysus', poetic madness, for its part, as the Muses', and the fourth as that belonging to Aphrodite and Love; the madness of love we said was best" (Plato, 1986:101;265b).

"The Dionysian will to power of the tyrant of Syracuse at whose court Plato spent some years" manifested here in Nietzsche's philosophy (Nietzsche, 2003:226. Commentary).

137 "uncoupling of modernity and rationality has set in … shake the iron cage .." (Habermas, 1991:4)

138 Nietzsche, F. 2003. Beyond good and evil, 156.

139 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 395. Tarnas quoting from "Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science, translated by W. Kaufman (New York: Random House, 1974), 181."

140 Nietzsche, F. 2003. Beyond good and evil, 156.

141 The circumstances were caused by widely formed beliefs, similar to the notions of Charles Taylor in his book The Malaise of Modernity.

142 Pienaar, MD. 2012. Management, 105, 108.

143 Vollenhoven, DHTh. 1934.  The foundations, 10-11.

144 Author read that stress causes diabetes, which humans share with animals. On 28 June 2013 a search with Google's search engine for the exact phrase "stress causes diabetes" gave a result of 292 000 results.

145 Author recalls he read somewhere that Jesus believed or 'will' believe everything. A reference could not be found, although a search on the Internet highlighted writings by Paul of the Bible.

146 [Socrates]: " 'In the dog's name!' " (Plato, 2007:306;567d. 95;399a).

"Glaucon swears 'By Zeus', the chief Olympian god; Socrates, who always avoided such oaths, swears the oath traditionally ascribed to him, 'By the dog'." (Plato, 2007:390;Part III;note 69)

"The condition of cynocephaly, having the head of a dog — or of a jackal— is a widely attested mythical phenomenon existing in many different forms and contexts. … Cynocephaly was familiar to the Ancient Greeks from representations of the Egyptian gods Hapi (the son of Horus) and Anubis (the Egyptian god of the dead). The Greek word (Greek: κῠνοκέφᾰλοι) "dog-head" also identified a sacred Egyptian baboon with the face of a dog. Reports of dog-headed races can also be traced back to Greek antiquity. In the fifth century BC, the Greek physician Ctesias wrote a detailed report on the existence of cynocephali in India. Similarly, the Greek traveller Megasthenes claimed to know about dog-headed people in India who lived in the mountains, communicated through barking, wore the skins of wild animals and lived by hunting." (From: on 28 June 2013)

The word 'cynocephaly' appears not in the Collins English Dictionary nor the New Oxford American Dictionary in which author looked.

147 Popper, K. 2011. The open society and its enemies, 419.  

148 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 11.

149 "Popper, K.  2011.  The Open Society and Its Enemies, p. 419.  London and New York: Routledge Classics. (Quoted with permission from the Karl Popper Library, Klagenfurt University)" From: on 12 June 2013.

150 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 380.

151 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 11.

152 Popper, K. 2011. The open society and its enemies, 419.

153 Taylor, CCW. & Lee, M. 2012. The sophists. "Euthydemus 284a–c, Theaetetus 188d–189a and Sophist 236e–237e"

154 Jolley, N. "Nicholas Jolley Leibniz and Malebranche Part 3", 3:49. (The Center for the Philosophy of Religion: University of Notre Dame. From: on 17 December 2013)

155 Troost, A. 1994. The idea of creation, 8.

156 Zalta, E.N. ed. 2013. Feminist philosophy.

157 Zalta, E.N. ed. 2013. Feminist philosophy.

158 Hart, H. 1999. Notes on Dooyeweerd, 143.

159 Wolters, AM. 1995. Creation order, 36.

160 Hart, H. 1995. Creation order, 71.

161 Hart, H. 1999. Notes on Dooyeweerd, 135-136.

162 Hart, H. 1999. Notes on Dooyeweerd, 140-143.

163 Hart, H. 1999. Notes on Dooyeweerd, 141.

164 Hart, H. 1999. Notes on Dooyeweerd, 141.

165 Tarnas, R. 1993. The passion, 101-102.

166 Hart, H. 1999. Notes on Dooyeweerd, 141.

167 Joshua 10:13 of the Bible.

168 Hart, H. 1999. Notes on Dooyeweerd, 142.

169 'Hugo A. Meynell. "The Philosophy of Dooyweerd: A Transcendental Thomist Appraisal," Faith and Philosophy 20 (July 2003): 270-272' (Zuidervaart, 2004:75,82,88)

170 Hart, H. 1999. Notes on Dooyeweerd, 143.

171 Elthaughts originate primarily when partly empiricists due to their realisms do not distinguish between fact and opinion. When they opine that someone think he is 'God' (the Christ or the Messiah) they accept empiricist opinion as true and negative consequences to creators and societies follow.

172 Mackie, JL. 2003. Cosmological arguments, 242.

173 "Used of a false thing. On the one hand, either because it has not been assembled or because it would be impossible for it to be assembled." (Aristotle, 2004: 148;1024b-1025a)

174 Aquinas, T. 2012. Summa theologiae, 231. Aquinas stated here that 'God' has different definitions. Because definitions about 'God' are not objective, definitions cannot be used to prove the existence of 'God', according to Aquinas. Aquinas did not consider the possibility that a definition can be corresponding to reality, as far as author knows.

175 Aquinas, T. 2012. Summa theologiae, 230-233.

176 Hudson, WD.  2003. What makes religious beliefs, 9.

177 Clouser, RA. 2005. The myth, 239, 241, 249.

179 Swinburne, R. 2003. God, 57.

180 Van Niekerk, AA. 2005. Geloof sonder sekerhede, 115.

181 Van Niekerk, AA. 2005. Geloof sonder sekerhede, 116.

182 Grote, J. & McGeeney, J. 1997. Clever as serpents, 127.

183 Van der Merwe, W. 2012. Conclusion: tracing transcendence, 188.

184 Westphal. M. 2012. Dimensions of divine transcendence, 128.

185 Van der Kooi, C. 2012. Struck by an arrow, 54-63.

186 Van der Braak, A. 2012. Nishitani's rethinking of transcendence, 179.

187 Versteeg, W. 2012. Trauma as transcendence, 115,123.

188 Stoker, W. 2012. Culture and transcendence, 18. Westphal, M. 2012. Dimensions of divine transcendence, 133-134.

189 Van Tongeren, P. 2012. Nihilism and transcendence, 159.

190 Trakakis, N. 2008. The end of philosophy of religion, 25.

192 Collins English Dictionary and New Oxford American Dictionary.

194 Blackburn, S. 2008. Oxford dictionary of philosophy, 11,12.

195 Karl Jaspers, Kane and Samay.

196 Stoker, W. 2012. Culture and transcendence, 5.

197 Aristotle, Kant, Husserl, Heidegger etc.

198 Nietzsche, F. 2003. Beyond good and evil, 9,13,15,71.

199 Stoker. HG. 1970. The philosophy of the creation idea, 6-11.

201 From: on 26 August 2013.

202 Van der Kooi, C. 2012. Struck by an arrow, 61.

203 Van der Merwe, W. 2012. Conclusion: tracing transcendence, 187.

204 Derrida through Stoker, W. 2012. Culture and transcendence, 20.

205 Van der Merwe, W. 2012. Conclusion: tracing transcendence 191.

206 "[Derrida, J.] Writing and Difference. [p. 230]. Tr. Alan Bass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978" (Mikics 2009:xvi,109)

207 Westphal, M. 2012. Dimensions of divine transcendence, 135.

208 Kenny, A. 2010. A new history, 78-79.

209 Wolterstorff, N. 1995. Points of unease, 64.

210 Utilitarianism allows human sacrifices for benefits of groups (Kenny. 2010: 928). "Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jews that it would be good if one man died for the people." (John 18:14 of the Bible). Paul probably was also subject to utilitarian Caiaphas syndrome before he was reborn. ' "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?" "Who are you, Lord?" Saul asked. "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting" ' (Acts 9: 4-5 of the Bible).

211 Stoker, W. 2012. Culture and transcendence: a typology, 13-14.

212 "Eerlikes" is an Afrikaans word in the plural form, which describes the honest. The word needs not 'the' ('die' in Afrikaans) in front of the word to make sense.

213 Reported on France 24 News channel (TopTV) during January to February 2013 in South Africa.