Homepage of Hannele Tervola
Links
Paradise wins (My main page!)
Rational Moral
Gaia
Holistic objective thinking
Feelings
Christianity, buddhism, taoism and other oriental wisdom
Links to my letters & their answers
Women and feminism
Symbolics
The interconnectedness of human functioning (my main theory supporting the paradise wins idea)
The buddhist enlightenment
Feedback that I have gotten
My collected comments about these internet pages
Do you want to question the validity of my thoughts very thoroughly?
Personal links
Watch my videos at www.youtube.com/khtervola
30 views in a more leisurely style
From Darkness To Light, a book attempt: overcoming modern horror scenarios
My Paradise Will Win netshop http://www.ParatiisiVoittaa.,fi
"It is fit for a hero to sing like the sea,
great, holy,
something to be afraid of,
tender like the rest of night above the lands.
There are many songs and many men of songs.
There is one song above the others:
Humans' ideologies', spirit's heart-touching life-changing song.
Peoples disappear,
does not disappear the power
sung by the connoisseur of the soul of one's people."
Eino Leino
I was less than a month old when mother and father took me to the forest, to see the trees, the natural environment of humans. My parents considered it to be very important and enjoyable, so I too treasured the memory and the thus found connection with the nature, with the original, with the untouched beauty and true health - with everything of worth, with the base of our lives. For, small though I may have been, I knew that sI was an individual interconnected with the rest of the biological world. The biosphere it was called: animals, plants, all kinds of life forms in one interconnected whole: our world. It was my nature to be a part of that world, my health and happiness depending on the health of the whole world, being supported by the health of the whole world. And my nature being to support the health of the whole world. That world-wide moral inscribed on my soul by the ages old fight for survival was the core of my being, my major goal in life, my only enjoyment. There was no separation between it and the personal quest for happiness and not between it and the ages old quest for survival. These three things: happiness, survival and world-wide moral were one and the same thing. There was nothing else of worth in the world for me. Those who thought otherwise were badly misled, delused. World-wide moral was the only rational choise. It is the soul of all living beings like the quest for happiness and survival is!
She was happy to hear the birds sing, to see the colourful hairy worms in the tall grass, to sense the moist earth beneath her bare feet,… And then in the autumn to see the colours in the leaves, to hear the sound of fallen leaves around her feet,… The winter snow, the tiny birds shivering in their ball like winter appearance, picking fallen seeds from the ground, the beauty of the untouched piles of snow,… The spring light, its widening space,…
She loved her body, not because of the beauty of youth but because it was her way to exist, to experience the warmth of the life in her veins, each touch of the loving natural world.
In social relationships she valued friendship instead of military practise like the other kids did. She knew that the healthiest soldier was the most capable and that the biggest healthy group the strongest, so she valued everything that could give her full health in every respect and was prepared to commit herself to achieve the best kind of allegiancies: real friendship. Toward the healthy we feel love, so love is what gives us strenght, so it is also militarily the best option. There is no difference between the search for happiness and the fight for survival, as long as one does not resort to artificial means like drugs and negligience, lying so to oneself in one’s search for happiness. And moral and happiness connected via the need to do meaningful things in one’s life, to gain social position, to protect the things that give us good life, to protect the future too. Living in social contact with the rest of the living world you can best form allegiancies and in other words care for their well-being via compassion and they will in turn protect you since you are useful to them, to their happiness and well-being, to the state of the large things in the world that affect their lives enermously.
I use a holistic view of everything that I come across, all the time.In addition I am unusually thorough in everything, both in thinking and doing things. I always reach for the greatest objectivity that I can reach with my abilities and seek to develop them greater. An important part of objectivity is to be as sure as possible and to apply all results as widely as they are applicable, while being all the time conscious of how sure they are in each occasion. This leads me to valuing the common sense as an important part of objectivity (common sense WITH a holistic view!) and that in turn leads me to thinking that following feelings increases objectivity since it causes that one's thoughts do not get overruled by emotions, and because feelings teach one to pay attention t the essentials - that's what the evolution (or God) created them to be like! Otherwise we propably would not have feelings.
I do not consider my thoughts so much a result of an unusually high theoreticaql intelligence or of theoretical education, than the result of the above mentioned qualities. So if you too love the paradise idea, maybe thoroughness, holistice view of everything, a biological picture of humans together with the obswervation that feelings help to answer needs which in turn safeguards health i.e. survival, valuing and using holistic common sense and following feelings in your life,... - maybe these would help you to see these things all by yourself?!
Supporting things that are positive for happy life, like
ice cream and strawberries,
singing and dancing,
good living conditions for children,
holidays
and so on.
This is an important part of the Finnish speaking culture of Finland in Europe.
"Live and let others live!" is the rule that we follow diligently in our lives (much more than the Swedish who claim it to be their wisdom instead but who restrict it to their own group and own nation).
The Santa Claus who is around here said to live in the Lappland of Finland, comes originally from the neighbouring country Russia.
Of music I have most enjoyed the songs from Tahiti, from the paradise islands.
Kaisa Hannele Tervola
L�hderanta 11 B 25
02720 Espoo
Finland
European Union
On the web there is information about Finland at http://virtual.finland.fi/
Maybe the tale of the Finnish speaking Finns will be like the tale about the Ugly Duckling, swan is the national symbol of Finland and our culture has some beauty of the compassionate human nature in it.
A quotation:
"
After us other people.
That comforts. Now already it comforts me.
In my dreams I carry in my arms a little child.
The child smells of safety and of a happy night."
A piece of Arja Uusitalo's poem book: Meren syli (In the arms of the sea)
The world is huge and our chances of affecting it are slim, or so it feel. Still we have to try! So why not make such attempts like a ritual that you perform according to your best ability to honour your true idels: do everything that you need to do in order to affect the world, and do it from the bottom of your heart, but do it just to express your inner values, not to force the world since the world is too huge for that to succeed. Honour the things of value. Whether you do it as a prayer by deeds or in the spirit of play or both does not matter. What matters is that you actually, in pravtise!, try your very best in saving the world. It brings a feeling of deep satisfaction and meanngfulness to life that is so huge that it is difficult to even compare to anything else on the intellectual plane.
SERIOUS-MINDED
Serious-mindedness is a typical charachteristic of the Finnish speaking Finns.
Serious-mindedness means taking everything with a serious mind, with feelings and understanding, and basing one's actions on that. The valuing of honesty in the Finnish speaking Finnish culture offers a better ground for this than most other cultures, I suppose.
Serious-mindedness:
* to take important matters very seriously in order to get the main things in life (and in the world at large) right, so that they lead toward good,
* to take light matters lightly in order to enjoy life as much as possible: healthy mind and spirit
Why to be serious-minded, i.e.
what does serious-mindedness consist of,
what does it aim at and what is its motivation:
* living fully, feeling fully
* understanding sizes right
* caring especially about life's important matters (like children, peace, a good future for the human kind and other living beings,...)
* COMPASSION
* (These give rise to:) carrying RESPONSIBILITY
* thinking of the WHOLE - holistic thinking is like a person in a landscape aiming to take the landscape into account as fully as possible, being sensitive to atmospheres i.e. to how things are in the whole
* understanding communication fully - so you reach also a better working social relationship
* understanding things as fully as possible, with one's own understanding and compassionate feelings
* common sense and objective thinking with a holistic view
To achieve a good happy life,
for oneself and others,
now and in the future.
is our common goal and motivation for the using of a holistic view, fact-oriented attitude and for carrying responsibility.
Close to my heart and close to the soul of the Finnish nation is the old Christmas song:
I am not seeking for power or glory
I am not longing for gold either
I ask for the light of Heaven
and peace upon the Earth
That brings Christmas
which brings happiness
and lifts souls up to God
I am not seeking for power or glory
I am not longing for gold either
I ask for the light of Heaven
and peace upon the Earth
Allow me a peaceful cottage
and the childrens' Christmas tree
The light of the words of God
in which my soul becomes enlightened
Bring to homes, even to small ones,
now the sweetest Christmas celebration
The light of the words of God
and noble minds.
To the poor like to the rich
come Christmas sweet
To the darkness of the world
bring the light of Heaven!
I want you, I wait for you,
You Lord of the land and the heaven!
Now to the poor, like to the rich
bring your sweet Christmas!"
No question is so big as to not to be worth thinking over by yourself. On the contrary: just the biggest questions should be thought over by all, all by themselves so as to find lots of new answers.
I am a wilderness guide specialiced into teaching how to increase school like or academical intelligence substantially by just trekking in the nature. (The idea is my own and works in practise. The effect is based on your love for the nature.)
This understanding of the base for the human intelligence = the human nature which is on this level the same as the animal nature, explains also how I can amazingly train my pet animals without the animals themselves being anything unusual to begin with. This is so in theory, and it seems to be so in practise too! Please watch the videos... I am myself amazed, you will be too!
Our view of animals affects our view on the human nature. Science says that the human and animal nature are the same. So if we value animals, we reach better the base of our own functioing: the human nature. In the competitive modern world we are all the time looking for better alternatives, well working ways to make us intelligent or otherwise more capable. So if we see that the human nature is capable of huge feats, we will not go ashtray, we will not count on artificialities in questions of human ways of living and doing things. All machines and all living beings work bets when used according to their own instructions of usage, according to their nature. So it is also with humans at these modern times filled with artificialities. But us understanding that depends on our respect for animals!
I am a Finnish speaking Finnish woman, 36 years old, who lives in Espoo, near the capital of Finland.
I am a Taoist, a Buddhist and believe in God, even though my personal opinion is that Jesus Christ did an enermous evil thing in giving mercy to the evil ones instead of to the good ones. My picture of the world is scientifical, even though I am mostly interested in more complicated matters.
One common misconception about moral is that it is equal to following rules set by others. That is just the way that evil ones sometimes try to be moral, or a plot that they use to get power over others - that is not what moral really means. Moral, the soul of laws is above laws, however difficult that may be to arrange in practise. It is the evil ones who try to enslave people, not the moral ones. Moral means following one's heart's voice with a holistic view of the world, and the voice of one's understanding - that means freedom, following the human nature and not any rules.
Another misconception about moral is that it is self-secrifice. It is the evil ones who should be sacrificed, punished. The moral ones should be rewarded, that is moral, so it is not moral to sacrifice any moral ones.
One of the messages of my texts could be that selfishness isn't necessarily bad, it could be only realistical and support good moral like it does here in Finland in Europe. Like all of the perspectives that I use, also my purely selfish point of view that I do follow in practise, supports excellent moral, so good moral that one cannot discern between it and moral born of beautiful emotions only. The good side of the selfishness based moral is that the harder one is pressed the more moral one becomes - if it is possible for one to improve one's moral even in theory.
I am for women power, not of the type of man like women who act like marionets inside the men's culture, but for the power of really womanly women who follow fully the women's culture. The men's culture gets its charachteristics of the military while women's culture is concentrated into quaranteeing a good future for us all. That's why I think that there should be women's culture in power all over the world. That would be good for us all!
I haver always had an excellent world wide moral, even as a baby I had this picture of me as healthy and as a part of the healthy world by my nature - that's what I learned from my parents the world to be like: a biological whole. The health of the world is for my own good, makes me happy.
I have written two self-published books which are available for free at
stores.lulu.com/khtervola or
here at my internetpages www.paradisewins.net/PPLEM.html and www.paradisewins.net/WEL.html.
The books are:
Power Politics Leads to Excellent Moral
Work Efficiency and Likings
The first one is about the traditional Finnish rationally grounded moral but the calculations in the book are my own.
The second book is about the women�s traditional wisdom about the value of feelings. Also its explanations are my own.
I have also written these tens of internet pages at
www.paradisewins.net.
I have also written numerous letters, mainly without answer but some with an answer that is worth mentioning:
A letter to the United Nations about writing a book about the usefulness of moral based on the traditional Finnish culture.
A letter to the Dalai Lama about the possibility to symbolose good quality objective thinking by the orange colour.
A letter to the White House of U.S.A. introducing my first book about the beneficiality of moral.
A letter to the White House about the flag of USA. The answer was dated 4th July 2007.
A letter to the White House of U.S.A. containing the thought which is now first on my main page (A paradise movement).
A newsgroup posting that I sent also to the White House of U.S.A.
An e-mail to the White House about a way to increase intelligence easily and effciently.
An e-mail to the White House about European cultural influence.
An e-mail to the White House about the rationality of feelings and mentioning my book Work Efficiency and Likings.
An e-mail to the White House about the value of health.
An e-mail to the White House about the effect of merican TV series on the Finnish European people.
An e-mail to the White House about the Finnish culture.
An e-mail to the headquarters of the United Nations about my paradise movement thought.
An e-mail to the White House about the traditional values of women.
An e-mail to the White House on Christmas Eve 2007 about my thougth "the world is of love".
An e-mail to the White House about putting all engineering work to computers.
An e-mail to the White House about the role of USA.
An e-mail to the White House about holistic problem solving.
An e-mail to the White House about changing the name of Helsinki.
An e-mail to the White House about the position of women.
An e-mail to the Dalai Lama (in September 2007 - Sorry to add it only now) about the hard rationality of Buddhism.
An e-mail to the Dalai Lama (in September 2007 - Sorry to add it only now) about the hard rationality of Buddhism.
An e-mail to the White House about the freedom of the press and about women's position in the media.
An e-mail to the White House about opposing the global warming.
My whole name is Kaisa Hannele Tervola. My former last name is Hari but I was forced to change it because my little brother Tuomo Hari attacked me badly without any reason. I have never ever been in terms with him since he is so very evil: just a lying kind of bastard, an evil man to the extreme, like the big devil, and I have always been so very much for moral (also for honesty when one is in a fight, so that justice could win) and happy life. So in order to make it clear that I have nothing to do with him, I changed my name to Ekholm but since that is a Swedish name, I noticed it to be easier to have a Finnish name: Tervola ("terve" means "healthy") which is my mother's mother's maiden name. I am not in good terms with the rest of my childhood family either. My both parents have an extremely negative attitude toward following feelings and I am an emotional kind of person. They also support my brother fully in attacking me.
Typical Finns in my experience lie just as much as is the reputation of Arabs to lie. There is the difference that Finns do not lose sight of themselves when lying while Arabs appear to lie to themselves too. But Finns too lie outrageously. But we do know that it is not good for us to do so. It is the Finnish culture which values honesty, not the individuals. I am very, unusually honest compared to all the people that I know.
Why if I am interested in the fate of the world, I do not look like a soldier? Have I forgotten that armies exist? Have I forgotten what all boys have to bear all their lives? No, I have not forgotten. Even though I enjoy the role of women, I have always thought that if I were to have some militaristic role that would be in the planning department. I am extremely interested in the general principles guiding things and in figuring out which kind of guidelines should be followed in the largest scale, which would be the most beneficial to have. My looks too reflect my interests i,e, the large scale and not the scale of an individual soldier lowest in the rank. In the large scale it is important to value peace, both as a tool and as a goal. That's why my looks are quite pasifist, even though I admit the need for having armies. The amount of conflicts that one can allow in the large scale is much much smaller than what one can have in the small matters. That is so because the questions are so huge and because one can use the most intelligent ones in large scale planning: they make fewer mistakes and no errors. It is just so that you should train your social eye to understand size classes!
It is a clisee that all Finns have poor social skills. But I doubt that a lot: being sincere we learn to see to the soul of others and to our own soul, and the traditional rule "Live and let others live." of the Finnish social life teaches us how to live in harmony with others without being pressed down oneself at all. Here is how I might describe my own social skills - propably the same would apply to many other Finnish speaking Finnish women too:
* the ability to make observations of the workings of one's own mind
* the ability to make observations of and to understand the workings of the minds of others
* the ability to make wise choises in life which make one happy and successful and make one's whole environment happier and more successful if that is needed for happiness
* the ability to get well along with different kinds of people, to see into their heart and mind and to see how they sing in tune with one's own heart and mind
* the ability to affect others positively, to change their life toward better and to make them more social in a friendly moral way
* the ability to cure bad habits away from both oneself andf from others, replacing them with healthier habits
* the ability to learnand to teach others, the ability to overcome obstacles in that by one's emotional wisdom
* the ability to see the workings of all humans as a group and the workings of the society and the workings of smaller groups, and to affect them positively via communication
* and MAYBE something else too
Generally I do not like the intellectual side of others. I do find it easier if I can agree with the views of others but I do not like the explaining that is needed in order to drag the others along. Everything intellectual feels like as if I were dragging a stone sledge which is formed by the intellectual understanding of others. I am not that much more intelligent, I think. Merely I am much more thorough than others are, much more experienced in thinking, quicker, aquiantaged with a wide variety of views and having several entirely my own observations. Anyway, typically thinking does not feel like thinking to me: it feels like a nasty social situation where others are cold and irresponsible. I would like to concentrate to feelings and other similar things which connect strongly to the human nature - that's where I can learn something new and what I feel pleasant. Consequently I do not find intellectual discussions fullfilling any lack in me, instead I would very much indeed like to have a positive emotional contact with my social environment. What lacks from my life, is the other areas of life, not thinking. That is seen also in my thinking work: all new ideas come from doing other things, completely unintellectaul or at least unacademical things! Arts are nice. (I prefer dance to music, since the physical side of my life is very important to me and music is quite intellectual after all or non-practical.) Most of all I like sports. I also enjoy animals and nonwordly social life. Those things teach me a lot. Buddhism and Taoism are my main intellectual interests and in connection with them I am also interested in the human nature at the level of sensations, sensed observations, as unfractured as possible - in other words: meditation in daily life.
I would like to remark that in my opinion the good sides that I have, the good sides of my theory perspective, are not results of the unfortunate life circumstances that I have had to bear. Too much schooling isn't good for anyone and an unemotional environment of an emotional kind of person is just cruel, not profitable in any way. But it is so that usually people without academical education are not listened to enough in intellectual kind of things. The academical learning is just a method, it does not make anyone intelligent. And even though many emotional kind of people are wise, theya re ususally not listened to enough in questions of hard rationality. This is especially connected to the too low position of women all over the world. "Respect that which truly deserves respect." and you will not have to rely on cruel and artificial means of getting the results that you want. If you would have listened to people without an academical education, you would not have needed to force the naturally wise to an extra schooling against their will. But things beings as they are, with the total lack of respect for the human rights of the talented, most of the naturally wise have to keep they mouhts shut and pretend to be somehow untrustworthy.
I am absolutely not suited to an academical career. Academical work is the opposite of objective thinking: it is just mechanical procedures which are pretended to produce true objectivity.
This work of mine I cannot do in an acadenical environment where there are not accustomed to any new ideas, neither are they used to women doing things in women's ways. I need to have my freedom, otherwise I am of ABSOLUTELY NO use to anybody! I never had a single thought of my own in the university, neither did the others... So the university isn't the way to solve problems.
What is the aim of objectivity, is to help in living. Therre is no other task for objectivity.
Much of today's modern world is run by the help of objectivity. So schools and academical work are given an enermous importance, as if they had ceased to be tools and started to be goals in themselves.
Education happens in artificial ways that are not good for our ways f living. The same applies to academical work.
What my goal is, is to change our views on what is the base and support of objectivity, so that the enermous drive for objectivity could not ruin our lives but once again be a part of giving us more room to live in.
Objectivity is a skill which we are naturally capable of, it is a part of the human nature. So it too functions best whern we live in a way that is good for us. Then we are naturally observant of life and that is the best kind of observation base for objectivity...
To the readers of these pages: please do observe conscientously what are the starting points of my thoughts (= all the points of view that I have heard of) which I use ONLY because you others use them, and what are the end results of my thoughts, the thus supported values (= paradise, excellent moral ad a life completely according to feelings) that I support from my heart. Here observe that the starting points are not logical premises for me but premises only for the other parties that I do oppose and to whom I try to prove my point in a discussion. I do support only the end results and not the starting points, even though I value realism but to me these end results ARE realistical values!
ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
If the scolar learns about life, she/he becomes wise. If the poet, who already understands about life, can put her/his understanding to the language of sholars too, that is true holistic wisdom, the words of a prophet with the body and spirit right, a road for others to travel in their life with both their understanding and heart.
I guess that I am good at crossing the meadow from the side of poets to the side of scholars but I am not a poet, I am a scholar. But if I could teach my skill to the poets, that would be worth a lot. Me texts here at www.paradisewins.net seek to give a picture of the world via whcih that could be possible for many. I wish you good luck! Starting with a feeling and an atmosphere, form a holistic view of the situation. Transform that view according to my picture of the world here to a mechanical language which emphasises health and harmony instead of feelings and atmospheres. Then it should be possible to make all, even the militarily or economically thinking, understand you.
It is my dream that I could help to support the hierargy of different areas of life so that insightful art and even religion would gain the position that they deserve above ordinary objestive thinking on the field of finding objective answers to world's biggest questions and to those of living the lives of us all.
Making successful solutions
BOTTOM-UP: The typical error of many is to try to solve problems by building from the habitual building blocks that they have solution attempts which they then try out.
TOP-DOWN: The correct ideal way to solve problems would be to begin in the opposite way: from the idea of a solution: figure out what you need, then figure out how to build such things: what structures you need, what kind of building blocks are available to build those structures and what kind of structures you can build from such building blocks (Only this last phase is availabke for you if you try the other way around.). Then just build those structures that you need for the solution. Ready!
REAL MASTERY IS NEAR THE HEART
Feelings reach the essential
Feelings as a map:
If we are motivated to some task from our heart, our feelings tell how we should do it: which road leads to success and which not. In other words, our feelings have memorised how well we did in each thing. So our memories about feelings and our emotional associations (structure analogs) serve as a map about what to invest in and which road to travel.
We naturally feel strongly about the central issues of human life, about their most important matters. Those things are usually common to all humans.
Feelings reflect our motivation. And our motivation in turn tells how well we have understoods the idea in what we are doing and so what kind of meaningfullness the end result has.
If we are not motivated, that can be seen in the end result too. By reading from the memory one cannot figure out anythjing new butinspiration makes one achieve better than what is usually possible for oneself by being actively observing and creative.
SEEING EMOTIONAL TRUTHS AS RATIONAL
First figure out what you feel strongly about and why you feel so. Then think of yourself by your very nature as a part fo the healthy world: all your feelings are a part of the dynamics of the world trying to repair itself back to full health: aiming for healthy things and feeling repulsion toward unhealthy things. Those dynamics are rational also in the present day world. Our understanding helps to take care of the artificialities for which there is no natural reaction in our instincts. So just see your feelings as a part of the natural dynamics of the world, then they are rational!
You look around yourself and the world shines in its beauty. If we use some machine against its instructions of usage, it makes a kraah like sound. It is the same with humans. When we have reached the natural correct way to live, our senses sing. That's our guide to better functioning that our natural tendency to enjoy beauty and things that are according to feelings and the deepest understanding guide us toward. Life really is a great panorama of natural music to some: that's why we still love music. Seeing the world answer centeredly, i.e. the human nature and health senteredly, makes the world look beautiful, shiningly, effortlessly, enjoyably, efficiently - that is the beauty of nearly full funtioning. Full functioning is something even better.
Someone said that the artists are the happiest kind of people. So the old following question is: how could everybody be an artist? IF I have it right, at least a partial truth, in my story at www.paradisewins.net/Gaiastory.html the reason why the original nature paradise got destroyed,
"Humans had simple tools with which they made a living in harmony with the nature. But at some point someone got attached to the tools and the society didn't correct the error away. The paradise was lost, since only with healthy ways of living can there be a paradise, only with a full understanding bought by the healthy ways of living can there be a paradise. Now there was no longer and those who didn't have didn't understand why since they used stupid artificial ways of thinking and could no longer understand the natural truths that each animal and each human being understand as a gift from birth. They tried hard and thought that maybe by the help of tools they could reach the happiness which they had lost when they lost their natural emotional understanding of the world."
then we might need to take a really close look at the looks of our artificial living environment, of tools etc. Those should reflect good complex intelligent healthy balanced natural and happy ways to do things and to live. Propably even all that we do with the tools should aim to be such. That ought to have something to do with art?
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Unlike you might think from seeing my picture, I am so convinced of my own views that I have a very strong character. And even though my ways are typically non-aggressive, that is largely because I am used to an academical environment where everyone relies on their intellectual side, and I happen to be maybe a hundred times more capable than them in intellectual things. I am not a pacifist: I think that good must be protected, one must fight against evil - with whatever the means happen to be in each occasion. Mine are typically intellectual and social...
Neither am I as naive and vulnerable as you might think from seeing my picture: I am conscious of what I look like and don't show others how I feel or think. I just value full capacity very much, so I keep my body-mind as healthily as I can, and typically that looks in the eyes of others natural, sincere and naive. Still, it is different because I AM protecting myself from others as efficiently as I can think of. I am also for friendly relationships and value honesty at the level of facts which does not tell so much about myself because I always choose what I say according to my audience, not so much according to how I have thought or felt. In my opinion this is honest but necessarily not so good communication between extremely different people. I consider myself sincere but very wary of all including near relatives. (My childhood home was an awful place: much much much much too academical and nothing nothing else.) Generally I speak on such a general level that my words do not appear personal to me at all.
I have also such a great capacity that I have to keep most of myself hidden. Otherwise others somehow think that I consist of several persons of roughly their own size - in other words that I have strong allies or enemies whose looks somehow are reflected in my own looks, when it is in fact just my different sides (peaceful and compassionate - tough and coolly calculating - thoroughly pondering and extremely responsible - mostly interested in enjoying life to the fullest - a sensitive emotional kind of person - and maybe something or even lot more...) that they notice but cannot understand as belonging to one single person. For example my emotional life has many sides, each of them full enough to correspond to the full emtional life of some other person, so that I may feel exactly like you at the same time as my main reaction and main feelings are of an entirely different kind. There is the same problem with my picture of the world: I can handle whole pictures of the world of others easily - my own picture of the world is more holistic including many partial views as its parts.
By the way, I am not a talkative person. So I prefer writing my views down so that I have to go through them only once. I have never ever discussed my moral with anyone. The efficiency grounds that I use I have lately explained maybe to two or three persons in my social environment, before that never ever to anyone. So please understand that you who read these pages are the only ones who get to know them. (My social environment is not interested in these things, not at all!) I hope that I am not writing without any reason, I hope that my texts will be useful in some way to someone at least...
My social skills are of the level that I can sometimes read some thoughts of others but nothing much more. I am also a very quick learner: sometimes I can copy some of the skills of others just by seeing them do what they are skilled at. My social position is that of a friendly moral person: I can affect others more than they affect me. I am respected for my great rationality.
I say this once again, since most other Finns in my environment are pacifists to the extreme of allowing all evil or even respecting it, I am NOT a pacifist. I think that HEALTHY SELF-DEFENCE is an absolute must and it is also A PART OF MY MORAL. I do not consider pacifism a part of moral. I am just a peaceful person, peaceful in my ways but not a pacifist. I do attack others when I have a good reason - typically they agree that I was right in doing so - so my aggression serves to smallen the amount of violence and evil, and to put things straight. I consider that a good things, much much better than what pacifism would produce - pacifism seems to lead evil ruling, since only the evil ones who do not respect anything fail to follow the rule of pacifism, so typically pacifism is in practise equated with supporting evil.
About my looks: Being the most rational and most holistically thinking individual that I have ever met, my looks are typically taken to represent my view on how to arrange things in the large scale: morally, well suited for happy life and in a holistically thought of way. But I do not know how to communicate that to others since around here moral is often equated with pacifism. I am for peace but not for peace at any cost since I know that the cost can sometimes be too high. (And especially I do not accept obedience to be a part of moral.) And since my looks are at the same time interpreted to reflect my view on how to behave on the scale of individuals, I cannot use any tough looks since those would lead to a kind of civil war like situation in my environment - like happened when I was sexually interested in a handsome man who studied to become a professional soldier. People kind of mix the size level where aggression is in my opinion needed: we need to safeguard ourselves against big dangers, allying with each other to oppose the big dangers. But typically people prefer to attack the small ones while leaving big dangers completely unopposed. Also if I show courage by being for happy life and feelings in an environment which is interested exceedingly much in rationality and in fighting with each other, I am thought to be a coward hiding behind the back of my mother. But my mother is never protecting me: she is very much for hard values, for the power of working life over individuals' rights and for cold rationality over feelings. So this communicative task just goes beyond my skills. I guess that so it does for the skills of others in my environment too, since how they could otherwise make this many misinterpretations in vital matters? Maliciousness is of course one explanation but but I think that lack of social skills connected to clothes and communication about values is another.
I generally agree with all the points of view that I hear: I consider them partial views which I fit inside my holistic view of the world. It is clear that if one uses a partial view one can have many kinds of opinions depending on what is included and what not. I typically prove my point to myself starting from each of the starting points that I have heard. My emotional life reflects this multitude of views...
Just yesterday, in the beginning of July 2008:
After a while they were by the lakeside. The big branches of the pine trees reflected on the water surface as if the water had been deep as the sky. Blue, green, brown, white,… A deep feeling of contentment at the sight of such utter beauty, fracturelessness, old age of the trees and the agelessness of the sky. This was what she lived for, how she wanted to spend each hour of her life. The Nature!
They continued along the strand. Near by was a swimming place. A small bird in the trees just by the waterside warned them that there were its children there. The dog reacted to the warning as another bird in the trees a couple of meters farther away from the strand urged it to avoid the bird youngsters. A few seconds later the dog was chewing a corn that it had found in the fireplace near by. Such perfect communication: the birds happy, the dog happy. We were swimming in the cool, almost warm summer water, admiring the beauty of the lake. There were tiny insects dancing and playing just above the water. My heart was clenching: if things could stay like this forever!
I guess that my social style says something of the kind: "Cutie, do you know that I don't need you but that I can help you."
I do not know whether this is a tabu or just avoided because no-one knows how to solve the problem. I know some of how one maybe could solve it, so maybe it is ok that just I mention it:
In the developed countries the stabdard of living is already high enough. The development of technology doesn't add to our happiness which depends on entirely other kinds of things. So why are we still developing the technology further? In order to not to drop away from the economical competition - in order to keep our own culture which we value very much (at least here in Finland in North-East Europe) so much in power that it doesn't get erased from the way of those cultures which do develop technology. But why is the development of technology this important? As far as I undersatnd it is for militaristic reasons: in order to not to be conquered by teh countries and cultures with high technology, we have to have high technology and enough money for arms ourselves. So our whole modern culture is in fact driven by arms race and justified by our fear for even worse alteratives, worse cultures conquering us.
Typically people come to think of two scenarios in connection with this: the arms race continuing (-> optimise my way toward best success -> room for naturality, moral and happiness) or a peace development via globalization and global communication. But even the latter option can be scary since it leads to large units which typically brings less power to influence things to the small groups and individuals which are afraid that their needs will be neglected. My thoughts about optimising large wholes via moral and happy life seek to make sure that even if our world is governed by some who cannot care about all the individuals, it is in their own good to give enough room to the answering of the needs of the individuals and small groups. Thus the fate of minorities is tied to the fate of the rights of individuals.
One ought to choose important things so that they lead the world toward good. That is the principle according to which they ought to be chosen. That could mean that this perspective of mine should - soon? - get a leading role in how to arrange things in the largest scale and in making tough decisions - completely morally and in harmony with happy life & feelings.
I am somewhat horrified by this, since it is so hard to achieve and a really big role to get. But of course one does not do this kind of big things alone - everything is done by many highly capable individuals. Still, I do not know whether I am up to the task: for example, what would be the first step for me to take? Is there anything that I need to do in addition to what I have already done?!??!!
Why do I write this much about myself? It is good to knwo whom you are associating with and I am such an unusual person that no-one ever gets my charachteristics right. For example I was under enermous social pressure to study mathematics because my social environment saw me always as a mathematically inclined person, but I hate mathematics and have nerver ever used mathematics to anything in my thinking. I am poor at mathematics but did after all graduate from mathematics. Usually I survive through the mathematical sides of things via feelings, atmospheres and the sense of sight - maybe that looks impossible in the eyes of my technically thinking environment. And since they dislike feelings, they guide me toward what they themselves like: mathematics. Kind of not letting any intelligence go unused or used to "unuseful" more emotional kind of things. But anyway, the same happens with most of my qualities, even when I am completely honest about them and observe the ways of communicating that are in use. So I feel that there is like a curtain between me and the others even when I am honest... It may have to do with the fact that I am an emotional kind of person in a country which values cool objectivity excessively much.
I was very unhappy for the little bit over 20 first years of my life when my parents decided everything in my life. Then at the age ofa little bit over 25 things went very well in my life for a while. But when it became apparent that I could do on my own much better than under the rule of my childhood family, they attacked me badly and I have ever since been deep in trouble because of that. Why are people so naive that they think thta mothers are always good willing, etc.? Especially I find this hard to believe this naivety of others because my mother is a brain scientist and a brain scientist can always be one to discover the secret of thought reading and be replaced by an actor to cover the secret, and there ios no reason to believe that the actor would care one bit! Some twenty years ago my mother did do experiments that could result in a thought reading machine much like what now is possible (= reading thought about words from the skull surface by localizing each word) according to some magazine article that I have read on the subject. Then the next day she just said that it didn't work out - such a great enthusiasm that they started with... One can never be sure...
One day when I was twelve and my extremely evil brother ten, he stood in the kitchen with a huge kitchen knife in hand and cried in a huge aggressive rage... We never did come along. I never had any reason to trust him.
My father is just a fool, uncapable of individual judgement of things, much much less of people.
I was so very happy to be on my own, to get rid of their very harmful influence to my life!
She shut her eyes and noticed once again that she could remember nothing. Her head was completely empty. No memories and no thoughts. It felt nasty. She was forced to open her eyes again, even though tired she was. What a relief to see something! The colours felt like the taste of food for some. If she only could live forever this way at the level of concrete experience! But others were always forcing her to think. They were always pondering, pondering and pondering. She felt a nausating sensating already at the thought of it and when they forced her to think it was pure pain. So it had been all the years through: just pain, pain, pain,... The other lived in their thoughts, thinking all the time. So enermously good was their memory. She had nothing to look at in her thoughts: just a few abstract lines at most and the rest grey like TV without any program. Thinking was torture to her. A fraction of a second was too much already. That is how long it took her to think all kinds of things through. And typically others wanted her to become an academical professional, a mathematician or the like. That was worse than death. Why didn't those who could remember things do the thinking work that just they valued so much and even seemed to enjoy?! She was not any better at it than they were, never had had any talent for just math. Torture, torture all the days through... The experienced reality was just a short reach away, but impossible in the social context. And wherever she went, she was classified as an academical kind of person, all people turning against her forcing her to think, think, think,... and nothing else. Why should an intelligent one think? It was the stupid ones who needed more thinking to their lives. She had already thought through all the thoughts that her thinking ability allowed her to think. Why to think them again and again?! The more intelligent ones ought to concentrate on communication. And if she was wanted to think more, she needed more material for their thinking, more experience of life instead of repetition and social situations where she had no other option than to wait while others pondered.
Why do you think? What is the point in thinking? Can you imagine any better result than what I have here reached? Work for it! But I am not thinking these thoughts, I am just communicating them to you. This is my old picture of the world, my viewpoint to the world that I have had ALL of my life! and not any schooled thought structure! So it makes no sense to educate me in thinking. I was more rational than adults already before I went to the first class in school. Education is not helping me one bit. it is YOU who need to be educated, YOU who are convinced of the usefulness of education to YOU, not to me! IT is your intelligence which is lacking and not mine. So you have to educate the rest of the world and not me. Otherwise these thoughts here are for nothing. There never will be a better world since no-one cares about it one bit. They just fool around forcing people to be educated, tortured, as if that would somehow miraculously, that torture, make things better. The children of educated parents have copied their parents' educated thinking already under school age, so school's only intention is to make them robot, to rid of them intelligence and individual thinking!
WHY ARE THESE THOUGHTS NEW, i.e. not already in use? Most PEOPLE ARE NOT ATHEISTICAL enough, they are NOT USING THE BIOLOGICAL PICTURE OF HUMANS thoroughly. Propably they think of feelings as a kind of spiritual kind of thing, almost of a religious kind, that just has no rational explanation, INSTEAD OF SEEING EVERYTHING IN THE HUMAN NATURE IN THE EVOLUTIONARY CONTEXT.
The right way to do things isn't to plan beforehand what you are going to do, to kind of act out a premade block like picture of the world. Insyead you must hold on to your personal integrity, to the naturality of all actionbs and intentions. So do not say: "This is this way" because it is always something else, nbot quite as fully so as your words let one to think, and not in any other fixed way either - or is it is then it will be different nthe very next second. You have to kind of flow with life, letting your picture of the world change each second, your point of view to the world and the emphasies change, your true ever changing motivation leading you always to new areas, never twice the same. This, like all successful action, demands awareness of yourslef anf of the things around you.
There is one Finnish philosophy book that I would like to recommend for its effect on objectivity: Esa Saarinen's school book Filosofia. Each time that I take it to my hand I wish that people would read it and that it could be translated to English too, to show what Finnish objective thinking can be like!
I have always tried to check and recheck all the claims that I use in my thinking, to check them again each time that I come to use them, to check them as open-mindedly and in a beginner like new way as I possible can with my skills, since otherwise I would have used some truths many many times and checked them just a few times. I have also checked all of my thoughts every time that I meet an opinion that disagrees with my views. I have done this all of my life, already as a child. So I have developed in skill to be quick in this, or then I was quicker than the others already to begin with - propably the latter. In any case Icheck everything that I can in every possible way that I come to think of each time that I meet any eveidence that would lead to a different view from mine. So typically I first check the facts, then I check the thinking routes that the other one has used and compare them to my own views, finding the errors, lapses, misunderstandings, generalising the other persons' strengths and cghecking whether I could find something new that way - for example a new area of expertice in which to develop myself as the time passes or new type of facts that others know and I have to take into account upon their word only - which I also estiumate in the light of the things that I can observe and in the light of what I know about thinking's trustworthiness. The most typical thing that I notice is that the other one disagrees about what is beneficial for a selfish individual to do, so across the years I have been well trained in making selfish beneficiality estimates in a war like or evil starting point, as objectively as I can.
My main page has had a bout a thousand visits, but no-one has yet bothered to ask me a single question about my thoughts. Please understand that my theory is objective, it isn't full of errors, I can answer questions. But if no-one asks me anything, you all other are left with the impression that there is something badly lacking. Propably you can follow the thoughts through from the points of view that you are most famaliar with, but wonder what would happen, say, if some technically thinking parasite like person wouldread them - in other words you cannot follow through the thoughts outside your own area of expertice. You ought to choose: do you want to be yourself or attempt something that you have never before been able to do at the same time as getting to know these new thoughts. I suggest that you would stick to your own point of view and ask the most obvious questions starting from that! Because otherwise those will propably be left unanswered. Now I feel as if I were some odd creature full of insight but with no communicational content to me texts. As if others were afraid of breaking the illusion that things really are this way. But I am used to testing my vbiew against all contrasting views, it does not get broken, it just gets stronger! And I am communicating to all at once. That is why these texts look fragmented: I always try to target my texts to the major problematic audience in each question - typically to the purely selfish though.
I have an extremely beautiful picture of the world that I believe fully in and I am much more intelligent than the others in my environment: with quite a clumsy style I achieve a standard of objectivity that the others cannot reach. So I have no interest what-so-ever in the thoughts of all the others. I hate intellectual discussions in the pondering style. Whenever I meet a person, I am interested in being social, but not in being in an intellectual contact which honestly hurts me! The most satisfying intellectual company I find in animals: so open-minded, so full of vigour!
If one trusts in instinctual impressions, the modern people are like idiots and the most brilliant minds like very stupid persons. We cannot reach any higher than that because we lack a holistic view of the world! This is one reason why this modern time needs to emphasise holistic objectivity extremely much.