Islamic Perception of the Governing Will
By Wossool Alosool
Ethics (control) = Justice … (a)
The right and left sides must balance for the values arrays to be stable. If not, The elements within this array will change themselves to keep individual’s states safe and secure, which results in adopting contradicting ethics before and after or changing the values of the unaffected elements in the same or any other encountered hyper arrays.
Change = Change (philosophy, motives) … (b)
We are talking about irrational elements, rational understanding of ethics, individuals who can take actions, and changes with no views. This is the result of having a choice, to choose between actions of different ethics. This choice parameter makes a definite isolation between different judgments about responses which makes the interactions ethical or non ethical. All elements have choices that even matter. Some are assigned ethical systems while others are not. Interactions that resist formula (a) are called evil. But there is a question, where is the right and wrong? Is it justice or injustice, it is not absolutely defined. An absolute definition must be given.
Any ethical behavior (the interactions between the individuals) of matter could change if wisdom changed.
LEVEL I- Wisdom (Baseline ethics)
Each level is composed of a different value. One can change behavior by merely moving his hands, but it is hard to change ethics unless you change the governing wisdom...
Change (Philosophy, Motives) = Wisdom. … (c)
Where there is will for change, changing the choices needs a forcing will. The concept of choice expands to be restricted by the question: who gave it.
Driving changes in wise behaviors drives changes among other. The will of change could be weak as an order from an element; the parameters are the dominating values.
What can be deduced from formulas (c) and (a):
Justice ≠ Wisdom→ changes function (Philosophy, Motivation)
Changes could be an unwise state compared with the given wisdom... If this is true then anything could be ranked as Just because any resulting change will be ranked so. We do not decide changes because we do not have an authorization to do so by the will which gave us the choice. Their will be no justice at all, hence no wisdom and no ethics, and every thing will be meaningless and for nothing - but despite that, the peace of information will remain valid. The essence of the will is information; if you know it is true at one time it will never be lost even if you are lost. If you want it to disappear, erase yourself.
A discussion of matter is needed:
What is the nature of changes from the downside that drive changes upside? The will that forces changes in all levels without giving reasoning is always governing and it forces responding changes by assigning possible allowable states.
If the wisdom vanishes which means, under my new concepts, that the ethics and consequently behavior changes or vanishes, it is Death. The death is attained when it crosses the line to zero values; there are no values .
Death is a change that takes something from our universe to another array of wisdom, of different ethics and behavior. The continuum of changes lead to this point, but what will or choice, if it can, drives it.
The original formula put for change was (c): the philosophy must be defined and conceived and there must be a motive. If philosophy or motives changes the wisdom changes but this is only authorized by the will. In this ultimate choice, the individual chooses to change whole things, behavior, ethics and even the wisdom surrounding him.
For humans, the philosophy is different for different elements; motivation or driving force is not universal: Less pain or more happiness. In any case, their must be a will beyond, and takes the element to the proper place of values that it belongs to, and this is governed by formula (a). Formula (a) is not effective between two different arrays of wisdom because there are no common ethics.
Do humans give an absolutely definite definition of existence of this thing? One can take the same amount of energy out of a system in far different states. Energy does not belong to a state. This is true because matter around us does not have choice to disobey the will; it has not given the ability to do so. But what is choice; it is the driving force to change response among matter that is not given initially. The choice as pure essence is nothing but what makes it effective is perception. Perception is the link between us and the material world and also between us and the documents of the will about us. There are two perceptions, logical perception, in the brain, and ethical perception in the heart. Depending on your perceptions, you decide your choice. The choice window is a dual one which opens to the mind and the other to the heart, the only way to judge the choice is the will. The soul is constructed from ethical essences to materially be found in this matter world.
As choices abandon ethics in its effective ethical representation surrounding injustice increases.
If there are gates or a transparent tune that could paint our inside or outside, trust is assured to be lost.
Some may argue, why did the author not benefit from this knowledge if it is true? Actually the author does not trust that his perceived knowledge is true. Because, if it is, then this information as an ethical tool will be worthless, because the high value ethical information have no value in front of him. It is a compensation for him to think that there is a way to escape the will. What you have of the will is one word, “ORDER,” and it is the soul. If the existence depends on one piece of information. Then the communications between its source and the existence must understandably transferred information to be rational. This results in that the will must check the balance and its information.
What about me? What am I...? I know who I am from what the surroundings have told me. The peace of information which I mentioned previously is known to me, not by learning. It is the fact that I feel I have been born in peace. What I have been told could be a lie depending on the ethics of the source because there are no ethics at my time “Trust is lost,” a time passed everything around sent pain, no help of any kind.
Ethics [care (subject), rationality] = Wars by (subject, rationality)
When you look around and find that GIGO boxes receive the highest values, what is left?