Why happier now

Posted on September 3, 2016 by drxarunxkumarxarya

ii

Some of us are forced by circumstances to avoid dangerous hurtful decisions in money, medicine, feelings and security for lack of adequate recovery.  I was one and decided to think scientifically about it. What is scientific – can derive all science and its evolution. This is rational scepticism – listen to no one. But practically you must – only those scientific and with secure channels to me. This I call rational stoicism = statistical rational scepticism, be a rational sceptic except when deviating for cost reasons into statistical trust regime. I wanted answers on how to make money, how to live, leave mother earth better than I was born in, and have a meaningful legacy. Everyone  derives to these in their individual distinct manner. These are my notes prior to hardening – now they only mean to me. I hope they will be useful to others too, especially in their think of answers. Do commit them to paper or file for others, and to trace your own development.

In Discourses 2.14.10-13, Epictetus presents two types of knowledge needed for the Stoic path. First, one must have a model of reality—a map of the terrain one intends to travel. That model of reality (physics) is then used to create a model for life (ethics). If we live in a meaningless, chance universe without a divinity who is concerned with the affairs of mankind, the Epicurean model for reality—withdrawal from society to seek tranquility—is likely to ease our existential angst. However, if there is inherent meaning in the cosmos and for our lives, precisely because the cosmos is divine and we are a fragment of that divinity, then an entirely different model is needed to navigate a life of virtue toward well-being. The divergence between the Epicurean ideal of retreat from society to attain tranquility and the Stoic ideal of engagement with one’s duties in society to develop virtue begins with the difference between their worldviews.

Money for Living and inheritance are important

Outline of how products is built and starting uses

What in my belief, is around the corner, and how do I contribute to it, at my age

21-century alphabet soup

What is truth

and can I derive how to live and universe around me from it?

quantum-gravity-stoicism outline

What is my legacy and for whom?

The claim

Overview of stoicism or the quantum-gravity-stoicism modern version?

I am an quantum-gravity-stoic, I conquered pain and desire, I am content mother, I want to understand you, I can because I am above animals

I evolved from you, I enjoyed of you, I added to your understanding, I will return to you. You are my only God, there is no other, rationally skeptically challenge all else.

I or no follower shall convert. Aaqgs requires education to comprehend and confusion to clear. I had both and time/expenses paid courtsey US taxpayers

Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, the greatest stoic ever, supreme master of Aaqgs-religion

• Death
• Do not then consider life a thing of any value. For a look at the immensity of time behind thee, and to the time which is after thee, another boundless space. In this infinity then what is the difference between him who lives three days and him who lives three generations?
• 
  
• Do not act as if thou wert going to live ten thousand years. Death hangs over thee. While thou livest, while it is in thy power, be good.
• Words that everyone once used are now obsolete, and so are the men whose names were once on everyone’s lips: Camillus, Caeso, Volesus, Dentatus, and to a lesser degree Scipio and Cato, and yes, even Augustus, Hadrian, and Antoninus are less spoken of now than they were in their own days. For all things fade away, become the stuff of legend, and are soon buried in oblivion. Mind you, this is true only for those who blazed once like bright stars in the firmament, but for the rest, as soon as a few clods of earth cover their corpses, they are ‘out of sight, out of mind.’
• Soon you’ll be ashes or bones. A mere name at most—and even that is just a sound, an echo. The things we want in life are empty, stale, trivial.
• “Why do you hunger for a length of days? The point of life is to follow reason and the divine spirit and to accept whatever nature sends you. To live in this way is not to fear death, but to hold it in contempt. Death is only a thing of terror for those unable to live in the present. Pass on your way, then, with a smiling face, under the smile of him who bids you go.

Life

• In the end, what would you gain from everlasting remembrance? Absolutely nothing. So what is left worth living for?
• This alone: justice in thought, goodness in action, speech that cannot deceive, and a disposition glad of whatever comes, welcoming it as necessary, as familiar, as flowing from the same source and fountain as yourself.
• 
  
• When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: The people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous, and surly. They are like this because they can’t tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own—not of the same blood or birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine.
• Shame on the soul, to falter on the road of life while the body still perseveres.

Nonchalance is the highest yoga.

• “Freedom is secured not by the fulfilling of men’s desires, but by the removal of desire.”
• “Man is disturbed not by things, but by the views he takes of them.
• 
  
• “If, therefore, any be unhappy, let him remember that he is unhappy by reason of himself alone.”
• “That which Fortune has not given, she cannot take away.”
• “The point is, not how long you live, but how nobly you live.”
• “Permit nothing to cleave to you that is not your own; nothing to grow to you that may give you agony when it is torn away.”
• 
  
• If thou art pained by any external thing, it is not this that disturbs thee, but thy own judgment about it. And it is in thy power to wipe out this judgment now.

• Composure
• “satisfied to live now according to nature”
• “speaking heroic truth in every word that you utter”
• “How ridiculous and how strange to be surprised at anything that happens in life!”
• “Outward things cannot touch the soul, it moves itself alone.”
• When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: The people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous, and surly. They are like this because they can’t tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own—not of the same blood or birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine.

Karma

• “Because your own strength is unequal to the task, do not assume that it is beyond the powers of man; but if anything is within the powers and province of man, believe that it is within your own compass also”
• “Why bother about reputation in past, change location. The emptiness of all those applauding hands, how arbitrary. earth is a point in space — and most of it uninhabited. Who cares re-admire , and who they are.”
• 
  
• Bhakti/prayer is the worst yoga that is not even one, simply opens you to most vicious abuse by the time waster lazy pretenders in robes. Those who prescribe it are criminal thugs preying on tired.
• 
  
• “Virtue is nothing else than right reason.”
• “Let Nature deal with matter, which is her own, as she pleases; let us be cheerful and brave in the face of everything, reflecting that it is nothing of our own that perishes.”
• “Whatever happens to you has been waiting to happen since the beginning of time. The twining strands of fate wove both of them together: your own existence and the things that happen to you.

Good and evil

• “I am formed by nature for my own good: I am not formed for my own evil.”
• “Everything is right for me that is right for you, O Universe. Nothing for me is too early or too late that comes in due time for you. Everything is fruit to me that your seasons bring, O Nature. From you are all things, in you are all things, to you all things.

Practical Stoicism today 

Stoicism is the ancient Greek philosophy of enduring pain or adversity with perseverance and resilience. Stoics focus on the things they can control, let go of everything else, and turn every new obstacle into an opportunity to get better, stronger, tougher. As the greatest stoic Marcus Aurelius put it nearly 2000 years ago: “The impediment to action advances action. What stands in the way becomes the way.” If you seek genuine peace, happiness and moral life and have contempt for addict victims of the opium of the masses, namely religion, and retain the quizzing inquisitive mind of the child, then science and quantum-gravity-stoicism is for you.

Aaqgs-religion

If you select any entire http link in this document, right click it, then a menu opens with go to in it. Aaqqs is pronouned as aux and stands for aroon-aryan-quantum-gravity-stoicism. Phrases joined by - have unspefied further semantics contained in the phrase which serves as universal extension.

Three critical components are required in aaqgs-view for an adoptable religion, a trifurcation of content offered by any religion that seeks to be propagated today without violence – a philosophy of universe, a philosophy of life and a philosophy that analyzes and answers current recognized controversies. Aaqgs-religion has chosen pure science for generation of it's universe dogma, stoicism for answering spiritual, behavioral and legal issues and a series of philosophical treatise on some of the recognised controversies. No long term benefit to authors are planned, in addition to my own, reference to and discussion of work without extra recognition will be to alien interesting authors.

Towards removal of doubts

Aaqgs-reference What I believe in

Proper repeated demonetization only a first step in corrupt+fake-currency emfubar

aaqgs-recognised dilemma – Public and private

AAQGS-RECOGNISED DILEMMA – EQUALITY VERSUS JUSTICE

Aaqgs-recognized-dilemma – Law versus ethics

Aaqgs-recognized-dilemma opt-in versus opt-out

Comparing power of aacqgs-philosophy with Marxian class view

Comparing power of aacqgs-philosophy with Marxian class view

Aaqgs-recognized-dilemma opt-in versus opt-out

Aaqgs-recognized-dilemma – Law versus ethics

Proper repeated demonetization only a first step in corrupt+fake-currency emfubar

It is NOT like montek which has incremental advantage suggestions over now and undesirable views on unannounced things. Proper Demonetization begins with what it seeks to accomplice in conjunction with required other realistic measures. The goal of this war on corruption/black-money is to make it impossible for the enemy to keep the ill-gotten wealth. Corruption collects and black-market sustains the contaminated money. Money has to be invested, which is why the pickings from currency demonization is small. Forced transparent valuation is a very effective tool, but currency demonization is essential towards attack on corrupt and fake collection.

Aaqgs-demonetization starts with a january start, say 6, announcement that all notes bigger than 50 will not be legal tender starting next year. All the subsequent notes will have a prominent year in letters and braille. They will always be legal tender only for that year. Government will issue nots valid for next year starting july 1. People have till end of year to get new ones. High denomination notes would have chips embedded for encrypted auto recognition by machine to fuck fake currency makers without mercy. Every note must have a number and its several exponent on it, the problem of finding exponent is known to be impossible. The machine check some subset in parallel, never all to make machines proof against easy pilfer.

All property and owner records are computerized. Not only real estate but gold, paintings in fact any value bearing commodity. The map is between aaqg-aadhaar and property description handle. Computerized emfubar is now possible since the computer output is just a suspicion revealed in nondeterministic manner to human agents. The agents are assumed to be corrupt (public, not private see relevant aaqgs-recognized dilemma) hence must prove self to be uncorrupted. Non-determinism and routine statistical mal-cases keep the corruption in inspectors low or nonexistent.

The last most important point is “not sci fi” any more. A determined government got aadhaar, with my improvements can hit corruption. Above will truly emfubar the corrupt.

aaqgs-recognised dilemma – Public and private

There are two approaches to law – Public or " the charged has to prove innocence" and"private or the prosecutor has to establish guilt". Further adjectives can be invented and applied to both - beyond-reasonable-doubt, by-preponderance-of-evidence, not-unusual, not-usual, under-preponderance-against and under-reasonable-against”

 I argue that ideological insistence on one ideology is stupid and unnecessary. I WANT my judge to be Public in justice and in fact most government servants, experts and choosers. I also consider my privacy important as in opt-in and opt-out debate. I want to be treated as private when faced by law-enforcement, my landlord etc. It is a matter of role, not the person. A judge, government servant etc have private lives too.

A dysfunctional big brother society of 1984 takes public to undesirable extreme. Very private societies are unbearably corrupt. A mix is needed as in all aaqgs-recognised dilemma in which factors that argue for one or another are considered and strict ideological positions are abused.


Empirically, cause-effect patterns are Public if they are or can be imposed like a judge, policemen or tax-collector, or assumed like a doctor, sales recommend er etc . They are all authority figures, by rules or assumption This is distinct from those providing us with requested optional service considered our equals or inferiors. One expects those in authority to have a Public modus operand-ii, while privacy for servers is all right. Fake service sets will catch the corrupt in both classes with statistical certainty.

AAQGS-RECOGNISED DILEMMA – TAXES VERSUS VALUES

I have NEVER understood the immense shenanigans huge number of servants of government and citizens go thru using lawyers, courts and chartered accountants for valuation of property and goods. If a fair, easy method was there, massive savings are possible, directly as well as nearly annihilated government. So I expose my aaqgs-secret.

By my definition, a value is always interpreted as sale value. Government some how decides on a division and asks the current owner of record to declare sale value. Government also secretly collects bids. The tax on any property above exemption is quoted by a tax rate. The owner then pays the tax or sells the property to the government at that price.

Dishonest are fucked. Value it too high, unnecessary taxes. Too low, government acquires and sells. There is no way to know how many buyers at what prices have bid on the property. Nor is this info ever released!

Unlike Georgian economics, this is very similar to it, all property, including stocks, bonds, historical papers, paintings etc are included. If you have a collection, but not a source of income, you better sell off some, or use it in lien, else the government might buy it.

I am more interested in this proposal than philosophical basis. Property and money mean something only when alive. I admit no rights to any parts of nature. We submit to rules of society solely because of fear and continuation of law. There are no ethical reasons except a belief that ethically cooperative behavior will be repaid in the future. There is no compulsion or lien returning the ethical investment in me by my parents. It is the inner joy that makes my behavior ethical to my children and parents. I feel blessed by USA, but disagree strongly with its individualistic nature. My ethics are backward but I accept that and make no attempts to improve.

AAQGS-RECOGNISED DILEMMA – EQUUALITY VERSUS JUSTICE

AAQGS-RECOGNISED DILEMMA – EQUUALITY VERSUS JUSTICE

THE DIFFCULTY CAN BE GAUGED FROM THIS -

It is not possible to be pure conservative and decry rational safety-net entirely. It is also a political fact that reduction in safety net benefits are very painful to conservatives. Clearly then, tying the level to some objective indicator eliminates the politics. The ratio of tying MUST not be national but local tied to local politics.

What indicator? It is a safety net, not a goal as might be in some socialist version which I am not. At the same time, one has to contend with the problem of lawyer-likes that will PROVE that benefits to their people are insufficient. Further there is the problem of cash assistance which must never be refused, moral or not. Even specific assistance is to be carefully used. Food stamps are routinely used by aged parents of doctors who live with them. The stupidity of imposing separation opens a cultural mischief box.

The ultimate cultural unifier between US and India is discussed in conflict between ethics and law. There is no law in US mandating treatment of family as a unit, exactly like possible in India. It is also abuse the semantics in India to argue successfully for very private-only beneficial and socialistic-abuse-inefficient-supposedly-fair or briefly congress deals. Clearly we are ahead in accepting the moral cultural burden even when grossly backward in economic terms. Some ideas I have are purely local. Nevertheless many AAQGS-RECOGNISED DILEMMA are not, and transcend economics. The solution to problems of aged parents is strengthen the great system here and modify the hands-off Social security in USA.

Analysis so far indicates typing to some indicator. Obvious ones like price index sound fair but are not, for the burden falls equally and unjustly on different profitabilities. This consideration and issues of incentives, consideration of devastation of the shared commons, and easy objective of law leads to the following simple but likely very controversial idea compatible with resolutions of all dilemma so far -

1. The idea of equal vote is stupid
2. The vote is proportional to taxes paid since the previous election

All kinds of retirees, commies, on-dole etc are eliminated.

I am a great believer in restoring force model of issues, also rock and hard place or scylla and charybdis models, with ideologies the extremes. Every issue has ideological solutions correct in some neighborhood. Real systems operate at some point away. An objective system with restoring forces will become the ideologies in extreme cases but not be tied to one most of the time, instead interpolate.

Let us consider tax rates. One might assume that such elections will create governments dedicated to cutting taxes. But doing that reduces voting strength and next government will return them. What if socialists come to power? Many people will lose taxes. Only taxed will be the bad guys, who will fuck the socialist next time.

This is not far from democrat-republican tussle in USA. Democrats don't like it, but their wishes on so-called poll-funding reform has fortunately failed in supreme court, so the rich essentially have multiple votes through political ads.

Why good for India is simple – the money for ensuring multiple votes to rich is going to the biggest worst morons – owners of media, journalist and actors etc. Happens here too, less following demonetization.

By the way, the deviation model is very general. I believe that educators at all levels have a deviation percentage in taxes paid by their students. Some will succeed regardless, for example, kids of big shots but this where deviation comes in. False stupid commentary by emfubar bastards incapable of understanding deviation is expected and will be replied with very offensive language since I consider them incapable of siring any but subhuman.

Aaqgs-recognized-dilemma opt-in versus opt-out

O

other view -

Solving the Opt-in/Opt-out Debate, Privacy Article | Inc.com

Conventionally, liberal side of the issue favors opt_in while conservatives prefer opt-out. What is meant is semantics of people who have not bothered to specify are assumed to have voted in the negation in opt_in, affirmatively in opt-out. Specification is generally hard. A simple abuse philosophy in opt-out is to invent a new method for every new transaction. Then you can claim on every complaint that bothering would never recur. Most people suffer from a second problem – address of agency is not known, nor is how they decode shut requests! How do you terminate the menace of telephone sales and browser hijack?
Consider telephonic sales. If you have explicitly forbidden calls, then they will not be made in opt_out, otherwise they can be made. Opt-out has the difficult problem of locating the forbidding database and meeting its requirements. It is very difficult to implement in opt-in, For many valid targets NEVER bother to sign up in equally difficult opt-in circumstances. Another big issue is impossibility of distinguishing between genuine errors and error-excuse destruction of opt-in.
The first aaqgs-comment is gross stupidity of deciding any issue by ideology. One might devote a small time otherwise, and decide by ideology anyway! But fundamental to aaqgs-belief is that all ideologies are applicable to small subsets of problems and it pays to have some discriminant function between ideologies that reduces to ideology in relevant extreme. This is true in ALL aaqgs-recognized-dilemma that the choice is pissed on stupidity of ideological answer and construction of the interpolation that reduces to ideologies in extreme. It requires brains, readers should try interpolation between the two options before reading on.
The first no-no is to come up with any complex solution that requires government servants or lawyers. These are simply the private-public version of same unproductive philosophical stupidity that serves to destroy productivity.
Fundamental to aaqgs-philosophy is error-free constitution, achieved whenever. For this purpose, the highest principles are

0. aaqqgs-philosophy explicitly recognizes conflicting parties of aaqgs-players. It is a document on rules of non-violent conflict. Once exhausted, only violent conflict remains.No ideology which considers violent conflict as legitimate can be an aaqgs-player.

1. There are rights and duties. No one deficient in duties can argue for rights.
   
2. The rights and duties must be textually enumerated. This is to prevent a party from imposing impossible burdens on adversaries. This does not imply the existence of undocumented duties. They can not be be used in current conflict but maybe incorporated for future conflicts. Professional judges are crucial in that they expand the law while delivering equitable judgement on current case.
   
3. The preferred aaqgs-solution is to invent a continuous measure which can be measured transparently and whose value decides the degree of closeness of ideological points. In case above, one must have opt-in-ishness-chooser which leans to opt_in when 1 and opt_out when 0. There is a very simple continuous numerical function obtained by analogy to grades – percent of population below and above. One extreme is nice multi-modes corresponding to grades. Other is a uniform distribution when interval schemes have to be used. In either case, depending on philosophy, an optin-ishness-chooser can be constructed. In fact, crime convictions are no longer digital 1 or 0, instead better done as percent of jury convinced above a threshold of clean chit that the convict is considered liable for. Death penalty can be abolished if what happens to a convict after such conviction, is no longer justifiable but left to the state including corporal punishment. Death penalty should not be considered as punishment but as a cessation of judicial protection on application with the thereafter treatment entirely political! Such convicts can be executed, used as mine-canary, drug-study-victims organ-sources etc, or simply life imprisoned based on political votes of others. As always, there is a popular democratic choice which is decides, never any intellectual moron which ALL are against the dynamic will of the people. Both aacqgs-religion and aaqgs-philosothy (i.e. ethics and law) are aaqgs-dynamic and different from ALL OTHERS up to this point which are condemned to be static and eternal in theory, while not so in practice through transparent lying, reinterpretation and sect-formation; three unpardonable sins aaqgs-free from now and forever.
   
4. Neither judgements can be delivered based on analogy, nor can argumentation be made by analogy, the parties in both cases must be either successfully master or be fired.
   

Security is the zeroth and highest aacqs-goal. That being so, one can safely assume its use to justify anything and describe its invocation by competition as politically motivated non-sense. Essen
It is the highest aaqgs goal to design popular vote answers where the will of members can be applied in a democratic manner without aaqgs-hard barriers implementation which constrains the future to a path. This can, however, be done by allowing irreversible steps now but only allowed by courts. For rapid pronouncements, the supreme court is of life-long tenure and insulated from cases of individuals, more like an administrative court with appointments from the high courts by repeated direct elections, giving it the flavor of judicial senate, and also popular removal every few years. It is this that prevents dictatorship and arbitrariness.
Second highest goal is efficiency. A society with high rates of growth