Why Einstein Was Able To Do What He Done Did.

Albert Einstein is considered one of the pre-eminent thinkers of our time. His accomplishments were foundational for modern understanding of the sciences and are the basis for many technological innovations, as well as the basis for present day investigations into the nature of reality. His originality and sheer output was astounding. His methods and pioneering efforts in the explorations of theoretical physics was so innovative and novel, that he was not awarded the Nobel prize for his greatest work, --the theory of relativity--, rather, for his explanation of the law of the photoelectric effect in 1921, a full 17 years after his "discovery". The conservative Nobel committee felt that the prize was to be awarded for a "new" discovery or the finding of a new "law" and Einstein's theory of relativity, although innovative, genius and groundbreaking in a way previously unknown, it did not fit into the pre-defined understanding of what constituted a prize winning accomplishment.

The question remains, how did Einstein do what he did?

Certainly, he was a unique individual, but also, his individual style, in practice, certainly constituted a method.

Just as we can learn from our mistakes, we can also learn from our successes.

The following are the major reasons why Einstein was able to do what he did.

1. His Circumstances: Einstein’s father and uncle were engineers who owned several businesses, the largest of which employed over 200 employees. They were early innovators in producing electricity, electric lights, dynamo’s, generators, etc. So Einstein’s upbringing was within an environment that not only naturally gravitated towards the sciences, but where his environment was one which encouraged his intellectual development in the sciences. Other aspects, such as His race, his culture/religion (Judaism), his geographic location, the age in which he lived, the problems that remained to be solved, his religion, socio-economic class, constitute a basis from which no one could replicate. Almost all of the great figures of our time were unique in the respect that the challenges of there times were suited to their abilities.

2. His Impudence: Einstein was quite naturally impudent, insubordinate, opinionated, questioned authority and hated being told what to do. He championed impudence and felt that it was one of his great qualities. He challenged authority, changed assignments to investigate what he found to be important and disdained rote learning.

3.His Academic Training: Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi: In high school, he was encouraged to drop out due to his difficulty in conforming to the curriculum. He followed this advice seeing as his father’s business had failed and it provided him the opportunity to move closer to them and pursue his desire to attend University. He flunked the entrance exam. (He passed the math and science portion, but flunked the liberal arts portion). He then attended a school run under the philosophy of the Swiss Educational reformer, Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi, where rote learning, standardized assignments and memorization was banned in favor of visualization, self-specified investigation, and visualization, imagination and creativity was stressed. Einstein flourished in this environment, but still was impudent.

4. His Faith & Science: His ultimate rejection of the Jewish religion formed the basis for his scientific investigations, in that he believed that the order of the universe was logical, understandable and not governed by change. As he famously said, “God does not roll dice with the universe.” And also, "What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world." Einstein’s desire to unify the various scientific/physical laws and theories was his version of finding an orderliness of the universe that served as a substitute for religion. When asked if he believed in God, Einstein replied, "I believe in Spinoza's God, Who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."

5. His Brain: Einstein, like many cerebral individuals, found greater pleasure in thinking, contemplation and finding solutions to problems than virtually anything else. His indulgence in this task was rewarding to a degree that he related his greatest joys in life, to times when he found solutions to problems. In Einstein's paper, "Fundamental Ideas and Methods of Relativity." Einstein revealed "the happiest thought of my life." It occurred to Einstein – thinking in visual terms – that if a man were falling from the roof of his house and tried to let anything drop, it would only move alongside him, thus indicating the equivalence of acceleration and gravity. "The acceleration of free fall with respect to the material is therefore a mighty argument that the postulate of relativity is to be extended to coordinate systems that move nonuniformly relative to one another . . . ."

6. His Focus and Dedication: This has several aspects. 1. Einstein refused to take work not related to his field. 2. The lack of an academic career (his impudence made him too difficult to be hired as a Jr. Professor) allowed him to focus on his own problems and areas of investigation, whereas if he had been an academic, he would have been directed on what to do, and the pressure to be published, would have lead to what he called “scientific superficiality”. 3. His job as a patent clerk was not as “lowly” on the surface as it may have appeared in folklore. The patents he reviewed were all of a scientific nature, and based on real world devices. His job required him to be discriminating, objective, and to use his powers of imagination to see if the plans he reviewed were actual working objects. 4. Because of his intelligence, he was able to complete a full days work in 2-3 hours, giving him the remaining time to work on his own theories and papers.

7. His Love of Music: Einstein played the violin and knew French, German and Italian, studied the great philosophers (Leibniz, Hume, Berkeley, Kant, Spinoza), which all fed his creativity, his sense of unity, balance and art, as well as furthering his understanding of differing concepts the ability to scrutinize and to draw from differing fields which expanded his creativity and genius to arrive at novel solutions.

8. His Use of Visualization: Einstein had a renowned ability to not only understand formula’s and equations but also to visualize them to the extent that he could build a model in his mind for scrutiny. Many of his theories were worked through by the process of “thought experiments”. Einstein knew math very well, but did not pursue it, for he felt that his true strength lay in physics, so he felt he did not need to know math as well. Einstein also was very focused and knew where to look to get the information he needed. Whether it was poring through experiments on light, waves, absorption, fluid dynamics, etc. he was able to find the information he needed to further his own ideas. Einstein also had a great ability to block out distractions, compartmentalize and to conduct several thoughts simultaneously. For example, during the presentation of one paper, he realized that he had erred in making some mathematical transformations. He asked if any of the mathematicians or physicist in attendance could see the solution. None did. He continued with his lecture. Ten minutes later, in the midst of his lecture he exclaimed, "I've got it!” he was able to work out the math, while simultaneously giving his lecture. Another example of his power of mind is that his Father and Uncle had been working for two weeks on a particularly troublesome aspect of math in the construction of a new device. Although Einstein was only 15 at the time, he solved the problem in 15 minutes. Einstein’s mind was different than most. As a child he was a late talker and this gave his parents reason to worry. When he did speak, he would practice, out loud, several times, the most routine of statements, working the words out for himself before stating them out loud. Once he found something he liked, he was able to use this caution and focus to serve as strength.

9. His Passion, Dedication and sense of Providence: Human beings, are magical, in the first and final analysis. Specifically, it seems to be, that anything humans focus their energies upon, eventually will succom to their will. First, the human will figure out how to attain that which they desire, Then, (and less significantly), they will set about to follow their plan. Finally (and least important), they will attain that which they desire. What they desire may be a thing, an understanding, a person, a goal... it does not matter. If Einstein had everything above (1-8), he would not have accomplished anything, had he not had the passion and single-mindedness to attain his goal.

10. He Viewed All Things Afresh: Einstein's natural ability and skepticism which caused him to look at problems anew. Many had thought of different aspects of his ideas, but their inner need to adhere to that which had already been established, blinded them to the possibility of pursuing that which had been indicated. The Definition of "Freshness" 1 a: having its original qualities unimpaired: as (1): full of or renewed in vigor : refreshed (2): not stale, sour, or decayed (3): not faded (4): not worn or rumpled b: not altered by processing; 3 a (1): experienced, made, or received newly or anew (2): additional, another b: original, vivid c: lacking experience : raw d: newly or just come or arrived 4 : disposed to take liberties : impudent

The most important lesson from the example of Einstein is that every human being is unique and FULL of potential from the day they are born, until the day they die. Every ability, special. Every deviation from the norm, potentially world saving. Every dream, a possible reality. The more we are all allowed, helped, facilitated in moving along our own paths, the better the chance that we will find our own unique destinations. It is also important to feed the mind with the basic chemistry of development. Historical Examples, Concepts, Development, Systems, Use of Creativity, Imagination, The potential of the senses. Originality. Also, to provide a well-rounded education. One that includes Music, Sports, Nutrition, Human Rights, Political Systems, An appreciation for different cultures. The needs of other animals, unique environments, great personalities, etc.

To label individuals as anything other than where their potential lies, is to rob that individual, of their essential humanity. To diagnose and to define individuals limits, to bar access, to divert from their path, to subjugate, to incarcerate, to deny, are all activities that rob not only that individual, but society, and the individual who is doing the robbing.

The Contiguous Being

imagine being so contiguous in your life, that there is no true awareness of a past or a present. yes, you have memories, but there is no true reflection other than the reflection of events and perhaps current understanding, but no insight that is not in full allegiance to that which was felt during the original experience.

imagine being so single minded in your existence that the voice of conscience was repressed and your sense of watching yourself was not in your locus. you were simply in action. no watching.

imagine that to have a conscience would be a dissociative event. there would be no abilty to distiguish that conscience from the feeling of being pervaded upon by some other force or conscience.

imagine being able to sit day after day, night after night, moment after moment in rain, cold, destitution, because your only consciousness was of th emoment and the full weight of the reality that if you were to do nothing, you would continue to suffer. the only suffereing you experienced was the suffering of the current moment. and so, you could endure the unendurable, for a seemingly unending amount of time, because for you, it was nothing more than a moment in time. for you it was nohting more than the fractional, infinitesimally small moment of "present" with no accounting for the instant moment or moments that had just passed, nor, event a momentary realization that in another infinitessimally small margin of time there was a future, that held the same degree of suffering.

imagine being old, and no reflection on having been young, or how much time had passed because, for you, there was only present.

the fantasy is that such beings would be wise. the reality is taht there are millions of such beings presently alive and they are anything but wise. they are simply humans that are alive.

Afro-Christianity

Continuing on my thesis that Afro-Christianity differs substantially, in the nature of the relationship and utilization of foundational elements of traditional Christianity, this essays hopes to further illuminate these differences.

To understand these differences fully, one must appreciate the ways in which Christ became infused with Americanism and Blackness, and the way in which Black African values were emphasized in the understanding of the bible, while at the same time, qualities hereunto not associated within the traditional African Spiritual Practices became infused into the African understanding with powers previously unassociated with their personalities. Many of these new understandings were contingencies demanded by newfound social, cultural as well as technological differences between the Afro and Euro traditions. Also, many qualities between the Afro and Euro traditions (religion notwithstanding) that may have caused Christianity to not be fully subsumed within an Afro-Psychological perspective, had already been mitigated by Euro transformations of the political, social and cultural nature. In the face of the renaissance, the enlightenment, the scientific revolution and the age of reason and philosophy, Christianity had already been transformed and re-cast to seamlessly transcend the possible boundaries of faith resulting in a practice of faith that was not to be confined to Reason, Philosophical Truth or Logic.

Mysticism, a long held practice and method of the indigenous to communicate with the divine could have been a possible blockage to the acceptance of Chrisitianity by indigenous and specifically Afro cultures. However, mysticism had previously been accepted in Christianity, as it had in Islamic faiths in the 8th and 9th century.

The native African and Native American traditions had long prescribed rituals and practices, the point of which was to put one into direct reception of the “truth”. Truth, did not have to be explained. Truth could be illuminated as part of the holy trinity, namely the “holy ghost”. Through the acceptance of mysticism, Christianity had found the “key” necessary to unlock access to the worlds indigenous cultures, religions and practices.

Reconciling religion and real life. The harshness of the conditions of slavery, of colonization, of being placed on reservations, etc. placed native folks in the position of the “meek” , the “poor” and destitute, who were foretold in the bible to be the inheritors of the world.

Origins of social contract theory (christian medieval theory), also placed those who were in the underclass and/or slavery as in God’s favor. In terms of political and class leadership, European societies had come up with the idea that God does not legitimate leaders, rather the authority of the leaders rises from and up through the people to their leadership, to the extent that those people believe their leaders are doing God’s will. All of this harkens back to the song of Mary. And the allegory illustrated by the birth in the manger stable, and the topsy-turvy nature of the three kings, the moor, the asian and the Caucasoid, paying tribute to this child born in the company of beasts.

The personality of Christ is compelling. No one really argues with that. The stage having been set by the traditional practice of the small Jewish sect, virtually all of the worlds spiritual traditions became infected with first, the sect of Judaism and then the cult of Christ.

In the beginning, there was the pervasiveness of the authority of the teachings built up from a long tradition that not only had a strong creation myth that was malleable and recognizable to virtually all creation myths, but also, an explanation for natural events, and a tale of devotional suffering and redemption as well as future promised salvation with adherence to a time tested covenant, that had examples of extreme moral test as well as innumerable perils.

Christ proclaimed himself the son of God. His path, as the way. his body, the bread, his blood, the wine and His life, a final reconciliation and fulfillment of God's covenant and promise to man, who was made in His image and given dominion over all things.

But also, the message of love, given by the life of Christ and demonstrated in his wisdom can not be underestimated. Christ put the common man directly in the path of God's love. No longer was God something to be divined by only priests, or Kings. Now, the common man, his sufferings, his trials, his tribulations, his wretchedness, now fully within God's purview and ever watchful eye. God became big brother. Seeing all, hearing all. Man could commune directly with God. Christ showed the way. But this big brother/God wanted nothing other than devotion. Prayer, Following his Commandments, and for us to love one another for us to be rewarded with eternal bliss in God's kingdom.

This association with the disenfranchised, the abused, the lowest levels of society, gave Christianity universal appeal to not only the conqueror, but even moreso the vanquished. For African peoples, who knew well their own teachings of Vodun as well as the various sons of God and sub-deities, there had never been one as great, powerful, rewarding and loving as Christ. Christ's power was met only by his devout devotional, undying and sacrificial love. In Vodun, the Shaman, the Witch Doctor, the mediator of heaven and the intemperate desires of nature/god was left to the divination of the village priest or priestess who could Divine the love and intentions of God almighty and destiny and the future. What They had never known was a personal relationship with the divine through the worship of an earthly being. Nor had they known an all powerful God, who asked for a covenant with man, and who, in exchange would provide scriptures and rules for living, if followed, would lead to eternal salvation in the kingdom of heaven, alongside God.

This God of the Christians, forced upon the native peoples, even in the African and later, the American tradition of slavery, the slave was exalted as loved, adored and welcome to the gates and kingdom of heaven, regardless of what lowly position they held in the present day.

All blessings were blessings of Christ. All interdiction of love and happenstance, were the blessings of Christ. all spiritual experiences, emanated from the firm embrace and spiritual love and guidance of Christ. All weakness our own, and that of man. All strength and righteousness was His and emanated from His strength.

Christ to the African, became the all-knowing, ever-present medicine man and shaman, who was the son of the one true God, and also, the ever-present watcher and interlocutor upon our daily miserable, wretched lives.

Christ's miracles were more miraculous. His promises, democratic and beyond imagination. His love, all encompassing, accepting and forgiving. No act, regardless of how evil, could ever separate imperfect man from perfect God. His love was always waiting. Always there, always available. All spiritual interdiction was the personified visitation of Christ, son of God, God himself, or the Holy Spirit, which were miraculously, one and the same. These were mind-blowing concepts for the indigenous peoples of the world. Life no longer was of ultimate importance. The afterlife became paramount.

People who do not understand the constant spiritual visitations of Africans and Native Americans, see these unique visitations and events as scary, or as something that they would be very disturbed to see. Or as proof of our being under the sway of The Devil. As heresy, insanity, of evidence of false idolatry, or of our swaying from the path of the one and true Christ.

To Africans, these spiritual visitations and experiences represent the very reason why Christ was able to supplant native and indigenous understandings for His own. For Christ had always been with us. As the messiah, it was only for us to hear of his living word, and his word to be brought to us, and suddenly, our understanding of how we had been in his graces all along, was now made complete and whole.

For Whites, these spiritual visitations may seem strange, but they aren't. Sometimes, after the fact, it can seem a bit creepy. But when you see the vision, or are visited by some other-worldly force, at the time, it seems like the most normal thing. Things are calm. There is no malice. The entities are from another realm, and so, could not hurt you even if it were their intention. Never do they want to, or try to, or do they act threatening. They have unfinished business. They have left pieces of themselves they must reclaim. They have spiritual connections formed through years of living that do not simply go away just because they are now dead. When you have a vision, or see these entities, you do not feel crazy, or weird, or confused. It's very lucid.

For the African and the Native-American armed with the knowledge that it is God, or Christ that understands, allows and sends these visions to give spiritual guidance and personal messages, the events are completely tamed and removed from the realm of doubt, (unless ones conscience lead one to believe that the visions were of the dark side and realm of the devil, who is also ever present and willing and able to work mischief and trickery upon those that lack faith and fall below the grace of God.)

Christianity, to the Native American and African American has survived into modern times, and revived native traditions, as well as given shelter to native practices and arts that were long ago stamped out by zealous Christianity wherever there was Christian conquest. There are many types of Vodun, and entities within it. Below it can be seen how basic elemental elements have been conceptually similar and have been subsumed into the Christian faith.

Firstly, the Vodun(s), like Christ are considered as the sons of Mawu, God the Creator; however in the Christian tradition, may of them have lost all of their relevance: Sakpata (earth); Xevioso (sky); Agbe (sea); Gu (iron & war); Mawu (agriculture, forests); & Jo (air/invisibility).

Lêgba who is Mawu's youngest son. He is different for he was given no power, for all of the major powers were distributed before he was born. He can be seen as a Judas/Caine/Ham, Lucifer type character whose jealousy and desire for power have corrupted him and lead him to acts of spite to upset the harmonious balance. At one he is to be feared, but also, he brings balance as he upsets the balance as he tests the wills and true natures of indivduals to abide by the word. It is he who loosens the rigid structure of the pantheon. He is the Vodun of the unpredictable, of what cannot be assigned to any other and he is characterised by daily tragedies; all that is beyond good and evil.

Another of the elements of the Vodun(s) that have found a dwelling place within the Christian understanding are the These are the eponymous deified ancestors. They maintain a link between the invisible world and human beings in their daily lives and are the basis for all that is intrinsically African and Native in the form of visitations and divination, and all of the ancillary, unexplained spiritual phenomena attributed to God's realm, but not thoroughly explained by Christianity.

The Omnipotent Mind

Omnipotent: Having unlimited power, authority, or force; all-powerful

Mind: The consciousness that originates in the brain and directs mental and physical behavior. Memory, recollection. Conscious thoughts; attention. Opinion or intentions. Intellect; intelligence. One considered with regard to intellectual ability. Mental or emotional health; sanity.

Contemplation: To ponder or consider thoughtfully. To intend or anticipate.

Imagination: The process or power of forming a mental image of something not real or present. Creativity; inventiveness, resourcefulness

Generalize: To render general rather than specific. To draw inferences or a general conclusion. To speak or think in generalities.

Genius: Brilliant mental ability or outstanding creative power. A person of the highest mental ability or the greatest creative power. A strong natural talent. The prevailing spirit of a place, person , time or group. A person who has great influence over another. The guardian spirit of a person or place.

The opening question in the investigation of omnipotence as it relates to mind, is why are humans (or at least some of them) seemingly so insatiable in their quest for knowledge? To escape ignorance, to draw out understanding, to combine understanding with something that resides within are all at least partial explanations. The desire to transform oneself, through the act of mental alchemy, with a result that in some essential and lasting way, empowers that individual through a newfound clarity of thought, understanding, perspective, or strategy. Transformation, that is thought to be an improvement, is surely signaled to us through the feeling of pleasure. It is pleasing to achieve solutions, to "grow" to change for the better, to become more efficient, and to solve. Perhaps all of these explanations for why we seek knowledge and growth, as well as the fact that we achieve pleasure though these through these thoughts, by these acts, while engaged in making these distinctions, are all "reasons". Beyond reasons, lies an intent, an inborn desire, an ongoing struggle, a programed action that we can not so much claim, as it claims us, or, "is" us.

We learn through; the senses, experience, observation, and action.

We deal with reality on a functional level beyond what our "senses" can detect. in the "stuff" we use, be it foods, fertilizers, chemicals, the bio-engineering, packaging, transportation, etc, all involve a level of reality beyond sight, sound, taste, etc. (except we can "see" the difference and "taste" the difference and "hear" the difference) the level that we manipulate is beyond our senses, with only the outcome being detectable.

The only reason we are able to deal with reality on these micro scales is because of three reasons. 1. the opportunity afforded by the chemical, sub-atomic structure of reality 2. Our ability to cognate, decipher, break apart, measure and conceive of new combinations and ideas about objects that we are then able to put into practice. 3. The innovation of methods to achieve this end.

It may seem that the world is in some overall sense seemingly incomprehensible. I only say this, because at this juncture of human understanding, many things, many important facts, conditions, states, properties, reasons, and causalities, as well as the notion or complexity, or even lack of intent is still beyond our comprehension. There is also the very real possibility that there is no "end" of knowledge, rather, it is continuous, and quite possibly, on the ultimate scales of interactions, beyond measure, beyond our ability to devise and perceive, and perhaps, abstract beyond meaning (for us). That notwithstanding, most of what we see and work with on a day to day basis is made up of ideas that have been around for centuries, if not millenia. High tech electronics, is built upon a series of ideas, all used together, and re-formulated and, through the power of imagination, used to create novel solutions. Very little is changed, the structure may be completely different, the basis, everything, but that is only because of the necessity of an idea for reorganization, which in truth, may be revolutionary, but in practice, represents a re-organization, or at best, an importation of a slightly different strategem.

[ The decision of which ideas come into practice and become widely disseminated, and which do not, is largely determined in the marketplace, largely by financial efficacy, or the ability to solve problems on a massive scale, for a target audience, whose tasks are in line with the solutions afforded by the new idea. The base, unenlightened marketplace creations, which appeal to not only needs, but the most selfish wants and gaudy attractions of the general lower motivations of man are but a small part of the meaningful contributions and creations of the human mind. ]

Historically, over time, enduringly, the basic stock from which these ideas arise remains essentially the same. Human ingenuity, diligence, passion, drive, determination, imagination, breaking problems into fundamental elements, outsourcing, collaboration, study, research, administrative process, oversight, alliances, patents, trademarks, intellectual property, licensing... these are ideas and abilities and processes that have been around in some form (or another), more or less for ages.

In terms of the history of philosophy, ethics, politics, etc. all of the world's ideas concern human life, and do not represent anything truly genius.

Thus, the importance of creativity, and pursuits that stress creativity to set the stage for our continuing ability to innovate and create. Music, sports, art, conflict, conquest, games, etc. all of these are areas that develop the talents that are relied upon so heavily by those who solve problems, those that innovate, and iterate. Talents and abilities such as dedication, pushing oneself to ones very limits, breaking through, challenging the seeming impossible, creativity, teamwork, coordination, practice, leadership, mastering ones role, learning from defeat, travel, competition, growth, culmination, management, contemplation, new strategies, deception, secrecy, dedication, desire, sacrifice, gathering tools, and talent...

And yes, war is a major contributor, motivator for humans to innovate. Games, competition, technology, all come down to learning basic survival skills and survival talents. War, continuing struggle, continuing conflict, to a conclusion... and then continued conflict, new alliances, all of which are a potent and essential form of "gamesmanship" that is both life giving, life saving and patently essential to the continuation of a peoples....

Teaching, is nothing more (when done right) than the dissemination of ideas that strike at a particular truth. The best students only require a mentor, whom they can learn from, observe, follow their recommendations and instructions and take what is given, and expand upon it and integrate it in new ways.

And it is but a simple note of truth and wisdom to say that what we should strive for is that which is deeper, that which is true, that which is sustainable, that which is translatable, generalizable.

Of the great sages and prophets, of the Greeks, specifically, Jesus, Mahavir, Gautama Buddha, etc, none of them wrote down or recorded their words. it may be speculated upon endlessly why this is so, but the general assumption is that to write these ideas and teachings down, would be to profane them. true knowledge was to be remembered. what was written down was that which was mundane. that which was essential, was transmitted orally. faults, errors in understanding were corrected verbally, and in person. Knowledge was fluid, dynamic, debated, discussed and given life anew. There were no additional "editions" to the bible. it was discussed, deepened, explicated. Even today, no one attempts to read the bible in seclusion in order to understand it's meaning. You go to church, you listen to the pastor, the story is interwoven with your life, true examples, modern day issues. There is illumination, there are scholars, researchers, bishops, scribes, seminaries... The word is not alive until it is spoken. The text remains the same. The task of the living is to expand their consciousness, their understanding, their practice, to make ever closer approximations, not with the literal word, but with the ever deepening, living word. This example is for any ancient text, or piece of teaching that is "classic" and does not adhere to the assumption of incompleteness that resounds today. The point being, that the living contemplation, the aliveness of the act of mindful contemplation is where any and all "power" of ideas resides, not within the text. Only as the text illuminates mind, is there power. For text itself, is profane in comparison, and in truth, merely a chemical composition of ink and pulp, with no power unto itself, until and unless read and comprehended by that which is living and capable of "acting" upon those inherent truths, or knowledge.

And it can be quickly seen that those qualities that distinguish a great student, from a mediocre one. A "great" student (and there is no reason why we can not all be one) has the ability to comprehend complex thoughts debate, and defend, and contemplate and logically apply and generalize their truths and apply them across wide ranges of even disparate or seemingly unrelated material. In short, the ability to not have to be told the same answer repeatedly, as the principle is replicated in slightly different context. The ability to deduce principles. The ability to learn techniques, or to perceive and elucidate the foundation of certain ideas.

And once again, most importantly and essentially, imagination. Virtually everything we see, touch, use in an urban setting, first existed in the mind of a human. And vice-versa, everything that exists in a natural state, is represented within the human mind and held, adorned and perfected over time to a increasingly truthful mental representations, such that over time, to "see" things is to at once observe and elucidate mindfullness and the thing itself. In the present day, where what we view, large is that which has been created or altered by human minds (and actions), we are in an age where this type of artificiality, begets more artificiality. We have entire generations that have known nothing but the combination of increasingly complex technologies. Once again, artificiality, begets artificiality. ever increasing and divorced from "nature" or that which is not man.

Turning another page in the discussion, omnipotence may be impossible to achieve individually, but the contemplation of omnipotence, or even the feeling of omnipotence is to be had for the taking. In an age where great ideas are realized on a daily basis, the contemplation of omnipotence is merely the extension of the mental ability to it's logical conclusion. It could be argued that omnipotence is a contemplation that human beings would be incomplete without having or aspiring to in some essential way, as a subtext to all acts that fit the definition of contemplation.

What exactly would be the defining qualities of the contemplation of the mind as a device, and process capable of conjuring up a complete representation of omnipotence? When I say, "complete" I mean, the fullest extent of the human capacity to imaginatively conjure up omnipotence, while engaging in the process of the contemplation of this state?

To conjure omnipotent contemplation would be, to comprehend omnipotence to the fullest ability of man... to the extent that such a contemplation would be equal to, or greater than, the fullest limits of the humane capacity to contemplate such a subject... would that not be the same, or equal to, the actual, limits of omnipotence itself? or, even would that not be the same as the actual contemplation of the actual experience of omnipotence itself? Because we are talking about limits, so the actual experience in this case would be the same as the contemplation to the highest/furthest degree. I'm talking about the most full and convincing experience an individual could have with such a thing, forever and ever.

One of the amazing things about the mind, is that it is limitless, to the extent that there always seems to be, a capacity, to understand, the great, eternal truths of existence. What I find specifically amazing about this seeming capacity, or, possibility, is that... somehow, the mind has built into it, a floating limit, that, has no seeming limits... It can be safely said that although we may not be able to contemplate existence "as it is" we can certainly contemplate existence, "as it is for us" and as a representation, --which may be the only thing that the entirety of existence is.. for we do not know-- this representation resides within the human mind. Inborn and complete, whether used or not.

The reason for this is not so much the amazing nature of human beings, or the human mind, rather, as a point of conjecture, seeing as the human mind is made of the "stuff" of existence, abiding by it's chemistry, it's physics, etc, the capacity to contemplate and understand existence itself, would be a priori for a device devised of the very stuff of that which is being contemplated. deep and completed, fully infused within the human mind, betwixt, around, and through it, is the very stuff that is being contemplated. When we contemplate omnipotence. we are thinking it on one hand. but on the other, we are divining, coaxing from the very nature of the object mind, the truth of the divine code, of that which came into existence, and plays by it's rules, and, as predicted and demonstrated, all of existence, through the forces, is aware of every other part, to the extent that it is all one, and the same, and seemingly indivisible. The mind is engineered, to serve as a mental representation of the universe and everything in it. As such, it is complete unto itself as a "universe" unto itself, yet, wholly dependent on the outside world for it's lucid reality-based divination.

And yet, as humans, our minds are not only mini-universes unto themselves, but programmable devices. Our own mini-sage's. We have the universe to contemplate, yet, we also have the ability to program our own minds and to contemplate and focus on that which we deem important. This is one of the reasons that man's "accomplishments" have been so pervasive. Not that we approach omnipotence, rather, that we can focus and specialize and gear our minds towards specific problems.

One of the major preoccupations of highly structured societies, is to establish a class of thinkers, teachers, leaders and intellectuals to serve the populace. To make full use of ones intellect requires that they integrate their knowledge and all aspects of self into a uniform whole of acceptance and understanding, and to continually further the process of learning and teaching. For the entire populace must be educated, exposed to education and have a voice to share their ideas and focus their talents. Everyone, has a talent. Everyone has an understanding, and the diversity of thought is not something to be graded or judged, for the most novel and unique discourses, viewpoints and truths, can not be predicted, nor reasonably, or reliably found in any particular group, area or type of individual. Intelligence means nothing in the face of individuality. Individuals can wallow in mediocrity and ignorance for decades, before (for example) a singular event, either subjective or external, occurs that suddenly thrust an understanding or purpose upon that individual that has enormous societal significance and that no one else, could or would ever be able to do, given the set, setting and time.

All of this is to say, "omnipotence" is the a priori condition of mind, and existence, and so, the mind as omnipotence, is a truth, rather than a specific contemplation or mere possibility. and Individuals will make use of their minds in novel, unpredictable ways. And so it seems that one of the major preoccupations of a wise and just society, would be to engage all of it's members in continual opportunities for mental self improvement and individual expression as well as to make them aware of the omnipotence of their own minds and the sublime truths that lurk for them to find and share if they follow their own unique pathways of self-experience and education.

The Great Negro Writer, Charles Johnson

A friend of mine forwarded me an essay by the great Negro writer, Charles Johnson that I didn't like all that much.

Part of the reason I say "Great Negro" is because Mr. Johnson strikes me as someone for whom the term "Negro writer" would be an insult. It seems to me that Mr. Johnson is one of these Negroes that thinks that all Black people, regardless of their experience or understanding, should somehow, by some means suddenly acquire his experience and perspective and forsake their own personal Negro Histories.

Here, I will address the problems in his essay, The End of the Black Narrative which can be found here:

1. This piece is way too long. Not because of how many words it has, but mainly because it's flawed. I'm sure Mr. Johnson would agree, that if someone is wrong, it's better that they be brief. As the Great Black Playwright Shakespeare wrote, in Hamlet

...since brevity is the soul of wit,
And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes,
I will be brief...

2. When Mr. Johnson states,

This unique black American narrative, which emphasizes the experience of victimization, is quietly in the background of every conversation we have about black people...

I do not agree. This argument makes the error commonly known as petitio principii or otherwise known as "question begging". Mr. Johnson assumes falsely that victimization is the background for discussions about Black People. I have certainly not found this to be the case. The only Black people I know who consistently state that Blacks are screaming, "victim", are Negroes like Charles Johnson, who place themselves in the position of having to explain themselves and the Black race to the very White people who actually do believe, that Black folks have assumed the victim role. "Black People" or at least, the vast majority and vast minority, quite naturally, and inescapably are lead to the contemplation of the question of the historical and present day inequality of American justice. Just because White folks call this American tradition of natural, inescapable questioning "victimization" does not make it so.

I sense in Mr. Johnson's essay a lack of compassion as well as truth. If he were to live in a Black community, like I do, or Work in social services with Black folks, like I do, he would find that in Ghetto's, Mental Institutions, Jails, Public Health centers, Public Hospital Emergency Rooms, Schools, Foster Care Agencies and in courts, Black folks rarely, if ever consider themselves victims.... Or at least not any more or less than any other nationality, or group that finds themselves in similar circumstances.

It has been my experience that almost all people, regardless of color, in casual, or formal discussions, do not accept Black victimization as a basis of understanding. The most predominant feeling is one of admiration, beauty, creativity, athleticism, resiliency, disparity, injustice, inequality, intelligence, innovation, cultural cohesiveness and perseverance. Another general assumption made about Black people is that they are human beings, faced with issues that all humans are faced with, and with the added burden of 400 years of unabated racism and discrimination. That is the basis of conversation in virtually all groups, when the topic of African-Americans is discussed.

3. I must give Mr. Johnson credit for quickly and lucidly recounting the African experience in America, as well as his worthy praise of the African-Americans accomplishments in this country of ours. He also does a good job of talking about the overshadowing of the present day accomplishments of African-Americans. That is nice. Then for some reason, Mr. Johnson turns for a moment to kick at a prone and irrelevant Louis Farrakhan, which is.. I don't know... Silly? Does Mr. Johnson believe, along with all White, right-wing radio hosts that Mr. Farrakhan truly speaks on behalf of Black America? Or does he bring up Farrakhan to more firmly establish his cuddly nature with those who thrust Farrakhan, Sharpton, Rev. Wright, Bill Cosby and other off-kilter, Negroes in the woods as the apcryphal Black "true north"? Once again, I must ask, what Black America does he speak of? Certainly not his Black America, or my Black America. Once again, his argument is flawed and tainted by a strong hint of White refusenik/Black apologist flavor.

4. Mr. Johnson finally wends his way to his prime example, Emma Dunham Kelley-Hawkins, Dr. Henry Louis Gates Jr., and the Oxford University Press’s 40-volume Schomburg Library of Nineteenth-Century Black Women Writers. Mr. Johnson focuses on the fact that it has recently been discovered, or at least alleged, that Emma Kelley-Hawkins never was Black. Mr. Johnson goes on to talk about Dr. Gates undertaking "damage control" over this discovery. At this point I would like to point out one very important fact that was not mentioned about this "controversy", and that is, that African-Americans have never had power to define who was and who wasn't "Black" in American. Seeing as Ms. Kelley-Hawkins lived before and after the turn of the 20th century, it's fair to wonder just who said she was Black? was it Black people? I doubt it. We did not have the power to define that.

In any event, Mr. Johnson apparently was not satisfied with Dr. Gates statement as weighed against the historical backdrop of America's Race Politics and the reality of the dubious racial definition of America's defined Black population. Johnson instead stokes the flames of the imaginary fire by saying, that Holly Jackson, (who discovered Kelley-Hawkins was white) acted as a "true scholar" and "would not allow this intellectual scandal to be swept under the rug." and that she makes 2 important statements and asks 2 equally important questions.

Statement #1: “There is so much at stake here, because of all the writing that has been done based on a false assumption about race.”
Statement #2: “We have stretched our understanding of how black women have written in America to incorporate texts that do not fit.”
Question #1: “How have her [Kelley-Hawkins’s] overwhelmingly ‘white’ texts successfully passed as black for so long in the absence of any corroborating historical data?"
Question #2: How does this discovery change our understanding of African American literary history?”

To answer these important statements and questions, I turn to Mr. F. James Douglas, author of, "Who is Black? One Nation's Definition". Of this dubious definition, Mr. Douglas writes (and please read all of this, because it's essential to your understanding of one of Mr. Johnson's errors):

In the South it became known as the "one-drop rule,'' meaning that a single drop of "black blood" makes a person a black. It is also known as the "one black ancestor rule," some courts have called it the "traceable amount rule," and anthropologists call it the "hypo-descent rule," meaning that racially mixed persons are assigned the status of the subordinate group. This definition emerged from the American South to become the nation's definition, generally accepted by whites and blacks. Blacks had no other choice... Not only does the one-drop rule apply to no other group than American blacks, but apparently the rule is unique in that it is found only in the United States and not in any other nation in the world...The concept of passing applies only to blacks--consistent with the nation's unique definition of the group. A person who is one-fourth or less American Indian or Korean or Filipino is not regarded as passing if he or she intermarries and joins fully the life of the dominant community, so the minority ancestry need not be hidden...a fractionally black person cannot escape these obstacles without passing as white and cutting off all ties to the black family and community....Because blacks are defined according to the one-drop rule, they are a socially constructed category in which there is wide variation in racial traits and therefore not a race group in the scientific sense. However, because that category has a definite status position in the society it has become a self-conscious social group with an ethnic identity...State courts have generally upheld the one-drop rule, but some have limited the definition to one thirty-second or one-sixteenth or one-eighth black ancestry, or made other limited exceptions for persons with both Indian and black ancestry.

Blacks did not say that someone 1/32nd, or with "one-drop" of Black is Black. That's something that Whites dictated to define slavery and Jim Crow for the purposes of control, access and to manage the system of discrimination. Not surprisingly, this definition, ridiculous as it may seem, still holds true today. White and Black culture has become defined by this dubious distinction.

The point is this. Seeing as "one-drop" of Black makes one Black, philosophically, how much difference does Emma Dunham Kelley-Hawkins' being White have to do with the questions Ms. Holly Jackson asks above? I mean, really? Culturally, Ms. Kelley-Hawkins could be White, which, apparently she was if the themes and stories she told were any indication. But, then again, she may have been "Black" in many respects, otherwise, why the confusion? many Black writers did not write on "Black Themes" most notably, Alexandre Dumas, and, if you believe it, William Shakespeare, neither of whom considered themselves Black men.

Overall, the willingness of African-Americans to embrace and accept Ms. Kelley-Hawkins as Black is an interesting story all it's own, and something that Black Americans have been trained to do. The social and cultural meaning of this, is much more interesting to ponder than the alleged "damage control" that Mr. Johnson says Dr. Gates undertook. Dr. Gates was exhibiting understanding and a realistic assessment of the situation by telling a reporter that the work of Kelley-Hawkins would be removed from future editions of the Schomburg series. What else is to be done? Is that "damage control"?

In conclusion to his essay, Mr. Johnson states,

I’ve gone into great detail about the Kelley-Hawkins story because it is a cautionary tale for scholars and an example of how our theories, our explanatory models, and the stories we tell ourselves can blind us to the obvious, leading us to see in matters of race only what we want to see based on our desires and political agendas.

Once again, I find it interesting, that with the backdrop of America's dubious definition of "Black" Mr. Johnson would use the Kelley-Hawkins example as a "cautionary tale for scholars" of how our stories can "blind us to the obvious, leading us to see in matters of race only what we want to see based on our desires and political agendas." There is nothing obvious about race in America, other than the fact that Race is a powerful dividing, defining and exclusionary force in the working of America, that Mr. Johnson would like all of us to ignore.

5. Mr. Johnson ends his essay with this thought,

In the 21st century, we need new and better stories, new concepts, and new vocabularies and grammar based not on the past but on the dangerous, exciting, and unexplored present, with the understanding that each is, at best, a provisional reading of reality, a single phenomenological profile that one day is likely to be revised, if not completely overturned. These will be narratives that do not claim to be absolute truth, but instead more humbly present themselves as a very tentative thesis that must be tested every day in the depths of our own experience and by all the reliable evidence we have available, as limited as that might be.

In many ways I agree with Mr. Johnson here. In some other ways, I don't. I generally agree, because I see modern man as simultaneously attempting to escape eight major contemplations. 1. the true past 2. the present 3. the unavoidable (as distinguished from the fantasized) future 4. true identity 5. intimacy/love 6. responsibility. 7. death 8. the meaning of life. I agree with Mr. Johnson that the real richness of subjective/objective narrative is not to be found in the past or the future, but it is to be found in the present, albeit via the past. For the past is the motivation, the dramatic tension, the element of truth that propels us headlong into our existential groping for "present" meaning and our role in it, as well as responsibility for it. Intimate love is the hidden guru, the "other" and a concept that to explain, would be irrelevant as well as to take us too far afield.

New grammar? new vocabulary? yes, but not a wiping away of the past, but a transformation of that past, into a deep meaningful search inside the simultaneous realms of "self" and "present". That is the only escape from an uncontrolled headlong death dance into the future.

I can see Mr. Johnson's point, for if we can not look at the past and be transformed by it and use it to not repeat it, then it can form a type of prison. Black people are not the only ones held dysfunctionally to the past. The Black history of "victimization" does not have the power to destroy the Earth, nor the future of life on Earth. The White history of domination and dividing up the Earth as a resource, does. The American White narrative of Entitlement and soullessness, is definitely closer to the front of the line for a tune-up.

I also disagree. because I have more than just five points of contention on Mr. Johnson's essay, but the overall one that I have, that existed long before Mr. Johnson's essay, is the truth that for the entirety of the Black experience in America, there have been nothing but denials as to the disparities, disadvantages, inhumanity and barred access that Blacks have had to both America and the American dream.

Each successive generation has been placed in the position of having to argue for equality. As slaves, we had to argue that we were human and deserved to be free. As free men, we had to argue that we deserved full rights of citizenship. As citizens, we had to argue for access that was not "separate but equal". As equal citizens, we had to fight for the right to vote, unfettered by racism, terrorism and poll tests and taxes. As holders of the vote, we had to fight for access to home loans, school loans, and the right to buy and rent homes and apartments, as well as access to public Universities and opportunities for public and private jobs. As right holders to Universities and Jobs, we now have to fight to eliminate the ongoing disparities in education, incarceration, and access to opportunities for uplift and advancement.

What's the common theme in all of this?
1. At each stage, we were told that we were taking the role of victims, rather than accepting the "truth" of the circumstances.
2. Our history, our struggle, our pain and wretched treatment, is very real, (like the blanketing of Sancho Panza) and has always been silenced because the White man, and those in power have continually told us, "Now with (whatever minuscule, incomplete concession that Whites in power concede) you are free. Stop talking about your history and just accept that we will never, ever, acknowledge your history, nor treat you as truly free."


As long as the Black American narrative is dismissed, repressed, and not accepted and disseminated truthfully across the nation, it will persist. It must be taken as it is, for all Americans to be able to move on. And to be taken as it is, will be very difficult for America as a whole, because it requires an accounting of not only the past, but as Mr. Johnson points out, "on the dangerous, exciting, and unexplored present" of previously unknown equality.

To render White America vulnerable enough, humble enough and daring enough to take this previously untantilizing Black American narrative at face value, will require The White American narrative, to change substantially from it's present-day soaking in denial, false history, and contempt. Until such a time comes, we will remain in our stubborn entrenched positions. Blacks calling for a full accounting and attendant equalization. Whites calling for a dismissal of previous treacheries and a final acceptance on the behalf of Blacks, as separate and unequal.

I for one hope that the Black narrative persists and continues unchanged and unabated, regardless of the accomplishments of Blacks, because like the Jewish people (whom Dr. Johnson does not mention a single time as "victims" in his essay), it is part of our history.

Deep underneath all of this is one truth that Whites in power cling to, as dearly as their own sense of entitlement, and that is, they think of Blacks as unequal, and so with each incremental concession, it's not that they feel Blacks have achieved equality, rather, that they have acquired all that they deserve to acquire.

We did not ask for it. We certainly did not want it, but there it is. And it is not a story of victimization. It is simply, "our story" complete with accomplishments, great men and women, inspirational leaders and overcoming the odds.

Overall, I must congratulate Mr. Johnson, on a very robust and sprawling document that clearly states not only his opinions, but also his process and position. As a Black man, I acknowledge his position as one of many among the Black race, and as a prime example of the diversity of ideas and traditions to be found in the present day African-American. And for that, I love Mr. Johnson; however, my final note to Mr. Johnson is this; you can end this narrative thing wherever you want to, but your essay as well as this response is where the Black American narrative will always begin.