The Book of Wesley

CD

Introduction to the Fourth Hundred

THE FULL WORKS which constitute The Book of Wesley have been dubbed “Wesley’s 500” or optomistically “The Thousand,” although it is not clear that he had a thousand coherent thoughts, much less that he wrote them down. I have access to only five hundred. Even though he considered the work “irrational,” a more appropriate term might be “non-rationalized.” He simply wrote his own observations and feelings and did not make an attempt to sort and categorize, but simply to express.

Each “C” or Book of One Hundred, explores at successively deeper levels the understanding that this one person came to have of life while living in a suspended state of consciousness. There has been no attempt by this editor to isolate and categorize the topics covered in anything more than the order in which he wrote them. Thus, cross-references are made only to preceding statements, and never anticipate or look ahead to future thoughts.

In the Fourth Hundred, Wesley continues to expound on topics about which he knows little; but even in those areas that he acknowledges mistakes, he presents them with commitment. In this penultimate hundred, Wesley touches on Platonic Ideals, Geometry, Magic, War and Peace, Socio-Economics, Sentience, and occasionally Love. This is the first hundred that contains no sections in colored ink or pencil and may have been written in a shorter period of time than the preceding hundreds.

Nathan Everett, editor

August 1, 1984

CCCX

Any strength in excess is a weakness.
Use greater strength against itself.
No principle, no matter how divine, is perfect once it has been stated.
The concept of the Ideal, as Plato would have it, is that once made material, no object is perfect. The Ideal of Table exists only in the mind.
It seems then, that these Ideals must be transmitted hereditarily or in some non-verbal, non-visual manner. For how could a person having seen only one table in his or her life develop the Platonic Ideal of Table?
Even after exposure to five, ten, or fifty tables, when does the mind make the link to Table as something that may be represented by numerous and various physical objects?
One would then have to consider this complexity: If it were possible to materialize a table directly from the workings of the mind, would it come out Ideal as in Table or would it come out as an image of a representation or composite of such, as merely a table?
The question of the Plantonic Ideal then might be reduced to this: Are generics Ideal? Is there actually an Ideal of Tree? Of Animal?
The likelihood is no. For if there were an Ideal of Animal, for example, we who are human could only comprise a flawed representation of the Ideal Animal, the Ideal Mammal, the Ideal Human, etc.
The generalization of our ideals is the flaw.

Editor’s Note: As is often the case, it is unclear whether the last statement applies to the topic of Platonic Ideals, or to Wesley’s own ideals. The word was not capitalized in the manuscript.

CCCXX

One might state instead that this creature who writes words upon paper is the Perfect Embodiment of the Ideal of John Wesley Allen. He exists on no other or independent plain.
The generic “tree,” which stands before you is, as well, the Perfect Embodiment of the Ideal of which you have not learned the name. Not for Elm, Oak, or Maple, for they are still only generics.
The ability to call a thing by its Ideal name is a link to the control of that thing.
Innocence is the greatest power.
We are creatures of choice and choose our own lives. We create our own embodiment. It is unlikely that such creatures would ever choose lives which they are incapable of living.
“Knowing better” is seldom a preventative, never a cure.
Changing your mind is not a flaw. In all likelihood, the “mistake” you made yesterday is the foundation of your enlightenment today.
If what has gone before is true and 1) all things occupy the same space at the same time (8); 2) it is possible to be in two places at the same time (48); 3) we are simultaneously at all times (113); 4) at rest all things are infinite (262), then…?
Is red better than blue? Is yellow less moral than green? Is one love ever inferior or superior to another?
Even if one chose to surround oneself with blue, dress in blue, decorate in blue, one would scarcely wish the grass blue, the sun blue, the roses blue, etc. (“Who painted my roses red?” demanded the Queen.)

CCCXXX

Choosing a favorite does not devalue the other options.
Thus, one may love many differently and choose one to be surrounded by, yet take none of the value, joy, or quality away from any of the others.
Is there then a difference between love and commitment? Yes, for one describes the emotion subconsciously extended past all barriers. The other describes the choice of which love to surround oneself with. One may be committed to that which one does not love.
Since at rest all things are infinite (262) we approach a state of all-knowingness when we sleep. Thus, our dreams may prove prophetic or give us insight into past and future events.
Sleep is our most creative state. If we can achieve the plateau of rest normally achieved in sleep while we wake, our creativity is unblocked and ideas flow unhindered. This is meditation.
It is also possible that we may catch glimpses of past or future lifetimes when we encounter people or situation in our current time/space continuum who are or will be sharers of another time/space continuum.
Doubt is the birthing stall of fanaticism.
The residue of activity of primitive deities may still crop up in the most modern settings. Some seeds take millennia in the soil to germinate. Thus, we may find ourselves surprised to discover a temple to the most ancient deity disguised as the most contemporary of scientific institutions.
If there are no negative (255) all numeric/geometric functions must have a finite origin.
Thus, all things (our geometrically defined universe being a numerical system) have a finite past, even if they have an infinite future.

Editor’s note: Wesley is all over the map in this set, including items that we must deem as relational, creative, and geometric. Into this, he tosses a gem on fanaticism. In Wesley’s book, it is not the true believer who becomes a fanatic, but rather the one who is plagued by doubt.

CCCXL

This says a lot about creationist theology. (330)
A point, as defined by classical Euclidean Geometry, has no dimension (length, width, depth). It has only a location defined by its coordinates relative to a point of origin. For the moment, let us assume this is true in tetrahedronal geometry as well.
Any point in Euclidean Geometry may be the origin of an axial system designating six directions—north, south, east, west, up, and down. (or x+, x-, y+, y-, z+, and z-) In tetrahedronal geometry, any point may also be an origin described by only four coordinates. For convenience, left, right, forward, and up. (x+, y+, z+ and t)
Any point may be observed from any direction (in either system). Thus, any point may be a definition of any and all directions.
The point which is the center of a sphere lies in every direction from the surface. Every perpendicular to the surface passes through the center point.
The “four corners of the earth” spoken of frequently in mythology and folk lore, are commonly interpreted as being the four points of the compass. But, while north and south are clearly defined by our poles, there is no such “corner” that is either east or west. The Euclidean system would require six corners rather than four.
The tetrahedronal approach to this question would assume that the origin of our system lies somewhere near the center of our roughly spherical globe. The four spatial axes would originate from this point. If north is considered as our constant, then the other three directions or corners of the earth would be definable points lying on a parallel at or somewhere below the Tropic of Capricorn.
Various sources have discussed “inner space” and “outer space” as two alternatives for exploration which are equally limitless. It may be a reasonable suggestion that our concepts of “inside” and “outside” are reversed.
That space that I define as inside my body is all that I can see, hear, feel, smell, touch. What is “inside” is defined by my senses (or perhaps an extension of them). What is outside is that which pumps my blood, that which supplies me with thoughts, that which propels and which motivates me.
Thus, the entirety of the universe is finite, defined by and contained within my senses. True infinity lies only on the outside—my mind, my soul, my imagination.

Editor’s Note: What Wesley continues to dance around, but never openly declares, is that tetrahedronal geometry actually assumes four finite points of origin “out there somewhere” against which all points are defined. He searches for an absolute that lies outside the observable from which the distance to all points can be measured. In Wesley’s world, it is assumed that this absolute (even four absolutes) is defined as God.

CCCL

If you reduce the size/volume of a body of reference to a non-dimensional point, the ultimate inside/outside relationship is revealed. Outside no longer exists. The entire universe can be defined as lying inside any given point of reference and is therefore finite, bounded on all sides by the same point.
Thus, just as the universe lies in all directions from any given point in that system, any given point lies in all directions from anywhere in the same system, contains it, and puts a finite boundary around the universe.
It might be suggested that a proponent of tetrahedronal geometry may as well increase the number of axes at will—develop a five-dimensional, six-dimensional, etc. system. There is nothing saying this is not possible.
The four axes approach, however, is the simplest model that can account for all spatial relationships without employing negatives. Fewer axes can define only a portion of space; more become redundant. If five axes are used, for example, one must always be defined as exerting null force on the point being located. Otherwise, any given point may be defined with an unlimited number of non-proportional coordinates. Thus, each point would lack a defined orientation. Normal Euclidean solid geometry actually uses six axes to define space, but the coordinates of three of those axes is always null. x and -x are two of the axes, etc. A point cannot have a coordinate on both axes.
To change one’s orientation in the universe, one must either “go there” or “be there.” The process of being takes no account of a time-lapse. The speed at which you go defines how much time is created in the interval.
Rationale for the development of a numeric/geometric system with no negatives: In a three dimensional spatial system, only one-eighth of the universe is “real” or having +x, +y, +z coordinates. Yet, by definition, that one-eighth is infinite.
The other seven-eighths of the system—also each deemed infinite—attempt to measure at least one coordinate as less than nothing. In reality, in order to deal with that quadrant, we must assume that a point within it lies a positive distance from the origin along a fourth, fifth, or sixth axis which we have arbitrarily defined as being negative. In fact, however, negative distance does not exist. Nor does negative space.
To go “outside” our system is equivalent to going a negative distance. Outside is, thus, a non-reality, all of our universe being defined as being inside our system, therefore finite, defined by any single point in the system.
Our strength is frequently defined in terms of what we cannot do rather than what we can do.
When there is motion, motion preempts simultaneity. Our moving, rotating, revolving globe cannot be perceived relative to other realities, but only relative to where realities have been. (17)

Editor’s Note: Wesley almost lost me as I attempted to parse his first point in this section. There is a mathematics joke—which I have on good authority that Wesley had never heard—that goes: Three mathematicians were looking at a flock of sheep. The first said, “The smallest linear footage of a fence that would enclose the sheep is a square. It has the greatest area inside for the linear footage.” The second said, “The smallest linear footage would be a circle as the square would waste interior space.” The third drew a circle around himself and said simply, “I define myself as being outside.” In essence, Wesley has posited the same theory. A point, having no dimensions, can have no inside and outside. Wesley holds that inside and outside are the same. Therefore, any point in the rational universe lies in all directions from any other point. The universe is bounded by that single point.

CCCLX

We constantly intercept history as we move. The light of the star that we reach tonight may be the million-year-old relic of a reality that no longer exists and which has not existed for a longer time yet.
All socio-economic political systems are based on the premise that there is an inadequate amount of wealth to provide a comfortable living standard for all people. Therefore, each socio-economic political system, i.e. capitalistic, socialistic, communistic, etc., is based on how that wealth is to be distributed among the world’s peoples. In other words, “Who will live in comfort and who will not?”
The basic premise is false.
Ergo: The socio-economic political systems of the world, based on a false premise, are collectively and individually irrelevant responses to world government.
Trust is not earned; it is placed.
We recognize the definition of the word “tesseract” to be the fourth dimensional analog to a cube. This was created in a world based on mathematics that does not allow for the modeling of more than three dimensions.
Since normal Euclidean geometry did not take into account any physical possibilities of more than three dimensions, it was assumed that a fourth dimension must refer to a non-physical element of time.
The tesseract was conceived based on a sine wave model, units of which were measured by the crossing of the x axis.
It was further assumed by this model that short-cutting along the peaks of the sine curve might result in skips of time, distance, spatial relationships, etc. How this could be accomplished is still in question.
Since tetrahedronal geometry does allow for physical models of four dimensions, and in fact of five and six dimensional equations, we must redefine the concept of a tesseract.

Editor’s Note: It seems likely that Wesley's concept of a tesseract was influenced or even created by Madeleine L’Engle in the book A Wrinkle in Time. Ms. L’Engle also was never exact in stating how one might fold time in order to skip along the wrinkles. Thus, we find one of those points at which Wesley builds a pseudo-scientific theory based on a science fantasy novel.

CCCLXX

The tesseract, now liberated from its antiquated bonds, can best be defined in metaphysical terms as any multidimensional system that may be supported by linear logic but which surfaces in quantum leaps independent of a logical process.
This, of course, is most applicable to philosophy, including its branches of mathematics, science, theology, etc. We must assume added dimensions of thought, skipping from peak to peak without bothering with the linear logic of the matter.
Tessering, far from the fantasaical riding of time waves through the universe, is a thought process that jumps across the peaks of concepts, connecting seemingly unrelated subjects and generating new creative ideas.
In this way the major thesis of the tesseract is preserved: The shortest distance between two points is not necessarily a straight line.
The difficulty with philosophical tessering is that it frequently leaves linear logic obscure at its best. It may take years for a technician to trace the logical course of an idea generated through tesser thought, thus slowing its implementation in the scientific world by decades.
Still, it can be seen that through the ages, most brilliant discoveries were made not through logical scientific investigation or process, but rather by the quantum leaps made by tessering from peak to peak of the thought process.
If the logic of tesser thought is difficult to follow, the pattern of a person engaged in tesser talk is even more difficult unless all the participants in that conversation are tracking on the same sine wave or thought process, frequently banking on the thoughts and ideas expressed by others.
In sum, the philosopher should avoid linear logic and engage in the quantum leaps of tessering in order to truly be of service to humanity. Leave logic to technicians whose responsibility it is to prove the theories of the tesserist.
Stupidity is its own excuse.
A wise man knows he cannot see his own mistakes. Women, too.

CCCLXXX

All higher mammals (including humans) have an inclination toward addiction. It is very easy to addict them to almost anything.
In some circles this is known as training. [In others, it’s education.]
Addictions are of two principal varieties: physical and emotional. An addiction to earning money or to love is every bit as compelling as a chemical dependency.
Our ravaged immune system is our only defense mechanism against both types of addiction.
An example of the expanded possibilities resulting from changing from a geometric system of x dimensions to a geometric system of x+1 dimensions is to be seen in the ancient problem of trisecting an angle, or creating a new angle of exactly 1/3 the radians of the original. In Euclidean plane geometry (2-dimensional) it is impossible to construct such an angle.
It can be demonstrated, however, that moving to a third dimension makes the trisection a theoretically simple procedure. It further poses the challenge, however, of creating the tools that enable us to model in three dimensions with the ease of a straight edge and compass in two dimensions.
Three planes, as defined in Euclidean systems, which share a common intersection—that is a single point shared by all three planes—will create three intersecting lines, defined by the intersections of each pair of planes. These lines define the x, y, and z axes of 3-dimensional solid geometry, which divides space into octants.
It is not necessary that the intersection of the axes form 90-degree angles in every relationship. It is, however, necessary to select an octant in which the three angular relationships of the axes are equal. These angles shall be called the angles of origin in the primary octant.
It is possible, utilizing the basic tenants of Euclidean geometry, to bisect any of the angles of origin of the primary octant. The resulting ray is always equidistant from the primary axes that it bisects; such a ray is a secondary axis.
If any two of the angles of origin the primary octant are so bisected, the angle formed at the intersection of the secondary axes will be 2/3 of the angle of origin. The secondary angle, when bisected, will yield an angle 1/3 that of the angle of origin, or one trisection of said angle.

Editor’s Note: A true genius like Da Vinci would have filled sketchbooks and notebooks with drawings illustrating what he was talking about and allowing a reasonably intelligent person with a background in the subject to deconstruct his logic. Not so with Wesley and thus it is impossible to determine if he had a moment of genius level clarity in this writing or if these are the ramblings of an idiot. There are no drawings or sketches to go with these notes. Wesley did everything in his head and thus even his theoretical planes may have been bent to his will. Perhaps a computer modeling program might be devised to follow Wesley’s descriptions, but Wesley himself, wrote in the early 80s before computers had become accessible to ordinary humans.

CCCXC

Regarding the problem of sentience and the existence of a soul. Inevitably the philosophical/theological question will be asked regarding whether or not life forms found outside the human-occupied solar system are sentient or, being so, whether or not they have a soul.
There is no clear-cut definition as to what sentience is, nor is there any clear-cut proof that such a thing as a soul even exists, let alone having it defined however, it is normally assumed that a being must be sentient in order to have a soul.
A commonly propounded test for sentience is the ability to make (that is, to invent) and use tools. This limiting definition rules out the potential for may possible forms of life; for example, disembodied sentience or beings which are not physically equipped with limbs and appendages that can deal with materials in a similar manner to homo sapiens.
The ability to make and use tools, it should also be noted, reduces by extrapolation the existence of a soul to terms of common engineering.
This test, however, when applied to any species utilizing a form of vehicular transportation, would be adequate evidence on which to base the assumption that any species encountered traveling in space would necessarily be sentient.
It is herein proposed that the definition of “sentient” be simplified to “self-awareness.” The sentient being, therefore, must be tested only on its ability to communicate that self-awareness.
When necessarily removed from a homo sapiens monotheistic theology, we may redefine “soul” as “super-self-awareness;” that is, the awareness of the self of others in relation to oneself.
The supra-self is that which bonds all sentient life forms into common unity.
Therefore, our own supra-self mandates that we acknowledge the “soularity” of all sentient life forms.
The price one pays for a rite of passage is to leave a part of oneself behind.

Editor’s Note: In his own round-about way, Wesley acknowledges the fact that people are very slow to recognize the humanity of others. Slavery in America, in which Africans were deemed to be not quite human, or the American push into the West that reduced vast populations of natives because they were merely animals are two examples. Wesley projects this into encounters with other living creatures on earth and into his imagined encounter with aliens. Or, perhaps Wesley had some experience with aliens. ???

CD

If it is true that emotion is experience-able only in a time-space relationship (154) then it is little wonder that our pictures of eternity are painted with oblivious smiles of non-feeling.
The Nirvana mindset is one of non-feeling, not one of all-feeling or emotion Christian heaven has no variance in emotion, being all-praise and all-joy. Being locked into a single emotional state for all eternity can be no different than having no emotion at all. The difference between heaven and hell is lost.
In ancient Judaism there was no expectation of significant change in the afterlife, but that afterlife was closely linked and bound to a single space on earth, not a different dimension.
Those who believe that witchcraft died in the seventeenth century, need only watch the sidelines of a modern sporting event for disproof.
The whole shape of modern sporting events in which two armies of warriors oppose each other as their spiritual guides on the sidelines step through intricate dances while reciting carefully cadenced rituals which serve to whip the worshippers into a spiritual/emotional frenzy, is not at all unlike any primitive spiritual encounter.
Modern sporting lacks only the deistic ingredient to rank it as equal to the great witch workings of magic of the 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries.
Imagine, for example, the overt symbolic magic which would be represented were we to dress our prison inmates in the uniforms of enemy armies, to be slaughtered on a field of combat by the forces of our native land to work sympathetic magic against our foes on the battlefield. Or, more profoundly, consider the socio-economic prestige gained by the conquerors in Olympic competition. Here, the priestesses have been denied admittance for the working of their ritual magic, leaving the fate of their tribes to hang on the prowess of the warriors alone.
Who invented the idea that 5,000 troops carrying automatic high-powered weapons, barricaded behind barbed wire fences, and plopped down in the middle of a country in which they do not even know the native language can possibly be called a peace-keeping force?
A multi-national super-corporation of civilians should be created for the purpose of creating peace in war-torn countries. They should be funded by a world fund, dedicated to establishing an economic recovery of the nation. The corporation should be production-oriented, custom made from the affected country, consumed internally, or for export.
This peace-making corporation must be made up of highly trained and skilled individuals, not the least of which training should be in the native language. For only by learning the language can the peacemakers hope to understand the people. Peace will not precede understanding.

Editor’s Note: And so, Wesley makes a journey from irrational mathematics to world peace. We might assume that Wesley reached the pinnacle of his discoveries in the first C, which concluded, “The search for meaning is endless. It turns ever in upon itself. And the further in you turn, the further out you get.” (100) We will discover if there is a point to his ramblings in the Fifth C.

❮ The Third C The Fifth C ❯

Donate!

Comments

Please feel free to send comments to the author at nathan@nathaneverett.com.