The Book of Wesley

D

Introduction to the Fifth Hundred

SOMETIMES REFERRED TO as “Wesley’s 500”, The Book of Wesley enters the last discovered 103 points. The existence of points 501-503 indicates that Wesley had intended to continue, but either lost interest or became unable to go on. This may have coincided with his “rescue” from the dimensional trap in which he had been held for twenty years. He must have had a sort of Rip Van Winkle experience as he re-entered contemporary society. His concluding point, therefore, becomes a touchstone for the hundred that lead up to it. “#503: The simpler the truth, the less bigots will understand it.” Wesley spends a great deal of his time in this final hundred contemplating love in all its varieties.

Nathan Everett, editor

August 11, 1986

CDX

All things are forever temporary.
There can be no healing where there is no injury.
Many believe that falling is the penalty for breaking the law of gravity. Actually, falling is the penalty for obeying the law of gravity. When you break the law of gravity, you do not fall.
Many of our laws extract a more severe penalty for obedience than for disobedience.
While it may be noble to maintain a respect for prophecy, no matter what the faith, we are all endangered when we place in authority a person who believes in the imminent destruction of the world or the promised rescue of a savior.
Prophecy itself is frequently the cause of its own fulfillment.
Violence is a byproduct of assuming the infinite.
Humanity has always assumed the possibility of escape: over the mountain, across the ocean, to the moon, to the stars.
This ability to go elsewhere inevitably leads to a cavalier attitude toward the treatment of the present environment.
The religious notion of a hereafter reinforces the temporal nature of the present. Even nihilists assume they will escape from the present.

CDXX

A complete destruction of the hope for escape—from our world, our solar system, our time, or our bodies—would result in a new pacifism. Energy would be directed toward co-existence rather than co-extermination. It is not only the hope of an afterlife, but the promise of death that drives our consumptive inhumanity.
The difficulty with treaties (234; 297) is that the treators seek constantly to create a document which exempts themselves from compliance while binding the other parties to a subordinate and inevitably vulnerable position.
Therefore, it is only to illiterate peoples (to whom the spoken word is binding to the intent of the agreement) that treaties with any true meaning can be negotiated. Advanced literary societies with complex legal systems cannot be expected to ever reach agreement.
To fully define the term in context with the world today: A treaty is a document in which the greater power subjects the lesser power to its will.
The most primitive artistic expressions of humanity’s relationship to the cosmos are geometric patterns.
If a viewer is deeply moved by a work of art—is impelled into an emotional awareness of the artwork—it is likely that the viewer is experiencing a residual of the exact same emotional impetus that went into the creation of the work in the first place. (141-143)
The chemical geometry of humanity is essentially the same from person to person. If this were not true, the concept of blood transfusion or organ transplant would be impossible. A significant difference in the chemical geometry might differentiate a mammal from a reptile, but not blue eyes from brown eyes.
From the moment of conception, our existence is defined in terms of three dimensions—the length, breadth, and height of the womb and the body that contains us. If one professes to live in a world of four or more dimensions or to have nth-dimensional experience, how can that experience be communicated in three-dimensional terms of reference? How can we transcend our own definitions of reality?
It is the chemical geometry we share that allows us to create art that transcends three-dimensional terms of reference to communicate nth-dimensional experience directly to the hearts of viewers. The viewer becomes a participant with the artist in the emotion of the work.
In artwork, this communication from artist to audience may transcend millennia as the viewer of a Grecian urn may still experience the emotion of the creator.

Editor’s Note: Wesley hits three themes in this section that, at first, look unrelated. But when combined, all three focus on communicating something that transcends the bounds of language. One can surmise that Wesley might return to the subject by suggesting that treaties be captured in artwork and music rather than words.

CDXXX

Artists typically deal in nth dimensional concepts in a world whose terms of reference are (n-1)th dimensional or less.
Agreeing to play football implies an agreement to play by the rules of football. (195)
A body in motion tends to eat at every available opportunity.
Food is frequently substituted for deficiencies in a variety of areas, i.e. affection, success, security, honor, sex.
The key ingredient to thinking irrationally, or in attempting to explain irrationality, is that nothing makes sense.
Opportunity is never convenient. If it were, no one would pass it up.
Love is a generic term which is used as a catch-all for a great many concepts. The ambiguity of its definition is one basis for emotional trauma. If I assign to one word a multitude of meanings, I increase the likelihood that I will be misconstrued when I use the word.
The Greeks used three words to describe different kinds of love in their ancient language: erotic, filial, and agape; to which Christian philosophers mis-assigned the overall meanings of animal, human, and god. They, then, composed a hierarchy of love. One’s goal should always be the highest.
The unChristianized Greek concept was actually only a little better, describing the dichotomy of the individual rather than humanity’s relation to the gods. Greek gods did not behave much differently than Greeks, after all.
This dichotomy would separate the individual into three parts: the physical, the emotional, and the mental or spiritual. Here again, church philosophers have split the mental and spiritual from the single Greek word, psyche. It seems that it has always been considered wrong to apply mental processes to spiritual concepts.

Editor’s Note: Wesley seems to have had a number of short quips to get off his chest before he started redefining what everyone believes about love. The diatribe on love will continue for another couple of sections before he exhausts himself on this one.

CDXL

There are many English words that may be classified as definitions of love; therefore, I propose the following taxonomy. Disclaimer: There is no hierarchy in this list, nor is any intended. Religious philosophers of a future generation can have at it.
Luvus accompanada: Common attraction. This type of love is identified by the simple pleasure of being in another person’s company. It is sparked by the immediacy of the person’s presence. It explains why people sit or stand where they do in groups. It must be carefully distinguished from Luvus attracta.
Luvus attracta: The desire to be in another person’s company. The distinguishing mark of this type of love is its internal motivation, not being dependent on a direct stimuli as the former. Subtypes A and B of Luvus attracta are differentiated only by whether or not the desire is directed toward a specific individual or is simply a desire to be accompanied in general.
Luvus affecta: Commonly called affection. This type of love is distinguished by the impulse to fawn, pet, or otherwise come in contact with its objective. This is equally as valid when the object of affection is a dog as it is when it is a person, therefore, Luvus affecta is not a purely sexual desire.
Luvus philea: Yes, this is brotherly or sibling love. This type of love is obligatory. It defines a socially acceptable mode of behavior attached to the relationship of the individuals. It is externally motivated and provides a framework for civil relations in the most unloving relationships. Luvus philea is love based on the accident of birth.
Luvus cynthia: To the objective eye this may appear the same as Luvus philea as it also describes a sibling love that complies with social standards. Its difference is that it is internally motivated regardless of any apparent external pressures or prescribed behavior. Thus Luvus Cynthia may properly be described as a hybrid of 433 and/or 434 with 435.
Luvus sexus: This is the object love generally felt at or near the moment of sexual fulfillment for any person or object facilitating it. Luvus sexus does not distinguish the facilitators from each other, cannot differentiate between the animate and inanimate, and does not grade for quality.
Luvus romantic: This is an environmental type of love, frequently brought about by appropriate lighting, looks, soft words, and music. It has the ability to affect a person’s judgment abilities and should may be closely related to Luvus seductia.
Luvus erotica: This type of love is a stimulus response. It acts on the central nervous system by way of neural centers located near the surface of the body. At this stimulus, the remainder of the body seems to respond involuntarily, marked by increased heart rate, engorged sexual organs, and rapid breathing.
Luvus parenta: Only a parent can love a child and thus this species describes the unique bond that exists between parent and child. Unlike many types of love, Luvus parenta describes a two-way flow of emotion and therefore may mutate into other forms if that flow is disrupted.

Editor’s Note: Wesley continues in the next section with three more types of love and then professes this to be only a partial list.

CDL

Luvus chattelia: This is the love of a possession, or more appropriately of possessing. It is an emotion attached to an object simply because it is owned and like Luvus sexus, makes no distinction between animate and inanimate, though a case may be made for defining Luvus chattelia as referring only to animate subjects and Luvus objecta as referring specifically to inanimate objects, as in ‘I love my house,’ or ‘I love my car’ as opposed to ‘I love my dog,’ or ‘I love my wife.’
Luvus dominatus: Sometimes confused with Luvus chattelia and frequently accompanied by it, Luvus dominatus is the type of love that describes a ruler’s relationship to the subject Where Luvus chattelia is objective, Luvus dominatus is subjective. Both of these two are straight-line loves that describe a superior’s relationship to an inferior. ‘The King loves his country.’
Luvus seductia: The conquest. Contrary to common opinion, coitus is not normally the ultimate goal of Luvus seductia. Coitus happens merely as a means of keeping score. What counts in the seduction, or the conquest, is winning. Fair object of heart’s desire is overcome, submits to the conqueror. Like a good sting operation, the good seduction leaves its object at least satisfied with if not proud of its part and ending state. The subjects ending state may be described as Luvus worshipa. Many other types of love may be defined before we can hope to have a complete taxonomy.
Einstein’s theory of relativity (242, 285) implies a state within the universe or a point in complete stasis. At that point or in that state, a meter is a meter and time is constant. When placed in motion (when velocity is introduced) the measuring stick shortens and is less than a meter. The clock slows and time is dilated.
The earth, traveling at 30 kilometers per second is already in an insignificant time dilation of .99999995, Approximately 3.145 seconds per year.
If one travels away from the earth and back at the same speed as the earth, time remains relatively real. The same amount of time will be created by the earth’s velocity as by the traveler’s velocity.
If one traveled from the nearest star (approximately 4.5 light years) to the earth at the same speed as the earth, it would take several thousand years to make the journey. But the same time frame would have passed for both traveler and earth.
Proposition: As the traveler from this star increases velocity, it is not time for the traveler that slows down, but rather time on the earth that speeds up. So, the traveler is stalemated. It will take that traveler just as long to reach the earth as the earth time that passes.
The Lorenz Transformation would indicate that traveling from that star at 90% of the speed of light would take the traveler five years but on earth, 21 years and ten months would have passed. Conversely, if the traveler reached earth in five years of earth time, the traveler would have been in transit only one year and two months, negating the speed traveled. The paradox of the timeframes would result in both the traveler and earth having the same amount of time pass.
This is completely consistent with the Einstein theory and with the constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum. In fact, it is this that would indicate that instead of light going faster or slower when you approach its source at an increasing velocity, it changes color.

Editor’s Note: The editor wishes to return to the taxonomy of love, which was at least partially understandable.

CDLX

Let’s try the whole concept of the speed of light and time over again in a different light, so to speak. As a child in school, I was told to imagine myself on the surface of the imaginary planet Alpha, orbiting the North Star. On Alpha, I am equipped with an extremely powerful telescope—so powerful, in fact, that I can actually see events happening on the mysterious planet, Earth.
Today, as I look through my telescope, I see Columbus landing in America. I see this, even though in “reality” the people on earth are preparing to land a man on the moon. The reason? It has taken 450 years for the light to travel from the earth to Alpha.
If you have difficulty picturing reflected light, imagine that Earth is a gigantic movie projector facing Alpha. The movie started hundreds of years ago, and on Alpha, you are watching it as the projected images reach you—450 years after they have occurred.
As far advanced as Alpha is, you now have a space ship that will travel near the speed of light. You load your incredible telescope in the spaceship and blast off toward Earth, following the direction of the projected movie. Consistent with the theory that an object must pass through all intervening points in order to travel between two points, you will intercept all the projected images from Earth that have been sent from the one you were seeing at blast-off (Columbus) to the one being projected when you land.
Since the trip has taken over 450 Earth years, you see everything from Columbus to your landing time, sometime in the 25th century. You have encountered 900 years of history!
But what time has passed for you on this remarkable journey? You step out of your space ship, set up your telescope to receive the projected images from your home planet Alpha and watch events occurring just after your blast-off. By your reckoning, on Alpha almost no time has elapsed at all.
Now the tricky part. Having proved that you could travel the 450 light years to Earth in almost no time at all, you turn around and head back to Alpha. On your return voyage, you encounter everything that has been projected from the time that you left with that same super speed that you viewed Earth with as you approached it. Your ship returns nearly a millennium later to its home base.
Reversing your telescope to look again at Earth, you see the scenes of the day after you left, just reaching you. How much have you aged? By making the round trip, you are over nine hundred years older, both by Earth standard and by Alpha standard. Does your own velocity keep you from aging? If anything, you have experienced nearly 2,000 years of history.
Now, let us extend the illustration one step further. Suppose that there is an absolute center of all that is—the cosmos if you will. Let us suppose as scientists have conjectured that all things originated at this center in a big bang and that they are forever expanding outward from the center. Time, in the absolute sense, necessitated by Einstein’s theory and the Lorenz transformation, originates at that center and radiates outward as a by-product of the expansion of the universe.
As you travel in your superoptic spacecraft, you will slow time down as you travel away from the center and speed time up as you travel toward the center.

Editor’s Note: This section and the one that follows shows Wesley in a new light. He has expounded theories and expostulated suppositions for 450 points, but in this he engages with the reader as if a student. He is a teacher, but the validity of his lessons remains to be seen. It appears that his logic could prove anything. It is his non-rational thought process at work.

CDLXX

If you travel perpendicular to the current—in other words, orbit the center—you experience time at its absolute rate, no matter how fast or slow you go.
This makes possible the theory of currents and short-cuts through space. The experienced space sailor will tack before the winds; pull out of strong currents; perhaps take cross-currents through space. If one actually found a whirlpool of space, conceivably one could use it to come out at a time before one went in and not suffer from the classic contradiction of existence. Perhaps that is what black holes are all about.
Among the first subjects treated in this work (43-45) is that of multiple relationships—assumed to be on any mental or physical basis with which the parties are comfortable. This appears to be as Utopian a philosophy today as it was when H.G. Wells first wrote of it.
Such relationships may never be possible in some societies where monogamy is so deeply seated that the results are an immediate guilt response, insecurity, and jealousies. However, were such a situation to prove possible, it would still be possible only in relationships which are completely, mutually open and honest. The alternative, of course, is that it will work in non-relationships in which nothing done by either party makes a difference to the other.
Typically, the relationship in which this is tried and fails is one in which one or both partners fail or refuse to recognize that anything they do might have any effect on the other partner. Therefore, their own acts are viewed as isolated and unrelational.
Honesty is empowering. (180-181) If Diogenes were to complete his search for an honest person today, he would find a person empowered to affect his or her own destiny.
An adjunct to self-empowerment is an inescapable power to effect other people’s lives. The self-empowered person (completely honest) must recognize and accept his or her ability to affect other people’s lives and accept his or her responsibility for the effect. Failure to accept the ability and responsibility will ultimately undermine the honesty and the power. Failure to accept is dishonest.
A careful distinction should be noted in that honesty generates power to, not power over.
We tend to view energy like heat and light as mystical phenomena. This comes from our rational senses. You can’t touch light. You can’t see heat. You can’t smell or taste or hear either one. You can’t put a quart of light in a bottle and store it for use later.
There may be an advantage in assuming a physical nature of heat and light. I’m suggesting that light does not travel. Instead, two other physical phenomena occur. First is displacement. If you drop a stone in a glass of water, you raise the level of the water. Similarly, if you introduce light into darkness, you raise the level of dark or push it outward, away from the source of light. This forces a compression of the darkness at the edges of its container or simply forces it ever outward if there is no container. Theory of the ever-expanding universe—the more light that is introduced, the further out the darkness is pushed. You can see this effect in a darkened room when a light is introduced. Objects near the light are illuminated, but those farther away stay dim. The darkness resides in the shadows.

Editor’s Note: Even after expounding on relationships, Wesley returns to Light and Darkness. One wonders if that is how he defined his relationships.

CDLXXX

The second phenomenon has to do with absorption/dilution/solution. The nature of light is such that darkness breaks it down and absorbs it into itself. This is the same thing that occurs when you drop a lump of sugar into a cup of coffee. It dissolves and permeates the entire cup.
It is important to notice that the second phenomenon changes the character of the darkness. Just as having sugar in a cup of coffee changes the character (taste) of the entire cup.
As in a true chemical solution, the light does not “settle out” of the darkness, but stays attached to it, traveling through the darkness more by osmosis than through a propulsion of any sort. Thus, it permeates the entirety of darkness, constantly moving toward an area of lesser concentration.
Unlike light, we have learned methods of keeping and storing heat. Heat must be viewed from the same perspective as light. It displaces cold; ultimately it is absorbed by cold, changing the character of cold.
An important difference between heat and light is that we have defined and isolated absolute cold—that temperature below which nothing can fall. We have not evolved a measurement or definition of absolute dark.
We have also learned to introduce a source of heat into an insulated chamber and that chamber will stay heated long after the source of heat has been extinguished. We have not learned to insulate a chamber in such a way that it stays lit after we turn out the source of the light. This should be possible.
Finally, we have learned to extract heat from our surroundings and use it—the process of breaking down a solution into its basic elements. The heat pump will theoretically extract heat from its surroundings down to a temperature of absolute zero—in other words, until no heat is left in the coldness. There must also be a means of creating a light pump which can extract light from darkness down to a lumen of absolute dark.
It should also be noted that since light ‘travels’ by osmosis, the speed of light is dependent on the rate of absorption into darkness. Since the absorption process indicates a movement from an area of greater density into an area of lesser density, the speed of light would be greatest when introduced to the area of greatest darkness.
A match lit in absolute darkness would be absorbed so quickly that it might not be seen by the human eye at all from several yards away. A powerful beam of light might take millions of miles of darkness (light years) to be fully absorbed.
A “light sail” could be created with which one could direct the force of a light beam during its absorption, driving a vehicle forward through the darkness.

XD

The fact of absolute zero—a temperature below which nothing may fall—should be indication enough that real numbers are all positive. The negative is a convention which only shows direction or relativity but has no bearing on reality.
An interesting cycle of events has occurred in the development of language. The words, phrases, sounds arise from the need to communicate. They augment and are augmented by gestures. The combined effect is useful in communicating between individuals when both are present.
If through my voice alone I am unable to get my message across, I can repeat it with different words or sounds, more emphatic gestures, etc. But my success or failure to communicate is immediately apparent.
When the race has advanced to a point where other people are deemed to exist even when they are not seen, heard, smelled, tasted, or felt, they might be able to communicate with others at times when no immediate feedback is possible. In other words, by writing. We develop an elementary grammar in which certain shapes represent certain sounds; or the shapes may represent objects/actions/concepts that have no sound as yet. This first grammar is strictly symbolic.
The second grammar is logic. In this grammar, the order in which the symbols are placed adds to the meaning. “House cat” and “cat house” refer to widely different concepts. “Run home” and “home run” cannot be interchanged. At this point the grammar is formalized and conventions come into play.
Conventional grammar is also order oriented but varies from culture to culture. “I see the dog” and “The dog I see” mean the same thing. In English, however, the former would be acceptable while the latter is stilted and awkward.
Finally, to expand on a word-short grammar, multiple meanings may be assigned to the same symbol (word) which can only be understood from their context. “Charging a purchase,” “charging a battery,” “charging a criminal,” and “charging the enemy” each assign different meanings to the symbol “charging.” Within the grammar, it is our only outlet for expanded concepts.
Paradoxically, the grammar which was born from the need to communicate begins at this point to limit communication. As it limits our ability to communicate new ideas, concepts, or experiences, it also begins to limit our ability to experience things which lie outside the grammar.
The limitation of experience also limits creative expression for, if anything, new artistic creations precede [perhaps proceed from?] and build upon the experience of the artist/thinker.
The result is a stagnation in society and an ultimate death to the language. Perhaps the most notable example of this is the displacement of Latin as a spoken language, even in the church where it proves inadequate to express or translate religious experience. With the death of that language came also the fall of the world’s greatest empire.

D

English faces this same demise in a time more likely measured in years than in centuries.
It is likely that the next great advances for humanity will come from third world countries with minority languages. If these countries are forced to Anglicize their tongues in order to co-exist in the modern world, we may forfeit our chances for survival and for advancement.
There are some things that we can do to combat the stagnation of our culture. The first suggestion is to teach bilingualism to our children. In fact, multi-lingualism would be better. Ideally, all humans would speak at least three languages. These would consist of a major popular tongue—essentially English, Russian, Chinese—a classical language—for example, German, French, Spanish, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Japanese—and an emerging language such as Farsi, Thai, Korean, Afrikaans, etc.
By schooling our people in this way, we impart to them the past, present and future. They will see the classical concepts that are engendered in our modern thinking and have a truly dynamic grammar with which to create.
Alternatively—possibly simultaneously—we should be inventing new grammars and new words. Words should be invented even before meanings are found for them. Then let people strive to define them with their experience.
Whole new structural systems for communication should be invented to encourage expanded thinking. If we can invent multi-dimensional forms of geometry; can create massive computer systems of ones and zeroes; can fly to the moon; then surely, we can utilize new grammars to conceptualize new ideas and to experience new events, emotions, and thought processes—perhaps even new senses.
A god must never allow its limits to be tested, for once tested it is confined to those limits, unable to grow, and therefore doomed to die.
To state that a god must never allow its limits to be tested is to limit the god just as effectively as testing them; therefore, it is the creation’s inherent responsibility not to test the limits of its creator/god. To do so defines the limits of its god, thereby making the god less than god.
Boredom is a substitute for deciding what to do, for creating, inventing, and thinking. If all the bored people in our world decided to do something creative (anything!) we would colonize the universe before the end of the century.
Final paradox: Frenetic activity may equally be a substitute for or a cover for ones boredom with oneself, ones inability to create, or ones incapacity for love.

And for good measure:

It’s hard to make a decent living as a professional victim.
We are defined more by what we leave behind than by what we take along.
The simpler the truth, the less bigots will understand it. Or to get Biblical about it, “And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.” John 1:5

Editor’s Note: This ends The Book of Wesley—his five hundred (and three) points of philosophy. The original writing was completed September 16, 1985. The editor has attempted to transcribe and correct Wesley’s manuscript without over-editing, though occasionally sentence structure was changed to clarify concepts. The book does not reflect changes in society or our world over the past forty years. Sometimes, however, his concepts are frighteningly on target.

❮ The Fourth C Cover ❯

Donate!

Comments

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