Blogs by D.C. Quillan Stone

Tuesday, July 28, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 271

Published in 2022 amid US Government's tyranny crescendo-ing to unprecedented magnitudes as done by many (if not all) presidential administrations and congressional classes, unchallenged by judicial benches, particularly those of 21st century (without exception), that is to say, my 12th book (3rd of trilogy thus 1st and 2nd, 3rd's TOC), entitled appropriately and exhaustively Propositions, Problems & Poems on the Peculiar Human ABILITY to REASON, Singular Human RIGHT to CONSENT & Other Neglected Matters (May 2022)...

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 271

~ William Thomson and Plato’s Forms ~

Forms (laws, theories) have triple mode of existence; they exist in the Divine Mind as ideas, and are the archetypes of creation; they exist as embodied in "instances" or examples, in which mode they are laws; they exist, lastly, in the human mind as ideas; thus they precede creation, they are in it, they succeed it.

William Thomson, Archbishop of York (1819-1890)

Taken from his 1842 book An Outline of the Necessary Laws of Thought: A Treatise on Pure and Applied Logic, the statement indicates three modes, yet one implied albeit paramount; preexistence then persistence of principle.

To expected of course the following retort. What principle? He speaks of mode or process. However, the logical counter would be the reiteration of the same mode(s) or process(es) as the very basis of principle if not morality or ethic. Accordingly it has been numerously, variously agued in this and last two books, the mere existence of the peculiar human ability of reason demands an ethical consideration and posture, while the significant distinction among all other species by the same human peculiarity demands a moral outcry if intervened, interfered, imposed, interrupted, inhibited, intruded or invaded.

If observably, logically, consistently accepted the peculiar human ability to reason as undeniable, unavoidable indication towards a singular principle fundamental, moral, ethical, it greatly challenges the common view hence preference for such in plural forms; lists of moralities, bills of rights, tablets of commandments, volumes of ethics, books of admonitions/proverbs, and other inconsistencies thus complexities. For the aforesaid common view hence preference have historically facilitated innumerable depravities therefore atrocities, monstrosities, inhumanities levied upon the singular human right to consent or dissent on all matters, as manifested per the peculiar human ability to reason.

The same facilitation prevails today for the perceived good intention or imagined common good hobbles the discernment, befuddles the judgment, misdirects the conclusion while enlivens the self-righteousness.

---

Upon the lush emerald hill she lays, then oddly slumbers in saunters
Ponders `tween maunders, liken ancient sages amid tombs and altars
O the mysteries as Love’s epistles and individuals’ logical passions
Numerous while exclusive to each and every person’s sacred bastion

Worsened the naked intuition, the erroneous, excessive propensities
Ah the sinful originalities (ergo hinted the skint among the polities)
So go the spark off flint upon stone, the flame `low muck and mire
Hardening to fuckin’ pride, hoisted thereon society’s arrogant spire

---

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.
Study, Ponder, Labor, till last Breath.

Monday, July 27, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 217

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 217

~ Peculiarity, Uniqueness, Distinction / 3rd Reprise ~

As much the one specie possesses the peculiar human ability to reason, so inseparably propulsive thus inarguably rightful the singular human right to consent or dissent on all matters.

As much the one specie possesses NOT the peculiar human ability to reason, so instinctively unaware thus inconsequentially moot the singular human right to consent or dissent on all matters.

Consequentially, if to propose the existence of human reason as absolute as it is peculiar, so must propose the existence of human ethic as absolute as it is singular.

---

Politically depressed, governmentally oppressed thus immorally blessed
While arrogantly dressed though perversely crested, covetously infested
As all pressed then wrested of prerogatives, propensities, preferences
Purses and properties too, upon shrewd thus duplicitous references

O for liberty’s sake, yet political waves break, and candidates on take
Hence navigating, rather strategically imitating, some morally narrow strait
Well plaited per covetousness, presumption, arrogance and perversions

So go the quick-tossing the aspersions, to trick-glossing the conversations

---

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.
Study, Ponder, Labor, till last Breath.

Friday, July 24, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 213

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 213

~ Peculiarity, Uniqueness, Distinction / 2nd Reprise ~

To deny an individual’s humanity is universally understood as inhumane, for certainly dehumanizing if to so deny. Who would disagree of course with this sort of obvious characterization? Yet a discussion or debate on the definition of such denial would result to something less than universal understanding, for also less than universal the definition(s) of the words humane and/or humanitarian.

The common scenarios representing inhumanity immediately come to the forefront; slavery, genocide, mass shooting, murder, rape and other physically violent activities. Even so among these examples, reactions differ per the events’ details and contexts, especially upon politicization and oddly upon heightened awareness of particular issue(s) per currently popular film, documentary, exposé, investigation, etc. Consequently, without the observable, logical, consistent thus ethical definitions for words humane versus inhumane, transgressions and tragedies are incorrectly assessed, determinations and decisions incorrectly concluded then legislations, laws, policies, programs incorrectly proposed, popularly confirmed, disastrously implemented inducing further inhumanities.

And so for centuries even millenniums as ordinarily contrived then randomly compiled the lists, codes, bills, canons of moralities, ethicalities, rights, statutes, commandments, principles, ideals, standards, behaviors, causes, often governmentally imposed yet none universally contended nor usually conducted.

Specifically, the U.S. Bill of Rights originated as 17 amendments approved by the U.S. House of Representatives, 12 of the 17 approved by the U.S. Senate, and in 1791, 10 of 12 ratified by then 13 American states. The rejection of rights from the start was as arbitrary as the approving 17 then 12 as well the eventual ratifying the final 10 (see Proem & Poem Nos. 27, 28). Prior of course, Thomas Jefferson named 3 unalienable rights in 1776, John Locke in 1689 proposed 4 rights that “no one ought to harm”, then fast-forward to 1948, the newly formed United Nations declared human rights in a lengthy document of 30 articles, as defined by Eleanor Roosevelt and the commission she chaired. The lack of consensus worsens outside political, governmental sciences thus within social, academic, religious contexts exemplified by far more diversity of thoughts and conclusions on the matter.

Oddly, the diverse opinions and various divisions over rights as well moralities, decencies, probities, equalities, do not dissuade nor discourage the passionately sentimental persistence even fanatically emotional insistence towards governmental presumption therefore institutional compulsion (force) per the vote of the vaingloriously monarchic one, the arrogantly oligarchic some, the riotously kratocratic many else the covetously democratic most, however never respectfully, ethically patient until the unanimously harmonic all upon each and every person’s consent. To be plain, covetousness, presumption, arrogance cannot bear the thought of constraint when confronted with one more dissenting soul.

---

The core, the root, fraught per rot, “All for not!” as most lament
As though foot in cement, society hell-bent, no ladies, nor gents
For dignity well spent, moral garments rent near consuming fires
Liken funeral pyres, while gypsies dance to “fool’s gold” lyres

And covetous desires fan to flames, panning polity’s fiat games
Tho’ few to logically triage the false claims, placing proper blame
While facing the slanderous aims, “Racists and Fascists are All!”
Appalled by disagreements the pious cabal while self-enthralled

---

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.
Study, Ponder, Labor, till last Breath.

Wednesday, July 22, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 212

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 212

~ Peculiarity, Uniqueness, Distinction / 1st Reprise ~

To state again, it is appropriate to infer so to clarify, the individual simultaneously even inseparably possesses the following three. Firstly the individual possesses the characteristic human as the specie within the genus of all other living species. Secondly the individual possesses the peculiar or unique ability to reason. Thirdly the individual possesses the constant prerogative and the consistent preference to consent or dissent, to accept or reject, to agree or disagree, to continue or discontinue at the conclusive end of each and every reasoning sequence.

It is critical at this juncture to understand the simultaneous and inseparable natures while equally critical to understand the constant and consistent presences of the aforementioned. If clearly understood, then it is logical to contend these possessions as absolutes per the simultaneous, inseparable natures, and constant, consistent presences. Are not determined similarly the sunrise and sunset (as one of many examples), simultaneous and inseparable to the arrival of dawn and dusk then light and darkness thus day and night, constant and consistent therefore absolutes?

The absoluteness of the sunrise and sunset hence respective characteristics are of course matters merely factual hence amoral. However, matters factual yet quite moral are the absoluteness of the specie human within the genus of all other living species, simultaneous and inseparable to the peculiar or unique ability to reason, along with the constant prerogative and the consistent preference to consent or dissent, to accept or reject, to agree or disagree, to continue or discontinue at the conclusive end of each and every reasoning sequence.

To morally illustrate further, for also constant and consistent the frustration even anger per an individual’s reaction if another intervenes, interferes, interrupts or inhibits the former’s prerogative and preference to consent or dissent as manifested by the ability to reason. The nearly involuntary frustration even anger, and truly involuntary raising of hairs on back of neck, well indicates a situation preferentially undesirable, intolerable else unbearable, then so constantly, consistently judged as presumption often arrogance, remaining unresolved always as an ethical dilemma until end of the intervention, interference, interruption or inhibition.

---

Hence study, ponder, labor `twixt the endeavors longstanding

Albeit experiences longsuffering, ever befitting, often blessings

From sticks to bricks, plows to circuits, cavern walls to books

The mind well reasoned per errors upon efforts since tenderfoot

The core, the root, fraught per rot, “All for not!” as most lament

As though foot in cement, society hell-bent, no ladies, nor gents

For dignity well spent, moral garments rent near consuming fires

Liken funeral pyres, while gypsies dance to “fool’s gold” lyres

---

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.
Study, Ponder, Labor, till last Breath.

Tuesday, July 21, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 211

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 211

~ Peculiarity, Uniqueness, Distinction ~

As much the human specie possesses the peculiar or unique ability to reason among nonhuman, instinctive species, so simultaneously even inseparably possesses the constant prerogative and the consistent preference to consent or dissent therefore to accept or reject, to agree or disagree, to tolerate (suffer) or refuse, to continue or discontinue at the conclusive end of each and every reasoning sequence.

In parallel, as much nonhuman, instinctive species possess not the peculiar or unique ability to reason, so simultaneously even inseparably possesses not the constant prerogative nor the consistent preference to consent or dissent therefore to accept or reject, to agree or disagree, to tolerate (suffer) or refuse, to continue or discontinue, else the possessions of such lesser magnitude rendering comparisons inconsequential thus irrelevant (as proposed in Proem & Poem No. 33).

Then it is appropriate to infer so to clarify, the individual simultaneously even inseparably possesses the following three. Firstly the individual possesses the characteristic human as the specie within the genus of all other living species. Secondly the individual possesses the peculiar or unique ability to reason. Thirdly the individual possesses the constant prerogative and the consistent preference to consent or dissent therefore to accept or reject, to agree or disagree, to continue or discontinue, to tolerate (suffer) or refuse at the conclusive end of each and every reasoning sequence.

Reversely engineered if you will, to consent or dissent is prerogative or preference, then to prefer is reason, and ultimately, to reason is human, as introduced per Proem & Poem Nos. 22-24, 33, 34 from the book 100 Proems & Poems on the Peculiar Human Ability to Reason, Singular Human Right to Consent & Other Neglected Matters.

It would then be logically prudent to ask further, could it be the human specie's aforesaid peculiarity or uniqueness if intervened, interfered, interrupted or inhibited by another, would likewise ill mitigate even negate the one distinction among other nonhuman, instinctive species therefore reduce or remove the human characteristic. In so doing, the Peculiar Human Ability to Reason along with human propensity, prerogative, preference, purpose thus the Singular Human Right to Consent or Dissent on ALL matters, are intervened, interfered, interrupted or inhibited quite inhumanely.

---

Of womb until tomb, each man starts as every man departs

Life imparts before death, toils amid else tumultuously apart

Infants decry forepart, whilst elders assay the observed verities

Alas, the Labyrinth’s terse respites, wine’s verses or clarities

Hence study, ponder, labor `twixt the endeavors longstanding

Albeit experiences longsuffering, ever befitting, often blessings

From sticks to bricks, plows to circuits, cavern walls to books

The mind well reasoned per errors upon efforts since tenderfoot

---

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.
Study, Ponder, Labor, till last Breath.

Monday, July 20, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 216

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 216

~ To Prefer Even Propend Is To Reason / 2nd Reprise ~

For it's the philosopher's job to investigate the truth by means of reasons, and in all things to follow not people's opinions but reason's lead. So having devoted myself to schools for a long time, and having been educated in both their reasons and their authorities, at last I brought myself to moral philosophy, which is the aim of all the disciplines and for the sake of which I judged all the rest should be mere preliminaries.

The aforesaid, as the character Philosopher introduced himself in the book Dialogue Between a Philosopher, a Jew and Christian, written by theologian Peter Abelard (1079-1142). And as this poet discovered upon years even decades of studying, pondering, laboring whether political sciences (and isms), various histories as well economics, psychology, sociology, praxeology, theology too until observed the element or dynamic, determined the logic, demonstrated the consistency then concluded the ethic(s); the Singular Human Right to Consent or Dissent on ALL Matters as inherently preferred then passionately expressed per each and every individual's Peculiar Human Ability to Reason.

Furthermore, in so doing, one would be correctly admonished and properly directed if to also heed the words of business/economic journalist and writer Henry Hazlitt (1894-1993), when he wrote in his 1916 book Thinking as a Science the following…

A man with a scant vocabulary will almost certainly be a weak thinker. The richer and more copious one's vocabulary and the greater one's awareness of fine distinctions and subtle nuances of meaning, the more fertile and precise is likely to be one's thinking. Knowledge of things and knowledge of the words for them grow together. If you do not know the words, you can hardly know the thing.

The point of course is to emphasize the necessity to study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Tm 2:15), as well among both good and evil men to show oneself logically, consistently, ethically therefore credibly, honorably, exemplary as well stalwartly, diligently and always gentlemanly. Hence expand direct knowledge by experiencing along with indirect knowledge by reading, studying, observing, experimenting, pondering, testing, debating, laboring, concluding the logic, syllogism, consistency, fact, truth then ethic. Do this till last breath, so to accordingly regard the right to consent for all individuals, and to appropriately respect the ability to reason as divinely breathed and bequeathed.

---

Sublime if to rid ourselves of political, social intervention and intrusion
(The plain-speak perhaps less poetic, more stoic, maybe epicure conviction)
And so the friction betwixt the factions, tyrannical traction and momentum
Upon all economically distressed (and then), ergo the Bukowskian factotum

---

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.
Study, Ponder, Labor, till last Breath.

Friday, July 17, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 215

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 215

~ To Prefer Even Propend Is To Reason / 1st Reprise ~

For two or three decades, it has been socially tolerable, acceptable even desirable to respect and regard sexual preferences(s), whether to sexually consent versus dissent as well various sexual persuasions. Prior, it was long argued in favor of “my body, my choice” regarding pregnancies, although ignoring the body and choice of the young person within the womb. It was hopeful per such newfound insight the logic would have incrementally, appropriately infiltrated other issues political, social, economical, personal, intellectual, spiritual, confidential and more. Dismally, only a few applied the principle to other aspects of life public and/or private, far fewer applied the same constantly, consistently, ceaselessly.

Why? Covetousness!

Thus the same depravity manifested as organizational interests then agendas, social justices then tactics, political planks then platforms, governmental policies then laws, regulations, prohibitions, taxes, subsidies, grants, loans, sanctions, embargoes, bans, wars and more. For covetousness is insatiable then quite impatient. Insatiable; thus always seeking further ends to manipulatively and/or coercively obtain. Impatient; thus always seeking further means of manipulation and/or coercion. With that said, the respect then regard for each and every person’s Singular Human Right to Consent or Dissent on all matters, as inseparably manifested therefore concluded per each and every person’s Peculiar Human Ability Reason, serves equally as the observable, logical, consistent thus ethical subjugator of Covetousness.

Consent not only negates any ethical dilemma but preempts the self-serving urgency to scheme and embrace the use of force as well (per Proem & Poem No. 120). However upon encountering dissent, there germinates in the mind’s shadows the temptation to criminally, privately, socially, electorally, politically, militarily, that is to say, violently, forcefully impose upon those dissenting thus soon resenting perhaps later resisting. As Consideration flirts then dances with Temptation, the slow seductive song eventually if not expeditiously incites Covetousness ergo the sorted Imagination and the cohort’ed Presumption, while Narcissism mandates boldly, masturbates solely towards Arrogance’s obnoxious erection, indomitably, opprobriously of course bestially Aggression’s wanton ejaculation.

This digression concludes and manifests obviously as the human activity of coercive exaction, unapologetic violence, categorically maybe redundantly the aforementioned methods of force. Characteristically, the brutal dynamic is in consistent disregard of the Singular Human Right to Consent or Not Consent on all matters, inseparably in constant disrespect of the Peculiar Human Ability to Reason.

---

O the academic squalls, the journalistic brawls, while all in throes
Amid inaugural balls, corporate banquets, each harlot `tween the rows
Every varlet as bedfellow, so they bellow, “Bestow the water as wine!
Who will question, who will know, who will betray then begrime?”

---

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.
Study, Ponder, Labor, till last Breath.