Blogs by D.C. Quillan Stone: July 2026

Friday, July 31, 2026

Constant and frequent questioning is the first key to wisdom... Peter Abelard (1079-1142)

Constant and frequent questioning is the first key to wisdom... For through doubting we are led to inquire, and by inquiry we perceive the truth.

Peter Abelard (1079-1142)
Sic Et Non (1121)

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.

Wednesday, July 15, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 214

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 214

~ To Prefer Even Propend Is To Reason ~

Every member of the specie human constantly prefers or not prefers, consistently propends or not propends. That is to say, each individual prefers or propends “this” else prefers or propends “that” then prefers or propends “that” else prefers or propends “this” and so on. Preference even Propensity are neither an elected preoccupations nor chosen activities, rather continuous states of human existence. To contend the self-evident, to reason is human (see Proem & Poem Nos. 22-24, 33, 34) is to redundantly confirm to prefer even propend is to reason else something instinctive.

To restate (per Proem & Poem No. 22)… If humans did not reason, possessing not the specie’s sole advantage for survival, then they as vulnerably featherless, furless, clawless, fangless as well weaker and slower, bipedal omnivores would instinctively, desperately resort to inefficient thus insufficient gathering, foraging, grazing then scavenging upon prior failed hunts per lack of reasoning skills to imagine then construct spears, clubs, slings, bows and arrows. In pack-like and herd-esque groups, these wretched non-reasoning humans would survive for a time, although eventually preying on each other, invariably becoming extinct.

Theoretical of course, for when have humankind, in the current biological and psychological state created or evolved, been without the Peculiar Ability to Reason. Consequently, it is impossible to logically consider humans without noting even highlighting their one tool for improvement even survival, at the same time, their one distinction among fellow species. Inseparably, the Singular Right to Consent or Not Consent is no less worthy to note and highlight, therefore impossible to ignorantly overlook, arrogantly dismiss or brutally reject if paramount the empiricism combined with diligence resulting to consistency thus logic, in a word; ethic.

Why the reiteration? First, to clarify the state of specie if without the Peculiar Human Ability to Reason as the essential tool for survival thus sustainment then improvement. Second, to clarify the definition of reasoning then to identify the elements or dynamics of the same. So to clearly define, reasoning is the economizing, evaluating then electing of priorities per individually assessed personal benefit versus detriment, personal cost versus cache along with personal urgency versus conveniency upon personal responsibility versus risk. Then to elementally identify, reasoning’s aforesaid process unavoidably includes personal knowledge experientially direct per laboring, practicing, encountering, generally living and experientially indirect per reading, studying, determining, academically learning, combined with personal propensities, prerogatives, preferences, purposes, pursuits.

---

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

Monday, July 13, 2026

Propositions, Problems & Poems on the Peculiar Human ABILITY to REASON, Singular Human RIGHT to CONSENT & Other Neglected Matters

Propositions, Problems & Poems
on the
Peculiar Human ABILITY to REASON,
Singular Human RIGHT to CONSENT
&
Other Neglected Matters

--- drafted/unedited version, online till publication mid 2022 ---

Note:

To continue beyond the latest two books' Nos. 1-210, thus...

No. 211 - Peculiarity, Uniqueness, Distinction

No. 212 - Peculiarity, Uniqueness, Distinction / 1st Reprise

No. 213 - Peculiarity, Uniqueness, Distinction / 2nd Reprise

No. 214 - To Prefer Even Propend Is To Reason

No. 215 - To Prefer Even Propend Is To Reason / 1st Reprise

No. 216 - To Prefer Even Propend Is To Reason / 2nd Reprise

No. 217 - Peculiarity, Uniqueness, Distinction / 3rd Reprise

No. 218 - Two Propositions on Humanity and Polity

No. 219 - Two Propositions on Humanity and Polity / 1st Reprise

No. 220 - Two Propositions on Humanity and Polity / 2nd Reprise

No. 221 - Two Propositions on Humanity and Polity / 3rd Reprise

No. 222 - Qui Tacet Dissentire Videtur

No. 223 - Qui Tacet Dissentire Videtur / 1st Reprise

No. 224 - Qui Tacet Dissentire Videtur / 2nd Reprise

No. 225 - Law of Consensual Unity / Part 1

No. 226 - Law of Consensual Unity / Part 2

No. 227 - Law of Ethical Continuity / Part 1

No. 228 - Law of Ethical Continuity / Part 2

No. 229 - Laws, Gates, Tables and Expressions / Part 1

No. 230 - Laws, Gates, Tables and Expressions / Part 2

No. 231 - Schaefferian Law of Anterior Covetousness / Part 1

No. 232 - Schaefferian Law of Anterior Covetousness / Part 2

No. 233 - Schaefferian Law of Anterior Covetousness / Part 3

No. 234 - Schaefferian Law of Anterior Covetousness / Part 4

No. 235 - Schaefferian Law of Anterior Covetousness / Part 5

No. 236 - Vox Humana Vox Dei Non

No. 237 - Vox Humana Vox Dei Non / 1st Reprise

No. 238 - Vox Humana Vox Dei Non / 2nd Reprise

No. 239 - Vox Humana Unius Vox Humana Alterius Non

No. 240 - Preferring Unfairness Even Injustice

No. 241 - Preferring Unfairness Even Injustice / 1st Reprise

No. 242 - Preferring Unfairness Even Injustice / 2nd Reprise

No. 243 - Preferring Unfairness Even Injustice / 3rd Reprise

No. 244 - The Science of One

No. 245 - Inveterate Covetousness Theorem / Part 1

No. 246 - Inveterate Covetousness Theorem / Part 2

No. 247 - Two-Thousand and Twenty-One

No. 249 - The Business of Science

No. 250 - Individualism’s Ethos or Creed

No. 251 - Individualism’s Pledge of Allegiance

No. 252 - Individualism’s Bill of Right

No. 253 - Individualism’s Bill of Right / 1st Reprise

No. 254 - Individualism’s Bill of Right / 2nd Reprise

No. 255 - Capacity, Ability, Proximity, Longevity

No. 256 - Capacity, Ability, Proximity, Longevity / 1st Reprise

No. 257 - Of Propositions and Problems

No. 258 - Vox Humana Vox Dei Non / 3rd Reprise

No. 259 - The Mind: Subject of Law or Seat of Law

No. 260 - The Mind: Subject of Law or Seat of Law / 1st Reprise

No. 261 - The Mind: Subject of Law or Seat of Law / 2nd Reprise

No. 262 - Capacity, Ability, Proximity, Longevity / 2nd Reprise

No. 263 - Definitions of Isms

No. 264 - Definitions of Isms / 1st Reprise

No. 265 - Definitions of Isms / 2nd Reprise

No. 266 - George Boole and Aristotle’s Dictum

No. 267 - George Boole and Aristotle’s Dictum / Reprise

No. 268 - Amiss the Peculiar Human Ability to Reason

No. 269 - Amiss the Peculiar Human Ability to Reason / 1st Reprise

No. 270 - Amiss the Peculiar Human Ability to Reason / 2nd Reprise

No. 271 - William Thomson and Plato’s Forms

No. 272 - William Thomson and Plato’s Forms / Reprise

No. 273 - William Thomson and Hobbes' Unresistible Might

No. 274 - Inveterate Covetousness Theorem / Part 3

No. 275 - Various Final Thoughts

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

---

To my daughters, sons-in-law and grandchildren, who I love more than they know. It is my hope they someday will read this book when aged enough by human experiences hence mildly or gravely despondent over the human yet quite inhumane experiments, that is, the political and social monstrosities called Government.

---

To the following (incomplete list of) influences, who in various decrees marginally or largely shifted my ideological thus moral paradigm(s), facilitating and fostering the conclusions in this book. Consequently in somewhat chronological order; the Taoist and Greek writers, the Apostles and their Gospels and Epistles, the Early Church writers, the theologians and economists of the School of Salamanca, Roger Williams (his book The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution for Cause of Conscience), John Locke, Richard Cantillon, John Stuart Mill, Anne Robert Jacques Turgot, Jean-Baptiste Say, Claude-Frédéric Bastiat (of course the essay The Law as well his complete works), Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton (his article No. 84 only) thus the Federalist Papers, then the arguably preferred Anti-Federalist Papers therefore contributors, Patrick Henry (his fiery speech at the Virginia Ratifying Convention), writers and orators like Ohiyesa (Charles Eastman) as well chiefs Red Jacket, Joseph, Luther Standing Bear, Seattle and others (as compiled by numerous historians), Henry David Thoreau, W. Stanley Jevons, Lysander Spooner, Mark Twain (his short story/prose War Prayer) and the American Anti-Imperialist League, Carl Menger, Eugen Böhm von Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises (particularly his books Liberalism and Human Action), F.A. Hayek, Garet Garrett, Albert J. Nock (his book Our Enemy, The State), Frank Chodorov, John T. Flynn, C.S. Lewis (his book Mere Christianity), Leonard Read, Henry Hazlitt (his masterly book Foundations of Morality), Ayn Rand (her book Atlas Shrugged and television interviews), Murray N. Rothbard (his two volume historical work on Economic Thought), Martin Luther King Jr. (his speeches and sermons on nonviolence and peace), John Lennon, Milton Friedman, Francis Schaeffer (his book True Spirituality, most noteworthy the section on covetousness), as well the few (among many) contemporaries per their books, essays, articles, lectures, shows, podcasts, documentaries and interviews like Lew Rockwell, Jeff Deist, Tom Woods, Walter Block, Hans-Herman Hoppe, Jesús Huerta de Soto, Walter E. Williams, Jeffrey Tucker, Rand Paul, Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente, Niall Ferguson, Hernando de Soto Polar, Thomas Sowell and of course Ron Paul (consistently a noninterventionist hence a man of peace).

---

Is 1:18 / Mt 5:9
2 Tm 2:15 / Cl 3:23

---

Friday, July 10, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 274

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 274

~ Inveterate Covetousness Theorem / Part 3 ~

Appropriately, the Inveterate Covetousness Theorem could very well be expanded and/or renamed as the Common Perversion Theorem or simply Perversionism. For the two quite tightly interlaced perhaps synonymously interchangeable hence incestuously intertwined, consequently to state and enumerate redundantly; Covetousness then Perversion.

To define once again, the following two isms restated per installments prior as duly noted.

Perversionism (see Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 265); to consent or dissent on all matters per his/her preference, yet remain discontented, disconcerted even disturbed until others act, speak even think compatibly, similarly by force legal or illegal thus force governmental, social or personal. It is critical to include in consideration and understanding the word and sentiment covetousness (Proposition, Problem & Poem Nos. 231-235, 245, 246) as the indisputable perquisite to such perversion (see Proem & Poem Nos. 135, 154, 190 and Proposition, Problem & Poem Nos. 247, 265).

Individualism (see Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 263); the constant respect hence consistent regard for each and every person's Peculiar Human Ability to Reason as manifested per the Singular Human Right to Consent or Dissent on all matters. Without exemption or exception (see Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 247), all considerations must rest upon the aforesaid, else the unethical dilemma remaining unjustifiable ergo unresolvable till resumed and revered the one ethos and creed (see Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 250) as determined then established since humanity first reasoned.

At core (incurably rotten) of all organized coercions, that is to say, all politics therefore all political isms, all social isms, all economic isms (including capitalism as popularly tho’ incorrectly used and abused since 1913), all governmental systems (thus any-ocracy), all partisan platforms (thus any plank), all socio-political movements (thus any reform), is of course Perversionism at stark odds against the sole ism logical, ethical, rightful hence Individualism. It should be quite unnecessary to note then warn; Perversionism stands ever readied covetously, presumptuously, arrogantly to forcefully constrain, violently reduce or inhumanely eliminate Individualism.

The contention always exists at this juncture, for by the two aforesaid definitions one’s emotionally embraced polities and sentimentally endeared moralities are logically challenged even ethically condemned, thus the often inimical response even hysterical rejection of the same.

---

Hence the belligerency as commonly ensued by the ever expansion
Never the contraction per assumption of further double-speculation
Hence lies are truths, truths are lies, reaffirmed if asserted twice
Recited thrice to suffice vogue hysterics pining for rogue paradise

And so it goes per cigarette pouts, martini slurs o'er high-heel stirs
Seasoned terse withal usual curse, twice recited, thrice liken verse
Mid cornet and saxophone blown, blue and mauve notes so moaned
Heaving as bosom-tones, ear-suckled by hungry souls, each alone

---

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

Thursday, July 9, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 246

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 246

~ Inveterate Covetousness Theorem / Part 2 ~

The importance of such consideration (see Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 245) is to grasp the prevalence of Covetousness particularly, within the greater context per the universally observable human propensities towards error and excess if philosophically determining, or the synonymous Calvinistic first-point regarding humanity as totally depraved if theologically determining.

To emphasize again logically although poetically, within the greater context defined either as the human proclivity for error and excess or as the human inherency for depravity, Covetousness exists, subsists, persists and insists.

---

Sublime conversely the mind amid Freedom’s uncontained plains
Confuse not as Eden’s lovely main, nor to feign as Utopia’s reign
Unsustainable as deranged, unmaintainable as estranged, so it goes
As the emperor oddly disrobes, to maniacally don his new clothes

Strolling oddly amid the furrows of thistles, thorns and dead roses
Oft supposed as predisposed, the insanities the crowned head poses
So the economical then societal throes for those disenfranchised
`Low the red moon, later the black skies, as prophetically surmised

---

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

Wednesday, July 8, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 245

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 245

~ Inveterate Covetousness Theorem / Part 1 ~

Presumption then Arrogance without exception precedes the disrespect thus disregard for the Singular Human Right to Consent or Dissent on all matters, as inseparably manifested by the Peculiar Human Ability to Reason. Covetousness also without exception precedes the same Presumption then Arrogance. So argued earlier observably, logically, consistently, ethically therefore consequently the three propositions as laws; the Law of Consensual Unity, the Law of Ethical Continuity and the Shaefferian Law of Anterior Covetousness (see Presumption, Problem & Poem Nos. 225-235). So must argue the following proposition logically albeit questionably thus declared not as a law rather presented as a theorem

To state, as much the Singular Human Right is in constant motion thus operation as determined in thought, as denoted by word, as demonstrated by action regardless the breadth and depth of respect then regard extended versus disrespect then disregard exacted, so Covetousness in constant motion thus operation as determined in thought, as denoted by word, as demonstrated by action regardless the breadth and depth of moderation then restriction self-imposed versus immoderation then facilitation self-roused.

It is true, one could argue whether Covetousness is ever present or not, with as much logic or evidence for either posture. However the debate would be moot if excepted the ever presence of Covetousness preceding each and every occurrence of Presumption then Arrogance followed by Disrespect thus Disregard, the constant and consistent antithesis to the Singular Human Right to Consent or Dissent on all matters, as inseparably manifested by the Peculiar Human Ability to Reason.

---

Politicians’ cronies, the johns and whores as meant then schemed
As dreamt mid river’s stream, per golden shores’ yonder beams
Fonder the morphine in cold hands, for diseased veins and minds
Sickened the soul, non-quickened the heart o’er the bestial grind

---

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

Tuesday, July 7, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 254

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 254

~ Individualism's Bill of Right / 2nd Reprise ~

Superficially educated by government’s schools and universities, stupidly conditioned by society’s fads, trends as well ever-changing norms and morals, the 21^st century American mind gravely lacks the logically ethical character and imperatively self-reliant fortitude to critically thus properly distinguish between personal preference and individual right.

If the mere existence of debates regarding rights is not sufficient evidence, then surely the evidence is plain by the various arbitrary conclusions, various arbitrary enumerations, therefore various arbitrary preferences suspiciously sanctified as rights. Plainer still the evidence when products and services requiring others to laboriously produce and provide, are conveniently, covetously promulgated as basic human rights while belittling, slandering and demonizing anyone who questions, challenges or rejects.

Yet, against all observable evidences, all logical arguments by many noteworthy philosophers, economists, professors, lecturers, thinkers, and writers since antiquities till present day, the 21^st century American mind doltishly misses, brutishly disses or foolishly dismisses, particularly of the two majorly partisan persuasions polarized hence intensified towards near lunacy.

---

O Publius, the one gem deterred, not thy alter-whims
Consolidating schemes upon themes of federalist vim
Yet rightly dividing as unnecessary even dangerous
Rights enumerated, hence allowing purposes devious

O the veneration of Statism by reverent “Thou art great!”
Referent the usual bait and titillation by prattle and prate
Such parades of pomposities upon asses among the masses
Flash o’er head, cash to shred, while raising empty glasses

---

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

Monday, July 6, 2026

Presumption even arrogance abounded over the holiday weekend celebrating America's 250th anniversary...

Presumption even arrogance abounded over the holiday weekend celebrating America's 250th anniversary, commemorating of course "national" independence, not "personal" independence. Among the outspoken many Right or Left, Conservative or Liberal, Republican or Democrat, whether per online comments, newspaper or magazine articles, TV broadcasts too, many implied concurrences for their present editorial, narrative, and critique by referring to some preferred ideological ancestor(s) as "rolling in their graves." The implications suggest if alive today, their preferred ideological ancestor(s) would agree obviously with them thus equally appalled towards opposing views.

Let us attempt to be observant, logical, then consistent; the best we (humans alive today) can do is to cite past writers and thinkers therefore quote their writings per books, essays, pamphlets, articles, documents, letters, notes, etc., then voice our own concurrences, not assume their concurrences for something declared today. Again, if the latter, then presumption and arrogance abound.

To exemplify, often to make my arguments regarding the singular human right to consent or dissent, I will emphasize the word "harm" over the Lockean enumeration of rights; life, health, liberty, possessions...

"No one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions."

John Locke (1632-1704)
Second Treatise on Government (1690)

It would be erroneous to go beyond my own "subjective" emphasis then to assume Locke emphasized similarly. I could assume Lock chose his words meticulously, yet my risk for error would be no less. I could also attempt to substantiate, that is to say, Locke relied on Epicurus' use of the same word "harm", as much as Jefferson admired too Epicurus' writings on rights, prerogatives, propensities, and moralities per moderations, ignoring of course translation preferences, yet I would still be presuming much...

"Justice is a kind of compact not to harm or be harmed."

Epicurus (341-270 BC)

"I consider the genuine (not the imputed) doctrines of Epicurus as containing every thing rational in moral philosophy which Greece & Rome have left us."

Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)
Letter to William Short (1819)

The most I may properly argue is to cite those writers and writings, then state my own emphasis of the word "harm", proceeding further with more observations, quotations, followed by deductions and inductions (ratiocinations), even algebraically Boolean demonstrations to articulate consistencies, then syllogistic propositions. I would grossly cross the reasonable line if by prattle or rant declare Epicurus and Locke would be "rolling in their graves" if anyone would disagree with me hence presumption and arrogance would abound.

I must confess; my own persisting arrogance (rooted in ever present covetousness) would not allow prolonged humbling of myself without the self-preserving moderation (haha) of exonerating myself within the same breath. Yet I defer...

"The climax of the Ten Commandments is the Tenth Commandment – 'Thou shat not covet' – Actually we break this last commandment, not to covet, before we break any of the others. Any time that we break one of the other commandments of God, it means that we have already broken this commandment, in coveting."

Francis August Schaeffer (1912-1984)
True Spirituality (1971)

---

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

Is 1:18, Mt 5:9, 2 Tm 2:15, Cl 3:23

Sunday, July 5, 2026

12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 253

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 253

~ Individualism's Bill of Right / 1st Reprise ~

All other rights as billed or listed among various governmental constitutions, political documents and international declarations are either redundantly unnecessary, thus compound and complex the argument if enumerated, or more likely disrespect and disregard the Singular Human Right therefore violent towards the individual. To historically affirm, consider Federalist Paper No. 84, originally published during the summer of 1788 by The Independent Journal, New York Packet and The Daily Advertiser under the pseudonym Publius, otherwise known as Alexander Hamilton, hence the following excerpt…

I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power.

Generally this poet ideologically despises Alexander Hamilton, although his insight expressed in Federalist Paper No. 84 is not only noteworthy among other such papers but quite logically prophetic as well. History demonstrates time and time again the predicted abuse by the U.S. government as covetously, presumptuously, arrogantly thus violently continued to this day.

---

Ten enumerations honored, revered, still circumvented
As the Founding Framers and Schemers perhaps intended
Syntax bended, parallax presented; a logical suspicion
Yet anagogical the promulgation for Statism’s veneration

---

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