Einstein,
Me, the strange and familiar
Preface
Maybe not quite enough Einstein. Definitely me
under the influence of
intellect and feelings. If you've read this far I picked the
right name.
I started writing when I was 19. Having no
respect for trivial facts, within a short time I discovered I had
nothing to write about. So I decided to take notes until I had
lived long enough to have something to say. I know this because
of two forgotten memos I found in the margin of my notes. They
said "Hello old man from your 19 year old self", and "I want to write
the greatest book ever written". I was born in 1938.
When I was 26 years old I got a math teaching job at
a private prep school based on having been a successful design and
development engineer. I had never taught a day in my life.
One of my classes was for high aptitude low interest seniors.
Thinking me creative, they charged me with teaching whatever I
wanted. That evening I put together everything I thought was
worth teaching; how to make and use order. The next day I
taught all of it without any thought of an encore.
At the end of the day the headmaster had me in his
office. It seems his daughter was in my class. She thought
it was fascinating but didn't understand any of it. He told me I
had better explain it to her. It took me a semester. I
taught it for 9 years.
It was the first thing I had to say. I called
it" the creation of order". Using it I wrote my first plan for
peace. It was political. I had not lived long enough yet to
realize that order may begin with society but ends with the
individual. Later the same base of information would found the
tools of peacemaking conversation. This duel focus is the first
section of this document. They are the intellectual tools for creating
order and peace.
After living longer and gathering my personal
collection of failures I discovered a large network of churches (the
people, not the buildings). I added two "churches", the
scientists and the hedonists. They all have their own dogma
and legends. They all propose they know the absolute truth.
Yet they propose similar behavior and the desire for peace.
I have lived long enough to have something to say
about this. It is the second section. It is called "the
second church ".
It is a place to practice the tools of peacemaking
conversation. It has no legends. Although nothing is
alleged to be the truth, it can be considered dogmatic.
Peacemaking conversation is not necessarily
peaceful. The dogma helps a lot.
It never ever deals with the truth. It deals
with beliefs instead. This needs saying again and again. It
never ever deals with the truth. It deals with beliefs
instead. It never ever deals with the truth. It deals with
beliefs instead.
Understanding does not imply agreement.
Understanding means that I can specifically identify those points which
we share and those points which we do not share.
If you cannot put aside the behavior of convincing
me of your truth in favor of understanding, then the second church is
not for you. Once again, if you cannot put aside the
behavior of convincing me of your truth in favor of understanding, then
an auxiliary religion is not for you.
The third section is my dogma. It is my
attitude. It is how I view the attitudes, considerations and behaviors
of people, society and belief.
It is my intent to be able to talk with others about
anything on an equal playing field. My purpose is to promote
peace between religions through understanding. I believe my dogma
serves this purpose.
The fourth section is my considerations. I'm
not sure of any of this stuff. Your view can change my
mind. Politics, religion, science, philosophy, et al.
Stuff to talk about. Do you agree? Do you disagree?
Can you make my plan a better plan? Do it.
If we are not transparent about our considerations,
we lose self determination to our leadership.
The fifth section is a collection of
fragments. Everything starts with a fragment. I don't know
where they come from. They are bits and pieces.
They arouse my curiosity. I think. I question.
If the wise man gains his fame from the questioning
idiot, then where is the knowledge contained? This is a
fragment.