A Small Philosophy of Association

By: A. M.

This article in pdf




- The problem: captivity
A way out
Light and Darkness
Purification: enlightenment and liberation
Equality in service of God
Soul and ego
Respect for the person
The necessity of proper discrimination
Identity: status-orientation groups
The inclusion of experience and level of abstraction
Order by level
To behave to it
Non-alienated administration
Materialism as a system
Values and their politics
The order of rule

Recommended study material



With me graduated as a psychologist and having developed myself in the philosophy of yoga must this present argument be seen as a reform-minded, partly political, partly spiritual conviction which, against a christian-catholic background, arrived at a scientific form of respect for the oriental philosophy. It concerns especially the philosophy of Krishna-dvaipâyana Vyâsadeva, the indian writer/philosopher from about five thousand years ago, who is responsible for having written down the hymns, mantra's and ritual precepts at the one hand and the culture of the holy stories of the purânas, the biblical if you want, of India at the other hand. Vyâsadeva, literally 'the god compiling', did this in the form of the comments we know as the vedântic approach known to belong to the six indian darshanas or philosophic views that, presenting themselves in the form of stories or not, arose to the defense of the classical order of the indian society. That order was doubted by later Buddhism, Jainism and other beliefs questioning the purity of the caste-system. Thus is of the vedântic school itself, from which this present discourse relating to the philosophy of yoga sprouted, also known a renaissance, a revival, through the grace of the vaishnava monk, preacher and incarnation, Krishna-Caitanya Mahâprabhu (1486 - 1534), who regauged the classical Indian system to the transcendental ability of arriving at devotional service to God in song and recitation and retrieve the original vedic path. Translating to our culture the vedântic philosophy of Vyâsa, as it to the tradition renewed was disseminated by Lord Caitanya and his vaishnavas, combined with the basic structure of the philosophy of transcendence in the eightfold of yoga, is what in this writing can be recognized which in the end presents an integrative approach of all the six basic views of indian philosophy. I combine the elementary divisions, methodically with an analytical understanding, to arrive in yoga-transcendence at a sound, comprehensive reason facilitating a practice of respect and social integration. The complete of it constitutes a spiritually founded, scientific sobriety, which I from my spiritual self-realization in the 'new age' baptized 'filognosy'; a certain love-for-the-knowledge which carries the quality of a high degree of sociopolitical clarity, and the ability to penetrate deep into the most concrete material of life. All direct references to the complicated vedic system of sanskrit terms were transposed to notions current in western philosophy and political thought and presented in their own logical context. Thus is offered a different, but quite clear image, of how our societies can also be considered, as well as critical of the social structure as to the ideal, and how one politically and personally in self-realization can aim ones arrows with that.
   It is my intention to put an end to the crippling psychology of modern and postmodern time in which many, up to the best of people, feel lost and confounded as being on a sinking ship. Ultimately entails taking seriously this text a change of consciousness that could be called the vedic reform of Christianity. As far as I am concerned is it about a restoration of the classical order - or otherwise the integration, without further esoterics or sectarianism, of the indian heritage in our christian society in such a way that the societal controversy with e.g. Islam vanishes. The angle of this change must be sought in the direction of a line of thought more founded on natural truths, also found with the Muslims at the one hand, and an engagement more dedicated to the person, as in India, at the other hand. The motive of the mission is directed against the impersonalism of just being of a system and only having a number, and fights the alienation of man in an existentially empty materialism of 'that's all there is' with having only sex and money as a motive of life. I consider myself thus to be a vedically reformed, christian behavioral scientist. But if someone else to this knowledge of matters considers himself a vedically reformed philosopher, democrat or protestant, am I just as happy with that. I'm not really talking about a new ecclesiastic or religious movement, but rather a more multicultural, comprehensive, behaviorally analytical view capable of saving, confirming, deepening and consolidating the unity of our politically so seriously divided countries, the unity of the in himself divided postmodern individual person and the unity of the so very much wanted European Union, and the world order and peace at large.


R. P. B. A. Anand Aadhar Meijer, Ma. ,
Enschede, The Netherlands, 4 May 2005


The problem: captivity

If your life is a lie, if you say one thing and do something else, you are divided within. What would be the use for you to meditate on this? The realization of an inner conflict offers you an option. An opportunity to escape. It is, being divided in one's material existence, like being incarcerated. One is locked up in the prison of one's own ignorance. A captivity of bad habits, of conditionings, automatisms, things you unwillingly witness of yourself, things you always run into but have no control over, things that are inexorable and give fear as you try to get rid of them.


A way out

True knowledge is undivided, is not self-contradictory, is not divided between a truth spoken and a truth done...for that discrepancy is what we call ignorance. In ignorance you put in words where you stand, what you want, but in reality you act differently: you have no clue how to translate your intentions into deeds. That is ignorance. With knowledge there for itself, but with the deeds missing, is there no real science. It's nothing but good intentions, but for the body there is no obedience, no authority, no order, and thus also no success. Likewise can the situation of modern man be described as one of ignorance: we know of all sorts of solutions, compensations often, and problems, but do not really know to translate that knowledge into deeds in such a way that there is no war or alienation, poverty and misery anymore. Ignorance as such is part of our lives and we must fight against it always. In fact has one with the inability to act no control, but is one rather controlled by the impulses from the outside world and is one engaged in rationalizing away one's impotence: one is, caught in the vicious, a slave of one's senses, one is lived and, faced with the inevitable disappointments and setbacks, easily filled with resentment and rancor against the outside world held responsible: one's boyfriend or girlfriend, your other friends, your political party, the government, or just as easy, does one simply blame one's enemies, for that is what seems to be the easiest then.

To be self-critical is more difficult, since you can not escape from yourself. And so you're just being nice to yourself, consonant with yourself, in accord with yourself, even though you're a bit an ignorant dope thus. And so you also see, more dramatically, from your lack of selfcorrection then, in your ignorance, the rise of enemies; men that deem your absence of penance and your ignorance dangerous; and that's not only expressed in personal fugues then, no, it ships with a complete society full of people alike who indeed easily find themselves at war with an enemy, another culture, another part of themselves as a world citizen, their own humanity, from which they estranged. In no time, just being your own dopy friend, you're enmeshed with a world full of political and otherwise named systems of philosophy that appear to be in conflict. Starting off with the personal lie of the half truth of what you do know but ignorantly don't know to employ, you end up with a war unwilling to face that and because you're incapable of admitting that you factually need the other. Thus thinks the one religion, political party or form of science itself capable of managing without the other, despite of an evident historical line of apparently all together necessary developments. We, after all, ultimately want to arrive at a society, a world order, in which everybody can be meaningful contributing. But in the darkness of ignorance is it the thinker of unity against the one stressing the methodology of setting things apart, is it the practical man against the analyst who only seems to create trouble, and is the religious man turned against the spiritual philosopher sticking to mere comments... All that philosophy though is in reality found as a complement and constitutes together the love-for-the-knowledge, which one then could call 'philo-gnosy'. With all the philosophical goodwill one had did one, because of being ignorant about implementations to arrive at a common order, without the philognosy, get caught in the ego of it and has one arrived at the contrary: enemies, people strange to you, people you estranged from, people you no longer recognize as a part of yourself...people with which you can not associate and unite.


Light and Darkness

True knowledge is thus knowledge which, no longer being ignorant, corresponds with what you do, you do as you think and think as you do: you are a baker and bake bread, you are a writer and write, you are a housewife and do the household, you are unsalaried and do your work as a volunteer. All fhat is then true knowledge, you know who you are and behave accordingly. But thus stated is also a criminal of true knowledge, you are a murderer and you murder, are you a thief and you steal, you are a sociopath and harm others for your own pleasure. And with the latter mentioned, that pathological selfhood of the criminal, one can see the link between righteous selfhood and selfhood directed against the law. Selfhood is the twilight zone between law and injustice. The way to slide down in darkness at the one hand and the way to climb out of being enmeshed in injustice and the accompanying vice, upwards to the light of true knowledge: better the world, start with yourself. True knowledge is indeed saying what you do and doing what you say, but implies thus also virtue and justice, not to be the true knowledge of darkness. For truth was no light yet. If one fuses truth with light arrives one at the true knowledge of enlightenment as opposed to the true knowledge of darkness resulting from selfishness and injustice. Enlightened, you see the light of the truth of your association with the other with whom together you form a society, with whom you are no stranger, but an alter ego of societal servitude. In enlightenment you see the righteousness of the selflessness that recognizes the interest of the other as its own. And then one may also speak of true intelligence. True knowledge, true intelligence, is, narrowed down, the truth, the philognostical - or filognostical - truth and intelligence of enlightenment, of the knowledge resulting from selflessness and righteousness.


Purification: enlightenment and liberation

To fight the lie that holds you captive in internal conflict and a lack of association, you must purify. That dirt must be gone. That preference leading you astray must be fought. That choice of selfishness you've got to ban from your mind, that form of injustice by which you in the end turn out to harm the other you must defeat: that is higher intelligence. The prison of in fact bad habits, in which you are locked up and by which you are lived, is your being possessed; that is the prison from which you must be freed. If you with the enlightenment accept the selflessness and justice, is it then that you seek liberation, then that you qualify for being liberated. Enlightenment is the state of being resulting from relinquishing the bad habits of selfhood and unrighteousness, the liberation is the practice of serving it; that with which the lie of just knowing and not doing finds its end. Enlightenment without liberation is then a lie: flowery language, it's all nice with yourself, but no according action, you don't propagate it in your behavior; and liberation without enlightenment is just an exercise, a job, a form of culture you comply with, with which you, without renouncing the selfhood, are only hypocritical and unjust. Liberation must be the practice of enlightenment; it is simply concrete the selfless engagement in volunteers work, work for a good cause without fostering ulterior motives for remuneration or otherwise; it is your grace, your sacrifice, your is possible because you already found the enlightenment and want to bring that into the world.


Equality in service of God

Liberation is founded on the principle of equality. "For God we're all equal". Liberation in equality gives brotherhood. Even though we differ in our natures and servitude, yet, in the selfless service, in the voluntary of labor, are we equals equally true and of value in relating to the ideal, the complete, the entirety of values and standards and persons to which we often refer with saying 'God' and 'God-conscious'. The word of God then stands for the reality of the entirety of the positive humanity that we can only respect and never fully know. The complete is more than the sum of parts. So too is God more than the sum of our humanity. It is, along with all the living beings and all the worlds as the creation or the embodiment of God, something you have to believe in, something which is always preparing you new surprises, keeps fascinating and connecting, which all-knowing and almighty is as the Divine, as a combination of all that's good and balanced. After all is it the purpose of liberation to serve God and the person of God that you yourself are too. God as the complete of all persons of God is thus incapable of shutting out any association of religion. And if we actually are excluding with the idea of God, are we then again selfish, being unenlightened engaged narrow-minded, out for the I of the religious group in question, the group-ego which also, being of moral consideration, is called the superego.



Soul and ego.

The I of God do we, from the enlightened, call the soul, provided the complete is covered by it. We as individual souls caught in a body of conditionings, in matter that became dependent on conditions, are parts, limbs, wholes, mirror images of that original large soul or supersoul. So is there always the duality, the twofold, of part and whole, supersoul and individual soul, mind and matter, I and society, individual and group, quality and quantity. Relating to the complete are we, united, considered to be souls with the I-ness of our egos. Relating to our material self-interest do we, divided and identified, call the ego identified with that false. With the I of the body, or with the I that's not really the true self, but a self that physically, caught in illusion, time-bound, is of fear about surviving and is driven by external impulses, does one find oneself in conflict. The mind at the point where soul meets ego is not united just like that, is not united without a good philosophical lead. In fact is one, unenlightened engaged, not of the by Christ wanted trinity, but is one rather, to the matters of authority being divided in the ego, constantly in conflict about the control from without and the control from within. And thus is one faced with the necessity of association in whatever field. From the outside is that association always temporary and with the pretense of sustainability clearly illusory, from the inside is it constantly the being united with what preceded, the personal history of experiences, the ancestors, the history of the country, with the relative eternity of the culture of God as we learned to know especially with the different religions or with the real eternal of God, the Greater Soul, as found beyond all religion as a by definition independent Greatness of knowledge, consciousness and bliss. Only in God, one can really unite thus.


Respect for the person

If we succeed in liberation, we stand united for the task to serve God and the person of God and with that to be also served ourselves. To know God as the true self of the classical standards - as e.g. not eating more than needed and handing over a small quantity of money to the, hopefully God-conscious, administration - and values as truthfulness, purity, repentance and compassion, constitutes itself not so much a problem as does the needed respect for the person in general and the person of God in particular. With the common person, and the person of God also, do we easily run into inequality: holier than thou, privileges, differences in income and status and... do we go rampant with the advantage of doubt in the egocentrically competitive condemning of others. We in principle do not want that, but can neither deny that persons in general and the person that you yourself are, by God or not by God, must be respected and represented, in order to speak of a hale and hearty society. The duality in question is that of the personal versus the impersonal. As with all matters of polarity is it not the method to have the one and oppose the other. With the rightness of the one you get the rightness of the other - that's how the polarity, the complementary happens to work in reality - that is the glory of dualism; it constitutes, scientifically pure, a mutually constructive association. There is as well matter as mind, there is as well the individual as the group, there is as well the personal of God as the impersonal aspect that is of, and with, the Time that God also is. The person do we know by the name and so do we know many persons, not just the leaders, the predecessors, the heroes of religion as Râma, Krishna, Buddha, Jesus and Mohammed, but also the saints, the scholars, the philosophers, the sages, the priests and the pious, the virtuous, the God-fearing, the believers, and the repentant or the truthful ones. These all united in God are parts and parcels, expansions or embodiments of God, who are also called demigods, gods, titans or incarnations because of their eternal quality, their eternal soul that then has, and then again has not, been embodied or represented in the material world. And so one has souls that are always liberated in their service to God and who are more or less the gods, and souls that are always but bound in their identification with the body with all problems of being fallen and enmeshed belonging to it. Because learning to serve God is a process of gradual progress on the path, is this last distinction of souls in fact a duality found with each separate soul; with every soul that individually more or less is of the physical interest of the ego, or of liberation in selfless action.





The question of respecting the person, the complete of body, mind and soul up to the highest person, requires in the first place an optimal differentiating between persons. Association, to unite in respect of the person, necessitates the differentiating between people or else we lose the difference and find the association false. The ego must be subjected to the soul, not effaced; the dog on the leash is the purpose. Not so much finishing the dog. It is the miraculous of the unity in diversity that we must see. Simply but saying: "that member of our association has been liberated and that person that is no member not at all" offers insufficient clarity just as assuming that this person does 'work' because he gets a salary and that one wouldn't 'work' because he lives on the dole, neither does justice to the reality of the diversity of people being more or less liberated. Optimally differentiating between people is essential for a sane society and a proper idea of what exactly progress would be. Nobody wants to be labeled impersonally and to a common denominator fall into a category where he doesn't feel himself at place, or doesn't know himself respected as a person. Discrimination in the sense of distinguishing persons to individual characteristics is a precarious thing. It is necessary to address the person individually to his individual character and to engage unestranged at the one hand, while at the other hand a wrong idea of ego that reinforces the falsehood to the contrary results in the discrimination, constitutes the inequality, that is forbidden by law. We want no class society though we unmistakably have social classes and we want no caste system though there are castes or subdivisions of status orientation with each their own standards. We are thus faced with a necessary evil of distinguishing between people of which we beforehand want to fight the falsehood.


The necessity of right discrimination

To bring this matter philosophically to a right conclusion, one will first have to differentiate between what would be true and what would be false. As being true we regard distinctions that by nature or by God, by the equality in association, are irrevocable, sustainable and inevitable and, metaphysically or transcendentally, are of a selfless nature. They are then considered morally proper distinctions or scientifically value-free distinctions, a setting apart of things carrying no specific preference for one against the other. Not true, not real, not essential, are considered the distinctions associated with time bound human self-seeking, the arbitrariness and identification of a separated religious, political, ethical or societal ego, which is thus revocable and avoidable as being not essential to the soul. And thus one has absolute, that is to say unavoidable, and relative, that is avoidable, distinctions, alike e.g. the difference one has between dates and weekdays on one and the same calendar. Under the absolute ones are counted age and occupation. This because at the one hand aging is an inevitable fact and essential for what we necessarily have to recognize as wisdom or life experience, and at the other hand there is the stratification of a society in different functional layers or occupational groups belonging to the nature of men living together which, absolutely necessary, manifest themselves in spite of the race or the specific culture. To the contrary is a difference in skin color or the type of skull, constituting a natural fact, or a political conviction or else a religious preference constituting a cultural fact, still no absolute, unavoidable factuality. A color of skin is not essential and is as a natural fact easily to ignore without landing in social chaos, and of the option to change the religion or political party as one likes one can neither say that a such a difference would be inevitable or absolutely necessarily... Thus one may say that a religion is something culturally relative while the spiritual basis for it as set to principles is something absolute we can't miss wishing to consider ourselves human. The difference is constituted by the rule of necessity. Going beyond necessity we are no longer of God, but infatuated. More money than needed, more food than you need, is all a fool's service, the enemy of spirituality, just as one religion or service to God in denial of the other one is a form of bewilderment, is constituting a form of folly in denial of the being united in a common history of God, in the collective experience of mankind relating to God. Not knowing our place we are fools; that's a way to describe the problem of identity we're dealing with.


Identity: status orientation groups

More difficult is it with differences of gender which as a distinc-tion are very prominent, also in the religions, but still are relatively easy to ignore though or even to alter with the help of hormones and operations. So are also sexual preferences easily to avoid and ignore with them not constituting a necessary distinction, except in case one is placed before the by a marriage confirmed private phenomenon of natural reproduction. For that reason is therefore to discriminate on sexual preferences, belief or race - and actually also on a political conviction -, constitutionally forbidden and easily to recognize as being part of the false ego of man identified with the body. With age however is the needed life experience associated and with one's occupation the nature of the soul in question, to which in both cases but little or nothing can be changed and in case of which one may speak of a rather inevitable and socially compelling fact of identity settled by God, by natural necessity or disposition of fate. Nevertheless must, just as with matters of good and evil, things not be considered to black-and-white since also age and occupation rely on one's identification with the body and it also is a positive value, nay an absolute necessity even, to strive, transcendentally to this, for equality. Thus one realizes oneself the necessary evil of the social inequality of the - inevitable - differences of by God or fate certain identities as based upon a: someone's class or vocational interest and b: someone's age or status, which, in the united form of a sixteenfold civil status-orientation, only then does justice to the person as an uncorrupted soul when the unity and equality in selfless action going in the beyond is transcendentally respected, the way one of old does e.g. with a religious exercise or service.


The inclusion of experience and the level of abstraction

This last issue, the going beyond in transcendence or the willingly accepting of a value-free position, is thus the essential matter to keep oneself fixed on the soul with the unavoidable differences of class and status or caste which traditionally are regarded as belonging to the absolute truth of God. With the four classes associated with the vocational groups of the intellect, the administration, the trading business and labor, and the four categories of age of youngsters, young adults, the middle aged and the elderly, are we consequently capable of uniting in distinguishing the previously pictured sixteen basic identities in society that, saying it again, only on the basis of a dimension of transcendence or a concrete intellectual level of abstraction can be respected. Without that transcendence, we'll land in the false or the delusional of a class society or a caste-system. Also must further the degree of experience, which is not the same as an individual's level of abstraction, be incorporated in order to distinguish properly between people at each level of professional and status bound functioning. The denial of the factor of experience can at any level of transcendence namely result in the corruption of a false or illegitimate method of progress, which may express itself in the form of fundamentalism, egotism, materialism or some other form of self-corruption.


To organize to level

If we engage with eight levels of abstraction to the science of transcendence as came from India to the West and is known under the name of the eightfold process of connecting oneself in consciousness (ashthânga-yoga) which consists of:

- the basic-level of accepting the principles of abstention,
- the practice of the observance of principles,
- the postures to control the force of the body,
- the control of the respiration that is linked to the mind,
- the turning inward to oversee the material world,
- the concentration in order to calm the mind,
- the meditation to penetrate the essence of the soul,
- and the absorption to attain to stability at the highest level;

and if we acknowledge three degrees of experience to the triple nature of God in the sense of:

- selfrealization (the Son, the Destroyer of the obstacles of belief)
- creative effort (the Holy Spirit, the Creator motivating for humanity and for adaptation and evolution), and
- preservation in wisdom (the Father, the maintainer of goodness always present in the beyond),

do we thus committed from the soul, from the all-encompassing self, value-free, arrive at a differentiation of people in three hundred and eighty-four different positions, of which we can say that to a sufficient degree an order of right discrimination is provided to do, in association, justice to the identity of a person. And such in a manner that with it we may consider ourselves to be as close to the concept of God in association as can be, to the concept of unity in diversity as also is known to be the motto of the European Union.

To behave to it

The remaining problem, concerning the question of the order of self-realization, the manifestation of man and the wisdom of goodness, is next to the levels of abstraction fill in these stages of experience in terms of concrete behavior. This translating is observed in the following parallels:

- The renunciation rules are there for the control of lust motives with a - to experience successive - experience of:

1 a certain attraction,
2 the keeping up of a certain appearance and
3 knowing a certain purification.

- The observance is then known by a certain exercise of the body as e.g. regularly having a day off in order to - again successively to experience:

1 play a sport, think of soccer e.g.
2 do things like hobbies and study,
3 turn inward to be oneself again.

- De postures of physical self-control are then observed in a particular regular practice of exercise in which one:

1 first competes for the best control, and then,
2 as one experiments with solutions,
3 arrives at a certain way of cooperating.

- The control of breath actually takes place in the social sphere of:

1 uttering oneself in private activities,
2 the public display of ones individual character and
3 the ultimately formal engagement to agreements (breath control in recitation and singing together).

- The going inward presents itself in offering a helping hand in:

1 firstly educating,
2 then regulating and
3 next the loving in compassion of, and in, mutual relations in which content, knowledge and remembrance then flourishes.

- Concentrating oneself one does practically in the dialogue in which one:

1 at first engages in discussions,
2 then develops resolve and character and next,
3 arrives at reflection in realistically imagining or internalizing, the dialogue.

- The meditating can be recognized in the understanding that distinguishes itself by:

1 first of all having a sane round of doubt,
2 following investigating the nature of things and
3 finally being the wise witness one has turned into of realizing what is essential.

- The highest level of abstraction in absorption moves about in the primary modes of:

1 first having to overcome hindrances in self-realization,
2 the following designing or discovering of a life or a culture of respect and gratitude,
3 and at last consciously maintaining the realized elevation of culture.

Thus takes the association of man distinguishing himself in all his activities a concrete form at the different levels to the ability to abstract in which he acquires experience to arrive from self-awareness via a creative ego-development at the wisdom of a well integrated humanity. Also is thus clear why one at each level must follow the whole procedure in order to prevent the corruption of an one-sided development in selfrealization, ego and wisdom. So is it possible that reflection and transcendence in selfrealization can be completely unwise and outlandish, that an ego-development goes at the cost of primary self-realization and that the goodness and ascending in wisdom is but a dry exercise in philosophy making no sense at all in real life. This 'vertical' corruption so has with paying attention to the degree of experience at each level been fought.


Administration without alienation

To the administration does such a victory over the being alienated with identities in opposition, that in reality are complementary, manifest itself differently. The political system can be recognized as a quest for association: without being too outspoken tries one with character to raise what is typical and of self-interest to a higher level of societal responsibility and thus take the lead in society. Put up with a lack of clarity with the fallen traditions about what exactly the power of administration would be and what its rules would look like, are there nevertheless animated speculations about what the interest of the electorate would be. Thus one has the right-wing and the left-wing politician. Both move in mutual denial on the dimension of individual versus social interests, of which each party factually very well knows that the two can not be blotted out against each other and that one in fact has to rule in coalition. From the ego of identifying with the material grip of the group of interest in question - usually corporate against labor interests -, lapses one into philosophical opposites and estrangement. One recognizes the sin and the greed in the other and not in oneself. One can not, without failing to be 'oneself', take the position of the other party and incorporate it in one's own approach, after which one consequently 'can't help it' when the 'others' have to suffer the damage. There are winners and losers, big shots and dopes, while that type of thinking really belongs more to the sports field than to the arena of political discussion where cooperation and doing justice to all constitute the ultimate purpose of the concept of democracy deemed holy. One with that wrongfully thinks that governance implies to impose oneself upon the opposition or unwilling citizen, in saying what rightways or leftways should be done, which is a hopeless affair factually boiling down to the notion that one is not familiar with the integrity of the philosophy of association. That philosophy is primarily more interested in the difference between quantity and quality, the dimension of the individual and the social (quantity) held against the dimension of spirit and matter (quality). With leftwing/rightwing-politics one forgets that governing and representing must be based on leading by example and self-correction (holiness and repentance), not so much on being in league with the weaknesses and next making others pay (identification and projection). The former is called nobility and clergy, the latter is in fact cheap swindle, or else a symptom of the unconscious of a neurosis of culture.

One knows, philosophically, as being fundamental to the leftist mind, the labor oriented, democratic and altruistic humanism named progressive as a culture of grace, having on the right side the more of corporate interest, conservative, confessional pragmatism, with a monetary twist in respect with 'one's own responsibility' and with 'freedom'. Of course is it ultimately a common notion of humanity and humanist tolerance with morally clear, spiritual underpinnings what assures the sanity of self-realization, the liberation and the personal character of the individual. But the unenlightened state of the ulterior motive turns it into a struggle against each other's weaknesses in which the socialists filled with ideals about sharing and helping fight against the selfishness of capitalism, while the selfdeclared moralistic conservatism - as if that wouldn't be materialistic - fights the sinful or not so considered lack of individual responsibility, or either the cowardly hiding behind the back of the group's weakness of humanistically condoned moral negligence under the pretext of tolerance... It seems to be so that the left-right controversy moves about on the dimension of the quantity, the interest of the individual against that of the group, but, next to the left wing also having a high regard for the freedom of individual selfrealization, fences also the right wing with social concepts as the communitarian idea of joint standards and values for an administration that has to fight the disunion of political parties and also expanding on that has to unite the entire society under one philosophical (viz. sociological) banner. The actual drama of politics proves itself in the human alienation of being identified with the material interest. One is, materialistic, conceited to the quality and confounded to the quantity; one engages with material notions of association with an evident lack of spiritual clarity in the sense of having accepted a common method, discipline and analysis fundamental to a properly working philosophy of association. There is, motivated for the matter, no real transcendence, purification, progress or development of intelligence as one tires oneself in games of winning and losing in not uniting in the values that must guarantee that very purification and progress. Within a cou-ple of years is one, as a politician, carrying the many papers of consultation and investigation, bewildered with gray hair and must one, debilitated, leave the political scene at the time wisdom really begins to develop. Governing as a weakness of youth is the picture emerging then. One has wasted one's best years just to discover that the coalitions formed were never stable. One does realize oneself the success or failure of one's political career, but is in ignorance about the being entangled in a selfish game of which the world no way got any better; a game about something in which one fairly pointless, as it were alike a rat in a treadmill, has run in circles.



The democrats more or less in the middle try with scientific zest to preach balance, which on itself is a commendable pursuit. It is just that they can't cope with the identity crisis of modern man of which they, in fact representing that, consequently suffer a lack of expressiveness. There is no satisfactory analytical understanding to arrive, departing from a nepotist - that is based on a policy of friends - democracy of ego parties, at an identity-conscious democracy of parties with a practical - not just theoretical - respect for fundamental human rights. One doesn't arrive at a democracy of parties that are all part of a same division that is of absolute value to the soul. The word soul is for a materialist, being of opposition, far too esoteric; the word God is easily too charged; absolutism is, fearing a dictate, forbidden; and the monetary motive coming first, with or without God, is then inevitable, so it seems. Thus one arrives at the peculiar conclusion that the nepotistically biased political party constitutes the greatest threat to the democracy that builds on reason, analysis and science. Nepotism as an association of the ego refuses the association based upon the soul that is needed. The nepotist democracy inclines by its striving for partybound dominion towards dictatorship, because of which the citizen lives in fear for his own, direly needed, elections. The interest of the intellect expresses itself nepotistically and materialistically striving for control over others, as fundamentalism. The interest of a formal societal order of administration expresses itself nepotistically/democratically as militarism or even, discriminating with a wrong idea of who the enemy would be, as fascism. Corporate interest expresses itself, lost in the darkness of the desire to consume and produce, in a capitalist elite conspiracy filling its pockets in abuse of the social trust, to which one never, being estranged from the complete of God, can arrive at the full of employment that simply is there on the basis of altruistic self-realization. Finally is the interest of workers time and again a large common socialist, or either fanatical communist, denominator of an institutionalized fall-down by which all individual differences get effaced with a godless repression of all dissident named criticism as being selfish or contra-revolutionary, without acknowledging one's own group-egotism as the true evil.


Materialism as a system

Characteristic of this nepotistical spinning out of control is the materialism of the false ego. Identified with one's material interest, loses one, compromised in the profit-mind, distance and view and thus also one's balance and is one confronted with one another's hostile dictate. Recognizing this all as as a lack of enlightenment resulting from the impurities of man materially motivated, must one face the fact that to simply moralize to it, ecclesiastical or behavioral, doesn't really work, ethically and philosophically speaking. Morality preaches its own necessity... One is caught in a system, in a state of consciousness that one religiously denotes as original sin and psychologically labels the culture of compensation. Being lazy, one got entangled and to try for the sake of liberation is something entirely different. One loses, emotionally and economically getting stuck, all synergy, all capacity to collaborate en look beyond one's own purview, being preoccupied with compensations like an extra holiday month, a higher income, security measures and an erroneously conceived form of deregulation not aware of the principles. In fact does one then, caught in the system, no longer really follow the rules of humanity - the actual values and virtues one needs to talk about for being human in stead of being a horde of fighting apes and dogs that over and over have to violate the human rights to enforce the false position of ones own dictate.

The values and their politics

Once more: it's about the integrity of man, the philosophy of man which we for the time being, proceeding authentic in being ourselves, call the small philosophy of association. This philosophy of association builds on the four pillars of values which constitute the regulative principles, that make up the foundation of the social reality and bring about the virtues. They are fundamental to all issuing of rules, governance and the human identity one has to work with and upon which our belief in ourselves and in God is based. In a christian sense are it the four commandments of truth, purity, penance and nonviolence. Thou shalt not lie, betray, steal or kill. That respected makes of an ape a man and, indeed, in that sense we evolve from, to the example of , God and His transcendental presence here on earth and not so much from the ape with its impudent needs or from the dog with its barking. The beastly must must be opposed by the human and thus we have to learn not to be such deceitful thieves and debauchees at any moment willing to kill - just for one's appetite even - people and animals, fictional in a book or in a movie or either real on the battlefield and in a slaughterhouse. At the level of state management do those offenses against the philosophy of association assume the form of all together consuming meat-snacks, and other meat-products during formal gatherings. That on itself seems to be innocent, but it is structural violence, the principle has been violated, one is of an unenlightened, mistaken notion of strength and health. With secondly consuming alcoholic beverages beyond ceremonial or professional use - smoking luckily a little less so has been accomplished must be said, but pills the more -, together with a twisted deceitful notion of a time that has been averaged, zonified and summered for the money only, becomes the illusion of freedom and naturalness jointly maintained as a big lie: The Big Lie. Thirdly lusting constantly for a career vehemently competing for the salary or an otherwise in 'freedom' acquired income, to such an extent that the rest of the world may eat sand for that matter, might indeed result in a thriving economy for a happy few, but makes definitely not for a healthy economy for the rest of the world. This attitude of hankering for false economic security is in fact a form of stealing representing a lack of restraint, an unwillingness to make room for and share with others. Fourth is the unfaithful, the impurity of the bond, sexually physical or else mentally in loyalties, politically clear enough in representing the civil betrayal of the philosophy of associating for the soul. With, in stead of that, associating for the sake of the body and the capital - sex and money as the pillars of materialism, is one in that as a consequence estranged to the nepotistical opposite, consciously or not so consciously, sliding down to collective warfare. If we do regard the rules of repentantly making room for others financially on a global scale, of being nonviolent of respect for the rights of all living beings, of being piously loyal to the true call of association and reverentially being truthful with the natural order of time and the purity of the body without intoxicating substances and other pills and pleasures of life, do we see dawning an order that does justice to manhood and is able to honor man in his original identity. It is the way eastern wisdom states it often; it is the attachment contrary to the values of association that are in the way of common happiness and real progress.



The order of rule

The nepotistical democracy at its end with having accepted this small philosophy, offers for a solution other types of democratically functioning political parties, that, practically seen, are more in line with activities at the level of state departments than with opinionated nepotistical egos. They constitute, a systematic way, the participating of, or consultation with the civilian groups in question, which have been piously settled following a ministerial redistribution of duties in such a way that the sixteen basic groups of human identity, striving for the value-free and with respect for personal experience, are covered a balanced way. Those more identity-conscious parties offer, from that balance, provided they're sufficiently supervised to experience, a more stable form of absorption which itself is needed to be politically active at an advanced age and to be of respect for one's acquired experience, and form thus also the basis for a more stable administration. The division in departments of state could, to the sixteen basic identities, be drawn as follows: there are e.g. four main departments or ministries of state which, to the inevitable classes of occupational groups, stand for:

1 the interest of labor,
2 the provision of goods and services,
3 the administration with civil servants, police and soldiers and
4 the section of coaching the school system, the interests of the religion, the intellectuals and the culture of knowledge at large.

Next do the four main ministries know each, to the four age groups or spiritual departments of values and standards, four subsections, sub-departments or sub-ministries:

1 The interest of labor knows:

a sports & recreation,
b labor and employment,
c wages, prices, finances and economy and
d volunteers work, social security and basic incomes.

2 The department of provision knows:

a maintenance, traffic and public engineering,
b public housing and environmental planning,
c trade, foreign affairs and foreign aid,
d agriculture, life stock, nature and ecology.

3 The main section of the administration knows:

a education, youth affairs and social work,
b domestic affairs, state security and the media,
c defense and justice and
d medical care, the elderly, social care and drug-politics.

4 The main department of the intellect knows:

a the school system and science,
b mental health care, the homeless and deprived,
c information culture and knowledge management,
d cultural, religious, integration, minorities and emancipation.

This way for example, can one build a balanced administration of which the discussion groups and commissions necessary for democratic decision-making with respect to the content are more or less fixed, and on the basis of which political parties thriving on nepotistical preferences may disappear or remain more in the background as social clubs or circles no longer considered essential.



The solution as proposed offers as well the administration as the individual citizen an integrity more substantial and structured with less bickering about the individual party interests that ultimately are in the way of a good rule for the country and the world at large. It constitutes a clear, more spiritually sound and scripturally better supported, ideal position in values and standards in relation to God, without however directly ending up in religious preferences and antagonism.

Behold here thus the blueprint of a small philosophy of association, in which political, administrative uncertainty can be turned into in a filognostic respect for the individual character and certainty of identity at the one hand and socioeconomic security, familiarity and solidarity at the other. It is a qualitative/quantitative sound objective that is feasible for virtuous, socially committed people aware of the actual values of political, religious, economic and social association. Those who are not that committed to these values, will possibly never develop the motivation and consciousness needed for a full-aware participation in that association, however fine one, nevertheless, might get along in one's own societal position of self-realization. To be of political or filognostic engagement is no absolute prerequisite for good citizenship though; it is rather the not-nepotistically politicized or not-egocentrically polarized disseminating of one's own identity what matters in a process of realizing what precisely the real structure of the material society and the spiritual reality is.



4 May 2005 © theorderoftime. org
This knowledge may on a nonprofit basis
be spread and published freely
provided the inclusion of the internet address


download the article and spread it!



Recommended study material (on-line) :

* For further elaborations on the subject of the sixteenfold administrative redistribution see also the political program for an identity conscious human rights administration (in Dutch).

* The article Democratic Elections... About the basic philosophy of our political system.

* The article 'The Splendor - the end of cynicism' About nepotism, human rights, dictatorship and non-illusion.

* The article ' My Struggle - My personal perception on the great day of the demonstration against the postmodern deconstruction politics of the Dutch government Saturday 2 October 2004.' (in Dutch).

* See also the most important story book of Vyâsadeva, the Bhâgavata Purâna on bhagavata. org.

* See for more political reflection and perspective the political 'Filognostic Manifesto - on Work and Unemployment'

* See for a presentation in pictures of the filognostic divisions offered, and more, the ' Filognostic Guide'.

* See for a clear image of the game of the identities 'The Game of Order'.

* See for a FAQ-like approach of the basic tenets of Filognosy, the so-called filognostic rounds, art and definitions.

About the logo:

The logo on the cover consists of a combination of the symbols of filognosy, in Latin represented with veritas, patria, temperantia et pax:

- The yellow circle relates to the sun and the moon, the truth of the light that rules our world: veritas.

- The red arrows (and the red background) stand for the will to share with each and everyone, which can only be accomplished with moderation: temperantia.

- The blue field represents the way in which nations nationally and internationally are united under the celestial sky loyal to the cause of unity: patria.

- The green square represents the nature with which nonviolent of respect for all living beings we find peace and happiness or pax.

The prayer of vedic reform, that following the Sanskrit to the regulative principles of uniting in yoga with the so-called vidhi speaks of 'truthful (sathya) in compassion (dayâ), austere (tapa) be faithful in purity (sauca)', says then in summary filognostically:

'May peace with the natural order (pax) rule the world in respect of the truth (veritas), sharing all with each in moderation (temperantia), faithful to the cause of unity (patria).'

(see also 'the filognostic flag' and the 'values in Latin').


back to science-main