The philosophy of F. Davies

Stone cold logic.
Derived from the burning minds of ancient men.
A means by which we foretell the future.
A method to analyze past and present.

If you have not yet learned this logic of old,
then you are here to soon.
There is no tool to replace it.
Those without it are only guessing.

Logic makes art of science, and science of art.
Logic is among the subjects which should be taught first.
Logic is the simplest of arithmetic.
Logic is the difference between correct and incorrect reasoning.

Philosophy is the love of science.
This writing (entitled Philosophy) is an examination of many subjects:
language, art, science, religion, cosmology, music, government and economics.
This is an artistic expression of my opinions, not stone cold logic.

---

Forward
I begin this writing, as the third millennium dawns. The past several centuries have seen mankind develop a societal infrastructure based upon new technologies. I have watched as we first walked upon the moon and developed the electronic micro circuit. Before me, the world has become one place through communication systems.

All this, brought on by our understanding of the laws of nature. It should be a comfort to know that we are able to perceive these laws of nature. They do seem to exist (in an abstract sense) as truth. Generations before have defined them in human terms (languages) and passed this knowledge on.

I ask that you pass your knowledge, skills, and compassion on as well. I am not trying to predict the future, but believe the world is in grave danger and will need the aid of humans to survive, just as we too need it for our survival.

Perhaps we can move to space for our own survival, but some (most) will be left to tend the earth. Our population is huge and displacing the other creatures. We are compassionate in many respects, yet, are causing great hardship for the life around us as we claim more of the resources.

I have always been a bit disturbed by the notion that we must kill living things to live. (I am referring to the plants as well as meat.) Most ambulatory living things do consume others. Why has this come to be I have wondered. More, can we correct it? A goal for food producers would be to synthesize the foods we need and enjoy and work towards being less a danger to the other life on Earth.

---

Introduction

When very young, I was active in the Lutheran church. I took the word of my elders, and assumed they had a greater wisdom than I. Still, the lesson of "there is no Santa Claus" had not been forgotten. (Here I refer to learning that not all that was told to me AS true, really WAS true.) Being an alter boy felt like I was on stage, (not communing with a greater being,) and greatly like I was being used by the pastor to add a finishing touch to the preformance. It next became apparent to me that the bible was not a single work of the Lutheran church, but a collection of works by another church! Further, that Luther had denounced the Pope as "antichrist" and vice versa. Still, I found the 'Bible' to be a very interesting collection of works indeed, and still 'am intrigued by it's stories.

I dropped out to join the Scouts. A knowledge of knots seemed much more practical than a knowledge of ancient religious prose. And many years later I still can recall standing atop Mt. Lena in the Olympics with awe inspired by the panoramic view.

In the following years, I examined other religious points of view or knowledge. They are seemingly equal in their missing proofs, and different in fundamental ways. Many no longer have any followers. Some are, or some have been, bound to the existing government as one, others almost without any boundary.

The contradictions amazed me, as did the power any of them had over their members. Add to this, "new" religions, whose creators claim to commune directly with any number of things, usually quite invisible to the rest of us.

Religion seems to be man made. And based upon a few assumptions or possibly visions or interpretation of ancient stories.

Control? Money? Labor? People? Land? Treasures? Buildings? I am not sure that the religions shouldn't be viewed and treated just as any other human group is.

Clubs, business, religions, political parties, unions, societies, governments, all are groups with differing numbers and rules and powers. 'Might making right', the powers aspect is the topmost element in rules structure.

The government can be used to control groups within its physical reach excepting those sheltered by another government. We confuse things when we have many different governments, each acting as if its rules were absolute.

We live within a complex mesh of beliefs and rules. Propaganda is diluted by not being 'singular' in our faster communicating world. But for an individual who is targeted and isolated as in some remote regions it is still possible to control opinions.

We are toooo 'many' for each of us to know everyone. We have lost most of our ancient small tribal unity, in favor of complex dynamic multiple group memberships. Six billion plus, wow.

Show the children the ancient texts, and explain various beliefs, but teach them logic so that they may know truth from belief. The world's people need to reach to a common understanding; that if there is no consensus, and yet great followings in several contrary belief systems, then they are likely not being evaluated and choosen logicaly but based upon emotions.

Religions seems ... but a guess, or, an early premise (actually many.)

Perhaps a universal conscientiousness is focused at regions of existence coinciding with the many fold things of reality. "The universe experiencing itself through its many parts' individual local awareness." Is God to be found in his own definition as synonymous with the everything? Is God a subset of all. If it is, then perhaps we should capitalize All. :)

Respect for the many possibilities (philosophys/religions/cosmological-views) seems polite, and good.
Respect for truth seems equally important. And so it is back to logic. We as individuals, should have access to the many ancient scripts (and their many interpretations) while not pushing our young to a single point of view. As adults we may be fair game, but as for the young student, their 'forced' learning environment should be free from single sided religious doctrine. I am not against the teaching of religion in public schools, so long as the 'class' (curriculum) includes an equal amount of time be spent on each of the religions, and none is presented as requiring the participation in any ritual or prayer acts, nor is any presented as 'truth' or the correct view or religion.
On the other hand, 'logic' should be taught to first year students.
With so many 'words' to know, language should be the focus of early years. But with an ordered approach. The simple concepts of 'yes' and 'no' can be taught as abstract mathematical concepts of binary logic through simple diagrams, and examples, and perhaps a few physical models of plumbing and switches, and simple two state systems.
Teach counting to 'one' in binary before counting to 'ten' in decimal.
The same goes for calculus. It's principles should be taught in the first grade. Start with the correct vocabulary when teaching reading and spelling, and include far more terms from the fields of mathematics and science, beginning with the names of the chemical elements and processes most basic to understanding such as integration and differentiation and frequency. If you are teaching the youngest of children you have a great responsibility to know calculus and logic and physical sciences so that your vocabulary be more precise and the children not spend the next years un-learning and re-learning. Mesh the home, school, community, and work enviroments more.

Links to a few of the books I have read and enjoyed.

The First Conquest of an 8000-meter Peak

The actual book I read was titled: The Theory of Relativity and the Non-symetric Field. The link is for the closest match I could find, and I hope is a later edition containing the same material.
I was suprised when I read this. I expected a book culminating in his most famous equation (E=mc²) and instead found this to be just one among the many used on every page, expressing his opinions, proofs, and hypothetical experiments. This book changed my view of the correct way to measure, and forced me to venture further into mathematics to understand the symbols used (Tensor calculus). Most amazing to me was how Dr. Einstien simply tossed in the notion that travelers could not go backward in time by including a coeffecient (x₄=&sqroot;-ict to prevent it which had no supporting proof just his personal opinion. Heavy.

A fascinating book showing solutions to designing injection molds.

This is a treasure of musical information. I found myself jumpinging from one word to another in a cascade of learning many times.

My copy came from the Boeing Aerospace Division Library through their surplus sales. I'm still looking for yours. This book tells how to design things to exhibit zero-wear.

If you are interested in inventing and design, you will need an understanding of processes involved and their relative merits. This is an excellent overview of the tools and processes you will find in an industrial area. Very practical.

Okay, I must admit, this is not a book. It is a LIBRARY of data which I have nearly worn out from use. I suggest it everyone, (even an old worn out copy is better than being without this excellent work.)

A small book, and a quick read although it seemed redundant to me at times. I much more enjoyed attending his lecture on black holes and baby universes while in Seattle.

Written by my instructor's instructor, I used it while instructing classic guitar at The Evergreen State College, and at North Thurston High School both. I believe a person could learn to play the classic guitar by starting with this book and spending just a half an hour a day for half a year or so.