The Era of Transubstantiation

The use of the technical term 'Transubstantiation' in the context beyond Roman Catholicisim is perhaps historically unprecedented. I do not wish to explain such usage in a simplistic manner, for the whole idea of such usage is indeed per se complicated, let alone the technical ramification we need to encounter in the deduction in between. Let us try to decipher one paragraph:

'2. A society of peoples or of an entirely heterogeneous people, given its advanced state in contemporary standard, is bound to go anarchic. By which I mean that the advancement in science and humanity flies so swift that the development of human intelligence lags so far behind that the complexity of the society becomes Greek to most of people domiciling or as parasite in the society. If our children are addicted to the liberal, pluralistic drugs that only allow liberal, pluralistic abuse, then it would lack the perspicuity to express in a clear manner how a society can continue to advance or progress, for the liberalism and pluralism have reached the most high of humanity – for different peoples may be welt together without difficulty and for confrontations are only the result of constructive disagreements. But only the fool believes the fact is so. Only fools believe the world is filled with the just we dream of; and only fools believe such a world, despite its non-existence at this moment, will be existent sometime in future. Only fools believe the world today will progress to that of morrow, from which we point to learn as much as we see from our history, a discreet world of suspicious existence. Why do fools so succumb to the delusions of progress when as a matter of fact they have been in for a dying plight in which they see without obstruction their own death bed near at hand, and touch it without any difficulty? It is so I declare war to ignorance, thence the lack of cognition of their own plight, leading to the phenomena that they continue to live on and sneer at the possible advent of an imminent Death, will subsequently disown such prodigal species or members of such species. Can this be scientifically verifiable? Yes, but what good a scientific verification to the species if the result of it would only mean a probability of their death rather than marking a certainty of death? A probability of eradication of a species means only a probability of survival. Fools undoubtedly with their indolence in their mind can only opt for survival in an easiest manner, and for death should survival mean a slightest form of hassles to them. They are immune to despise and, in Darwinian interpretation, speak of survival of the fittest – such fitness only prevails in undesirability.'

Epicurus (341-270 BC)

The Greek philosopher intended to show mankind that it is possible to live a life of undisturbed happiness (ataraxia), devoid of fear and worry, through right knowledge of the way the universe works: the main objects of fear, divine punishment and death, need not concern us, as the human soul does not survive death and gods do not govern events, which are ruled by natural laws. The universe and everything in it including ourselves and our souls consist of atoms whose motion is governed by natural causes; nothing composed lasts for ever as the atoms move around, and their motion, temporary conjunction and ultimate dispersal the generation and dissolution of all objects including living things. Epicurus described the gods as perfect and eternal beings who live a happy existence untrammelled by the activities or sufferings of humanity. It puzzles many others that Epicurus added the element of the gods in a philosophy which appears self-sufficient without them. Obviously there was a practical reason. I personally love Epicurus' attempt to create a philosophy that rids humans of worry and enables them to live in happiness. What I approve of the most is that happiness does not come from glory, power or wealth but it can be had from little things such as good food, the company of friends, etc, which, to some extent, is hedonistic in that we enjoy the corporeal now-ness, for there is no future of ourselves when we die. There I believe has nothing wrong to hold such a belief, for, obviously, any coming life deprives oneself of memories of the former life. Some claim knowledge of the former life but few can establish such claim with convincing evidence. But Epicurean living is quite enjoyable. It has, to me, a spiritual element that occurs when you enjoy your company of friends, the good food or simply a walk in the garden.

Having said that, we do not have every reason to refuse to accept the premise that the soul survives our own death. But this does not weaken the happiness of ataraxia and his living secretly - when I think of it, I feel happy.

Gordon Brown

Gordon Brown is of course no Winston Churchill. But some temperament of a prime minister of Great Britain appears the same. In the annual foreign policy speech at the Lord Mayor's banquet in London, Mr. Browns said,

'When Britain is bold, when Britain is engaged, when Britain is confident and outward-looking, we have shown time and again that Britain has a power and an energy that far exceeds the limits of our geography, our population, and our means.

'As a nation we have every reason to be optimistic about our prospects: let us be confident in our alliances, faithful to our values, determined as progressive pioneers to shape the world to come.

'I believe that Britain can inspire, challenge and change the world.

'And to do so we must have confidence in our distinctive strengths: our global values, global alliances and global actions; because with conviction in our values and confidence in our alliances, Britain can lead the way in this construction of a new global order.'

Epicurean Living

Epicureans showed little interest in participating in the politics of the day, since doing so leads to trouble. They instead advocated seclusion. Their garden can be compared with present-day communes. This principle is epitomised by the phrase lathe biōsas λάθε βιώσας (Plutarchus De latenter vivendo c. 1128; Flavius Philostratus Vita Apollonii 8.28.12), meaning ‘live secretly’, ‘get through life without drawing attention to yourself’, i. e. live without pursuing glory or wealth or power, but anonymously, enjoying little things like food, the company of friends, etc.