HAVE YOU HUGGED A PEST TODAY? ....a wikimedia pest

Sunday, June 24, 2007

My Harness Racing System....Triactors Only

.
.
My Harness Racing $ystem....
.
Triactors Only


.
I want to introduce you to my harness racing system. It is a triactors only system. This is the system that I use when I play any harness race. I developed it while playing mostly the Meadowlands Racetrack in New Jersey. It also works quite well at Woodbine Racetrack in Toronto. These are two of the more consistent harness tracks in my estimation, and that is what my system is based on; reliability and horses being able to perform to past performance. These websites are listed below:
.
.
.
There is nothing magical about my system and all I am really doing is considering eight factors which I consider to be important in the outcome of a harness race. I will not detail these features at this time, but you may be able to figure these things out by examining the third race from the Meadowlands last Saturday night, June 23, 2007. These results for this race are shown below:
.
.
Now, in this particular case I received more for my one dollar bet than is indicated here, if you scroll down and look at the results of this third race ( 232.60). I was paid about ( 247.00 ) The racing program says that there is a common betting pool with Woodbine and the Meadowlands but the Canadian players are receiving a different payout. I am not sure still why the result is different. It may be because this common pool does not exist, or it may be for some other reason which I am not sure of. You can also watch a replay of this race here. It is free to join up.
.
.
I bet only triactors with my system as I stated above. A triactor bet is essentially termed a " sucker " bet because your odds of winning such a bet are much higher than simply betting a horse to win or even betting an exactor, which is picking the first and second horse in the exact order of finish. With a triactor bet you have to have all of the first three finishers in exact order: win, place, and show. But, that is the beauty of the system in my estimation; you are trying to beat the odds and that is what my system tries to accomplish. I usually try to keep my bets at the 14.00 dollar level, but I will bet more as the situations arise, but not usually betting more than 20.00 dollars per race. In this example that I am showing you ( Race 3 at the Meadowlands Racetrack on June 23, 2007 ) my top three picks in exact order are the horse numbers: 2-6-5. The race track program at the top of the page is picking the horses: 7-6-3. My system picks 5 horses that I will use for betting purposes. The 5 horses that I selected and shown at the bottom of the page are: 2-6-5-7-1. ( my scribbling at the bottom of the program ) Owing to my handicapping methods, however, I ended up eliminating the last horse from my system ( the number 1 horse ) and added instead to the system horse numer 3. I will explain this detail to you later as I describe my system more fully. But, once I have determined my five horses the rest is simple. I am going to invest altogether a total of 14 dollars. My first bet is to combine the first three horses, or " box " them. What this means, essentially, is that I am going to make sure that I have bet all of the combinations that will allow for horses 2-6-5 coming in any way imaginable. Any one of these horses can can come in first, second, or third, and in any order whatsoever and I will win. Since triactors involve usually a bet of one dollar per bet this transaction will cost me 6 dollars. So, my six bets are:
.
2-6-5
2-5-6
6-2-5
6-5-2
5-6-2
5-2-6
.
I have two other horses that I have to bring into my system, namely horse 7 and horse 3 which replaced the original system bet of horse 1. I have spent so far 6 dollars and I have 8 dollars left to spend for my total 14 dollar bet. Even though these last two horses are my fourth and fifth pick in order of preference either one of them can win this race. That is what horse racing is all about, essentially any horse in the race can win. I am just trying to narrow things down a bit with my system. I am only going to use my top two picks when I bring in the fourth and fifth horses. ( the 2 and the 6 are the top two picks ). These two horses have to be part of the top three finishers when I am employing the fourth and fifth horses. And, while ' keying ' my bets I will only reverse the fourth and fifth horses with my top horse which is the 2 horse. Examine the six bets below to see what I am talking about. One of the objectives of my system is to save money, so certain horses are favored over others, and that is the role of my handicapping methods, to identify in order of preference the better horses over the lesser horses. And, this is done systematically. Here is what I am going to bet for my final 8 dollars. These are
called " key " bets because the first horse that I bet now utilizing the fourth and fifth horses has to win, while the second and third horses can come in either second or third. Listed below is a series of 2 dollar bets and the bet itself is called a " 1 dollar triactor key ".
.
( remember the first horse has to win, while the second or third horse can come in second or third )
.
The four 1 dollar triactor key bets are shown
below:
.
7-2-6 ( includes 7-6-2 )
2-6-7 ( includes 2-7-6 )
3-2-6 ( includes 3-6-2 )
2-6-3 ( includes 2-3-6 )
.
So, this is basically my system, a combination of bets totalling 14 dollars. For this 14 dollar bet I received approximately 247.00 dollars. The winning horses in this race were in exact order: 5-2-6. ( my top three horses which I had boxed ) And, this is actually a pretty decent payout considering the fact that there are only 7 horses in the race. I prefer a 10 horse field because the chances of winning are less because there are more horses that can potentially win the race. But, my system focuses on the best 5 horses in the race, so I do not care how many horses are in the race. In a 10 horse field there is more risk and you are getting paid for this risk if the system wins. ( the payouts will most likely be larger ) The system gets a little tricky at times, but I base all of my decisions on logic and this is applied systematically. That is why I call it a system. I will explain all the essentials of the system in detail at a later time, explaining why and how I pick my eight factors, etc. But, for now you might want to just examine the program and see what kinds of things I am looking at in the statistics provided by the racing program.
.
During this racing session I won a total of 3 triactors, races 3, 7, and 10. I spent a total of 120 dollars and had a gross profit of 382 dollars. That means I made about 262 dollars. I did not bet races 1, 5, 9, and 11. Here again are the results for the Meadowlands Racetrack for June 23, 2007.
.
.

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Happy 81st Gladys Baydala

.
Happy 81st Birthday
.
Gladys Baydala

.
Today Gladys is 81 years old.
.
The above picture is Gladys when
she was seventeen years old, so
she says.
.
Remember, this is the woman who says:
.
" you don't have to buy the cow to get
the milk. "
.
.
.

.
.

Saturday, June 16, 2007

God and Son business for sale

Business For Sale
.
Father and Son owned and
operated business
.
To qualified applicants only.
.
Nature of the Business:
.
The business is comprised of an intellectual property, mainly consisting of the idea of a god, namely the Lord God Jehovah and his Son in name, Jesus Christ and in the ideas surrounding these names. Upon transfer of ownership to a qualified buyer or buyers these above-mentioned terms will remain the exclusive right of the new owners. This intellectual property has existed for all time and will continue to exist for all time, so long as the ownership of the above mentioned rights desires to continue to disseminate these ideas about God and his Son. WE are offering to sell our ideas to a qualified buyer. Christian-minded prospective purchaser are encouraged to apply for this once in a lifetime opportunity, although other religious affiliations will be considered as suitable purchasers of the business.
.
This is a turn key operation and WE will provide all necessary training to the successful purchaser of the above-mentioned asset.
.
Guaranteed ownership of ideas include the following:
.
* the idea of God as the Supreme Being and originator of all things imaginable
.
* the notion of a Heaven
and that God created the Heavens and the Earth
.
* the idea of everlasting eternal life
.
* the idea being saved in the procurement of an everlasting life
.
* a moral code
.
* a philosophy of life
.
* exclusive use of the terms: a father figure named The Lord God Jehovah;
His Son named Jesus Christ who performs miracles;
and who died in a ritual to save Man from his sins
.
Scriptures detailing the miracles of Jesus Christ and the Lord as read in the Holy Bible
.
Official use of the crucifix as Christ saving humanity.
.
All of the above shall remain as protected, copyright ideas forever and into eternity.
.
Not included in the sale, but aids in the business include many certified religious practitioners, including a bureaucracy, and numerous physical structures where worhsip takes place. Also useful, but not part of the sales contract are use of the word " God " in judicial proceedings of numerous countries as well as being mentioned in the official currency of the United States of America.
.
Terms are negotiable and the price to be paid
shall be assumed to be consistent with the ideas as
they are so presented and as represented by the Good Will that the business has accumulated since the creation of Christianity and its forebearer, Judaism. The 'owners' of Judaism are not directly involved in this sale, and the sale of our business does not affect the operation of that entity or its operational ideas. They are free to conduct their business as they see fit. We, the sellers do not grant any intellectual property to the practitioners of Judaism. That religion is a man made affair and We do not confer upon those practitioners any of the intellectual property that we deem to call as our own. Their intellectual property is of their own making, and as such We do not recognize it as a viable competitor to our own product which We now offer to the general public for sale and to do with as they see fit upon purchase of the assests identified in this sales proposal. It is expected that the sellers
shall receive an agreed upon annual stipend as a percentage of the
profits of the new owners.
.
Please apply through prayer
.
as this is the preferred method of contact. If you are successful in
prayer then you are a qualified purchaser of the above-mention assets.
.
Signed by our hands,
.
The Lord God Jehovah,
Jesus Christ
.
.
. . . . . .
.
.
.
Other prospective purchasers are encouraged to apply by the following means:
.
Email only: Business for sale@Heaven.com
Agent on Earth: qualityis@shaw.ca
.
.

Thursday, June 07, 2007

Judgement Day For Carl Baydala: A Play

.
Judgement Day For Carl Baydala:
A Play
.
A One Act Play Concerning the Death
of Carl Baydala
.
Characters:
.
The Lord God Jehovah
Jesus Christ
A Beautiful Woman
Angel ( clerk of The House of the Lord )
Tom ( a dead man )
Carl Baydala
.
Setting: Heaven
.
.
Please see Special Notice at bottom of play
.
Act One
.
Scene One: the waiting room in Heaven
.
Carl Baydala is sitting on a bench next to a man named Tom. They are in a small room and the only other furniture in the room is a table with a pitcher of water on it and two glasses. Attached to the wall is a picture of Jesus Christ and a large wooden white cross.
.
Carl gets up to get a glass of water. The conversation begins:
.
Carl: " I'm thirsty. I think I will have a glass of water. Would you like one?" ( he turns and faces the man )
Tom: " Sure, that would be great. Thanks."
.
Carl pours two glasses of water and walks back to the bench and sits down. He hands the man a glass.
.
Carl: " So, I guess we're dead eh? That's kind of the way I got things figured out. How about you?"
Tom: " We are dead allright. Dead as a door nail."
.
They both chuckle.
.
Carl: " What's your name? My name is Carl." ( he extends his hand to shake Tom's hand )
.
Tom: " My name is Tom. Pleased to meet you. How did you die?"
.
Carl: " I was driving my car and smashed into a brick wall at a very high speed. I figured it was the end when that wall came at me so quickly. Just smash, bang. I knew it was the end. I just accepted it. I could feel the death coming. There was the impact. That is the last thing I remember. Funny thing I don't seem to have any bruises, cuts or anything. And, I feel just fine too. How about you. How did you die?"
.
Tom: " I suppose that is the way they do things up here. No pain or anything I mean. I guess that is why they call it Heaven. It really is a unique place. Just like they said it would be. I hope you didn't leave anybody behind that would miss you. About me. I had cancer, had it for a long time actually. I am glad it is over because it was really painful for me, and especially my wife. I know she will really miss me. We are both Catholics you know. I believe in God and what he will do for me. " He touched the cross that was hanging from his neck.
.
Carl: " Oh, that is swell. That you are a Christian, I mean. I hope your wife is OK. Me. Nah, I didn't really leave anybody behind. By the way, I am very surprised that I am even here in Heaven. I am an atheist you know. I just don't really believe this God stuff. I wonder what happens up here anyhow. This looks like some kind of waiting room or something. What do you figure goes on here anyway?"
.
Tom: "Well, most likely we will both get to meet God and be judged by him. He will take a look at our lives and make a decision I suppose. I think that is how it works, but I am not sure of the details of course."
.
Carl: " That's fascinating. Here I am in Heaven, an atheist about to meet God and be judged by him. Wow, that's pretty heavy stuff. I guess this is not really the place to criticize God. I mean, that I got this far, I mean. What do you figure God is like Tom? Do you think he is a Jew like Jesus Christ?"
.
Tom: " Well, I can't see it being any other way Carl. That is the way it looks to me." He lifted his glass and took a large swallow of water.
.
Carl: " Well, I hope he is fair-minded and all that. Being God I suppose he will deal with my atheism as he wants to. I will just explain everything to him. That's what I'll do. You being a Christian Tom I guess you will just breeze through eh?"
.
Tom: " I believe in the Lord Carl. I trust him and his judgement. I fear nothing and praise the Lord."
.
Carl: " Sounds like you got the system beat. I wonder which one of us will go first."
.
The sound of a door opening is heard and an angel walks into the room. He has a file folder under his arm. He takes hold of the folder and calls out Tom's name.
.
Angel: " Tom. The Lord is ready to see you. Please follow me."
Tom gets up, places his glass back on the table and follows the angel out of the room.
.
Carl: " Good luck Tom. Talk to you later, I hope."
.
Tom: " Thanks Carl. Bless you and good luck yourself."
.
Tom and the Angel leave the room and Carl is alone in the waiting room. Carl begins to contemplate his life and all of the things that he felt were good about it and all of the bad things as well. He thought about his good deeds and the fact that he was an atheist and that he criticized God a lot. He also thought that what he was experiencing was a dream. He just did not believe that God really existed. As an atheist he was quite sure that God did not really exist anyhow and that thinking about God was just a product of his imagination or mind. He just did not believe in the ideal God that the Christians believed in. He was starting to believe that this was in fact a dream and that he would most likely wake up soon and that would be the end of everything. It seemed like about a half an hour passed while he was contemplating his life and all of the events that had occurred within it. He was thinking about love and sex and death, his job and the ideas that he held. He thought about the philosophy that he had created on his own as well. It was a philosophy that did not involve the Christian God, and that is why he was thinking that this situation he was in could not be real. Here he was in a waiting room in Heaven and about to meet God. Good grief! What a predicament. Finally, he heard movement and sounds again. The door to the chamber that the angel and Tom had gone into was opening again. Tom was coming out and his face was beaming. The angel followed him holding a sealed envelope and told him to take a seat. He sat down and did not speak. The angel started to speak:
.
Angel: " Mr. Baydala I have your file here would you like to follow me please?"
.
Carl got up from the bench and placed his glass on the table and then he spoke:
.
Carl: " Yes, thank you. You can call me Carl if you like. Do you have a name or should I just call you Angel?"
.
Angel: " This way please Mr. Baydala. "
.
Carl thought that was strange the Angel calling him Mr. Baydala and not just plain old Carl. He wondered about the formality of the Angel. He followed the Angel into the chamber adjacent to the waiting room.
.
Scene Two: The House of the Lord God Jehovah
.
Carl and the Angel enter the House of the Lord. They stand together and face three people who are seated at the large bench in front of them.
The room is very much like a courtroom. There is a small table with two chairs directly in front of the large bench. The Angel beckons Carl to sit at the table and to face the three people. The Angel then walks over and hands Carl's file to the man seated in the middle. There is a beautiful woman next to him on his left. And, to the right of the man is a younger man. And, on the floor beside this younger man is a large German Shepherd dog. The dog is lying flat with his paws extended and he is panting. The dog is looking directly at Carl. The Angel leaves the bench area and sits in a chair in the back of the room. The man in the middle begins to examine Carl's folder. Carl decides that the man in the middle must be God and that the other man must be Jesus Christ since he looks exactly like the picture hanging in the waiting room. But, he does not know who the woman is, except that she looks almost identical to the woman that he has liked for a very long time. After examining her again, he is sure that it is her but he does not say anything. He sits and waits for God to speak.
.
Lord God Jehovah: " Carl. I am God. The Lord God Jehovah. "
.
Carl sat quietly and was glad that he called him Carl and not Mr. Baydala like the Angel. He responded to the Lord.
.
Carl: " Thank you Lord. Thank you for allowing me into Heaven, I mean."
.
Lord God Jehovah: " Carl, before we proceed I would like you to know that on my right side is my son Jesus Christ and on my left is, well you know who she is. She is here for a very specific reason which we shall talk about later. But, to begin. I want you to know that your case is a difficult one. And, if you like I can make arrangements for you to have counsel to help you to explain yourself and your life."
.
The Clerk of the House of the Lord ( the Angel ) rushes over and whispers in Carl's ear: ( he tells him that he might be better off with " legal " representation since this is a difficult case for the Lord to decide. Carl tells the Angel that he can handle things himself and thanks the Angel for his help. ) The Angel returns to his seat at the back of the room. Lord God Jehovah begins to speak again:
.
The Lord God Jehovah: " You have declined counsel. That is your decision Carl, so let us proceed. Before I make a decision concerning your future I need to ask you some questions and to examine your life in detail. You are not a Christian and I know that, and in fact, you have gone out of your way to not be a Christian. And, I also know that there are reasons for that as well. I notice in your file that you were saved when you were a child and received Jesus into your life. He turns toward Jesus for confirmation of this fact. Jesus nods approvingly.
.
Jesus Christ: " Yes, Father he accepted me when he was a child but has since renounced me. "
.
Carl: " Dear Lord, I don't think you can hold that against me since I was only a child and not of legal age to enter into a contract with Jesus Christ, or any one for that matter. "
.
Lord God Jehovah: " One needs to recognize Carl that my laws are different than those of human ones. My word through my Son is my bond. The minister who performed this task as my agent performed a legal contract that must be honored for a lifetime. These are my rules. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. I am sure you have heard that phrase before."
.
Carl: " Yes Lord. I can appreciate your position on this matter. But, I still think that as humans we act as humans, in spite of your laws and I think that should be taken into accout. I plead guilty as a human being. If I need a defence then this it it. You are the final judge of course."
.
Lord God Jehovah: " Thank you Carl for your response. I accept your reasoning of course and that is an element of your human weakness. But, as a human you will also recognize that there are ways of overcoming sin and the breaking of my laws. And, that is in asking for forgiveness and confessing your sins. I believe you are confessing your sins, but that you are not asking for forgiveness and to be saved. Is this the case Carl?"
.
Carl: " I believe that to be the case Lord God Jehovah."
.
Lord God Jehovah: " Let the record show that Carl Baydala is refusing to be saved by my Son Jesus Christ."
.
The Lord God Jehovah proceeds with his questioning.
.
Lord God Jehovah: " Carl I have examined your life in complete detail as you can well imagine. I am not overly troubled by your atheist tendencies and you may be surprised to learn that. I know that you have rebellion in your life and that this stems from your childhood. I am fully aware of the events concerning your childhood and into adulthood. These times were not easy for you and hence arise the roots of your rebellion and your atheist attitudes. Once again, I repeat, I am not overly concerned with these matters as I understand the history of the thing. But, I want to be perfectly blunt Carl the issue between us is one of philosophy. Our differences are based on the notions of idealism and materialism. I know that you have spent the final days of your life investigating this important feature of life. It is in fact the main thing for one to come to grips with in life. I congratulate you for taking on this important study. Because in knowing these things allows you to experience me as opposed to not experiencing me. Are you an idealist or are you a materialist Carl?"
.
Carl: " I am a materialist dear Lord God. Respectfully I tell you that I can be no other. Whether in the sight of God and his Holy Son and the woman next ot you, or in any other place. I cannot lie to you. You do not and cannot exist as you say you can. "
.
Lord God Jehovah: " So, you maintain then that I am not real and that I do not exist. Is that correct?"
.
Carl: " That is correct. I see you and talk to you and experience the events around me, but I cannot accept them in their totality; I take them to be imaginary; a product of my brain and no more. I am in fact starting to think that this all a dream."
.
Lord God Jehovah: " You refuse to accept the notion of my idealized nature and my ability to create something out of nothing, such as the universe and all of the things contained within it such as matter and space and the earth and the moon and all of the stars. Is that true?"
.
Carl: " That is true. Logically it cannot be. You are not and creating something out of nothing is an impossibility. You Sir are an idea and no more."
.
Lord God Jehovah: " I see. And, this Heaven and my Son and this girl here. They are all imaginary then?"
.
Carl: " Absolutely."
.
Lord God Jehovah: " I want to precise here Carl. You do not accept the idea as well that things exist on their own, certain mathematical constructs that stand on their own legs and only need to be discovered through the course of time. Logical things and any abstract thing that could be found to exist at some point in the future if only one should look hard enough to find them. Things that only need to be discovered. Things that have existed for an eternity and even longer than that, things such as myself, which is the grandest idea of all. I Lord God the Almighty Jehovah. And, that if I did not exist then nothing coming after me could have existed at all. That I am the cause of the effect. That I am the mother and the father of all things imaginable. Can you not perceive Carl Baydala that nothing would be anything without the Idea itself to make it happen? That to cause matter and space and all manner of things required an impetus and that I am that thing that causes all. What part of that misses your understanding? That something is created out of nothing and that is the greatest principle and belief imaginable. Faith alone cannot produce this thing because faith itself is only the explanation. The opposite of the something is the nothing. How can you imagine something without perceiving its opposite which is nothing. Nothing must exist for you to have something, otherwise it could not be. And, it is the mere idea of this thing which makes it intelligble to you. I Lord God Jehovah am that idea, that nothingness, which has now become everything. You renounce this principle, this article of faith that I the Lord God Jehovah have existed for all time and will exist forever into the future. You reject this? By what right do you challenge me? By what materialistic notion do you reject me?"
.
Carl is deeply moved by the speech of the Lord God Jehovah
.
Carl: " Lord God Jehovah. I am me and I am real. I am matter speaking though matter. My consciousness which is me is the result of the atoms within me. They have become alive with ideas and are being expressed though me. I am the result of the will of the atoms and the energy within them. Just as the sun sets off gases and light then it is the atoms within my brain that produces thought and imagination. It is my consciousness. An idea needs a mother and not the other way around. You claim to be nothing and everything all at once. You are asking me to believe that you are the nothing which created something. If you are nothing then you cannot exist. If you are nothing then you cannot even be discovered. But, you say you are something and I believe you are. If you are something then you cannot be nothing. If you are nothing then you cannot be the creator of the universe. But, you are indeed something. And I say to you that that you are the idea in my brain."
.
Lord God Jehovah: " Be at peace my son for one day you will learn the truth." There was a moment of silence in the room and Jesus Christ crossed himself after the Father spoke. And then the Holy Father spoke again.
.
Lord God Jehovah wanted to change the direction of the conversation.
.
Lord God Jehovah: " My son, seated beside me is a woman. I believe you know who she represents even if you do not think that she is real. I created the idea of sex for a reason Carl. Do you know what the reason is?"
.
Carl: " Yes Father I do. But, I do not accept the fact that you created sex as you say. I believe nature created sex. It is just another example of the force of the atoms within us, compelling us to act, and in this case to reproduce. It is the natural way of things. And, I am quite sure that you have presented the woman as a depiction of the power of sex and its role in society. Yes, Father the sexual component is real and dominant. I understand the lust that consumes us all from time to time. Lust is just natures way of introducing the sexes to one another. It is the power of atoms and of energy Father. And change is the dominant condition in nature and the universe. Nothing is static. Everything is movement and reproduction. Lust is the form of energy that accomplishes this task for us. Who or what decided that things should move Holy Father? It is simply part of the inherent nature of matter, that something must react to something else. It is part of its essential character just like the human being, which is just another form of matter. So, I am not ashamed of lust Holy Father, but rather I should seek it out. For it is the beginning of all things just as your Genesis is. Is not the whole thing based on lust? Your version of lust is an idealized one. Lust does not require that you explain it or draw pictures about it or control it. Lust is that thing which causes movement and change; it is the power of all things; it provides direction for the human being. And, it is natural. You have tried to make it ' unatural ' by idealizing it. That man was created and so desired a woman and you created one for him. Did you not have lust in your mind Father when you invented these things, otherwise why would you consider the notion of lust and sex and love? And, in fact did not these things become the predominant preoccupation of man; that he reproduce though the mechanism of lust, which some call love, but I say to you that it is the same thing. Love is an idealized form of lust Father, you are trying to change its form but you cannot. You are trying to control a natural force Father. Even the Holy Father, with respect of course, has difficulties with these things since they are beyond his control. With respect dear Father if man is created in God's image, which is your own, then surely you must have been consumed by lust as well at some time during your eternal reign. Otherwise, why would you bother to create something like sex?"
.
Carl and the Holy Father locked eyes and Jehovah did not speak, but merely listened. He looked at Jesus Christ and smiled. He did not respond to this criticism.
.
He paused and then he finally spoke:
.
Lord God Jehovah: " Do you not believe that I created lust for other reasons as well, Carl?"
.
Carl: " I cannot imagine what those other reasons would be besides pleasure and reproduction. Personally, I cannot think of man and woman getting together without some impetus to make that happen. Lust, father is that thing which binds us together, it brings forth the atoms of the woman and the man. It is not magical Father, or mystical or God-created. I am sorry Father but I cannot accept your creating the business of sex for pure pleasure. For if you have then you have created nothing but problems with it in the process. Was that your intention to father to simply confuse man and to make his life more difficult by introducing such a thing as sex and love? As an all-knowing being could not you have not derived some other method for the man and woman to come together? I say the answer is no because man is governed by nature and nothing else, including the ideas that you propogate. Is man condemned to rationalize these things, to create a philosophy and an understanding when all that is really required is to seek out its natural origins which are in our very being from the beginning? I am referring to the atoms within us Father. These are the things which move us, not the ideas which you say you create."
.
Lord God Jehovah: " Carl, you are naturally combative as I have known you to be. You do not accept my notions of things now, nor have you in the past. I understand your feelings and I know of their origins. But, you struggle unnecessarily with your understanding of things. Do you not believe that it is better to accept and to believe my word? For the things that I say are true. They are true for the now and forever into eternity. Do you not accept my judgements Carl? If I am real and I am in the now then why cannot you accept me? And, that if I can be real then I produce all things, including all of the ideas that consume your mind. Why do you struggle to believe Carl Baydala when I have simplified the thing for you? If you can envision me the Being, the you can envision my ability to create something out of nothing which is what you have just accomplished. The idea is not originating in your brain as you would believe because your brain is not capable of imagining the thing until I plant in there. You say your atoms create your images for you. That is nonsensical thinking. That ideas are contained within these structures. Think about what you are proposing Carl Baydala. Structures are things, they are matter. By themselves they are not even intelligible until they become ideas or concepts. If by your own definition ideas are different things than matter then how can matter be an idea? It is the idea which produces the matter and not the other way around. Matter is the expression of the will. It is the idea which has the ability to create something out of nothing. The idea produces the matter and not the other way around."
.
Carl: " Father. You have not simplified the matter. Sorry for the pun of course, but I think you understand my viewpoint. Your conception of things is just not possible. And, therefore you are not posssible, with respect of course, Father. I respect your ideas concerning concepts and the will to want to create. That is the human way of things, to want Father. It is what we do as humans. No argument from me at all. But, you push the issue too far by suggesting that something can be produced out of nothing. I know that it is the logic of the universe that demands that to be true. Logically it can be no other way, that is to say that the Idea is the paramount thing and rules over matter in this regard. And, you the Creator, the Lord God Jehovah would represent the reality of the situation. You being real would be the evidence in the case at hand. But are you real or are you imaginary? When I die Father perhaps I should find out once and for all. You say that I am dead but how do I know for sure that I am not dreaming Father? "
.
Lord God Jehovah: ( smiling ). " You are steadfast in your ways Carl Baydala and I know that I cannot convert you. In the business in life that I have created for you and in which I have given you free will to conduct your life as you see fit you have rejected me. I provide you with a philosophy and with lust and all of the rest and you go about creating a philosophy that is inimical to mine. I have failed in thee that I cannot make you believe. That I am providing you with untold amounts of evidence and yet you still cannot believe and accept?"
.
Carl: " I think you might have made a mistake Father, by creating free will I mean. Why would you create free will if it causes so many problems? Is this not a simple philosophy design flaw which we can lay the blame for only upon yourself? If perfection is the guiding light Father, then you have failed. If you have failed in this important area, then how can I accept the idea that you created all out of nothing? Wouldn't your abilities be suspect then? How can I accept this notion of the existence of things when I know that an aspect of your philosophy has failed to achieve its intended results? If you were perfect and supreme then why would you bother creating things like free will and sex? Two things that confound the issue and create conflict for man and his God. Father, I say a better philosophy is required if eternity is the goal, and peace and harmony as well. These things cannot be achieved with a flawed plan and philosophy. If I am criticizing God and the idea of him, which is You Father then that means that you have built in the feature of negativity into your system; some people will reject you as a matter of common logic. I respectfully submit Father that you are merely testing yourself by introducing such things into man and his being. Is not this evidence of a poor construction of man by having people being able to criticize You in this fashion? Is your design not flawed? Does this not mean that your are still struggling with your own existence as a God and that you are still testing yourself, using man as your proxy? That I can stand here and debate with you means that the creation of me serves your interests. And, those interests are in determining your own nature which you do not fully understand. I see no other reason for this philosophy of yoursFather. With respect of course."
.
The Lord God Jehovah smiled and did not speak. He paused at looked at Jesus and then at the woman.
.
And then he spoke and while he did he gestured his hands to make Carl approach the bench.
.
Lord God Jehovah: " Carl, move towards the bench and let me whisper in your ear. " And, Carl moved toward the bench and placed himself firmly with the reach of the Master's voice. And the Holy Father bent over and whispered into his ear: " Carl, I am much impressed with your philosophy and your logic, even if I do not agree. I would be interested in knowing if you would like to be my assistant and to follow in my footsteps, so that we together could construct a better form for the future for the universe. Would you like to be involved in such a task if the opportunity was presented to you?"
.
Carl was much impressed that the Lord God was pleased and that he was not angry with the way in which he had presented himself and had in fact criticized the Lord God Jehovah. And, then he responded to the Lord:
.
Carl: " Yes, Father I would like that very much. I accept your offer."
And then the Lord God Jehovah spoke again:
.
Lord God Jehovah: " Carl, I am finished with my assessment of things and now you may go. "
.
He motioned to the Angel that the interview was over. He handed a piece of paper and placed it an envelope to give to the Angel. And, then the Angel escorted Carl out of the chamber and back into the waiting room.
.
Scene Three: The Waiting Room
.
Carl sits himself down back on the bench. Tom is sitting on the bench as well. He is drinking a glass of water. Carl is smiling and is happy with his assessment of things. Tom and Carl talk to each other and discuss their meeting with God.
.
Tom: " So, how did things go Carl?"
.
Carl: " Well, all things considered I think they went well. God and I had a very big discussion. I told him about my philosophy and the way I understood things. He seemed receptive to my thoughts even if he did not accept them. He knows what I am like so I guess he takes that into account when he makes his final decision."
.
Tom: " Yes, God is very understanding. He is a loving and all-knowing being and that is why I accept Christianity for what it is. There is no other way to eternity except throught Jesus Christ. Did you accept Jesus when you were there? That is why he was there you know. To give you an opportunity to make ammends for the past and to allow God to forgive you for all of your past sins. Did you accept Jesus and God Carl?"
.
Carl: " Well not exactly. We more or less had a large argument and we just talked about things. I sort of disagreed with God on things. But, that is just the way I am and I suppose God accepts me for that."
.
Tom: " You did not admit to the glory and the idea of God?"
.
Carl: " Not really. No I did not. I just think there is too much conflict. His philosophy is really not perfect you know."
.
Tom: " And you told these things to God?"
.
Carl: " Yes I did and I think he accepted my ideas and took them into account with his judgement of me. By the way, was there anyone else in the room Tom when you were there, besides Jesus and God, I mean?"
.
Tom: " Yes, my wife was there. I believe it was her as it looked exactly like her. "
.
Carl: " What did you feel like when she was there?"
.
Tom: " I felt the love for her that I always have felt. It is the love inspired by the belief in God. He created woman for me and to know how to love her and to move beyond lust. God taught me all of these things through his being and his knowledge."
.
Carl: " I see. So you believe in the concept of love then. That real love is possible and that the only way to achieve that is through God. Well, that is interesting Tom, but I am just troubled by the whole concept personally. I think that we can move towards love without God. I believe that we have to do that on our own, to create our own philosophies and understandings, I mean. I think that God just gets in the way of these things. He just confuses things. I think it is possible to love and that this is achieved through understanding, understanding our origins and then making a meaning out of them. With regards to lust Tom. I think that is the natural order of things. And, that when man and woman come together they can achieve love together, by understanding each others origins. We are all just a bunch of atoms Tom. Atoms clashing together to produce a consciousness. Love and lust are the same thing, just called by different names. They are emotions produced by my body and my brain, and not by God's ideas. Matter and the energy within me produces these things. My consciousness and my thought is my understanding. I describe the idea of lust and love with the help of my body, not the Lord God Jehovah. My lust is the fire within me; it is the thing that leads to understanding."
.
Tom: " God has a different version of things Carl. I accept his way and his judgements.. He created lust so that we may come to know him. That was his intent. He could not have created lust if he did not know it. The lust that I have experienced is God's own lust. It is the way to understanding."
.
Carl was smiling and was confident that he had reached God with his philosophy.
.
Carl: " I know that you believe in God and accept his version of things. That is your choice through free will of course. But, something interesting happend at the end of my interview with God Tom. The Lord God Jehovah called me over and asked me a question. Did he do the same to you Tom?"
.
Tom: " Yes, he did Carl."
.
Carl: " And, what did you say?"
.
Tom: " I said that I accept your authority and that there is no other. What did you say to that question Carl?"
.
Carl: " Well, I responded a little differently. I thought his idea had possibilities and that I would be interested in his proposition. I think I have something to contribute. What do you think Tom. Do you think the Lord God Jehovah would be interested in some help with his grand designs?"
.
Just at that moment the Angel appeared in the room again
.
Gentlemen it is time to go. God has made his decisions concerning you both and I am sure you will both be satisfied with the results as God is the all knowing and the most caring and loving God imaginable. Tom and Carl got up from the bench at the same time. They were both smiling as the Angel spoke of God's intentions.
.
The Angel began to speak and and he read the contents of the envelopes to himself. He examined them both while he was talking.
.
Angel: " Tom, The Lord God Jehovah has asked to see you again and I am pleased to tell you that he has accepted you into the Kingdom of Heaven. Welcome aboard." He extends his arm and shakes Tom's hand. He leads Tom back into the chamber and into the Kingdom of Heaven. Shortly, he returns to the waiting room and And, he looked at Carl. Carl was not smiling any longer and he was worried. The Angel was examing the piece of paper concerning him. And then Carl spoke.
.
Carl: " Angel. What is my fate? Has the Lord God Jehovah made a decision concerning my future?"
.
The Angel put his arm around Carl's shoulder and led him to the bench in the waiting room. They sat down together at the bench facing the picture of Jesus Christ and the crucifix upon the wall.
.
Angel: " Mr. Baydala, the Lord God Jehovah has instructed me to tell you that he thinks that the relationship between you two will not work. I am sorry to have to report this to you, but you should know the truth. Lord God wanted you in Heaven. He truly wanted to welcome you aboard as one of the family. But, Mr. Baydala you said things that upset the Lord. And, well, quite frankly, he had no choice in the matter.
.
Carl: : " Is it my philosophy that upsets the Lord Angel?"
.
Angel: " Yes, I think that is the main reason. You had a chance to repent Mr. Baydala and to accept Jesus as your Saviour and you did not. These are basic things, but they are not the only things of course. It is your attitude that concerns the Lord. He has asked me to to convey his feelings to you and that is why I am talking in this vein. Do you understand Mr. Baydala? The consequences of your actions I mean?"
.
Carl: " Yes. Angel I think I do. The Lord God Jehovah has rejected me in his Heaven. The Heaven that he created. The whole thing is his idea and no one elses. That is it isn't it? He is the sole authority in the universe and expects obedience doesn't he?"
.
Angel: " Yes Mr. Baydala these things you say are true enough. That is a beautiful woman you are in love with. She would be with you in Heaven if you and God had agreed upon things you know."
.
Carl: "Yes, I am aware of that. But, it is a matter of principles with me Angel. I know God has his vision of things, but so do I. I have to be true to myself Angel. Surely you can understand that even if it means I cannot stay in Heaven. But, if the Lord God and I cannot see eye to eye on things what would be the good of spending an eternity with Him if we were just going to fight all of the time, you know philosophical fights. What would be the point?"
.
Angel: " You are indeed a principle man Mr. Baydala. But, your steadfastness has cost you your place in Heaven and the chance of being with the woman of your dreams. Do you think about that?"
.
Carl: " Of course I do. But, love is subservient to principle Angel, for without principles you have nothing. I have my philosophy and God has his."
.
Angel: " If I may interject Mr. Baydala. Are you not deviating from your argument somewhat in suggesting that love is subservient to principle? Both are ideas. Love is God's idea of the ideal state of man; it is through his guidance that we can all reach this state of happiness. But, yet you say that love comes second place to something like principle. A principle is an idea, perhaps even a morality. God's very Being suggests that humans be moral and that all will follow. Are you not in accordance with God's philosophy when you speak in this way Mr. Baydala?"
.
Carl: " Well, not exactly Angel. Love is an important thing, something we should all strive for. But, God's definition of love which is just really his philosophy does not truly depict the human element of love. I am talking about the relationships between man and woman Angel. The love that God refers to is just an idealized form of lust. He is in fact denying human nature by calling something love when he really means lust. Angel, why is man attracted to women in the first place? The answer Angel is because of the difference in the sexes; each one is made differently and they have different functions to perform. A man may say he ' loves ' a woman, but isn't he really saying something else? Think of it this way Angel. A man may say that he loves milk or wine, or anything other thing which makes him feel good or that satisfies his wants and needs. But, at bottom. what he is saying is that he wants to consume these things, for his peronal pleasures or needs. And, it is the same thing with the woman. The woman brings him sexual satisfaction as well as company and someone to talk to. But, the root of the thing is a physical attraction. God created woman for man and not the other way around; she is performing necessary functions for the man So, when the Lord God Jehovah speaks of love he is just putting a different face on the issue, if you understand what I mean Angel. Lord God Jehovah is denying reality Angel, and he is also trying to manage sex. This is a difficult thing to do. It is as simple as that. If the sexes, as a result of nature, were not different, they would not be so interested in one another. So, when I say that love is subservient to principle I mean just that. Now, I am not going deny that 'principle' or 'morals' are ideas, but in the same breath, I am going to tell you that they are my ideas and not the property of the Lord God Jehovah. For how could I learn such a thing from the Lord if he plays with love the way he does. "
.
Angel: " The Lord still believes Mr. Baydala that love the way he presents it is possible; it is something that we should all strive for in spite of the way in which you categorize the thing. I think you should take time to reconsider your arguments in light of the great power that the Master holds. Surely, his power did not come from naught, Mr. Baydala. "
.
Carl: " His power is derived from his ideas and his ability to implement them. He holds great power, but not total power Angel and that is because he has not converted me to his idea about creation and his ideas about love. If he has to try and convince people that he is God and sacrifice his Son in the process then he is not a complete power. He has to sell himself Angel; it is not a natural event - man coming to know God. That means he does not have complete power and it also means that I may be right and that the Lord God himself may indeed be wrong."
.
Angel: " You are allowed to have your views Mr. Baydala. That is the function of the free will that the Lord created for you, in the hope that you would discover the truth in your lifetime. The Lord God, however, remains troubled by your conduct. It is in the totality of your beliefs and behavior that led the Lord to his decision concerning your future, He had no choice in the matter Mr. Baydala and you know that."
.
Carl: " So, what happens now Angel? What are my options? Does Hell exist, is that where I am going next Angel?"
.
Angel: " Hell exists in your mind Mr. Baydala. It is the exact opposite of Heaven. The Heaven that the Lord God created for you. Everything is in the opposites Mr. Baydala. Idealism and materialism and all of the rest. The Lord God Jehovah ( he crosses himself ) has gone out his way to show you the way to eternity, yet you reject the Master's gift to you. His Idea and his Being is the eternal light which all mankind seeks. Some find him and some do not, for they fail to recognize him when he appears to them. The Lord God Jehovah has shown himself to you Mr. Baydala yet you maintain that he is your own idea or a mere dream. Can that truly be the case Mr. Baydala that upon rejecting the Lord you will be seeking something to satisfy your curiosity. And can you imagine what that something would be if if was not an idea or something like God? And, Carl. Just one more thing. I truly hope you find what you are looking for. "
.
Carl: " Angel. "
.
Angel: " Yes Carl. "
.
Carl: " Thanks for calling me Carl. "
.
Angel: " You're welcome. "
.
.The Angel stopped talking and he quietly left the waiting room.
.
Carl was alone on the bench facing Jesus Christ and the white wooden cross upon the wall. He was not sure if he was dreaming or not. Dreaming would be the most logical explanation for what had just occurred in his life. If he wasn't dreaming and he truly was dead and God had appeared and had offered him everlasting life for the simple price of being saved and upon being offered it he rejects it. Then what? Is it morally correct to accept this offer of eternity and in this process to degrade a personal principle in exchange? What would God think of man if he did such a thing? A loving God aiming to produce a perfect man and world would undoubtedly respect a man and his beliefs because he " believes " them to be morally correct. Free will accomplishes that. If the Lord God Jehovah rejects a man like Carl Baydala in his Heaven then God cannot exist. Or, if he exists he cannot be moral. He produced the man with all of his faults and all of his beliefs as a function of free will. Now, Carl Baydala could say to the Lord: you created free will and this is the result. Please save me because you are at fault for making me like this. I think Carl Baydala could live with something like that. But, instead, he takes a more principled route. He challenges God's logic, centering on existence, namely the debate concerning idealism and materialism. Carl Baydala takes a position and defends it, based again, on the idea of free will. He is allowed freedom of expression under this concept. Just because he disagrees with God should not signal his condemnation and rejection from Heaven. Rather, quite the opposite should occur. That is why he jumped on the chance to help God improve his system for the universe. But, yet God rejects him because he is supreme and all powerful and demands obedience. Carl is a rebel at heart and God should know this because he created him. Would God want or expect Carl Baydala to act out of character? Either God does not exist or he is immoral. If he is moral he does not exist, but if he does exist he can be no more than a human being. Or, in the alternative, created by a human being.
.
.
* * * *
.
Richard Dawkins ( Atheist ) and Alistair McGrath ( Christian )
Discuss the existence of God:
.
.
.
.
.
The whole history of philosophy from the Greeks down to the present day consist of a struggle between two diametrically opposed schools of thought—materialism and idealism. Here we come across a perfect example of how the terms used in philosophy differ fundamentally from everyday language.When we refer to someone as an "idealist" we normally have in mind a person of high ideals and spotless morality. A materialist, on the contrary, is viewed as an unprincipled so-and-so, a money-grubbing, self-centred individual with gross appetites for food and other things—in short, a thoroughly undesirable character.This has nothing whatever to do with philosophical materialism and idealism. In a philosophical sense, idealism sets out from the view that the world is only a reflection of ideas, mind, spirit, or more correctly the Idea, which existed before the physical world. The crude material things we know through our senses are, according to this school, only imperfect copies of this perfect Idea. The most consistent proponent of this philosophy in Antiquity was Plato. However, he did not invent idealism, which existed earlier.The Pythagoreans believed that the essence of all things was Number (a view apparently shared by some modern mathematicians). The Pythagoreans displayed a contempt towards the material world in general and the human body in particular which they saw as a prison where the soul was trapped. This is strikingly reminiscent of the outlook of mediaeval monks. Indeed, it is probable that the Church took many of its ideas from the Pythagoreans, Platonists and Neo-Platonists. This is not surprising. All religions necessarily set out from an idealist view of the world. The difference is that religion appeals to the emotions, and claims to provide a mystical, intuitive understanding of the world ("Revelation"), while most idealist philosophers try to present logical arguments for their theories.At bottom, however, the roots of all forms of idealism are religious and mystical. The disdain for the "crude material world" and the elevation of the "Ideal" flow directly from the phenomena we have just considered in relation to religion. It is no accident that Platonist idealism developed in Athens when the system of slavery was at its height. Manual labour at that time was seen, in a very literal sense, as a mark of slavery. The only labour worthy of respect was intellectual labour. Essentially, philosophical idealism is a product of the extreme division between mental and manual labour which has existed from the dawn of written history down to the present day.The history of Western philosophy, however, begins not with idealism but with materialism. This asserts precisely the opposite: that the material world, known to us and explored by science, is real; that the only real world is the material one; that thoughts, ideas and sensations are the product of matter organised in a certain way (a nervous system and a brain); that thought cannot derive its categories from itself, but only from the objective world which makes itself known to us through our senses.The earliest Greek philosophers were known as "hylozoists" (from the Greek, meaning "those who believe that matter is alive"). Here we have a long line of heroes who pioneered the development of thought. The Greeks discovered that the world was round, long before Columbus. They explained that humans had evolved from fishes long before Darwin. They made extraordinary discoveries in mathematics, especially geometry, which were not greatly improved upon for one and a half millennia. They invented mechanics and even built a steam engine. What was startlingly new about this way of looking at the world was that it was not religious. In complete contrast to the Egyptians and Babylonians, from whom they had learnt a lot, the Greek thinkers did not resort to gods and goddesses to explain natural phenomena. For the first time, men and women sought to explain the workings of nature purely in terms of nature. This was one of the greatest turning-points in the entire history of human thought. True science starts here.Aristotle, the greatest of the Ancient philosophers, can be considered a materialist, although he was not so consistent as the early hylozoists. He made a series of important scientific discoveries which laid the basis for the great achievements of the Alexandrine period of Greek science.The Middle Ages which followed the collapse of Antiquity were a desert in which scientific thought languished for centuries. Not accidentally, this was a period dominated by the Church. Idealism was the only philosophy permitted, either as a caricature of Plato or an even worse distortion of Aristotle.Science re-emerged triumphantly in the period of the Renaissance. It was forced to wage a fierce battle against the influence of religion (not only Catholic, but also Protestant, by the way). Many martyrs paid the price of scientific freedom with their lives. Giordano Bruno was burnt at the stake. Galileo was twice put on trial by the Inquisition, and forced to renounce his views under threat of torture.The predominant philosophical trend of the Renaissance was materialism. In England, this took the form of empiricism, the school of thought that states that all knowledge is derived from the senses. The pioneers of this school were Francis Bacon (1561-1626), Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and John Locke (1632-1704). The materialist school passed from England to France where it acquired a revolutionary content. In the hands of Diderot, Rousseau, Holbach and Helvetius, philosophy became an instrument for criticising all existing society. These great thinkers prepared the way for the revolutionary overthrow of the feudal monarchy in 1789-93.The new philosophical views stimulated the development of science, encouraging experiment and observation. The 18th century saw a great advance in science, especially mechanics. But this fact had a negative as well as a positive side. The old materialism of the 18th century was narrow and rigid, reflecting the limited development of science itself. Newton expressed the limitations of empiricism with his celebrated phrase "I make no hypotheses." This one-sided mechanical outlook ultimately proved fatal to the old materialism. Paradoxically, the great advances in philosophy after 1700 were made by idealist philosophers.Under the impact of the French revolution, the German idealist Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) subjected all previous philosophy to a thorough criticism. Kant made important discoveries not only in philosophy and logic but in science. His nebular hypothesis of the origins of the solar system (later given a mathematical basis by Laplace) is now generally accepted as correct. In the field of philosophy, Kant’s masterpiece The Critique of Pure Reason was the first work to analyse the forms of logic which had remained virtually unchanged since they were first developed by Aristotle. Kant showed the contradictions implicit in many of the most fundamental propositions of philosophy. However, he failed to resolve these contradictions ("Antinomies"), and finally drew the conclusion that real knowledge of the world was impossible. While we can know appearances, we can never know how things are "in themselves."This idea was not new. It is a theme which has recurred many times in philosophy, and is generally identified with what we call subjective idealism. This was put forward before Kant by the Irish bishop and philosopher George Berkeley and the last of the classical English empiricists, David Hume. The basic argument can be summed up as follows: "I interpret the world through my senses. Therefore, all that I know to exist are my sense-impressions. Can I, for example, assert that this apple exists? No. All I can say is that I see it, I feel it, I smell it, I taste it. Therefore, I cannot really say that the material world exists at all." The logic of subjective idealism is that, if I close my eyes, the world ceases to exist. Ultimately, it leads to solipsism (from the Latin "solo ipsus"—"I alone"), the idea that only I exist.These ideas may seem nonsensical to us, but they have proved strangely persistent. In one way or another, the prejudices of subjective idealism have penetrated not only philosophy but also science for a great part of the 20th century. We shall deal more specifically with this trend later on.The greatest breakthrough came in the first decades of the 19th century with George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831). Hegel was a German idealist, a man of towering intellect, who effectively summed up in his writings the whole history of philosophy.Hegel showed that the only way to overcome the "Antinomies" of Kant was to accept that contradictions actually existed, not only in thought, but in the real world. As an objective idealist, Hegel had no time for the subjective idealist argument that the human mind cannot know the real world. The forms of thought must reflect the objective world as closely as possible. The process of knowledge consist of penetrating ever more deeply into this reality, proceeding from the abstract to the concrete, from the known to the unknown, from the particular to the universal.The dialectical method of thinking had played a great role in Antiquity, particularly in the na�ve but brilliant aphorisms of Heraclitus (c.500 B.C.), but also in Aristotle and others. It was abandoned in the Middle Ages, when the Church turned Aristotle’s formal logic into a lifeless and rigid dogma, and did not re-appear until Kant returned it to a place of honour. However, in Kant the dialectic did not receive an adequate development. It fell to Hegel to bring the science of dialectical thinking to its highest point of development.Hegel’s greatness is shown by the fact that he alone was prepared to challenge the dominant philosophy of mechanism. The dialectical philosophy of Hegel deals with processes, not isolated events. It deals with things in their life, not their death, in their inter-relations, not isolated, one after the other. This is a startlingly modern and scientific way of looking at the world. Indeed, in many aspects Hegel was far in advance of his time. Yet, despite its many brilliant insights, Hegel’s philosophy was ultimately unsatisfactory. Its principal defect was precisely Hegel’s idealist standpoint, which prevented him from applying the dialectical method to the real world in a consistently scientific way. Instead of the material world we have the world of the Absolute Idea, where real things, processes and people are replaced by insubstantial shadows. In the words of Frederick Engels, the Hegelian dialectic was the most colossal miscarriage in the whole history of philosophy. Correct ideas are here seen standing on their head. In order to put dialectics on a sound foundation, it was necessary to turn Hegel upside down, to transform idealist dialectics into dialectical materialism. This was the great achievement of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. Our study begins with a brief account of the basic laws of materialist dialectics worked out by them.
.
Source here:
.
IDEALISM
.

This is the view that the only reality is the ideal world. A well known exponent of this view was Plato, a philosopher in ancient Greece (428-347 B.C.). Plato believed that the physical world around us is not real; it is constantly changing and thus you can never say what it really is. There is a world of ideas which is a world of unchanging and absolute truth. This is reality for Plato. Does such a world exist independent of human minds? Plato thought it did, and whenever we grasp an idea, or see something with our mind's eye, we are using our mind to conceive of something in the ideal world. There are a number of proofs of this ideal world. The concepts of geometry, such as the concept of a circle, which is a line equidistant from a point, is something which does not exist in the physical world. All physical circles, such as wheels, drawings, etc. are not perfectly round. Yet our mind has the concept of a perfect circle. Since this concept could not come from the physical world, it must come from an ideal world. Another proof is that from moral perfection. We can conceive of a morally perfect person, even though the people we know around us are not morally perfect. So where does someone get this idea of moral perfection? Since it could not have been obtained from the world around us, it must have come from an ideal world. Platonism has been an extremely influential philosophy down through the centuries.
.
Source here:
.
.
A special notice to my valued readers:
.
Please note this one act play is not meant to be a discussion about death, per se, ( such as my own ) but rather is an indication of my current interests, namely the study of philosophy, and in particular, ideas concerning ' Idealism ' and ' Materialism '. ( I believe in the notion of Materialism as an explanation of life and as a means of understanding ) I thought a good way to try and understand these concepts was to put myself in a position with the Christian God ( origins of Idealism ) in an attempt to clarify these issues in my mind.