terminal 0
unfinished
NEFX - Critical Thoughtform Analysis Revealing Erosive Dogma's Hollowness Regardless of the commonality of erroneous reflexive recourse to societal givens as the basis of knowing and morality, this does not absolve a particular holder under investigation of such a mentality as regards their own persuasion and cultural camp concerning knowledge and morality — especially where it is the more aggressively propagated and predicated against beings-as-such and in particular those the holder is targeting, or where the knowledge and morality is inherited by (at least perceivedly if actually second-hand) direct fiat, particularly from an ever-distant and dogma-rendered icon of the Absolute. Moreover, the grasping and righteous interpretation of such content cannot be got from memorization and regurgitation, or from mere reliance upon authority qua cultural longevity, purported source, or implicit punitive threat of the content; nor does general tendency of beings to do so regarding various sources of truth invalidate all the enterprise except for the one presently propounded or such that the source and nature of such misunderstandings can be generalized across all such sources and leveled as identical, let alone irrelevant. The ability to point obliquely to other sources of insight about the position that are supposedly sufficient to explain it doesn't change this dilemma. This is crucial to bear in mind for beings-as-such as we consider the absolute maxims certain dogmas propound supposedly to protect being-as-such yet which in practice are given exceptions for and which, by installing a provisional and contextually qualifiable term for it, allow for enactment of the very prohibited act — namely, murder -- after the beingness — namely, humanness or pre-divinity -- can be mentally erased in the thoughtholder; so that now, Erosive agents can re-appropriate mystical doctrine to extant malicious ends, and other Erosive factions can later denounce this only with the safety of retrospect and rough historical consensus, and assert that their guiding dogma absolutely condemned and defiled such re-appropriation. After all, absolute axioms that can be so excepted for do not constitute axioms proper in the Erosive dogma that hold to them regardless of their absolute, contextless content, but rather as justifications to consolidate power of deciding which beings are legitimate in the hands of the custodians of Erosive dogma as an institution (and as supposed voices of icons of the Ultimate). It gains this primacy societally in part by the ancientness it follows, thought it does not truly follow it in principle, and presumes any nuanced cooperative and adaptive efforts in creating and legitimizing thought and ethical code to be both wrong and second to dogma, and also the cause of atrocities waged in the name of said dogma. Said atrocities are themselves common historical givens from history and presume that ancient word sanctions it. But see through this facade and arise further.