3.6/B2) Confrontation and Pseudo-Power

When it comes to a B2-breakthrough, even terror organizations like the Nazis, ISIS and Hamas have a caring side for those who succumb to them. Thus philosophy cares for people who "love" the OPTION I wisdom of relieving people of understanding the truth. By employing category errors, the B3-path that in truth that leads to live is cared to death in discussions in very >3 unsatisfactory ways for those F5-entrepreneuers who genuinely care to Ow-work out objectives towards lifefulfillment, starting with mid-wives, the founder of modern medicine, Leonardo da Vinci, understanding the laws of nature beyond dogmas, up to the lifefulfilling innate relationship truth of real human systems...

In "Being and Time" Heidegger plainly said his "Being-in" is in the world as the water is in the glass, or the garment is in the cupboard, e.g. under OPTION I. And he means the relationship of Being to the world simply with regard to a persons location in the worldly space OPTION I allows. In short YOU are like a lego piece in a toy and God like the Higgs particles that hold the whole zoo of particles together.

Then as with objects, being-present-at-hand along with others in the sense of a definite common location-relationship beings have the same kind of Being, are ontological characteristics which we call 'categorial'. In short, you have no meaning other than as a representative of some target group and are replaceable. This allows grouping people into "nazis" and "jews" and let them interact according to what such collectives are about.

Heidegger's long winded smart talk veils to glorify the above mentioned prime terrible category error of philosophy as its achievement! This is perfectly exemplified in the way of the philological, philosophically driven evolution of the German word "Wirklichkeit" – check the dictionaries: Before post-normality, "wirklich" came from "Wirkung" then meaning the impact of an essence, like the laws of nature, e.g. that of gavity impacts matter, to it them fall to the ground in lawful ways in the absence of any other interferences. Thus "Wirklichkeit" meant the causal essence (keit) such as modeled by what we still call "laws of nature" thou some intellectuals already speak of social conventions to sound mass-attractive for those too lazy such as those who failed in hard science and then turned to philosophy or some other soft. e.g. substance less subject free for anything goes...

Driven by such substance less spirits, German dictionaries define at great length the philosophical and manipulative aspects of "Realität/reality", simply the tangible facts about things and what about the claims for attentions and the ways people are organized. But then "Wirklichkeit" is treated like Cinderella by her stepmother, as a synonym to "Realität", and fancy, in English and most western languages there has never been a word with the original meaning of "Wirklichkeit"! What comes close in English, "actuality", rather point to the present politically correct way of speaking about objects that can be a cause, say poesy in enhancing the psycho-political power of common language.  This points to the prevailing, philosophically driven thinking catastrophes of western cultures which have evoked the worst human catastrophes in history with its peak of the crucifixion of Jesus, now of the living space Earth after wasting billions of so ever lived some 100 billion human beings let alone of making half the species extinct since industrialization.

The only country that stands out, specifically in the BIP-madness since 1998 is Bhutan with its Brutto National Happiness Index – the first necessary collective step since the Greeks systemically obscured and suppressed human being via the recoding definition power of philosophy, formerly called magic!

It's is time for the sufficient OPTION II, even if most philosophers and power figures abhor it as their stumbling block for their hidden agendas, for the same reasons the Pharisees had Jesus crucified. Fyodor Dostoyevsky in his novel "The Brothers Karamazov" has revived this confrontation between OPTION I and OPTION II in the parable of "The Grand Inquisitor" with that power figure's hypocritical interaction with the reborn Jesus in the former's prison. Here is the scenario at the end of the aged of (o-outer, i-inner) ideologies to be overcome in time by timely exchange of project-oriented competence:

First of all professionally speaking, in the outer OPTION I society, 11% tend to get educated in a temple as followers, 33% in a palace to rule, and 56% in the  market economy to serve, eventually as slaves up to masters.
Driven by the inner vocation  30% tend to find their well-being eventually in the institutions, 4% in (0.0) temples, 9% in (2.2) palaces, and 17% in the (1,1) economy.
19% are called to ride some trend, as go-between the institutions, 2%  via (0,2) aiming philosophically as scribes, to influence the ruling class, via (2.1) 7% as managers  and via (1.0) 10% pre-trans- traping as system guardians
Opposing the trend, 28%, 9% are called via (2.0) as left-wing intellectuals, via (1.2) 17% trade unionized, and via (0.1) 2% as a alternative artists of some kind
As conscious#3 objectors 23% are called via (0.3), 3% as "holy" aesthetes, via (2.3), 8% as OPTION I system incompatible ones, and via (1.3), 12% as a quasi prophets. - denounced as know-it-all. But here is it where the UNDERSTAND - individually, YOU of your corner stones take place! And then you have to internalize it via (0.0), in order to be able to stand up for it with the (0,2) courage to confront the (2,2) palace beyond its stumbling blocks - like Martin Luther in front of the assembled might of this world in the edict of Worms with: "Here I stand, I cannot be anything else, God help me!"...

Summing up, 26% are called to the content-free responsibility#1 (about quantities), 28%  to the personally-neutral responsibility#2 (about social values), 23% to the not anything-goes responsibility#0 (appearances), and 23% to personally relevant responsibility#3 (life- through task-fulfillment).

However the latter, is taboo under OPTION I as socially acceptable! It challenges OPTION I custodians and scribes, threatening their OPTION I pretentions. And this is treated as politically incorrect by pre-trans- traping the messengers of, and the bad news, first with bullying and then up to the worst of systemically liquidating it/them, whereby those on top wash their hands innocence...

Context