Summary—This essay calls for a revolution in thinking now. Robert Frost said we dance around in a ring and suppose while the secret sits in the middle and knows. It is time to put an end to supposing and start walking the path of knowing.
Quotation—The art of revolution lies in dislodging established customs by probing down into their origins in order to show how they lack authority and justice. There must be a return to the basic and primordial laws of the state which unjust custom has since eradicated. —Blaise Pascal
In 1998 I began consulting to the CFO and treasurer of Canadian Pacific Limited (CPL) in conducting mathematical analysis, writing valuation reports and building risk management models, which later turned into The Bernoulli Model. The Bernoulli Model is an advanced application of portfolio theory. True portfolio theory brings all the moving parts together into a single organizational probability distribution—from which organizations can set a risk exposure limit (first-order risk management) and can also help select portfolio assets that are efficient in terms of risk and reward (second-order risk management). It was great working with these two fine individuals who possessed holistic perspectives. Unfortunately, the project ended a few months later because CPL split into its five subsidiaries. Next I went to consult to a company where my contact for implementing portfolio theory was a middle manager who insisted that I attend all sorts of meetings aimed at teaching me the business. But I was trying to implement what Niels Bohr called the complementary principle, which states there are two ways of looking at the same phenomenon. The tactical way of looking at risk management is in the trading room where each asset is managed individually. The strategic way of looking at risk management is at the executive level with portfolio theory where all assets are managed in aggregate. Unfortunately the middle manager would not let me develop portfolio theory independent of existing tactical practices and the project failed.
Complete Determinism. BF Skinner (1904-90) was the father of behaviorism who wrote, “Many anthropologists, sociologists and psychologists have used their expert knowledge to prove that man is free, purposeful and responsible. This escape route is slowly being closed as new evidence of the predictability of human behavior is discovered. Any personal exemption from complete determinism is being revoked as scientific analysis progresses—particularly when accounting for the behavior of the individual.” Both behaviorism and determinism are the worldview that man has no freedom and no responsibility. Both existentialism and freewill are the worldview that man has total freedom and total responsibility. In that Canada is strictly behavioristic, it means that the decision as to whether we will floss our teeth tonight was determined at the moment of the Big Bang. It also means that criminals cannot be held responsible for their criminal actions as they are predestined. People commit crimes to rebel against the lie that is behaviorism. If we were to tell people they are each responsible for the worldly state of affairs, crime would drop dramatically as it would eliminate rebellion and would put an end to the tug-of-war between governments and people.
Faith and Reason. Faith is the complete trust or confidence in someone or something based on spiritual beliefs rather than reasonable proof. Reason is the explanation or justification of an action or event based on the power of the mind to think, understand and judge using logic. Consider a Frank & Ernest comic strip showing a chick breaking out of its shell and proclaiming, “Wow—Paradigm shift.” The chick must rely on faith alone in deciding whether or not to break out of the shell. No amount of reason will help the chick decide if he should leave his home. Consider that the Church tells us we can know God by faith alone. Sir James Jeans (1877-1946) said, “God is a mathematician” and Albert Einstein (1879-1955) said, “God is the sum total of the laws of nature”—which is essentially reason. Jeans and Einstein effectively tell us that God is the mathematical laws of nature. So, as far as God is concerned, we can supplement our faith in God with reason. I would argue that both faith and reason are necessary for a complete understanding of God. Robert Solomon said, “Even though God is transcendent, He is none the less related to the material world through reason.”
Paradigm Shifts. A paradigm shift means a time where the usual and accepted way of doing or thinking about something changes profoundly. It is a radical revolution in underlying beliefs or theory; a change in attitude, confidence of a way of doing things. Peter Bernstein said, “Paradigm shifts are not unpredictable, just unthinkable.” Stanislav Grof said, “We are approaching the time of a major paradigm shift.” The paradigm shift identified by Thomas Kuhn in his 1962 book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, is a fundamental transformation in basic concepts and practices of scientific thought. He contrasted these shifts with normal science, which describes scientific work performed within an existing paradigm. Since 1962 the concept of the paradigm shift has itself shifted to include other nonscientific paradigms like philosophy that comprise profound changes in fundamental models and perceptions of reality. Paradigm shifts also apply to government responsibility for answering arguments like existentialism and the theory of one.
Rights and Freedoms. In Canada the Charter, as well as federal, provincial and territorial laws, protect human rights and fundamental freedoms. The 1960 Canadian Bill of Rights was the first federal human rights law in Canada. It guarantees many basic rights and freedoms, including the right of the individual to life, liberty, security of the person and the ownership of property. The 1977 Canadian Human Rights Act also protects human rights in the federal, public and private sectors—particularly the rights to equality and non-discrimination. The Constitution says that the Charter takes priority over all other legislation in Canada because it is part of the supreme law of Canada. It applies to all government actions—meaning Provincial Legislatures and Parliament and everything falling under their authority. This means that governments must take the Charter into account when developing laws and policies. It also means that people may go to court if they believe Parliament, Provincial Legislature or a government agent has violated their rights or fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Charter. I would add that the government is compelled by reason to acknowledge the existence of rights and duties independent of convention, agreement or contract. For example, a person could argue that the government is compelled by reason to answer arguments. As it stands now, not only does the government not respond to arguments, they will not even admit they do not respond to arguments.
The Philosopher-King. According to Plato (428-348 BC), “A just society will only be possible once philosophers become kings and kings become philosophers.” According to Wikipedia, “The divine right of kings is a political and religious doctrine of royal and political legitimacy. It asserts that a monarch is not subject to any Earthly authority; deriving the right to rule directly from the will of God. The king is thus not subject to the will of the people, the aristocracy, or any other estate of the realm.” My theory of one establishes a divine connection between myself and God. So once again, I declare myself to be the Philosopher-King Christopher. As king, I make the following argument—Consider that the Canadian Constitution “recognizes the supremacy of God” and as Einstein claimed, “God is the sum total of the laws of nature.” Therefore, the laws of nature are supreme to everything including the laws of government. In other words, the laws of nature trump the laws of government. Relativity theory, quantum theory and my theory of one are all laws of nature. As per my theory of one, I would argue the government has no legal right to take action against me while I have an outstanding claim of a law of nature. Consider also the fact that the laws of government in Canada are only a couple of hundred years old while the laws of nature are as old as the Big Bang that occurred some fourteen billion years ago.
Revolution Now. John Locke (1632-1704) said, “We are compelled by reason to acknowledge the existence of natural, inalienable rights and duties independent of convention, agreement or contract.” He also said that, “If the government violates the rights of individual citizens, then the people have the right to get rid of the government.” The government is compelled by reason to answer my theory of one. Since they have not done so, we have the right to get rid of the government. I propose we symbolically get rid of the government by recognizing me as king. I also propose that we make an amendment to the Constitution so that the government is compelled by law to answer arguments. I am arguing for a paradigm shift in thinking so that we stop hesitating with one government study after another and start following the arguments wherever they lead. I would contend that if an argument is simple, beautiful and reasonable then it is mathematically true. In short, I contend that the government should stop mulling over things and start acting on mathematical truths.
Conclusion. Ronald Reagan (1911-2004) used to say, “Trust but verify.” Trust is faith and verify is reason. In my revolutionary writing I go for the jugular while most writers just go through the motions. Robert Frost (1874-1963) said, “We dance around in a ring and suppose, while the secret sits in the middle and knows.” I would argue that it is time to stop supposing and start knowing. We should stop navel gazing and start a philosophic and scientific revolution. As Jim Morrison (1943-71) said, “The time to hesitate is through.” As Albert Camus (1913-60) said, “Integrity has no need for rules.”