Spheronics: The True Peace Megascience.
Its Technology and Roadmap for XXI Century.
14. Structural Theodicy of the Spheronics’ True Peace
By Leo Semashko and Rudolf Siebert (+coauthors)
Below you find once more my now corrected short theodicy essay. Please, use this form for your further considerations.
from the House of Mir.
Leo Tolstoy, and Ivan Ilyin were rooted in the Christian tradition. While Mahatma Gandhi was a Hindu, his central principle of non - violent resistance was taken from Christianity, from the Sermon on the Mount, from its fourth commandment:
You have heard how it was said: eye for eye and tooth for tooth. But I say this to you: offer the wicked man no resistance. on the contrary, if anyone hits you on the right cheek, offer him the other as well; if a man takes you to law and would have your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone orders you to go one mile, go two miles with him Give to anyone who asks, and if anyone wants to borrow, do not turn away.(Exodus 21:24-25; Matthew 5:38-42)
Mahatma Gandhi was more Christian than many Christians. Jesus own teaching on peace and war was highly dialectical. He said on one hand at the beginning of his teaching:
Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth: it is not peace I have come to bring, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father,, a daughter against her mother, a daughter -in - law against her mother-in-law. A man's enemies will be those of his own household.(Matthew 10: 34-39)
Jesus said on the other hand at the end of his teaching:
Peace I bequeath to you,
my own peace I give you,
a peace the world can not give, this is my gift to you.( John 14:27)
When Peter wanted to defend Jesus against the Jewish police, which wanted to take him prisoner at Mount Olive, he told him to put his sword away. Jesus dialectical teaching on war and peace lead to different opinions among his followers, including Leo Tolstoy, and Ivan Ilyin, and Mahatma Gandhi, and Leo Semashko.
The early democratic, as well as communistic Church excluded soldiers entirely from its community. Itwas only with Emperor Diocletian and his cancellation of the Non licet esse vos for Christians, and with the conversion of Emperor Constantine, and with Augustine's Just War Theory, that the Church considered defensive, just wars to be justified. There appeared the army chaplains. There started the Constantinian Christianity. But only twice in the 1500 years since Augustine did a king, or a queen, not make war, because it did not meet the conditions of the Just War Theory. In all other cases both combatants considered their war to be just. In spite of the fact that the Just War Theory was a failure, it continues to the present. The American Administration still used it for the war in Iraq.
Hundreds of army chaplains participated in Barbarossa and gave their blessings on the basis of the Lateran Treaty between Vatican and Mussolini, and the Empire Concordat between the Vatican and Hitler, while 4 million European soldiers marched to Leningrad, and Moscow, and Kiev, and killed 26 million Russians and 6 million Jews, preparing the colonization of Russia up to the Volga. Robert Oppenheimer, the father of the atomic bomb, demonstrated a most aggressive, authoritarian personality from his youth on. In college, he tried to kill a co-student with a poisoned apple. When Oppenheimer came to the completion of his absolute, nuclear weapon in the Manhattan Project, he identified himself with the third person of the Hindu Trinity, Shiva, not as the God of life, but rather as the God of the death of the worlds. Oppenheimer named the first exploded, atomic bomb Trinity, the holiest name in Christianity. Later on the Russians named one of their own atomic weapons Satan, certainly the theologically most adequate name, taken from Judaism, Christianity and Islam. After Oppenheimer's atomic bombs had been thrown on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and had killed immediately over 100 000 human beings, the Church itself had doubts concerning the further validity of its own Just War Theory. At this moment in history, no living or dead world religion has a valid, theoretical theodicy answer. Who could say, that Auschwitz was a holocaust, a burned sacrifice? Who would be the priest offering this sacrifice? What would be its purpose: the state of Israel? Who could say that Hiroshima was a divine punishment? Who could say that Nagasaki was a divine test? In August 1945, an American, Catholic army chaplain blessed with holy water the two atomic bombs, which were shortly afterwards thrown on over 100 000 civilians to incinerate them, without any historical necessity.
It was the moment of utter bankruptcy for all religious theodicies. In terms of the history of philosophy and science, Christianity was the Religion of Becoming, Freedom and Complete Manifestation, in terms of Heraclitus, the philosopher of becoming. There is not a word of Heraclitus' teaching, which would not be present in Hegel's dialectical logic. Both philosophers taught panta rei. It is because of this statement, that Hegel's philosophy has been persona non grata in America, since the Great Depression. His dialectical logic is rejected. The old Aristotelian logic is continued, with some derivations. The psychological, social and cultural consequences of the rejection of the dialectical logic have been enormous, not only in military science. Hegel and his archenemy, Arthur Schopenhauer, the father of occidental, metaphysical pessimism, and Max Horkheimer, the founder of the critical theory of society, agreed, that world history could not be understood without the story of the original and inherited sin in Judaism, the Religion of Sublimity, in the Pentateuch, in the Genesis, as well as in other world religions (Genesis 3). In philosophical translation, the original and inherited sin meant, that people sacrificed the happiness of others for their own happiness. Every nation has its own original and inherited sin. The old Israelites built their state on the annihilation of the Midians and of other states in Canaan. (Numbers 31).The Europeans built their states in the Americas on the annihilation of the native people, and on the enslavement of the Africans. Adolf Hitler wanted to build his Third Reich on the annihilation of the Jews and the colonization of the Slavic World. The new Jewish state was built on the expulsion of 2 million Palestinians, and the occupation of the rest of them.
Each nation has to find atonement and reconciliation concerning its own original and inherited sin, before it moves into its own niche of world history. No nation wants to be reminded of its own original and inherited sin. While in all social systems the masters wanted their servants to believe that they were eternal, Hegel ,informed by Heraclitus, taught in his dialectical world history the very opposite: that the freedom of the one is superseded by the freedom of the few, and the freedom of the few is superseded by the freedom of all. Not only the servants, but also the masters die, and are replaced, until all human beings will be free, and can develop their potential fully. Hegel learned from Heraclitus also: Polemos pataer panton. After Einstein, Oppenheimer, Heisenberg and his student Ivan Supec, this sentence has become most problematic. When my friend Ivan Supec was asked by the Tito Government to produce an atomic bomb for Yugoslavia, and the other non-aligned nations, he refused to do so. He even stopped teaching quantum physics in the University of Zagreb, Instead he founded a global peace movement. I became part of it in Dubrovnik, where I worked in Ivan Supec's Inter-University Center for over 40 years.
If spheronics wants to face the most horrible theodicy problem, the goodness of God, the freedom of man, and the origin of evil, developed by Leibniz, ridiculed by Voltaire in his Candide, and by the bourgeois enlightenment, and reconstructed dialectically by Hegel, it must differentiate between history and evolution. It can also not be dualistic, but must be dialectical: determinate negation, concrete negation. A critical, dialectical spheronics must explore the origin of evil specifically, namely, e.g. as the origin of exclusive, authoritarian, totalitarian fascism, in its different forms, in the 20th and 21st centuries. one goal of this fascism has been from its very beginning up to the present the colonization of the Slavic World for Europeans without space.
The denazification worked in the German Democratic Republic. It did not work in the German Federal Republic. My uncle Dr. Karl Siebert had been the national-socialist judge in Geisa, near what today is called Point Alpha in Thüringia, where the Russian and American army, members of an anti-fascist alliance, met in Summer 1945, according to the Yalta and Potsdam Agreement. My uncle was denazified in the German Democratic Republic. He was punished for his having been a Nazi, and he was sentenced to work in a kali mine near Geisa. He lost his pension. But he was able to flee into the West, into the German Federal Republic, where he found new employment in his profession, and his pension was restored. Denazification was suspended to a large extend in the German Federal Republic, in order to win over the German people for the Cold War against the Soviet Union. Marshal plan and consequent economic miracle helped further.
Admittedly, denazification was not stopped completely in the German Federal Republic. Thus my cousin, anti-fascist Judge Persecke, participated in the Auschwitz Trial in Frankfurt a.m. in the 1970ties. His hairs became white in a short time, not only because of the witnesses reporting on the terrible Auschwitz crimes, but also because of the pressure he received from the German population, who told him not to prosecute German compatriots, who had only done their duty according to the prevailing German law, thirty years earlier. A critical, dialectical spheronics may very well be able to penetrate the origin of evil in its most recent, most concrete, historical form of fascism, threatening a nuclear, or hydrogen World War III, and thus practically to postpone it, or even to prevent it, in the name of the goodness of God and the freedom of man.
Thank you very much for your strong support and development of the ideas of social theodicy for spheronics and for your co-authorship in paragraph-13. Your updated essay on theodicy inspired me to a new, joint paragraph-14 as a transition to paragraph-15, dedicated to "Spheral Democracy", which removes the social evil of theodicy with a new, spheral organization of society instead of a branch, corporate one, generating theodicy. You initiated the addition and renewal of spheronics with critical theodicy so that it becomes “Critical, dialectical spheronics may very well be able to penetrate the origin of evil in its most recent, most concrete, historical form of fascism, threatening a nuclear, or hydrogen World War III,” Your valuable covenant to spheronics I tried to fulfill in model-14 below.
Rodney Atkinson found a total and totalitarian corporatist mode/way of existence for social evil, pathology and violence. It perverts the natural, but still unknown to humanity, spheral, true and sociogenetic way of its existence, intuitively discovered by Gandhi, Vernadsky and Chardin, which is scientifically substantiated and revealed in spheronics.
The organizational evolution of humanity goes from corporatism to spherism, from branch to spheral organization of social production and true peace, preserving and developing all positive corporate achievements. Your ideas of theodicy and corporatism in spheronics receive a fundamental scientific, sociological and philosophical justification, without which it is insufficient both in a theoretical and pragmatic sense.
Therefore, inspired by your ideas, today I quickly built model-14, which synthesizes in synergy and integrates your ideas of theodicy and corporatism into spheronics and is proposed for discussion to all coauthors until September 15th.
Best wishes for you good health and true peace,
Model-14. Spheronics’ Structural Theodicy.
Corporate Structural Evil, Pathology and Violence Against True Peace
by Social Production Spheres
Dialogue: Pro and Contra
Leo Semashko, Russia
Rudolf Siebert, USA