But I’ve told of the worldview of triunity as of an alternative to the worldview of four-person Amon, – Salem tried to object.
It’s right, but in part. You told of the energy as of some stable transition state of matter when it changes its aggregation state. Moreover, in your discussions the matter concerned the space-time continuum. That’s why the quadruple matter-energy-space-time could be divided into two pairs: matter-energy and space-time. And I consider the conversion from plain alternativeless binary to the worldview of triunity, which it encloses, to be a step forward because we are still living in the three-dimension space. In addition, in very Cairo I’ve heard the logical and coherent account of the worldview, which the matrix methods of ruling are based on, as it seems to me. I avoid the term “weapon” expressly, since many people, met with the matrix methods of ruling, would try to add the adjective “matrix” with the noun “weapon”, taken from the biblical culture, and drag it into the 21st century. But if to examine the process of ruling from the position of mutual enclosing of matrixes then the mankind has a chance to stop all the wars. It needs that these methods become a common property not just of the “elite”, but of everybody, who wishes to increase his measure of righteousness of understanding the general current of events. In this case, when some conflict appears, a manager proficient in the matrix methods will need simply achieving a higher level of understanding the general current of events and solving out the conflict from a position of enclosing matrix.
But if it would be more profitable for him to aggravate the coming conflict, well, to cause a clash between the enemies for achieving the desired result? – Salem tried to object again.
It would be unrighteousness from his side. And the day will come when he wishes he hadn’t done it. One should remember of the mutual enclosing of matrixes, which in the limit go to the matrix of God’s Predetermination. Such actions or evil thoughts will return to the aggressor, since they could not be dictated by the higher measure of understanding the general current of events. Quite the contrary his aggressive intentions, whatever he thinks of them himself, will objectively mean that he had gone down an enclosed matrix instead of rising his measure of understanding to the level of enclosing matrix. And it seems to me, that all what his happening with the USA, or precisely with their government, demonstrates just the same algorithm of the matrix ruling. And I’m thankful to you, Mr. Salem, because I needed your account for understanding of some details, linking the matrix methods of ruling with the two worldviews. Surely, I haven’t understood everything. Something has left because of many translations from language to language, but I seem to have caught the main. The Most High controls this weapon, in the sense that its use for the sake of some clan is rather dangerous for this clan. Since the weapon possesses the reflexive ability, which is known as an effect of “monkey’s paw” to the Western civilization. And the Russian “picnics”, which were the matrix-scripts of the possible variants of events development in Russia, demonstrates us this effect.
Leaving for here I tried to realize my role in these intricate processes, for which the whole world is a scene. And now, when I’m trying to solve the Russian riddle and am occupied with business unlinked with the “picnics”, I got the necessary information from all over the world from people completely unfamiliar to me! This is possible, as I now understand, only in one case: the whole my activity aimed to solving the mystery of “picnics” and their connection with the “black Tuesday’s” events, is going inside the course of matrix enclosing these events. And for not committing follies I was to understand how those two worldviews differ one from another. But I’ve got one doubt after all I’d heard here.
Please, Mr. Holmes, I’m ready to help you resolve your doubt. By I ask you to take my retelling of the information with leniency.
Well, I’ll try to state my case. Since the discussed information should be available for everyone, I think that for an abundance of complicated terms there should be simple images. And when one needs, he or she should be able to expand and rebuild with these images all necessary attributes of the two worldviews in his or her memory.
Quite right, Mr. Holmes. Such simple images exist. And the Russians told of them a lot. They are a mosaic and a kaleidoscope. Everyone is able to understand how a “mosaic” differs from a “kaleidoscope”. All pieces of glass in mosaic are connected one with another. If one moves or rotates one of them it causes the movement of not only nearest but also of rather far pieces. And though some picture’s fragments can be somehow distorted, its whole substance remains the same; no matter how does one turn the very picture. One is able to examine a mosaic picture in details up to necessary scale, to choose, remember and visually recall the whole picture as well as its single fragment.
But a kaleidoscope is a horse of a different colour. Any slight turning or a simple jog will change the substance of the picture appearing in a kaleidoscope, and every time a picture will be new and charmingly fantastical. But in contrast to a mosaic picture, a next picture of “kaleidoscope” can be neither predicted nor visually recalled. Why? – Because all the pictures in kaleidoscope are substantially empty. One sees the same unformed heap of glasses, but reflected by the system of mirrors. This system also catches any the slightest changes in the order of glasses observed in a kaleidoscope.
Since the phenomenon called a “worldview” belongs to the unconscious psychical levels, the words “mosaic” and “kaleidoscope” are just symbols, indicating its two types, which possess all the above-listed properties of “mosaic” and “kaleidoscope” accordingly. Any other types of worldview could be brought to these two. The world understanding is the creation of the worldview type, which one’s psyche is devoted to. But it belongs to the consciousness, thus it’s expressed in certain words. It means that a mosaic world understanding corresponds with a mosaic worldview. As well as a kaleidoscopic world understanding corresponds with a kaleidoscopic worldview. One can conclude from this that a mosaic worldview is unified and whole, and everything is cause-and-effect related within it. Within such worldview the world is predictable, i.e. it is stable in predictability under the influence of external, internal factors and ruling. In other words, any new facts, event, phenomena or processes, become possessions of a mosaic worldview, just complete or make more exact the substance of the already formed whole picture of the world. From here the mosaic world understanding naturally develops an idea that the objective reality is cognisable.
In difference to a mosaic worldview, a kaleidoscopic one is a list of unconnected casual facts, events, phenomena and processes. Within such worldview the world doesn’t possess stability in predictability. It means that any new facts, event, phenomena or processes, become possessions of a kaleidoscopic worldview, changes beyond recognition the whole picture of the world. This fastens a stereotype that the world is incognisable. That’s why when it comes to worldview the consciousness labels with words only some primary maximally generalizing categories discussed earlier. These categories could be divided into two groups:
matter, information, measure;
matter, energy, space, time.