Modern logical reliability is no core value of the POMO. The most competent of POMOS prefers debilitating ignorance, mental anguish and copious amounts of anxiety medication to the common sense of Modern predictability, and this repulsion spans every cultural variant in his life from airbags to religion. The problem, I believe, hinges upon a proper framing of the Modern concept of truth.
For many reasons I will provide, the Modern "liberal" and "conservative" concepts of truth are both relative. I know that the especially conservative Modern argues that he has stood and continues to stand solely upon "absolute" truth, but I am going to eventually explain how every Modern, regardless of his religious or political affiliation, is a product of a relative view of truth. Then I am going to explain how the POMO's context and baseline of truth has been this relative view of truth. Then I am going to illustrate from the POMO's cultural perspective how if truth is relative, then the POMO is obligated to "play" with logic.
For many reasons I will provide, the Modern "liberal" and "conservative" concepts of truth are both relative. I know that the especially conservative Modern argues that he has stood and continues to stand solely upon "absolute" truth, but I am going to eventually explain how every Modern, regardless of his religious or political affiliation, is a product of a relative view of truth. Then I am going to explain how the POMO's context and baseline of truth has been this relative view of truth. Then I am going to illustrate from the POMO's cultural perspective how if truth is relative, then the POMO is obligated to "play" with logic.
Modern logical reliability relies upon a mechanistic system indispensable to the rational thought of the Modern, whereas the POMO navigates mechanistic systems with incessant suspicion ultimately undermining his ability to reason with Modern logic. The net result is his genuine inability to logically deduce within the constraints of Modern thought-forms. Let me be clear: Modern and POMO thought forms are not the same. Because of incompatible referential frames, Modern common sense is not the same common sense to the POMO. And I am talking about a baseline standard.
Key to understanding the matrix of POMO reasoning is analyzing contrasts between POMO and Modern cultures. Observing their differences in science is a demonstrable way to extrapolate the values of each. I will outline the development of these two views through three scientific developments: Newton's Laws of Motion (1687), Einstein's Theory of Relativity (1905) and Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle (1927).
Newtonian Physics is the direct ancestor of Modern logical reliability and largely responsible for the development of Modern sensibilities, aka, common sense. In his Laws of Motion Newton outlines three rules of deduction to be applied to physical objects:
Law 1: Every object remains in a state of rest unless acted upon by an equal or greater outside force. Every effect has a sufficient (strong) cause, so that it is impossible to attribute an effect to an insufficient (weak) cause. For wood to burn (effect), it must be produced by a cause strong enough to produce the burning. A series of sufficient causes and effects is called a “chain of events” and makes it possible to trace an event back to its original cause. The ability to "link" ideas in this way is a Western value and a hallmark expression of a free individual.
Law 2: Any object enacted on by an outside force will respond in the direction of a right line from the point at which it was enacted upon. An object forced upon by another object is “forced” to move in the direction of a right line from the point of impact. Notably called the law of entropy, an object at rest will move in the direction of a right line eventually to return to a state of rest once more. A fire will burn up wood until the wood is no more. A fire “wants” to extinguish itself. So the Western aspiration to satisfactory “conclusions” was codified. Perpetually inconclusive motion (like anxiety) is no original Western value.
Law 3: The effect of an action upon an object results in an equal and opposite reaction of the subject. The action-reaction law or reciprocal motion maintains that not only does fire interact with wood, but the wood reciprocates by “wanting” to be burned. The wood, assumed to be passive, is equally contributive. So the Western value of reciprocal motion (reciprocal engagement) via organically covenantal or mutually contractual relationships is an expectation unique to the Western Hemisphere.
Newton's laws codified the idea of the integrated system and contributed to the normalization of the common Modern man an unwavering logical reliability in the material consistency of the universe. The idea eventually splayed into two very broad, divergent interpretations of Newton's system.
