INTRODUCTION
We identify this website as mikekevitt.substack.com, and it is home to the Kevitt Institute of Philosophy. The website and Institute were established and founded by me: Mike Kevitt, lifetime resident of the agricultural, industrial, mining and manufacturing heartland of the United States of America.
As of this date, Tuesday, December 4, 2023, we will publish content of varying length from the perspective of four branches of philosophy: the nature of reality, the means of human knowledge, ethics or morality, and central control of human relations by physical power, which has always been used to smear politics, law and government. We might even touch, occasionally, on the fifth branch of philosophy: aesthetics or art. The main outside influence will be Objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand.
At the outset, meaning, starting now, we will publish on an irregular basis, no regular schedule. Any interested reader can check and see if there is anything new, at any time. In the future, we might adopt a regular schedule, but for now, it will be irregular, though frequent. While the content will have a basic theme, the specific subject matter can vary substantially. So, we begin now, at the beginning.
* * *
The basic theme, or “bottom line” of this website and of the Kevitt Institute of Philosophy is something correctly thought of, though in an unwarranted way, as political: Unalienable Individual Rights. This is a form of organized human relations by rules, and backed, ultimately, by physical power. This form is further characterized by required participation by all, under the rules. Thus, this form is here called central control of human relations by physical power, as distinguished from the other forms which don’t require participation. All other forms of organized human relations, under Unalienable Individual Rights, are characterized by freely chosen participation by all parties. They don’t, as a collective group, need a label by which to call them. We can merely remember that they do not, and cannot, under Unalienable Individual Rights, require anybody’s participation. Only central control by physical power requires participation by all.
But, Unalienable Individual Rights is not the only form of central control by physical power, but it is the only legitimate such form. By the definition of the concept of unalienable individual rights, all other forms are illegitimate. (A list of definitions follows, below.) As the only legitimate form, the rules of Unalienable Individual Rights are laws, and likewise, the enforcing mechanism is government. The rules and enforcing mechanisms of the illegitimate forms are not laws or government. They are criminal plans and criminal regimes, respectively.
Under Unalienable Individual Rights, all other human relations consist of parties by their own free choice, who may leave the relation by their own free choice at any time, or may be expelled. Under the illegitimate forms, all other human relations can be by free choice or by coercion, in either case, arbitrarily, even when formed by the regime, and are ruled over or disbanded or forbidden, arbitrarily, by the regime.
The “bottom line” of all illegitimate forms, and therefore of any human relations formed under them, even when formed by the free choice of all parties, is physical force. This physical force is automatically initiatory physical force, meaning, crime.
The “bottom line” of the one legitimate form, Unalienable Individual Rights, is RESPONSIVE physical force against initiatory physical force, by means of law and government. Financially, the “bottom line” of law and government is zero, or break even, in principle, variations therefrom permissible over a reasonable time period. But, in physical fact, the “bottom line” is unalienable individual rights as per the identity of those rights: no zero, no variations therefrom, no violations uncorrected. In this case, the principle is kept case by case ongoing, not just over time. This is guaranteed by adherence to the full extent of the ever increasing human knowledge and by physical force. The guarantee of adherence to human knowledge is physical force by those who already adhere to it. Only they are to be entrusted with the physical power to recognize in writing and to enforce Unalienable Individual Rights and to keep them. Only they shall man the three branches of government. The guarantee of physical force is physical force, by those who adhere to human knowledge.
Thus, the “bottom line” of Unalienable Individual Rights, law and government is, ultimately, physical force, just like that of the illegitimate forms of central control of human relations by physical power. HOWEVER, with the former, the force is responsive to initiatory force, meaning, to crime; with the latter, the force is initiatory, meaning, crime. So, the former is legitimate and the latter is illegitimate.
The “bottom line” of this website and of this Institute is, again, Unalienable Individual Rights, intellectually, by ever increasing human knowledge, but not by physical force. Neither this website nor this Institute is law and government.
* * *
This quick rundown of Unalienable Individual Rights requires extensive, lengthy intellectual explanation, and contrasting from the illegitimate forms of central control of human relations by physical power.
This lengthy explanation and contrasting, in great part requires great delving into fundamental philosophy. The explanation and contrasting will be validated and justified by the philosophy. The philosophy will validate and justify itself because it all derives from the data of the five senses, is logically consistent, fully, to the five senses, and is geared to human life, its maintenance and its improvement, in other words, to common sense. The validity and justification of Unalienable Individual Rights rests on this philosophy and on the contrast from the illegitimate forms.
The illegitimate forms, by contrast, can rest only on a non- or pseudo-philosophy which also derives from the five senses (no other derivation is possible), but runs afield of logic and thus cannot be geared to human life, its maintenance and its improvement. It might have only pseudo-common sense, if any at all. All non- or pseudo-philosophies are non-philosophical, non-thinking mental or psychological processes leading to the illegitimate forms, with their untoward and illegitimate physical actions entailed by those processes, which can be validated or justified only by a non-or pseudo-philosophy which cannot validate or justify itself or be otherwise validated or justified, because it is afield of logic and human life and, thus, floats in mid-air and anchorable to nothing, detached from and not based in reality.
Purveyors of illegitimate forms and the pseudo-philosophies and non-thinking, etc., from the Stone Age through the present, usually know all this. They are not usually just making honest mistakes. They do it knowingly, deliberately, in cold blood, out of a perverted ethics or morality as part of their pseudo-philosophies, or out of knowing disregard of any notion of morality, right or wrong, good or evil as such. It all serves a pure lust for physical power over people, a lust for arbitrary power, therefore, it is automatically INITIATORY physical force. All non- or pseudo-philosophies and everything, and everybody, coming from them are illegitimate.
The extensive lengthiness mentioned above will be books, many volumes, a small library, indeed, a library of indefinite extent, length, size. That is the ongoing work of this Institute. We now continue with a few definitions required by the foregoing to ensure better and more accurate understanding.
DEFINITIONS
The following is definitions of some words and terms used in the foregoing. They are listed in the order in which they appear above, then listed again in alphabetical order.
These definitions are formulated by this Institute, and might not always be consistent with commonly accepted definitions or with dictionary definitions. They define concepts devised and aimed at the “bottom line” of this institute: Unalienable Individual Rights. The concepts might not be commonly accepted, and might not be defined in a dictionary, but they are still formulated, defined and used here.
The words and terms are labels for those concepts, as all words and terms of any language are labels used for, and only for, concepts which, assumedly, have definitions, without which words and terms are only incoherent noises and chicken scratches, but with which they actually say things, in terms of concepts, but are still only words, not concepts. Definitions define concepts, not words. The definitions now follow.
in order of appearance
philosophy - the study of correct thinking in terms of a goal, and of how to detect and correct mistakes in thinking
warrant(ed) (unwarranted) - right, fair, well founded (power or command not intended here)
politics - candidacy (candor) for elected office for votes in favor of versions of how best to ensure recognition and enforcement of unalienable individual rights, to the exclusion of all other considerations
Unalienable Individual Rights - moral power of the individual to take physical action in the cultural context, such power inherent in and inseparable from human nature
collective - entities taken as a group due to a crucial similarity
legitimate - recognizable or informally recognized as a right
definition - brief statement of the essentially distinguishing characteristics, from all else, of the units of a concept, based on their basic similarities to each other
concept - mental construct one forms as derived from the five senses of things or of other concepts, based on their basic similarities to each other and essentially distinguished from all else
law - recognized formally, in writing by due process as legitimate and as a right
government - duly organized mechanism to recognize and enforce rights
crime (criminal) - physical action, or deception to enable physical action, which violates unalienable individual rights
coercion - physical force, compulsion
arbitrary (arbitrarily) - thought or action from emotion, wish, whim, etc., not from reason, regardless of truth or of falsehood
automatic(ally) - doing or operating without conscious or unconscious human involvement
initiate (initiatory) - begin or start use, start something where no such thing or use previously operated or existed
guarantee - assurance or reason to expect, beyond belief or trust
knowledge - awareness by the five senses and by concepts derived by the five senses, consciously or subconsciously (memory)
intellectual - referring to human intelligence, to conceptual knowledge
valid - true concepts, as equivalent to the physical, logically derived from the five senses and logically reducible to the five senses
justified - consistent with the standard of a moral sense, particularly in, but not restricted to, human relations
the five senses - passive receptors recording input in nervous tissue
logic - identification of physical and relational connections among things
human life - life of the Homo-sapiens operating and living by conceptual process and conceptual knowledge
human nature - the volitional faculty, plus all its biological prerequisites and effects
pseudo- - false, fake, counterfeit, inverted, fraudulent
derive - to make an example of, to get from, to deduce
afield - counter to, away from, astray from or off point, out of focus
thinking - concept forming and derivations from the five senses and from concepts with at least an implicit eye to human life, its maintenance and its improvement (errors inevitable)
psychology - study of the volitional faculty, as separate from other processes of consciousness
untoward - inappropriate, not favorable, contrary
perverted - abnormal, astray, against, contrary to a norm or standard
alphabetical order
afield - away from, astray from or off point, out of focus
arbitrary (arbitrarily) - thought or action from emotion, wish, whim, etc., not from reason, regardless of truth or of falsehood
automatic(ally) - doing or operating without conscious or unconscious human involvement
coercion - physical force, compulsion
collective - entities taken as a group due to a crucial similarity
concept - mental construct one forms as derived from the five senses of things or of other concepts, based on their basic similarities to each other and essentially distinguished from all else
crime (criminal) - physical action, or deception to enable physical action, which violates unalienable individual rights
definition - brief statement of the essentially distinguishing characteristics, from all else, of the units of a concept, based on their basic similarities to each other
derive - to make an example of, to get from, to deduce
government - duly organized mechanism to recognize and enforce rights
guarantee - assurance or reason to expect, beyond belief or trust
human life - life of the Homo-sapiens operating and living by conceptual process and conceptual knowledge
human nature - the volitional faculty, plus all its biological prerequisites and effects
initiate (initiatory) - begin or start use, start something where no such thing previously operated or existed
intellectual - referring to human intelligence, to conceptual knowledge
justified - consistent with the standard of a moral sense, particularly in human relations
knowledge - awareness by the five senses and by concepts derived by the five senses, consciously or subconsciously (memory)
law - recognized formally, in writing by due process as legitimate or as a right
legitimate - recognizable or informally recognized as a right
logic - identification of physical and relational connections among things
perverted - abnormal, astray, against, contrary to a norm or standard
philosophy - the study of correct thinking in terms of a goal, and of how to detect and correct mistakes in thinking
politics - candidates for elected office for votes in favor of their versions of how best to ensure recognition and enforcement of unalienable individual rights, to the exclusion of all other considerations
pseudo- - false, fake, counterfeit, inverted, fraudulent
psychology - study of the volitional faculty, as separate from other processes of consciousness
the five senses - passive receptors recording input in nervous tissue
thinking - concept forming and derivations from the five senses and from concepts with at least an implicit eye to human life, its maintenance and its improvement (errors inevitable)
Unalienable Individual rights - moral power of the individual to take physical action in the cultural context, such power inherent in and inseparable from human nature
untoward - inappropriate, not favorable, contrary
valid - true concepts, as equivalent to the physical, logically derived from the five senses and logically reducible to the five senses
warrant(ed) (unwarranted) - right, fair, well founded (power or command not intended here)
OTHER DEFINITIONS
consciousness - immediate awareness of current sensory input and of stored input (memory), and the process of remembering (retrieval of memory)
true or false - recognition of reality and of facts, or faking of reality and of facts
right or wrong - response consistent with reality and of facts, or inconsistent with reality of and facts
good or evil - response by the volitional faculty, especially in physical action, consistent with human life, its maintenance and its improvement, or inconsistent with, or, especially contrary to, human life, its maintenance and its improvement
Definitions state the essential distinguishing characteristics of the things, and of the concepts, that a concept refers to, and they differentiate those things or concepts from everything else. Concepts are mental constructs people form, based on their choices among similarities and differences in the things and other concepts they observe. That’s how people DECIDE WHAT THEY WANT to think about and how to formalize it in words and language, in speech and in writing. This is how people know what they’re thinking, writing and talking about, and how they know what others are writing, talking and, thus, thinking about. It seems automatic, like people just do it, like thinking is automatic, but it’s not. It’s by their choice.
And, it IS a matter of what people want, not just what they get, because it’s a matter of their choice, by their volitional faculty.
The only thing pushed onto people is their five senses, and perceptions from them, thus, their sensory perception. But, sensory perception has free, 100 % reign, only at the beginning, and not for very long. Before long, babies or toddlers gain a degree of control over what they perceive, and even of what they sense, according to their already formed concepts, which they chose. Adults know how to control much of what they sense and perceive, by their concepts, in order to maximize their control over what they think and over their concept formation. From the toddler age on, choice becomes ever more prevalent over the given of their sensory perception, to the extent that people use thought as their expression of their volition.
Definitions are how people control their control. Without precise definitions, even the most intelligent and educated people lose, or never gained, the control they think they have. Those who come closest to having the control they think they have are the criminals, because their “bottom line”, their final argument, is physical force. What else can be as within one’s control and certainty as that? The aftermath might be their only uncertainty and lack of control.
But, the best control and certainty, potentially total, grounded in reality (in the five senses), is very careful and precise thinking. With good concepts and definitions, this enables checking for and correcting mistakes. One need not be an Einstein. One can be below average intelligence and still do it. But, Einstein is a good high profile example. Check his General Theory of Relativity and his prediction of his theory’s truth being born out in the then coming eclipse of the Sun in 1919.
With bad concepts and definitions, checking for and correcting mistakes will likely bring confusion and more uncertainty and cause more or other mistakes, no matter how smart, educated and knowledgeable one is. (Or, one might not be at all confused by one’s confusion. One might know exactly what one is doing, and does it deliberately, in cold blood, to confuse others who are victims of their own loose concepts and definitions, an excellent path to power over them.) It all comes down to knowing what one is thinking, writing and talking about, and that comes down to carefully, precisely formed concepts and definitions of concepts.
We now present a brief essay putting forth the purpose of philosophy:
The Purpose of Philosophy
We need food, clothing, lodging etc. We must act to get them. What makes us act to get them? For animals, instincts in response to their five senses and their needs do it. That doesn't work for people. For people, knowledge gained from their five senses and thinking guides them to act in response to their needs. This, thinking and knowledge rather than instincts, then appropriate action in response to their needs, get people their food, clothing, lodging etc. So, by their thinking they get their knowledge so they know how to act, they know what to do, to satisfy their needs. So, people just think, learn, then act. Thinking, learning and acting, as a whole, is philosophy, but it's only part of philosophy. It comes FROM philosophy's basic part and it indicates the purpose of philosophy.
Thinking is a mental act taken by choice. It seems automatic, but it's not. It's by choice. In addition to all their needs and desires, choice, as the pre-condition of thought, is part of human nature. Action by knowledge by thought by choice, all four as part of a seamless whole, is part of human nature. This is preceded by the rest of human nature: its biological prerequisites, and human needs and desires. It's all a seamless whole: biological prerequisites, needs and desires, choice, thought, knowledge, action. That's human nature, the common denominator of which is the volitional faculty. (There's also sensory perception. How does that fit in? Thought comes from the five senses and only from the five senses. That's how.)
But, as instincts for animals are not always enough, so human nature can lead to mistakes in action, rooted in falsehoods (not knowledge) from mistaken thinking and wrong choices. This means no food, clothing or lodging. So, a person, when failing, must review that seamless whole and discover the mistakes and correct them. This becomes an ever recurring thing which must be controlled and minimized to ensure food, clothing, lodging etc. Ever recurring mistakes in thought is rooted in human nature, so we must control, minimize and correct them.
How? This is a study in itself. And it is simply another train of thought, like all others, subject to mistakes, to discover HOW to control, minimize and correct mistakes in thought. The study of how to control, minimize and correct mistakes in thought, not to mention detecting them before bad action from falsehoods is taken, is a study we can call, philosophy. This is a description of what is meant, here, by the word philosophy. This includes the part of philosophy mentioned above, which comes from philosophy's basic part, and which indicates the purpose of philosophy. A definition of philosophy might be: the study of correct thinking in terms of a goal, and of how to detect and correct mistakes in thinking. This definition identifies philosophy's basic part, mentioned above, which is what philosophy is, and is, thus, defined here.
This concept of philosophy, when applied, has an indefinite number of different meanings. For example, it is in the branch of philosophy dealing with human relations, which we mistakenly call politics, more than anywhere else, where we discover that thought is choice, not automatic, which is another part of human nature which must be accounted for when deciding how best to CONTROL human relations (a derivative and crucial branch of human relations which leads to realm we can rightly call politics).
In sum, we can see how human nature establishes the need of philosophy, which leads to knowledge of human nature and in turn to our awareness of the need of philosophy. Philosophy as a whole, not just everyday common sense thinking carried on every day by everybody, is needed to reliably secure food, clothing, lodging etc. For animals, the right actions are prompted by instincts. For humans, it's not instincts. It's thinking.
But, it must be right thinking, which must be discovered, thus prompting the right actions. And, though seemingly automatic, it's by choice. All these things about human nature doesn't just point up the need of philosophy. It IS philosophy, in its essence and in all its meaning. Mistakes (and deliberate wrong thinking, falsehoods and deliberate wrongdoing) points up the need of detection and correction. That's the essence, the definition and all the meaning, of philosophy. And, that is the purpose of philosophy.
This concludes the first installment of content of the Kevitt Institute of Philosophy.