See MiracleLikeNature.BlogSpot.com
Of these the paradise theory books and the thinking course were before the two last letters, and all or just about all others later. Most of the videos were also before tge two last letters.
keskiviikko 7. helmikuuta 2024
perjantai 29. huhtikuuta 2011
The White House of Bush on 4th of July
Round stars
Hannele Tervola <hannele.tervola@gmail.com> 4. heinäkuuta 2007
Vastaanottajat: comments@whitehouse.gov
Dear Sir,
The stars in the flag of U.S.A. have risen to be a symbol of the
nation of U.S.A. maybe more than anything else. Those small suns of
the blue sky represent high ideals and dreams. Their shape is
secondary, their idea the most important. From rock stars to
celebrities of any other area of life, all are called stars. But how
much is there still left of the old militaristic tradition? What used
to ber a symbol of the army, is now a symbol of the whole nation. What
was a traditional form of military emblem(?), is now a symbol for an
idea that unifies the nation. Still, I cannot help but wonder, if the
form of the stars is insignificant. Could the nation, if another form
of stars turned out to be much better, change its traditional symbol
to a newer more beneficial version of the same star idea?
People take the flag as a model for themselves of what some higly
intelligent nationalistic have considered best for the whole nation, a
best course of action for all. So what there is in the flag, gets
copied into people's lives – with an enermous variation, yes, but with
an enermous repetition too. So the flag has its effect on the national
identity and on the workings of the nation. That was not for what the
stars' original use was, the stars were a symbol of one militaristic
part of the nation, not of the whole nation. Now that they symbolise
in a way that is meaningful in a larger context, one must rethink
their exact form so that they effect would be as beneficial as
possible.
I come to think of at least five reason why round harmonical healthy
and happy looking stars would be more beneficial to have in the flag
than the old five-pointed stars:
1) They would make people happier by making health and happiness
appear a more rational choise and even a part of the national
identity.
2) They would support excellent moral by giving an example of healthy,
happy and harmonical ways to live and to arrange things.
3) They would optimise the nation's forces toward best benefit and
success on all areas of life by removing needless conflicts (unlike
the broken line formed by adjagent five-pointed stars), by ensuring
that all the parts of the society are kept healthy and by summing
their effect harmonically together (see this as a vector sum).
4) They would give an easy model of the world for all to understand:
cooperating parties on a same island, conflicting ones to different
islands. Each type of benefit or other phenomenom in the world is
created by some island(s). By taking into account all the islands that
people form, one can see how we together make the world what it is.
Justice and optimisation of the forces demand that those who create a
benefit, are entitled to it and no-one else, except via common islands
intended for the sharing of goods and services. For example farmers
and parents of small children form islands of their own: food
production and homes of small children.
5) More intelligence to all since a successful solution looks healthy
and happy, like a round star and unlike an edgy star. Also the
building blocks of any successful solution should preferably be
healthy and used harmonically (read: effectively) instead of just
parts and somewhat in conflict. More natural looking stars would also
be closer to the nature which could increase the nation's capacity to
holistic thinking by giving more practise in handling seen landscapes
which in turn is good for pictorial thinking which is the most
effective way to handle large amounts of information. There are also
other reasons to think that round stars would be better for
intelligence than edgy stars: the borders of concepts should be
natural – that means airy and not edgy. Also social intelligence gets
better if one aims toward health, happiness, harmony and naturality.
People are sensitive to atmospheres. They copy the atmosphere in the
flag and via it the structures in the flag. So the flag should be
chosen carefully so that it would have all the good sides that the
structures can have: health, naturality, happiness, freedom,
sovereignity and harmony. The flag's effect is even wider than the
nation of U.S.A.: it is all who support U.S.A. and all who identify
themsleves with that great nation and consequently with its flag too.
Even feelings are economically important: with each success in every
task that we feel motivated toward, we feel happy, and with each
failure we feel down. So our emotional memories, the road which we
love, show us the best road to success. So it is good to trust one's
insight about how to do things.
Humbly Yours,
Hannele Tervola
Espoo, Finland
Hannele Tervola <hannele.tervola@gmail.com> 4. heinäkuuta 2007
Vastaanottajat: comments@whitehouse.gov
Dear Sir,
The stars in the flag of U.S.A. have risen to be a symbol of the
nation of U.S.A. maybe more than anything else. Those small suns of
the blue sky represent high ideals and dreams. Their shape is
secondary, their idea the most important. From rock stars to
celebrities of any other area of life, all are called stars. But how
much is there still left of the old militaristic tradition? What used
to ber a symbol of the army, is now a symbol of the whole nation. What
was a traditional form of military emblem(?), is now a symbol for an
idea that unifies the nation. Still, I cannot help but wonder, if the
form of the stars is insignificant. Could the nation, if another form
of stars turned out to be much better, change its traditional symbol
to a newer more beneficial version of the same star idea?
People take the flag as a model for themselves of what some higly
intelligent nationalistic have considered best for the whole nation, a
best course of action for all. So what there is in the flag, gets
copied into people's lives – with an enermous variation, yes, but with
an enermous repetition too. So the flag has its effect on the national
identity and on the workings of the nation. That was not for what the
stars' original use was, the stars were a symbol of one militaristic
part of the nation, not of the whole nation. Now that they symbolise
in a way that is meaningful in a larger context, one must rethink
their exact form so that they effect would be as beneficial as
possible.
I come to think of at least five reason why round harmonical healthy
and happy looking stars would be more beneficial to have in the flag
than the old five-pointed stars:
1) They would make people happier by making health and happiness
appear a more rational choise and even a part of the national
identity.
2) They would support excellent moral by giving an example of healthy,
happy and harmonical ways to live and to arrange things.
3) They would optimise the nation's forces toward best benefit and
success on all areas of life by removing needless conflicts (unlike
the broken line formed by adjagent five-pointed stars), by ensuring
that all the parts of the society are kept healthy and by summing
their effect harmonically together (see this as a vector sum).
4) They would give an easy model of the world for all to understand:
cooperating parties on a same island, conflicting ones to different
islands. Each type of benefit or other phenomenom in the world is
created by some island(s). By taking into account all the islands that
people form, one can see how we together make the world what it is.
Justice and optimisation of the forces demand that those who create a
benefit, are entitled to it and no-one else, except via common islands
intended for the sharing of goods and services. For example farmers
and parents of small children form islands of their own: food
production and homes of small children.
5) More intelligence to all since a successful solution looks healthy
and happy, like a round star and unlike an edgy star. Also the
building blocks of any successful solution should preferably be
healthy and used harmonically (read: effectively) instead of just
parts and somewhat in conflict. More natural looking stars would also
be closer to the nature which could increase the nation's capacity to
holistic thinking by giving more practise in handling seen landscapes
which in turn is good for pictorial thinking which is the most
effective way to handle large amounts of information. There are also
other reasons to think that round stars would be better for
intelligence than edgy stars: the borders of concepts should be
natural – that means airy and not edgy. Also social intelligence gets
better if one aims toward health, happiness, harmony and naturality.
People are sensitive to atmospheres. They copy the atmosphere in the
flag and via it the structures in the flag. So the flag should be
chosen carefully so that it would have all the good sides that the
structures can have: health, naturality, happiness, freedom,
sovereignity and harmony. The flag's effect is even wider than the
nation of U.S.A.: it is all who support U.S.A. and all who identify
themsleves with that great nation and consequently with its flag too.
Even feelings are economically important: with each success in every
task that we feel motivated toward, we feel happy, and with each
failure we feel down. So our emotional memories, the road which we
love, show us the best road to success. So it is good to trust one's
insight about how to do things.
Humbly Yours,
Hannele Tervola
Espoo, Finland
United Nations Headquarters
I wrote about writing a book about the usefulness grounds for moral, based on the traditional Finnish cultural inheritage.
Tilaa:
Blogitekstit (Atom)