From—Bek—To—Clark—Request for Agent Representation—21 Apr 2003


Right Honourable Joe Clark

Tel—403 292-5632

King Christopher Bek

333, 100 Fourth Avenue SW

Fax—403 292-6031

Office of the King

Calgary Alberta T2P 3N2

joeclark@telusplanet.net

1004 First Street NW

Calgary Canada T2M 2S1

Room 636-C Centre Block

Tel—613 995-1561

House of Commons

Fax—613 995-1862

21 April 2003

Ottawa, ON  K1A 0A6

clarkj@parl.gc.ca

Dear Right Honourable Joe Clark,

Subject—Request for Agent Representation

 


Table of Contents

Caption

Introduction

Determinism and Freewill

Bad Behaviorism

Collusion Among False Gods

Authentic Freedom

Individual Rights and State Duties

The Evolution of Sovereignty

Realizing Authentic Sovereignty

The Messiah

A Sovereign Perspective

Agent Representation

Specifics of Representation

Quotations

Copy

Profile

Enclosures

 


Caption

We are compelled by reason to acknowledge the existence of natural, inalienable rights and duties independent of convention, agreement or contract.

—John Locke

 

Moral law has an absolute character.  Rights cannot be arbitrarily overwritten or weighed against the profit of ignoring them.  Duties cannot be arbitrarily set aside or cancelled by the bad results or due obedience.  I must respect your right, regardless of conflicting interests, since you alone can renounce or cancel it.  That is the point of the concept—to provide an absolute barrier against invasion.  A right is an interest that is given special protection and cannot be overwritten or cancelled without the consent of the person who possess it.  By describing an interest as a right we lift it from the account of cost and benefit, and place it in the sacred precinct of the self.  Likewise duty, if it is to exist at all, must have an absolute moral character.  In the final analysis, to treat a person as an end rather than a means is to acknowledge his rights against mine and my duties towards him—and to recognize that neither right nor duty can be cancelled by some other good.

—Roger Scruton

 


Introduction

You probably do not remember me but we met very briefly at an Italian restaurant on Seventeenth Avenue SW in Calgary a couple of years ago.  I was invited to a Progressive Conservative function by my long-time casual friend Sonya Savage who, as I understand it, was your campaign manager in the last election.  Sonya has also served as my lawyer on several occasions and has a house just two blocks from mine in Crescent Heights.  I am writing to request that you provide agent representation on my behalf to the sovereignty of Canada.  The basis of my request is that the sovereignty of Canada has failed to respect my inalienable natural rights and failed to honour its inalienable natural duties—and in so doing has committed a series of fundamental moral errors.  It is my intention to rectify this problem.  The essence of my request for agent representation is that, in light of the fact that my sovereignship dictates that I only answer to God, I am requesting you to act as my agent in dealing with the government of Canada.  The tone by which I am writing this letter is consistent with the tone which I am requesting that you argue my position to the government of Canada.  You will therefore please excuse me if it seems at times aggressive and note that this conviction is not intended for you but instead towards the government.

 


Determinism and Freewill

Determinism, which effectively represents the status quo, is the view that every event occurs necessarily from the events that preceded it—and therefore freedom only exists in such a way as to be compatible with necessity.  Freewill, in direct opposition to determinism, is the view that, while we are compelled by the past, our actions and choices are not causally determined and thus we are free at any time to radically convert.  As evidenced by the story of Creation in which Adam is given a choice, Christianity embodies freewill as an essential part of the divine plan by allowing individuals to share in God’s own nature.  Existentialism is the psychological theory which supports freewill and asserts that individuals have total freedom and total responsibility.  The self-verifying Form of the Cartesian cogito is the basis of existentialism and makes awareness of consciousness or self-awareness coincident with the act of soul-searching—therefore giving man the great gift of freewill.  Behaviorism is the psychological theory which denies the existence of consciousness and supports determinism and asserts that individuals have no freedom and no responsibility.  The perceived absence of freewill under behaviorism means that doctors, judges and cops are, by definition, gods in that they are predestined to do the right thing. 

 


Bad Behaviorism

As a way of expressing their displeasure over my behavior, for a couple of days last year the cops were calling my house a half-a-dozen times a day and pretending to have dialled a wrong number.  When I spoke to Sonya she said that this was standard operating procedure for cops.  In other words, the freedom I am afforded is not that of the manmade laws of government, but instead the acceptable behavior determined by idiot-cops whose entire intellectual scope consists of shoe-squeezing, donut-eating and Adam Sandler movie-watching.  On 18 October 2002 my former doctor Dr Karim Surani called four government agents to his office to take me to the hospital where he promised me they would provide financial assistance.  I reminded him that I was the sovereign and that my rights were being violated.  He acknowledged my claim but said that I should just blur my eyes and go along anyway for the greater good.  After being forced to go to the hospital I was told that no such funds were available.  Dr Surani violated his Hippocratic oath by harming me when overriding my inalienable rights and by lying to me.  This is the problem with behaviorism.  There is no absolute barrier against invasion.  Cops, doctors, judges and educators creepingly expropriated rights and shirk duties as they please.  When the government does not approve of behavior it simply employs its standard shock-the-monkey tactic.  And if this does not horrify you then you need to go take a long walk in the snow.

 


Collusion Among False Gods

Aristotle (384-322 BC) once said that small errors in the beginning become serious consequences in the end.  Both times when I was abducted and forced to go to the hospital in 2002 the doctors and nurses asked me whether I was considering killing myself.  I responded by saying that I agreed with Albert Camus (1913-60) that the only true philosophical question was that of suicide.  They asked me, aside from philosophically, would I considering killing myself?  I responded by saying that philosophy for me, as for Plato, is a lived experience.  Their telling response points towards a massive collusion between the false-gods of healthcare, judiciary, police, church, education and other government.  Consider that the arguments for behaviorism, the underlying psychological model in the healthcare system and society, made by Skinner, that consciousness does not exist and that determinism follows from predictability, are obvious mistakes that any first-year university student could spot.  I recently read an article about a University of Calgary philosophy professor named Richard Zack who received a twenty thousand dollars grant to work on logic and the philosophy of mathematics.  René Descartes (1596-1650), who was a lawyer himself and who founded both modern philosophy and modern mathematics by tearing down the medieval and building again from the ground up, rightly argued that we should make a simple set of rules and follow them.  But our legal system is anything but simple and the complicated laws we have are further drown out in an ocean of behaviorism.  Our educational system forces children into wave after wave of tyrannical uniform testing without ever addressing profound and simple questions such as whether or not the universe is bounded.  Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-78) rightly asserted that children should be educated naturally and allowed to develop a higher sense of good in their own way at their own pace and not to be straitjacketed by the unnatural mores of society.  I read an article from 23 March 2003 in the Calgary Herald regarding how the Calgary Police are trying to curtail an upsurge of child pornography on the web.  The simple truth is that people are being forced to live two lives—the outward self that is forced to conform to increasingly-ridged behavioralistic standards—and the inward self for which society denies.  As evidenced by the philosophy professor who turns a blind eye to behaviorism, everything is pretend in our society and nothing matters.  Most people find their release for the inward self in drugs, alcohol, gambling and gladiator sports like professional hockey.  Unfortunately, some are driven underground into deviant activities live child pornography.  So in truth, the Calgary Police profit off of child pornography as much as anyone.  Rousseau rightly asserted that man is good by nature and only made bad by institutions.  Under my proposed switch from behavioralism to existentialism, the police would be sitting around waiting for the phone to ring like the Maytag repairman while studying philosophy and science and dreaming up ways to solve problems before they exist.  Václav Havel was dead right when he said that corruption begins when people start saying one thing and thinking another.  Wild inconsistencies brought on by behaviorism are not the exception but the norm.  And what is even more remarkable is that nobody cares.

 


Boundary Value Problem

The Prudent Man Rule is an ancient doctrine whereby the actions and decisions of individuals in position of authority are held accountable to the standards of behavior that a prudent and reasonable person of discretion and intelligence would conduct themselves in similar circumstances.  Special relativity in 1905 revealed that spacetime dilates as a function of velocity relative to lightspeed in accordance with the Pythagorean theorem.  A simple application of the Pythagorean theorem then reveals that the universe is bounded rather than unbounded.  Albert Einstein (1879-1955) claimed the reason he deduced relativity is that he was slower to develop and started thinking about space and time when he was older than most children.  Similarly, the commonly held belief that the universe is unbounded is neither rational nor intuitive and likely accounts for the reason that most people place their trust in authority rather than rational thought.  Following through on the rational thought of a bounded universe leads us to a dead end until we realize that consciousness is the perceptual apparatus by which we comprehend space and time.  And from the 1935 Schrödinger thought problem we know that consciousness is real—thus providing, for the first time in history, both children and adults with an elemental conceptual picture and a rational, intuitive understanding of physical reality.  Over the past two years I have spoken to no less than ten doctors about this monolithic discovery—all of whom have fled in bad faith.  I went to doctors because this mistake that the physicists have made is so utterly trivial that it could only be accounted for by a collective psychological complex.  Carl Jung (1875-1961) was dead right when he said that an individual does not have a complex, the complex has the individual.  To my dismay, I discovered that not only are the doctors suffering from the same complex, but that they are in fact the authors of it with their choice of behaviorism as the psychological model for Canada—which denies the existence of consciousness.  In 1947 in The Strange Story of the Quantum Einstein’s friend and biographer Banesh Hoffmann wrote that the salvation of our civilization depends on uniting quantum theory and relativity.  In 1948 in The Universe and Dr Einstein, in which Einstein wrote the forward, Lincoln Barnett wrote that completion of the unified field theory is the leaven of science and the loftiest passion of humanity.  In 2001 I united quantum theory and relativity with my theory of one and in 2003 I completed the unified field theory and in both cases sent copies of my findings to ten department physics chairs across North America—none of whom responded.  Canada can in no way call itself civilized until it begins to satisfy the due diligence of a prudent man in making itself accountable to Higher Truths.

 


Authentic Freedom

In making freedom central to his thought, GW Hegel (1770-1831) rightly asserted that the commonsense utilitarian conception of freedom used by economists bares little resemblance to true and authentic freedom.  Hegel believed this form of freedom to be utterly superficial for the reason that it does not look beneath the sur­face to ask why we make particular choices and what are the external forces that control us.  In other words, we are free to choose within the paradigm that is presented to us, but we are not free to choose another paradigm.  We can choose between dumb and dumber on the election ballet, but we are not free to empower a philosopher and scientist like me to advocate educational reform where children can sleep until noon, are not required to take exams, and firstly learning how to make rational arguments by studying subjects historically.  Hegel believed that real freedom only begins with an understanding of the underlying forces that control us—which is exactly what I have done by exposing the patently-defective behavioral psychological model employed exclusively in Canada.  In classic liberal trad­ition, we are independent beings with conflicting wills—and that is simply the way the world is.  Hegel, however, argued that this problem of conflicting wills can be overcome by establishing a common ability to reason so that individual-interests and sovereignty-interests ultimately become asymptotically synchronized.  The realization of authentic freedom then becomes coincident with the apprehension of self-awareness for both individuals and the sovereignty as each begins to rationally capture the others perspective.

 


Individual Rights and State Duties

Roger Scruton argued that moral law has an absolute character.  Rights cannot be arbitrarily overwritten or weighed against the profit of ignoring them.  Duties cannot be arbitrarily set aside or cancelled by the bad results or due obedience.  Individual rights and state duties must be respected regardless of conflicting interests and cannot be cancelled by some other utilitarian good.  The very point of the concept is to provide an absolute barrier against invasion.  John Locke (1632-1704) rightly asserted that we are compelled by reason to acknowledge the existence of inalienable natural rights and duties independent of convention, agreement or contract.  While the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and other government doctrines describes rights afforded and duties honoured by the sovereignty of Canada, there is no provision for the support of reasonably argued inalienable natural rights and duties.  Such rights include the Right to Say No and the Divine Right, and such duties include the obligation to acknowledge and foster Higher Truths.  The sovereignty of Canada denied my Right to Say No (Carstairs—14 Feb 2003) and my Divine Right (McLachlin—28 Sep 2002) and refused its duty to acknowledge and foster Higher Truths in regard to my theory of one, my unified field theory and my identification of behaviorism as the malignant cancer within society.  I have spent the last two years speaking with and presenting rational arguments to politicians, doctors, judges, educators and cops regarding these Higher Truths.  The response I have received is consistent with that of a six year-old who refuses to admit breaking a lamp.  Roger Scruton described totalitarianism as embodying the conviction that nothing is sacred.  In such a system, authentic human life is driven underground and the ideas of freedom and responsibility—ideas without which our picture of man as a moral subject disintegrates entirely—have no public recognition and no place in the administrative process.  The sovereignty of Canada employs the parent-child model which forbids the child to challenge the parent at all.  This totalitarianism will continue as long as Canada refuses to acknowledge reasonably argued inalienable natural rights and duties independent of convention. 

 


The Evolution of Sovereignty

In The Philosophy of Right (1821) Hegel rightly asserted that both individuals and states are sovereign agents that have will, reason, rights and duties.  By denying reasonably argued individual rights and state duties, Canada is denying individual sovereignty and thus denying the authentic sovereignty of the state.  This is why Locke claimed that sovereignty must ultimately reside with the individual.  My legally declared sovereignship thus compels the government to acknowledge reasonably argued inalienable natural rights and duties independent of established convention.  Hegel’s celebrated dialectical method is the natural law of reality that describes the unfolding of history by revealing its hidden reasons.  The process begins with a thesis which is met by an antithesis which then results in an optimal synthesis—which then becomes the thesis for the next iteration.  And this is ostensibly the thinking behind the parliamentarian model and specifically the notion of the loyal opposition as the antithesis.  In keeping with Rousseau’s assertion that those committed to practical political change must take into account existing habits, customs and ingrained sentimentality—my sovereignship is consistently set forth in accordance with the predefined role of sovereign in Canada such that I hold no political power.  As such, my sovereignship represents a legitimate antithesis to the thesis of the present closed, dumb sovereignty model.  Hegel also rightly asserted that sovereignty only arises as the end result of the dialectical process.  Both individuals and states find their sovereignty during the process of self-discovery and interplay with each other—which is why my proposals for public debate and public court on 28 March 2003 would have been an immensely useful exercise for Canada.  By being quarantined from the manmade laws of government and economic necessity, I am able to effectively hold up a mirror to the government, thus making it self-aware for the first time.  I suspect the revulsion I have experienced so far arises from the fact that the government is not at all enamoured with the newly-realized inauthentic image of itself.

 


Realizing Authentic Sovereignty

The existing Canadian sovereignty model, which is essentially represented by the behavioral and parliamentarian models corresponding to the individual and the state respectively, are commonsense three-dimensional models in that there is no accounting for the temporal dimension.  One of the problems with three-dimensional models is that they are subject to manipulation.  Behaviorism, for example, is based on the patently-false notion that consciousness does not exist.  Under behaviorism, truth of fact is subject to authoritian decisions as to which facts to accept and which to ignore.  In antithesis, my sovereignship proposes existentialism and The Bernoulli Model, which is an advanced form of portfolio theory.  Both Einstein’s relativity in 1905 and my theory of one in 2001 are a priori models that make use of the Pythagorean theorem as their underlying a priori Form.  Relativity derives its a posteriori validation from the 1887 Michelson and Morley experiment while the theory of one gets its a posteriori validation from the 1982 Aspect experiment.  The term a priori refers to a four-dimensional mathematical essence while the term a posteriori refers to a three-dimensional commonsense existence.  Existentialism is an a priori model that makes use of the Cartesian cogito as its underlying Form and then finds its a posteriori validation in the 1935 Schrödinger thought experiment which proves consciousness is real.  The Bernoulli Model is an a priori model that makes use of the mathematical concept of risk-reward efficiency as its underlying Form and then finds its a posteriori validation in business applications.  Both existentialism and The Bernoulli Model decisively shift from three dimensions to four by incorporating the temporal dimension which allows us to better remember the past so that we are able to make much better decisions about the future.  Camus was dead right when he said that memory is the enemy of totalitarianism.  My sovereignship invokes the a priori Divine Right of Kings as its underlying Form and finds its a posteriori validation in its consistency with the predefined role of sovereign in Canada, in the fact that I am putting forth a radically superior sovereignty model, and in the fact that an active sovereign is necessary, as Thomas Hobbs (1588-1679) rightly asserted, to insure that the sovereign power finds concrete expression in a sovereign in order to invoke the allegiance of the people and support the cohesion of the sovereignty.

 


The Messiah

Muhammad (570-632) was a merchant in Mecca who became the central prophet and founder of Islam.  The term Islam derives from slam and means peace and surrender—namely, the peace that comes from surrendering to the will of God’s sovereignty.  Before Islam the religions of the Arabic world involved the worship of many gods—Allah being one of them.  Muhammad taught the worship of Allah as the only God, whom he identified as the same God worshipped by Christians and Jews.  And Muhammad also accepted the authenticity of both the Jewish prophets and Christ—as do his followers.  Just like Muhammad, I have exposed the false gods to reveal that there is only one God—the mathematician—which is consistent with the same God worshipped by Arabs, Christians and Jews.  According to William Barrett in his 1958 book Irrational Man, the Jews demand a sign to verify the coming of the messiah.  Einstein, one of the greatest Jews of all time, claimed that God is the sum total of the natural laws of the universe.  My theory of one unites the laws of nature.  My unified field theory solves the problem Einstein spent the last thirty years of his life working on.  The literal interpretation of Creation is fundamentally incompatible with both rational thought and evolution.  The allegorical interpretation of Creation is totally compatible with both rational thought and existentialism.  My power simply lies in stepping back and seeing simple truths which will, if I am given a chance, be able to bring together all people into a common faith.  So why am I not the messiah?  Understand that I have no interest in being worshiped or in having dominion over anyone.  I am just tired of having to lie to survive and of being dominated by a society that is dominated by idiot-cops, idiot-doctors, idiot-judges and idiot-professors.  All I want to do is live a simple sovereign life in truth.

 


A Sovereign Perspective

Thomas Jefferson once said that he knew of no safer depository for the ultimate powers of society than with the people themselves—and if the government thinks them not enlightened enough to exercise control with wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to shed light on their discretion.  Similarly, when the people discover the government not enlightened enough to exercise good governance with wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to bring them down but to shed light on their discretion.  This is what the philosopher-king Václav Havel meant in his essay The Power of the Powerless when asserting that the people can bring down a totalitarian government nonviolently by simply living in truth.  My intention is not to bring down the government of Canada physically, but to metaphysically bring it down by holding up a mirror thereby compelling the government to rethink everything from first principles.  In order for me to hold up a mirror to the government and begin the process of awakening to self-awareness, I must be allowed to maintain an independent perspective.  In other words, I need to be quarantined.  And this has been my thinking all along in my lawful and rightful declaration of sovereignship to the sovereignty of Canada.  If I am required to work within the system, my perspective becomes tainted and I become just another piece of a sick system like everyone else.  In addition, by answering only to God the mathematician, I am establishing the first bridge between the people and the simple, beautiful truth that is so abhorrently lacking in this county.  Furthermore, if I capitulate to bad faith government cohesion, then I am letting the government off the hook for the long list of wrongdoings that I rationally argued here and in other government correspondence that have been sent out to many government agents including the National Library of Canada.  China is being chided for withholding information about the SARS virus, but I have been speaking to doctors about the impendingly monolithic paradigm shift as the result of my theory of one.  I am making some immensely important claims about society and the nature of reality that are most assuredly going to fundamentally alter the course of history.  No one at all has said anything that could possibly refute my claims.  What is going to happen when the young people suddenly realize that the government has been lying to them?  The reason that my theory is not recognized is because it is metaphysical—for which behaviorism denies.  I would assert that Canada, just like China, is in denial.  Peter Bernstein was dead right when he said that paradigm shifts are not unpredictable, just unthinkable.

 

Agent Representation

My argument is that moral law has an absolute character and that my inalienable Divine Right cannot be arbitrarily overwritten or weighed against the profit of ignoring it.  Similarly, the government of Canada cannot arbitrarily set aside or cancelled its Duty to support my inalienable Divine Right by overriding it with some other perceived good.  In addition to my challenging anyone who morally stood against me in my declaration of Divine Right to Chief Justice McLachlin of the Supreme Court of Canada on 28 September 2002, I proposed a public debate on this and related matters for 28 March 2003 to ten government agents including Chief Justice McLachlin—none of whom responded.  Furthermore, I offered Senate Leader Carstairs the opportunity to preside over the debate for which I was then willing to accept the Senate of Canada’s binding decision regarding my Declaration of Sovereignship.  Once again I received no response.  I am therefore extremely confident in saying that I have exercised the due diligence of a prudent man in giving the government ample opportunity to refute my inalienable Divine Right.  In that it is against both my interests as the sovereign of Canada and the interests of the sovereignty of Canada for me to forgo my Right to Answer only to God, I hereby formally request that you, The Right Honourable Joe Clark, as my Member of Parliament, represent my interests on my behalf to the sovereignty of Canada.  Specifically, I hereby formally grant you full agency rights in all matters concerning legal, medical and the procurement of funds from the various government agencies in support of my Sovereignship.  Furthermore, I hereby formally grant you the right to enlist the services of others to act as agents of the sovereignty of Canada on my behalf in matters relating to legal, medical and the procurement of funds.  I would also like to note that I sent out an enclosed proposal to a former client for consulting work relating to The Bernoulli Model last week.  If the government recognizes the profound significance of what I am doing here and honours its Inalienable Duty to support me, then I believe that within a few months time I can once again become self-sufficient again.

 


Specifics of Representation

The agents that I suggest you consider enlisting include legal—Sonya Savage, medical and procurement of funds—Dr Surani, and procurement of funds—my cousin-in-law.  For the record, I do not trust either Dr Surani or my cousin-in-law or any of my family-of-chance members for that matter.  If there is a crucial decision to be made, then I place my full trust in either Sonya Savage or my long-time friend.  In that what I am requesting is legitimate, I will assume that unless I receive written notice, you have agreed to the terms of this request.  If the government does not acknowledge reasonably argued inalienable Natural Rights and Duties separate from convention, or if it denies the Rights and Duties that I have argued for, I demand a written statement to that effect signed by the prime minister, the senate leader and the chief justice.  Otherwise, I will rightly assume that the government is accepting my argument and will respect my inalienable Natural Rights and will fulfill its inalienable Natural Duties as I have laid out here.  Assuming that the government does enlist the legal services of Sonya to act on my behalf, the first order of business is to ensure the halting of the unlawful foreclosure proceeding against my house.  I will be forwarding on to both you and Sonya the names and numbers of the collection agencies that have been calling.  In that I am the sovereign and that I answer only to God, any harassment of me at all is harmful and is therefore, by definition, treason.  For reference, I would note that a writer was convicted of treason in 1663 for writing an article suggesting that the king was accountable to the people.  I would suggest that you ask Sonya to firstly contact these agencies and inform them of the situation.  In that the prime minister wrote to me and forwarded my material to the Minister of National Revenue, Elinor Caplan, I would argue that he is onside for the government providing me with assistance in getting through this extremely difficult period.  Perhaps you and Sonya might coordinate the effort to work with the different parties to provide me with some financial relief and work towards restoring my credit rating to it former glorious self.  One possible solution would be for the government to either forgive all of my debt or to transfer it to the Business Development Bank of Canada and offer me a low or no interest loan.  You might also consider contacting my former doctor and asking him to offer me basic medical support and to act on my behalf in procuring in-term social assistance.  My cousin-in-law has previously told me that he would be willing to act on my behalf in working within the system to procure funds.  My family-of-chance has previously provided me with groceries and I will be making a similar request in the next few days.  I would ask you to coordinate with Senator Carstairs to insure that the services to house remain active.  I will be contacting Sprint Canada in a week with the hope of regaining access to the internet.  I would also propose the establishment of a Sovereign Trust Fund that would be used for providing basic financial support for the sovereign and, hopefully down the road, be available to restore sovereignty to all people with projects like developing prototypical schools.  In that I have clearly qualified for candidacy for the Nobel Prize, I would ask you to work on my behalf in securing consideration.  If I were to be awarded the Nobel Prize and attendant funds (I believe it is one million USD), I would first pay off any outstanding debt and then put the rest in the Sovereign Trust Fund.

 

I would remind you that it is a violation of my sovereignship to either be required to sign anything or to work within the system.  For my sovereignship to be true, I answer only to God and am above the manmade laws of government.  I am literarily my own government for which the government of Canada must support and protect.  I thank you in advance and would hope you respect that what I am doing here is profoundly important.  Socrates (470-399 BC) was the original prudent man for radically insisting that we must first answer the question of what X is before we can say anything else about X.  As far as change is concerned, X is living in truth regardless of the consequences.  That is what I am doing here.  I am asking you to do the same.

 

Sincerely,

King Christopher

 


Quotations

Truth and immutability are the same thing.

—Edgar Allan Poe

 

No problem was ever solved by the same mind that created it.

—Albert Einstein

 

Those committed to practical political change must make reference to the habits, customs and ingrained sentimentality.

—Jean-Jacques Rousseau

 

I know no safer depository for the ultimate powers of society but with the people themselves.  And if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise control with wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to shed light on their discretion.

—Thomas Jefferson

 

Men have called me mad, but the question is not yet settled, whether madness is or is not the loftiest intelligence—whether much that is glorious—whether all that is profound—does not spring from disease of thought—from moods of minds exalted at the expense of general intellect.

—Edgar Allan Poe

 

The totalitarian system, and the extermination camp which represents its most sublime expression, embodies the conviction that nothing is sacred.  In such a system, human life is driven underground, and the ideas of freedom and responsibility—ideas without which our picture of man as a moral subject disintegrates entirely—have no public recognition and no place in the administrative process.

—Roger Scruton

 

If we do discover a complete theory of everything it should be understandable by everyone and not just a few scientists.  Then we shall all, philosophers, scientists and ordinary people, be able to take part in discussing questions as to why both we and the universe exist.  If we find the answer to that it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason—for then we would at last know the mind of God.

—Stephen Hawking

 

There can be no other truth to take off from this—I think, therefore I exist.  There we have the absolute truth of consciousness becoming aware of itself.  Every theory which takes man out of the moment in which he becomes aware of himself is, at its very beginning, a theory which confounds the truth, for outside the Cartesian cogito, all views are only probable, and a doctrine of probability which is not bound to a truth dissolves into thin air.  In order to describe the probable, you must have a firm hold on the true.  Therefore, before there can be any truth whatsoever, there must be an absolute truth; and this one is easily arrived at; it is on everyone’s doorstep; it is a matter of grasping it directly.

—Jean-Paul Sartre

 

Completion of the unified field theory will climax the long march of science towards unification.  Within its framework all man’s perceptions of the world and his abstract intuitions of reality—matter, energy, force, space and time will finally merge into one.  Its goal touches the grand aim of all science which, as Einstein says, is to cover the greatest number of empirical facts from logical deduction based on the least number of axioms.  The urge to consolidate premises, to unify concepts, to penetrate the particularity of the manifest world into the undifferentiated unity is the leaven of science and the loftiest passion of humanity.  The philosopher, mystic and scientist have always sought to arrive at knowledge of ultimate immutable essence that undergirds the mutable illusory world.  Plato once wrote that the true lover of knowledge is always striving after Being—and will not rest with those multitudinous phenomena whose existence are appearance only.

—Lincoln Barnett

 

The final theory of everything will undoubtedly be a mathematical system of uncommon tidiness and rigor that accommodates the physical facts of the universe as we know it.  The mathematical neatness will arrive first followed by its explanatory power.  Perhaps one day physicists will find a theory of such compelling beauty that its truth cannot be denied—truth will be beauty and beauty will be truth.  The theory will be, in precise terms, a myth.  A myth is a story that makes sense on its own terms, offers explanations of everything we see before us, but can neither be disproved nor tested.  This theory of everything will indeed spell the end of physics.  It will be the end not because physics has been able to explain everything, but because physics has at last reached the end of all the things for which it has the power to explain.

—David Lindley

 


Copy

Right Honourable Jean Chrétien

Prime Minister of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario

Honourable Sharon Carstairs

Leader of the Senate

Ottawa, Ontario

Honourable Elinor Caplan

Minister of National Revenue

Ottawa, Ontario

Honourable Beverley McLachlin

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

Ottawa, Ontario

Honourable Stephen Harper

Leader of the Opposition and Leader of the Federal Canadian Alliance Party

Ottawa, Ontario

Ms Sonya Savage

Lawyer, Randal Jarvis Law Office

Strathmore, Alberta

Ms Brigitte Vanherzeele

Canadiana Acquitions Division and Legal Deposit Office, National Library of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario

Mr Peter Jennings

Broadcaster, ABC Inc

New York, New York

Dr Karim Surani

Eaton’s Medical Centre

Calgary, Alberta

Mr François Jubinville

Privy Council Office

Ottawa, Ontario

Mr Nigel Lloyd

Executive VP, Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada—Investing in people, discovery & innovation

Ottawa, Ontario

 


Profile

Christopher Bek is a mathematician, actuary, philosopher, scientist and writer—and is a superior spreadsheet, database and riskmodeling craftsman.  He has consulted to the top executives of one of the largest companies in Canada—and has made presentations relating to the philosophy and science of risk management in Houston and New York. Chris founded Risk Management Services in 1995 dedicated to helping executives develop scientific management practices that will allow organizations to properly serve the shareholders, the stakeholders and society in the community.  Socrates (470-399 BC) set the table for Plato (427-347 BC) by radically insisting that we must first answer the question of what X is before we can say anything else about X.  Plato then founded philosophy by daring to ask what existence would be like outside the cave.  Chris founded Philosophymagazine on 1 January 2001 in support of those who have taken a less traveled road in the struggle towards daylight.

 


Enclosures—see philosophymagazine.com

From—Bek—To—Clark—Request for Agent Representation—Postscript—30 Apr 2003

From—Bek—To—McLachlin—Notification of Treasonable Action—1 Apr 2003

From—Bek—To—Carstairs—Proposal for Public Court—21 Feb 2003

From—Bek—To—Carstairs—Proposal for Cooperation—14 Feb 2003

From—Bek—To—Mansbridge—Proposal for Public Debate—14 Feb 2003

From—Bek—To—McLachlin—Declaration of Kingship—28 Sep 2002

PM—The Bernoulli Model

re-cognizes the notion of wisdom—and argues that the world is on the cusp of a monumental paradigm shift due to the imminent fall of the authoritian model and the rise of portfolio theory in the practical incarnation of The Bernoulli Model of governance.