RATIONAL vs. RATIONALIZATION- A strange and unusual topic eh? Maybe so, but I suspect most people get caught in the trap of either not understanding the difference , or not honoring that difference. Rational refers to objective truth whereas rationalization refers to using objective truth in an illegitimate or unrelated context in order to justify a position of some kind, either attitude or action.
In his famous Gettysburg address, Abraham Lincoln is quoted as saying, “We hold these Truths to be self evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”. The objective truths of which he spoke were to be found in the Declaration of Independence. Reasoning and reasonable men, after observing and enduring centuries of oppression by tyrannical governments of one kind or another, were able to glean those basic truths. Furthermore, they had the stalwart courage to express and promote those basic truths with their lives, if necessary.
So, rational or rationality refers to the intellectual ability to discern truth, and the willful mandate to accept, choose, love that truth.
One might ask how it is possible to know the truth. Truth is established in various ways and by using various techniques. In the world of science, truth is established by the ‘scientific process’—postulation, experimentation, observation. If the same identical result is obtained with each identical experiment, then that result becomes a scientific truth (fact-law). A similar formula may be applied in the field of philosophy—however it may be a bit more ‘tricky’ and always involves subjectivity. As in Lincoln’s proclamation, ‘We hold these truths to be self evident’ , meaning, of course, that after centuries of observation and experimentation with human beings lives, the basic truth of human dignity became obvious.
Another form of ‘truth establishment’ is Logic, which deals with premises leading to a conclusion. In its simplest form one, might use the following example: Premise 1—all houses are white Premise 2—that building is a house Conclusion—that building is white. Nothing more, nor less can be added to that proposal because no other factual information is available, However, in the ‘real world of speculation and rationalization, the average ‘Jack or Jill’ may be caught expounding endlessly about the additional qualities of that structure. So, in such a case, one rationalization leads to a pseudo-truth which may be expounded upon and expanded to the point that, in very short order, that basic house could not be recognized using verbal communication.
Here we are, at this very moment, embroiled in a national revolt because the ‘truth’ of Lincoln’s observation has been ignored—likely by rationalizing individuals. At the same time, decent, respectable, citizens are attempting to stage ‘peaceful objection’ to such rationalized activity. Their voices, however, have been drowned out for the most part by ‘insurgents’ who have a different agenda—that seems to be overthrow of our government which was founded on a precious concept of equality of all and prospects of happiness for all. Their subversive agenda no doubt sprang from hatred and deceit and is justified in their minds by the ‘rationalization process’.
Now, lets turn to our Creator which President Lincoln recognized. Just who is that Creator? How do we know that there is such an entity and if there is, what is it like?
Simple observation of world history will demonstrate rather clearly that our Creator has been denoted with at least a thousand different titles, understandings, qualities, abilities, attitudes, demeanors, locations and intentions. How is that possible when literally each person speaks rather authoritatively about ‘his/her Creator’? The answer to that question lies in a very simple framework called ‘Rationalization’.
Throughout the eons, each king, society and person, aided by the process of rationalization, has created an ‘image’ of their Creator. Their god/ being, of course, was fashioned nearly always for self-serving purposes. In more ‘modern times (6,000 years), those Gods served a wonderful purpose—-to keep the troops in line.
Of course, most of those ‘gods’ were fashioned with human qualities—selfishness, ire, revenge, mercy—a little bit of occasional love—but don’t get too snuggly—you’ll get burned.
Quite obviously, that god had to be appeased, and, usually, with sacrifice—RELIGION WAS BORN.
That form of rationalization possibly began with concepts of god/s and , of course has pervaded the human ‘thought process’ ever since—rather dramatically negatively, I might add. Just look at our streets this very minute.
How did all this confusion about God come about? Remarkably, everyone, including ‘Honest Abe’, talked/talks about god, but not a single one knows God—none were able to define the essence of their god.
With God’s help, I did.
Without an essential definition, absolutely nothing nor any one, especially God, has any meaning at all.
My definition: God is a Perfect Rational Being. That Perfect Rationality means that with its Perfect Intellect, it perceived ‘all’, and with its Perfect Will, it loves (accepts, chooses, wills ) ‘all’. Furthermore and most importantly, there is not the slightest possibility of ‘any rationalization’ coming from that Perfect Intellect’.
If you choose rationality over Rationalization, please read my two little books, Wilderness Cry, and Peace in Spirituality.
906242_Press Release for Wilderness Cry
Press Release for Peace in Spiritiality
AFFLICTED: as a young child and young adult, it was rather commonplace to hear someone being spoken of as ‘a poor afflicted child or person’. I learned rather quickly the implication of that word ‘afflicted’. It meant that the person being spoken of generally had experienced the misfortune of being befallen with a painful and/or crippling disease or disorder.
Now, I ask you to go look in the mirror—look yourself squarely in the face and answer that question, and then ask yourself ‘why is my religion better?’ I would suggest the usual answer would be that you were ‘raised a Catholic, a Methodist, a Baptist etc. In other words, each of us has been brainwashed from the time we were little kids on with that kind of thinking—Joe is OK but he goes to the Baptist Church; we’re Methodists. It goes without saying that If one Church were as ‘good as the next’, there’d be only one church.
COST-When we think of ‘cost’, likely the first thing that comes to mind is how much money we have to pay for something—how much does it cost. However, costs come in many forms and fashions—some overt and obvious—others obscure and/or hidden.
One could go on and on about the various consequential costs of our attitudes and activities. Seemingly, most of those consequences are either not recognized or , for what ever reason, ignored.
So how do we ever correct that evil and ‘eliminate that terrible oppressive cost’? I can assure you, there is only one absolute and mandatory method—we must all become like-minded in our understanding of God’s essence. We must abandon the mythology and superstition thrown at us for ages and ages.
For those who may not know, a quantum is the smallest particle of energy in existence which cannot be farther subdivided. There are, in fact, several varieties of these particles. Each has been given a name such as photon, electron, boson, etc. It is of particular interest to note that each is identical to and indistinguishable from its counterparts. Furthermore, each is ‘perfect in both form and function’—never changing nor changeable.
I am certain that Jesus did understand God’s essence—he attempted desperately to impart that knowledge to his disciples. As far as I can tell he failed miserably. Biblical scholars have shown us conclusively that the writings at hand have been so distorted over the centuries as not to be reliable. It’s very likely that we will never know.



All one has to do is investigate a teensy-weensy bit to understand that the bible was written, rearranged and rewritten dozens, maybe hundreds of times by people who ‘had an axe to grind’. They were all astrologers at heart—the celestial bodies controlled everything—even the ‘star of Bethlehem’ led the astrologers (magi, wise men) to King Herod in search of baby Jesus. That made a great story for those who knew that the ‘earth was flat’, who knew that the earth was the ‘center of the universe, who knew that God was a grizzled old man sitting in the clouds ready and willing to ‘crack the whip’ on anybody or anything that crossed him. They had absolutely no idea of science which is knowledge, which is truth.
ESATER-What a glorious day—so most of us have been taught to think and believe. So, what’s so glorious about Easter? If someone ask you to explain the significance of Easter, what would you tell them?—would you have a definitive answer? I truly would like to hear a few of those answers.
When Jesus began speaking and teaching of an ‘all loving God’, the Jews mind-set just was not ready nor capable of accepting such a philosophy. Jesus was quite aware of their attitude—he recognized that his task was severe, but he accepted the challenge. Knowing full well that his message would not be well accepted by the Jewish hierarchy, Jesus stayed in the shadows trying desperately to educate his apostles and followers to his ‘new commandments of love’—God and neighbor. It seems very doubtful that he ever succeeded—-We’ll never know.
But what about the ‘Resurrection’?—Jesus had told his followers he ‘first had to die’. In their greed and exclusionary demeanor, they had to have a recreation of Paradise and they had to have it now. They could see plainly that Jesus was dead—-he had to come right back to finish the job. That meant he had to ‘raise from the dead’ and ‘ascend into heaven’—the ‘second coming ‘ was both mandatory and immanent. Therein lies Paul’s injunction to his followers to ‘abandon their usual lifestyles of marriage, family, children, etc.; put on a holy face and prepare for Jesus immanent return—maybe tomorrow’ (paraphrased).
What did happen is this—through his teaching and death, Jesus ‘turned on the lights of God’s truth and love’. He became the Christ—the light of the universe. He demonstrated for all to see the perfect love of God.