To Be, Or Not to Be, — That Is the Question

The phrase "to be, or not to be" comes from Shakespeare's Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, Act III, scene I. The popular interpretation of these words is that it is a debate on suicide. Hamlets rather impersonally considers the attractions of death ("not to be"), which he likens to a sleep, over life ("to be"), whose pain seems unavoidable. But in the end he notes that the fear of possible suffering in the afterlife "that we know not of" (as opposed to the known evil that is life) tends to stop human beings from actively ending their existence.

As seen in the phrase --- to be or not to be --- the mind is using logical reasoning, in that, ‘to be’ is one extreme and ‘not to be’ is the other extreme of a pair of opposites. This phrase is Aristotelian, in that, ‘not to be’ is the contrary of ‘to be.’ Plato opens our minds by transforming this phrase into the phrase — to be and not to be. This transformation changes the term ‘not to be’ to the negative of ‘to be.’ With this change ‘not to be’ merely becomes something different. This change does not destroy logical reasoning. It merely lifts our minds above logical reasoning. Let me present an example of using Plato’s negative.

Take the phrase --- to be a Christian. Plato’s negative would generate the phrase --- not to be a Christian. The generated phrase is merely something different. Now, change ‘not to be a Christian’ into something positive. Let me choose this positive thing, ‘to be a US citizen.’ With this choice, the phrase, to be a Christian, and the phrase, to be a US citizen, become a relationship that humans created because of their freedom. With Plato, really new positives in the universe can be found. And, if Plato’s negative is used again, the double negation will reveal God. Logical reasoning does not have this ability. So, the mind has a power that is higher than logical reasoning.

Now, let me show how to relate the phrase, to be a Christian, to the phrase, to be a US citizen. In my book, I discuss the Christian term ‘forgiveness.’ Forgiveness begins with the admission by a person who did something wrong or false. If the person admits, the Christian forgives that person. In my book, I also discuss freedom and its origin. My scientific proof of God says that God is the origin of all finite things in the universe. But, I also say that God’s freedom is absolute. Since our freedom is relative, rather than absolute, our freedom comes from the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God, as identified in the Declaration of Independence. So, it is through laws that man becomes free. Accordingly, ‘to be a US citizen’ every US citizen must always be seeking new laws that increase their freedom. Otherwise, the USA would become a nation of bandits and irrational humans.

Currently, I have been debating with four reviewers of my book, The First Scientific Proof of God. I believe that their reviews are wrong and false. As a Christian, forgiveness is a possibility. And, as a US citizen, I also want to save or even increase the freedom of all other US authors from such wrongs and falsities. As a good citizen, one should test US laws to determine whether a law has been violated. As seen, Plato’s negative opens the mind to new realities. But his negative also creates new laws and increases our freedom.

Clearly, the work of the world’s logicians must be limited by law. Further, this blog’s teaching could be very helpful to unify Eastern and Western Christianity.