Friday, 30 December 2016 07:21

A new philosophy for mankind

Written by 

The extant world is predicated on science; its culture is increasingly scientific culture; instead of trying to become a part of this new world, Africans run around extoling what they call their African cultures, cultures that are by all indices primitive; they must change their cultures and make them scientific. Additionally, they need a new mythology of creation, a story of how they came into being and a culture that springs from that myth (I say myth for no one knows how we came into being). As a myth maker, my function is to provide mankind with a story of creation and attendant culture. This essay is part of my efforts to provide mankind with a story of creation and a culture based on it.


Ozodi Thomas Osuji

At some point in our lives we have been sufficiently exposed to competing philosophies on what this world is and what it should mean to us. At that point, based on the information available to the individual he must consciously decide what the world is and what it means to him.

When one has consciously chosen what the world is and should mean to one then one should live in accordance with one's choice. This is called conscious living and integrity: you choose what the world is to you and live accordingly without apologies to other people and their philosophies. You choose and take the consequences of your choice.

I have studied the world long enough and have reached conclusions as to what it is to me. In this brief essay, I will briefly summarize what the world is and means to me.


I accept material monism (with an idealistic metaphysics). That is, I accept that at some point in the past the material world came into being and that everything is of matter and energy.

How exactly the universe came into being is unknown. There is no doubt that as our information base improves we shall change our perception of how the world came into being. This is the nature of science.

Science says something based on available information and when information base changes it changes its mind and says something different; the process continues for as long as we do not have complete and perfect information. In other words, in science there is no absolute answer to the question: what is reality.  What is real is dependent on what we currently know about it and when our knowledge improves the nature of reality changes, ad infinitum.

I accept what contemporary astrophysics says about the origin and nature of the universe. I accept that about 13.8 billion years ago, a point of light emerged (out of where we don't know).

That particle of light is also wave of light; it got inordinately hot and exploded; this is called the Big Bang. Light exploded and shattered into other particles of light (photons of light).

In quantum mechanics wave and particle of light are one; you see wave or particle if you choose to see one but you cannot see both at the same time; when you see one you cannot see the other; and where is the other when you do not see it? It is in superposition, in a different universe? The relevant point is that the observer decides what function of light that he wants to see; he decides what aspect of reality he wants to see (unified or separated) and sees it. The individual influences his perception of reality. In tht case, the question is: is there any such thing as reality independent of the observer or is reality the product of the mind of the observer?

The great sociologist, Karl Mannheim suggested that since we do not know what reality is yet everywhere have notions of reality that reality is probably a social construct. Findings in quantum physics seem to lend credence to Mannheim's thesis; it seems that human beings construct their reality but turn around and attribute it to what they call God. Indeed it is human beings who seem to have created God in their image and then projected what they did to what they say that God did; it seems that God is created by human beings in human beings self-images!

Moving on, some of the emergent particles of light immediately transformed themselves to electrons (which are particles of light with some mass).Some of the particles of light transformed themselves to quarks and quarks transformed themselves to protons and neutrons. Outside protons and neutrons quarks immediately dissolve into photons; neutrons outside nuclei decay into protons and electrons.

By the end of three minutes from singularity, after the big bang explosion, protons and neutrons combined into nuclei of the simplest atoms (hydrogen, helium and lithium).

Before we move on, it is pertinent to observe that contemporary cosmology built on the discoveries made in physics and chemistry during the early part of the twentieth century; without those discoveries we would not have extant cosmology.

The discoveries began with J.J. Thompson's discovery of the electron in 1897. In 1896 Henri Becquerel discovered radiation. Around the same time Wilhelm Rontgen discovered what is now called X-ray radiation. Pierre and Marie Curie added to the study of radiation and showed that nuclei does decay and sometimes form other elements.

In 1900 Max Plank discovered that light has units that he called quanta; in 1905 Albert Einstein, in his paper on the photo electric effect of light, showed that light indeed has units, and renamed them photons.

In 1911 Ernest Rutherford discovered that the atom is not the final indivisible part of matter as the Greek Democritus and John Dalton claimed but that atoms have a nucleus that he called protons. In 1932 James Chadwick discovered that the nucleus of the atom has an additional particle that is electrically neutral and he called it the neutron.

In 1913 Neils Bohr posited how electrons circled the nucleus of atoms hence gave us a glimpse as to how the atom is structured and operates.

In the 1920s a fuller understanding of the workings of the atom and its particles were explored by Louis de Broglie, Werner Heisenberg, Emil Schrodinger, Paul Dirac, Wolfgang Pauli, Max Born and others; their work is now collectively called quantum mechanics.

In the 1930s Lise Meitner, Otto Hahn, and Fritz Strassmann and Enrico Fermi showed us that the nucleus of the atom can be split (fission) if struck with neutrons until chain reaction is caused. Thomas Oppenheimer and his team utilized this information during the Manhattan project to explode the first atomic weapon in 1945. In August of 1945, the USA dropped nuclear weapons at Japan's Hiroshima and Nagasaki and those helped end the Second World War.

For our present purposes, the salient point is that cosmology employed the discoveries made about the nature of the atom in explaining the origin and nature of the universe (biology employed the same information on atoms to help give us a fuller description of how the human body works; molecular biology is impossible without understanding of the particles of the atoms; quantum mechanics is the basis of much of our contemporary knowledge of everything!).


The laws of physics predict that the Big Bang would produce equal amount of matter and anti-matter: electrons and anti-electrons (positrons), quarks and anti-quarks; protons and anti-protons, neutrons and anti-neutrons.  Physics would say that both matter and anti- matter would clash and annihilate each other and return the incipient universe to radiation (hot light). In other words, our matter based universe should not have existed.

Some physicists hypothesize that for every billion particles of anti-matter produced by the early universe a billion and one particles of matter were produced so that when they clashed some matter remained to continue the evolution of our matter based universe. This is a hypothesis.


The physics of gravitation predicts that the matter formed by the incipient universe ought to have collapsed to itself and returned to radiation hence aborted the incident universe. So, why did the universe continue expanding?

Alan Goth posits what he calls inflation theory; according to this hypothesis (it has not been proved) the incipient universe expanded at a velocity greater than the speed of light hence escaped the gravitational pull to re-collapse.

This is kind of like what happens when we shoot rockets into the sky; ordinarily, the gravitational pull of the earth would make the rocket fall back to the earth but if it travels at a certain speed it escapes the gravitational pull of the earth and escapes from falling back to earth.

What was that rate of expansion? It is not known; what we have are conjectures. Let us, then, just say that the universe continued to expand and that for some reason (s) matter did not get destroyed by anti-matter.


There are many unexplained coincidences whereby what was predictable by the laws of physics did not happen, such as why matter and anti-matter did not destroy each other and why the early universe did not re-collapse to itself.  It is as if the universe was from its inception intent on evolving and ultimately producing human beings; this perspective is called the Anthropoid Principle; it is a conjecture, not a proven fact.


Talking about the expansion of the universe requires us to mention the scientists that helped us understand that phenomenon.  Building on the mathematics of Albert Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, the Russian mathematician, Alexander Friedmann, in 1922 concluded that the universe is expanding.  In 1927, the Belgium mathematician, George Lemaitre, also building on Einstein's equations speculated that the universe must have begun in one spot (that he called tht cosmic egg) and expanded outwards. Thereafter, the American attorney turned astronomer, Edwin Hubble used his telescope to prove that the universe is, indeed, expanding.

The English astronomer, Fred Hoyle, while agreeing that the universe is expanding, said that it did not begin in one spot; he posited what he called steady state universe, a universe that has always existed. Hoyle is largely responsible for teaching us how nucleosynthesis takes place inside stars.

The Russian astrophysicist, George Gamow building on Hoyle's work on what takes place inside stars, concluded that the universe began in one spot, exploded and expanded out.

In an early 1950s BBC program, Fred Hoyle tried to make fun of Gamow's hypothesis, by calling his hypothesis Big Bang; that originally derisive term stuck hence we now call the origin of the universe big bang. Physicists such as John Wheeler, Murray Gell-Mann, David Deutch, Steven Weinberg, and Eugene Wigner contributed to our evolving understanding of how the universe began and expands.

Subsequent to the Big Bang explosion the incipient universe existed as an expanding cloud of nuclei, electrons and photons (plasma).  This state lasted for about 400, 000 years.

Thereafter, nuclei captured electrons and the simplest atoms, hydrogen and helium, were formed. The formation of atoms allowed the escape of photons of light (that escaped light is now called cosmic background microwave radiation; Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias discovered it in 1965).

For the next millions of years the universe consisted of a cloud of hydrogen, helium and other simple elements.


Millions of years later, somehow, space emerged in the cloud of hydrogen. Each clump of hydrogen separated from other clumps.

Gravity acted on each clump of hydrogen and pressed it inwards. In its core heat and pressure led to the fusion of hydrogen to helium and stars are born.

A star is a clump of hydrogen in whose inner core heat and pressure lead to the formation of helium and heat and light are given off.

The heat and light produced by the fusion of hydrogen to helium (nucleosynthesis) gradually work their way from the core of stars until they reach their surface and escape into space as the light we see and call stars.

Some of the light we see coming from stars have been on their journey for billions of years; indeed, the stars that produced them may be long dead!

At any rate, there came into being trillions of stars.  Stars are grouped together into galaxies and super galaxies. So far, astronomers believe that there are over 200 billion galaxies; each galaxy contains over 200 billion stars.

Our galaxy is the Milky Way; it has over 200 billion stars. Light travels at the speed of 186. 000 miles a second; it takes light about 100, 000 years to travel from one end of our galaxy to the other.


Apparently, the initial stars were massive in size and did not live long.  A few million years and they begin fusing other elements, from hydrogen to helium, to carbon, oxygen and when the process reaches iron the star expands in size and eventually explodes in a supernova.

The core of the massive star collapses to itself to form either a neutron star or a black hole.  A neutron star is composed of only neutrons (all matter is crushed into neutron forms); neutron stars rotate at mind dizzying speed.

Black holes are composed of what we do not know; what we know is that everything that enters black holes' event horizons, even light is swallowed.

The external part of the exploded star are shattered into smithereens and spilled into space. The accompanying heat to the supernova produces all the elements beyond iron on chemistry's Periodic table.

There are 94 naturally occurring elements on Chemistry's periodic table. Scientists have synthesized another 20 or so elements.


Our sun and its nine planets (Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto) apparently were agglomerations from shattered massive stars and were formed about 4.5 billion years ago. In addition to the nine planets are chunks of rock rotating around the sun in asteroids and comets belts: Oort cloud and Kuiper belt.

There are many types of stars, including Proto-Stars, Quasars, Main Sequence Stars, Red Giant Stars, White Dwarf Stars, Red Dwarf Stars, Neutron Stars, and Supergiant Stars etc.

The sun and its planets are predicted to last another five billion years. However, in about 2 billion years the sun begins running low on hydrogen and begin fusing helium to other elements; when the fusion process reaches iron  the sun would expand and eventually explode.  Its outer core would be shattered and spilled into space as star dust and its inner core would collapse into a small object (red giant) that glows like amber of burning wood and eventually burn out and become a piece of rock floating in space.

When the sun begins to expand it would produce too much heat and that heat would dry up water on our planet. Our earth would die and become a piece of rock in space (first, it would become as hot as mercury and then die). That is to say that in two billion years all biological life forms on earth would have seized being.


Astrophysicists have identified many exoplanets in our Milky Way galaxy and other galaxies, such as Andromeda. It is possible for some of those planets to have conditions that can sustain human life?

Before the earth dies human beings probably would have the science and technology to travel to other star systems and find habitable planets to migrate to. That way our progenies shall be migrating from one planet to others and from one galaxy to others.  It probably would take trillions of years for them to have migrated to most galaxies in our universe.


The universe is expanding. As it expands galaxies separate from each other and space becomes cooler. In trillions of years all the stars and planets would become cold and die.

Stars and planets would explode and separate to the elements that compose them; those elements would shatter into protons, neutrons and electrons. In time those particles would decay to photons.

Thus, in the end only photons, radiation, light would exist in the cold universe.  In effect, the universe began in light and ends in light. The universe came from cold light, became hot and expanded, and returns to cold light.

(An alternative scenario of how the universe would end is  that after a certain level of expansion the universe would collapse back to itself, dubbed Big Crunch, and, perhaps, rebound in the emanation of another universe; this hypothesis is no longer in vogue with many cosmologists.)


Physical light came from somewhere, where we do not know. I conjecture that physical light came from spiritual light; that is, from nonphysical light.

I reached this conclusion because nothing ever comes from nothing, so the big bang light must have come from something, albeit something that we do not yet know, something I choose to call spiritual light.

In my cosmology we came from spiritual light and shall eventually return to spiritual light.


Physical light has wave form as well as particle form.  Light are both wave and particle; wave and particles are not separable. However, you see the function of light that you want to see: wave or particle; when you see one you cannot see the other. Neils Bohr called this phenomenon complementarity.

(Werner Heisenberg in talking about the velocity and position of electrons inside atoms said that you cannot ascertain the electrons momentum and position at the same time; it is either you ascertain its speed and not know where it is at or you know where it is at and not ascertain its speed. This is called the uncertainty principle.)

I choose to believe that spiritual light is like physical light; that is, spiritual light is wave and particles; and you see the function, wave or particle that you want to see.

You can see spiritual light as separated particles, us, or you can experience it as one continuous wave of light, God; you cannot see both wave (whole) and particles (separated) at the same time.

When you experience spiritual light as wave, you are in the state of union, aka heaven and God; when you see spiritual light as separated into particles you are on earth, in ego state.

The wave of spiritual light I choose to call God; the particles of light I choose to call the parts of God or the sons of God.

Wave and particles are one; God and his sons are one; they are inseparable; they have existed forever and ever and will continue to exist forever and ever; there was no time when they did not exist (indeed since there is no space in the wave and particle there is no time in them; there is no time in heaven, in the union of God and his sons).

Our true nature is spiritual light; in spiritual light we are eternal, immortal, permanent and changeless. But in the forms we transformed ourselves to, physical light, matter and energy we do change forms (what we call death).

Death is really the transformation of matter (our bodies) to other forms of matter. Matter is eventually transformed to energy.

Energy transforms from one form to others: to light, chemical, mechanical, heat, electrical, sound, and kinetic and other forms of energy.

Matter and Energy is not destroyed but merely transforms from one form to another.  The first law of thermodynamics, conservation of mass, says that the quantity of matter and energy in the universe is constant. The second law of thermodynamics, entropy, says that energy can be transformed to other forms of energy hence seem dissipated, lost. However, what actually happens is that energy is transformed from one form to others but never disappears from existence.

Spiritual energy (light) is transformed to physical energy (light) and from physical energy back to spiritual energy.


On planet earth, one of nine planets orbiting a medium sized star, a star at the tail end of a Spiral galaxy (the other types of galaxies are Elliptical and Irregular), in the goldilocks region where it is neither too hot nor too cold, water accumulated on the surface of that rocky planet. It is speculated that water was brought to earth by comets (water covers about 70% of the surface of planet earth).

Inside that water some elements mixed and lightening acted as the source of heat and light to combine the various elements to form biological life. This hypothesis was proposed by Urey and Miller.

Sixty-four elements, especially carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, potassium, calcium, magnesium, sodium, phosphor, iron, zinc, aluminum, copper and so on combined to form single cells. Single cells, in time, combined into multiple cells.

Over four billion years of evolution on earth, cells evolved to what are now human beings bodies. Apparently, human bodies evolved from other forms of animals.

During that long evolution changes were made in the human body and brain.  About 100, 000 years ago human brains developed the capacity for thinking (or for thinking to be done through them).

We began thinking and using thinking to find ways to adapt to our environment.

Human beings evolved in Africa. From Africa human beings migrated to other continents. Thus, all over the world are found Africans, albeit with different skin colors. Some Africans' skins were made white or yellow by the climate of the areas they migrated to and live at.

Apparently, human beings will continue evolving. And they will keep on understanding their world. In time they probably would have the science and technology to transcend their little earth.


Hugh Everett's interpretation of the Big Bang and quantum mechanics says that there are many worlds.  Scientists extrapolate to speculate that there are infinite universes.

Before our present universe dies we shall probably have the science and technology to tunnel our way to other universes. We shall probably worm hole ourselves from one universe to another.

Given that entangled particles communicate instantaneously (proposed by Albert Einstein and John Bell and proved by Alan Aspect), as if space and time does not separate them, it is conceivable for entangled human beings to travel instantaneously to every part of the universe.

Since there are infinite universes we shall probably keep going to them and do so infinitely.  Thus, there may be no such thing as end to our existence.  The individual ends but his progeny lives on and when our universe ends they move on to other universes, ad infinitum.


Based on my personal experiences, I conclude that in our immediate state are three universes. There is our current universe of matter, space and time; I call it the universe of dense forms.

There is another universe; in it everything in our world is there except that they are made of pure light. I call it the universe of light forms. It is the universe those who have had near death experience say that they see. Our ancestors are probably there (unless they reincarnate to our earth or move on to other universes).

Ultimately, there is a universe that does not have forms; it is composed of spiritual light; in that wave of light each of us is a particle in it. It is a formless universe; in it we live eternally. It is the universe that religious folks call heaven.

Heaven is a wave of spiritual light; the entirely of that wave of spiritual light is what folks call God; the parts of that light is what folks call the sons of God.

God and his sons are one; they are unified; there is no space and time between them. The sons of God, parts of the wave of light, occasionally, seem to journey away from their true home, unified wave of light; they leave unified light to seem to have separated existence.

One of the seeming separated universes is our current physical universe. Our universe, however, is not real; it is a mere dream.

As in our nightly dreams, what is done on earth has not been done in reality. What we do on earth is done in dream states and has not been done. Our real selves are not the selves we see in bodies but the formless spiritual selves.

The sons of God play in our world and eventually gravitate to the gate of their home, the world of light forms. From the gate of heaven, the world of light forms the sons of God eventually return to the awareness that they are formless sons of a formless God and his formless world, heaven.

When the sons of God have had enough of union, they journey away, again, to other universes; since there are infinite universes they do this sort of thing forever and ever.

The sons of God have fun going from one universe to another; they spend their time studying whatever universe they are currently in; after they have understood a universe they return home and rest for a while and thereafter leave and go to explore other universes.


On earth I accept that we all came from the same wave of light; we are all related; we are all brothers.

Since we are brothers the right thing to do is to love all of us. Thus, I accept that it is for me to love every person I see on planet earth.

I love you and every person I see.  I hope that you do the same, love me and every person you see. If we love one another we have peace and harmony in our world.

On the other hand, if we choose to hate one another we shall have disharmony, conflict and war. The choice is ours. There are no gods coming to tell us what we do.

I choose love and urge you to choose love, but if you choose war then I will fight you; I am not a pacifist.

If you attack me I will defend myself. I do not forgive unnecessary attack on me. I will not attack you and do not expect you to attack me but if you do I will defend myself and since offense is the best defense I will attack you.

For example, Muslims seem to believe that their religion is the way to go. It seems that they believe that they have the right to attack and kill people to bring about a universal Muslim Caliphate.

In my judgement, killing people is an act of madness, killing people is psychotic.

Since Muslims kill on behalf of their religion and its blood thirty god, if they attack me I will attack them; better still, I would organize and go kill them.

We must cut off Muslims heads before they cut off our heads. Muslims are psychotic; this is literal; Muslims are madmen; we deal with madmen by locking them up in psychiatric institutions and treat them, and, hopefully, they become sane. That is, we must do whatever we can to heal Muslims of their mental disorder masquerading as religion.

Since Muslims are aggressive and violent madmen we must use violence to checkmate them. You heard me correctly: we must go kill Muslims before they convert this world to an insane asylum.

Islam is an insane religion and a world composed of Muslims is an insane asylum.

This is my perspective on these things. I make no apologies for it. My perspective is based on my experience and sound reasoning. It is a philosophy that sees this world as it is and accepts it on its terms; this philosophy does not seek escape from our painful world.  However, it posits a metaphysics that says that there are other universes that we go to. The immediate universe we go to is the world of light forms; the ultimate universe we return to, our real home containing our real selves is the formless world of spiritual light.

I believe in loving every person but not in forgiving all wrongs done to me; I work to correct our mistakes, not condone or overlook them.

If you see a person killing another person or abusing a child you prevent him from doing so and if he persists in doing it you kill him.

You do not see murder being committed or a child being abused and overlook it under some misguided metaphysics that asks you to overlook evil because it is done in dreams and have not been done.


In our world we do not know what is real or not; we do not totally understand our environment. Perhaps, we have begun to understand one percent of phenomena but ninety nine percent is not yet understood.

Physics tells us that may be we have some information on four percent of the universe; 96% of the universe is unknown to us (73% is dark energy and 23% is dark matter and we do not understand those).

Because we know very little about our universe we must study it.

Studying and teaching what we have learned and learning more about what we don't yet understand is the rational approach to our universe.

Studying, teaching, learning and exercising leadership in  organizing people to study,  understand and master our world are things we must do in this world. We would not have to do those things if we had completely understood and mastered our world.


I believe that there is a unified universal intelligence in the universe and that we are part of that universal intelligence; we are a smidgeon of it. May be, it is because we manifest in matter and matter densifies things that we do not know much, certainly not as much as we would if we are outside matter, space and time.

Universal intelligence is so huge that I do not believe that we have understood one percent of it yet or are using one percent of it.

I do not see universal intelligence as a punitive father figure that we ought to be flagellating ourselves before.

If it makes you feel good to pray to universal intelligence, aka God, go ahead and pray to it; praying helps folk to shrink their egoism; folks need to shrink their tendency to see themselves as powerful, important and grandiose.


I personally prefer meditation to praying to God. Hinduism and Buddhism helped me to understand the nature of mediation.

In meditation one is trying to transcend one's separated ego self and reach ones real self, the formless unified self that Hinduism calls Brahman and his part, Atman. The goal of meditation is to lose the awareness of one's ego separated self and attains the awareness of the unified self. When that state is reached one is said to have experienced Samadhi, Nirvana, Satori, the mystical union of the son and his father. In it one feels peaceful, happy and eternal.

I sit quietly for one hour very day and try not thinking; I make my brain emptied of all thinking and all ego categories. I believe that if I can silence my mind I can listen to higher intelligence and that it can penetrate my mind.

I have had some of my best insights from meditation.


The main theme of the message given to the world by the Jewish carpenter called Joshua Ben Joseph, whom the Greeks called Jesus Christ, is love and forgiveness.

Jesus taught that God is love and that we are the sons of God and, as such, the sons of love. He says that our nature is love and that we ought to love each other and love our father, God.

In our world we do harm each other. So, what should loving persons do to those who harm them? He said that we should forgive those who harmed us.

The man walked his talk by forgiving those who crucified him: father, forgive them because they do not know what they are doing.  Jesus believed that the way to return to love is through forgiveness.

Let us review Jesus' basic teachings to show that forgiveness is his central theme. In the Sermon on the Mount he said that if a man slapped one of your cheeks that you should turn the other cheek to be slapped and should not fight with him; that is, you should be defenseless when attacked.

In a parable he said that a man was on his way to worship God and realized that a neighbor had wronged him and said that the man must first go home and forgives the wrong doer if he wants God to pay attention to his prayer and requests.

And how many times should we forgive the wrong doer? He said sixty nine times sixty nine times, meaning infinitely.

And they brought a woman caught in adultery to him and asked him what to do to her, stone her to death, as Mosaic and Sharia law requires them to do? He told them that we are all sinners and, as such, do not have the right to judge others as sinners. Let him who is not a sinner be the first to throw stones at sinners. We all live in glass houses and should not throw stones. He asked us to forgive the woman so that God would forgive our own sins.

In the only prayer, Our Lord's prayer, that he taught his disciplines he asked them to forgive their wrong doers if they want God to forgive them their own wrongs.

Simply put, Jesus taught forgiveness as the only path to returning to our true nature, love.  Until you forgive you will not love; and when you forgive hence love you are back in love (love is the state of union; ego is the state of separation).

God is love; God and his heaven is love; only loving persons, hence forgiving persons come to God's presence, enter heaven.


To forgive the person who wronged you implies that in the past you had condemned him as evil. To forgive means that hitherto one had the assumption that people could and did do wrong to one; one assumed that people do, in fact, steal from one or even kill one.

The egos world is organized around the belief that people have the capacity to do evil and do do evil to one another hence the need to defend against their evil behaviors.

We set up governments to protect us (governments pass laws that protect us); we establish police, courts, judges and jails and prisons because we assume that people do commit crimes and want those agencies to protect us.

In our world, if you commit a crime you are arrested, tried in a court of law and jailed. You do the crime and you do the time in the big house is our ego jurisprudent philosophy.

If one did not condemn evildoers, and forgave them would one still be in a world organized around crime and punishment?

If I see you do bad things to me, say, steal from me or even kill me and I forgive you I would probably not live in this world for more than a day; this is because people are inherently evil and will kill you if you do not defend against their evil behaviors.

If forgiveness is practiced people would not exist in this world.  If we overlooked evil doers they would kill us and then set upon each other and kill each other.

Radical forgiveness, in effect, would end the social world as we know it.  If we overlook people's evil behaviors they would kill each other off.

Human beings would no longer exist in this world if the old boy's (Jesus) teaching of forgiveness is actually embraced and practiced.

No wonder that forgiveness is not practiced by those who claim to be Christians, certainly not by vengeful Muslims who cut off your head for merely desecrating Mohammed's name.

So, does the old boy, Jesus, who asked folks to forgive all wrongs done to them desire to end human beings existence in this world?  Yes! That is the only logical conclusion one would reach from taking the old boy's teachings on forgiveness seriously.

Frederick Nietzsche was able to grasp this idea hence considered Jesus an imbecilic. If you take Jesus seriously you must conclude that he is nihilistic and wants to end human existence on earth.

Alternatively, he knows something that those of us in the ego do not know. He knows that there is another world, a world we return to the awareness of when we forgive this world hence die off.

Forgiveness first returns us to the world of light forms (gate of heaven) and from there we return to the formless world of God, heaven.  This is probably what Jesus knew that most of us do not know.

In the meantime, those who want to live in this world of separated egos, egos with different interests, cannot forgive those who wronged them and expect to survive in this world.

The logic of our ego based world is that if you steal you are sent to prison; if you kill you are killed; this is the philosophy that maintains our ego separated world.

To forgive criminals is to transcend this world and go to other worlds (there are infinite universes including the universe of light forms and the formless universe that folks call heaven).

To live in this world of separated selves we must protect ourselves from criminals bent on harming us. Alternatively, if people want to die off and return to the world of light forms and, ultimately, to formless heaven they must forgive criminals and thus allow  them to keep on stealing from them and even kill them (as criminals killed Jesus).

These are the only two choices available to us in this world.  The choice we make determines how we live in this world or even whether we shall be in this world or not. To forgive or to punish criminals; I opt to punish criminals. If you want to exit from this world you can choose to forgive criminals and not try to correct their anti-social behaviors.


Should we forgive criminals and terrorists? And if we do so would that not embolden and keep them being criminals and terrorists?

Does forgiveness deter criminal activity and terroristic acts? I have not seen a person that forgiveness of his past criminal acts made him a better person.

If you forgive, which is, overlook, murderers and terrorists they would only conclude that you are a fool and keep on murdering people!

If you want to prevent Muslims from converting you to their lunatic and nihilistic religion you have to cut off their heads before they cut off your own head or force you to accept the psychosis that they call religion.

If you forgive Muslim jihadist terrorists they probably would seize the opportunity to intimidate the entire world to embrace their violent religion of death.

Forgiveness does not prevent criminal activities! Therefore, we must defend ourselves against those who want to harm us and have the wisdom to know when people really want to harm us or when the sense that people want to harm us is only our imagination, as in paranoid misinterpretation of other person's intentions.


Since human beings have freedom and in their freedom or their lunacy can decide to harm and or kill other persons we must have the means for defending ourselves. We must set up governments and empower them to protect us from dangerous persons.

We must have police, courts, judges, prisons, prison guards and other means of domestically protecting ourselves. We must also have military for protecting ourselves against foreign attackers.

In effect, I embrace the philosophy of this world; I accept that we must do what protects our bodies and egos.

I am also aware that our bodies and egos are temporary things; our sense of selves and bodies are chimeras; what we do on earth is like what is done in dreams hence not to be taken as real or too seriously.

As a result of my awareness of the dream like nature of our earthly existence, I forgive minor crimes against me but not life threating ones.

This is my philosophy. I found it necessary to write it down, to clarify how I see things and live my life because there are too many unrealistic philosophies out there asking people not to defend themselves when they are attacked.

If you did not defend yourself you could be enslaved by those who want to use your free labor to procure luxurious living for them or you could be terrorized into embracing the religion of violence and death called Islam.

Sometimes we must fight for what we believe is right, such as fight for our freedom. Of course we do not need to be paranoid and see the entire world as out to harm and kill us and thus be perpetually defensive.  It is quite possible to ascertain the difference between paranoid defensiveness and realistic defensiveness.

When all is said and done, I choose to love me and all people for selfish reasons because it is in loving us that I experience peace of mind and body.


Human beings live in bodies; bodies are vulnerable; bodies can be hurt and or destroyed; eventually bodies do die. When bodies die the elements that compose them decay and separate from each other; in time the elements decay to protons, neutrons and electrons; those in time decay to quarks and photons. In other words our bodies are transient things.

This makes people feel like they are nothing important.  People would like to feel like they are something important.  Alas, their bodies are not important.

What some religions, such as Gnosticism and A course in miracles do are offer people with a tantalizing metaphysics with which they deny the reality of their nothing bodies and juxtapose what they call spiritual self.

Thus, you say: I am not body, I am spirit. The fact is that in the here and now world you are still body and live in the world of space, time and matter.  You still have to walk from point A to point B, meaning that you are in space and time. You still have to eat food to maintain your body meaning that you are in the world of matter. You still have to defend your body to exist; if you did not defend your body with food, medications, and clothes and shelter your body would die. Simply stated, you are in the world of space and time and must do what that world requires of you to live in it.

In wishes you fictionally transcend the world of matter but not at the realistic level.

I am not saying that life does not transcend body, space and time; I am merely stating the fact that to live on earth one must do what folks must do to live on earth.

On earth folks do attack, harm and kill each other. Muslims, believing that their god requires them to kill people for him, do kill people; Muslims are not trying to transcend their bodies; they are not trying to escape from this world; thus, they are defensive of their bodies; Christians set up elaborate governments and legal systems to protect themselves while talking about going to heaven.

Talking about wanting to escape from this world does not make one escape from this world's reality. Therefore, a rational philosophy must study this world on its terms, understand it and do what it requires one to do to adapt to it.

So far science and the scientific method and attendant applied science, technology is the most effective way to adapt to the realities of this world. Thus, I embrace the scientific method and a culture based on it, the scientific culture.  I do what I have to do to adapt to the realities of this world.

I also accept idealism, the notion that there is something more than this world in our existence.  I posit a metaphysics that talks about three worlds: our world, the world of light forms and the world of formlessness.  Each world has its requirements.

For now I am concerned with the requirements of our physical world.  While doing what enables me and people to cope with the realities of this world, I remember that we have spirit and that our spirit is love hence I love all people.

I endeavor to correct the evil behavior of people via our legal system.  These are what I believe; I live in accordance with what I believe.

As this year comes to an end and a new year begins, I felt a need to explain what it is that I believe to be true. I have done so in this short essay. Now you know what I believe is true, where I am coming from.

Cheers and have a happy new year.

Ozodi Thomas Osuji, PhD

December 30, 2016

(907) 310-8176

Read 1043 times
Ozodi Osuji Ph.D

Ozodi Thomas Osuji is from Imo State, Nigeria. He obtained his PhD from UCLA. He taught at a couple of Universities and decided to go back to school and study psychology. Thereafter, he worked in the mental health field and was the Executive Director of two mental health agencies. He subsequently left the mental health environment with the goal of being less influenced by others perspectives, so as to be able to think for himself and synthesize Western, Asian and African perspectives on phenomena. Dr Osuji’s goal is to provide us with a unique perspective, one that is not strictly Western or African but a synthesis of both. Dr Osuji teaches, writes and consults on leadership, management, politics, psychology and religions. Dr Osuji is married and has three children; he lives at Anchorage, Alaska, USA.

He can be reached at: (907) 310-8176