Skip to main content

Introduction: About this blog series.

"To the extent that you produce and not consume is the level that you are enlightened."  

About the God Series

The God Series is a group of books written by the Pythagorean Illuminati. They present a metaphysical, mathematical, Grand Unified Theory of Everything. The books are available on on amazon.com.

These books have served as a major catalyst to my understanding of life and the universe. They are the most influential, thought-provoking, and mind-expanding books I have ever read. While I still wield my skeptical light saber as necessary, I think it’s safe to say these books have forever changed and expanded my world view.

About this Blog

I was reading the God Series book 8 when I came across the following quote:
Writing down your thoughts on Illuminism helps you clarify what parts you understand and what parts you don’t. It’s hard to sustain bullshit for several hundred words. We would encourage everyone to write a synopsis of Illuminism based on the God Series.
Hockney, Mike (2012-12-20). Hyperreason (The God Series Book 8) (Kindle Locations 4543-4545).
It made a lot of sense to me that after having read so many of the books in the series, I might actually get more out of them by actively writing about them rather than passively reading yet another book in the series . And to be honest, I was beginning to get to the point where I felt like I had reached a temporary limit on my absorption level, and it kind of felt like I reached a logical milestone. Maybe this is a good time to stand up, take a breather, and reflect on the new ideas I’ve been exposed to.

So I decided to take up the challenge.

The God Series is not your typical book (indeed, book series). It didn’t seem right to post one amazon-like review. To do the series justice, and to honor the seriousness of the tomes themselves, it would necessitate posting a series of articles each coming at Pythagorean Illuminism (PI) from a different angle.

To this end, I plan to post the following articles:
  1. Introduction
    This is what you’re reading right now. Just an overview of the structure of my reviews, and some info about my background and attitudes so you know where I’m coming from.

  2. Synopsis
    Here I will attempt to give an objective and fair summary of what PI is in my view.

  3. PI: The thesis
    Here I will attempt to present the best case for PI. This is the place for me to talk about all the great things it has to offer and not feel obligated to be critical, or mention the things I don’t like. In short, this is “PI: The Good”.

  4. PI: The antithesis
    This is where I get a chance to be devils advocate and state what I don’t like, or what I think is wrong etc. In short, this is “PI: the bad”.

  5. PI: the synthesis
    This is where I explain what PI means to me, blending the good and bad, and merging in with other points of view such as science and Software Engineering. In short, this is “PI: the balanced, personal edition”.

About Me

I’m only going to talk about the things in my background that have a bearing on these posts, so you know what biases and points of view I bring to the table.

I am a practicing Software Engineer, with a bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering, and personality-wise, a Meyer-Briggs INTJ (but weak on the J, so close to INTP). I am a free-thinking atheistic libertarian. Before reading these books, I would say that I was a pretty much a hard-core scientific materialist, and was not spiritual, religious, or new-agey in any way. In short, aside from my libertarianism, I was an ideal candidate for having these books resonate with me as they clearly state that intuitive thinkers are their target audience.

At the time of this writing, I have read a total of 41 books in the God Series and its various offshoots over the last nine months (starting in Aug 2015):  23 from Mike Hockney, 12 from Michael Faust, and 6 from Adam Weishaupt, with intent to read all of the Mike Hockney books going forward.

While I am obvious fan of their work, I am not a zealot or someone who unquestionably accepts everything they say. Far from it. I am basically a skeptic at heart. As a matter of fact, I have been told several times by the authors, in print of course, to "fuck off" (direct quote) because I am a person who holds certain beliefs (e.g libertarianism) they don’t agree with. But this is OK, as I’m only writing these reviews for my own benefit, or for anyone with a similar background. I obviously think they have lots of great ideas too. I just want to make it clear to the reader that I am approaching PI with what I feel is a balanced perspective.

And, as will become apparent to anyone reading my posts, I have no training in philosophy or any deep understanding of metaphysics. I’m just a curious, and interested student of the subject. Of course, this won't stop me from spouting off on philosophy or ontological mathematics as I see fit: BTW you’re welcome.

About the mfaust Id

This is a pseudonym.  My last name is not Faust, nor is my first initial "m".  I am certainly not Michael Faust, one of  the authors in the series.  

Comments

  1. Are their books the only place to learn this? 41 books is a lot

    ReplyDelete
  2. There's some fairly good YouTube videos out there. Search on "morgue official" to get the officially sanctioned offshoot called "hyperianism". And just recently, someone by the name of Joseph Postma has created a new video series https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GHww-ajDzw. BTW, Joseph Postma might be the "actual" Mike Hockney. No, not the three authors who wrote the god series, or who necessarily came up with *all* of Ontological Mathematics, but the inspiration behind some of the core ideas. This Quora post https://www.quora.com/Who-is-Mike-Hockney originally had two answers and one of them nominated Joseph Postma, but this answer has mysteriously disappeared. I just thought I'd mention this, although I have no authoritative info as to who the "real" Mike Hockney is.

    But really, the books are the best place. You don't have to read *all* the books -- you'll see quickly there's a large amount of repetition. The quickest approach is to start with the "Truth Series" from Dr Thomas Stark. There's only 17 books in that series. But if you read the first three, I'll think you'll get a pretty good idea. The Truth Series is a little more direct than the God Series, which is a little more circuitous at getting to the point than the Truth Series (but still, in a very fruitful way).

    But you're right, it's kind of slim pickings out there. There should be a couple of dozen of sites out there like mine, but there's only very few. Even the CTMU (Chris Langan TOE) appears to have more "followers". Hopefully, that will change someday. IMO, they haven't treated a lot of their online supporters very well, but that's another story for another day.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

A Tale of Two Patterns

A Tale of Two Patterns - Gold only has value if it can be traded. Knowledge only has value if it can be applied. - Insecurity is loud. Confidence is quiet. Introduction Well, as we all know the PI/OM/AC online community is currently in its latest death throes, with a pretty intense and nasty civil war going on between Hyperianism and the AC/PI . This is either the second or third iteration of online Illuminism (*1) that has failed, at least according to the AC. As an outsider, and someone who is not involved in either the AC, or Hyperianism, I wrote a prior post called "The State of the (Collective) Monad" commenting on this situation already. *1 The first being the "cypher gang" era, the second being the Diabolically Informative era, and the third being the hyperianism era. After writing this last "state of" post, I thought I was done commenting on the politics of the community. As I've made clear in my prior posts, being an engineer and m...

The State of the (Collective) Monad

If we want a rational and logical world, we cannot expect to achieve that goal by presenting rational and logical arguments. These will always be rejected. So, we must use a different type of reason and logic. The reason and logic of force. Some people, most people, must be forced to be free, as Rousseau put it. In the end, that was an unavoidable rational and logical conclusion. Plato’s Republic was never implanted not because it wasn’t rational and logical enough, but because Plato didn’t have an army to impose the Republic on the people. Plato wanted to create an intellectual Sparta. The Spartans themselves wanted to have the best army in the world, not the best intellectuals. They understood that force, not reason and logic, was what would keep them safe, make them powerful, and turn them into a people of glory. Newman, Dr. Cody. The Ontological Self: The Ontological Mathematics of Consciousness (p. 261). Kindle Edition. Introduction A while back I wrote a post called "Th...