A site dedicated to the rational study of the UMMO affair
D80 Our gnoseology.
OUR GNOSEOLOGY.
In truth, we have not elaborated a theory of knowledge detached from our own WOALA OLEASS (Philosophy-Theology) and with an entity of its own.
Our source of knowledge is empirical. Convinced that AAIODI (the real entity) is unknown to us, convinced that the WAAM accessible to us through our intellective and sensory paths is a “phantom” created by our THINKING-SELF, we chose to unravel at least that image of the AAIODI deformed by us. (On UMMO there is an ancient legend that illustrates this attitude.)
The IGOONOOI (sand-laden hurricanes, abrasive and dangerous, which manage to destroy vegetation and strongly erode the rocks) wished one day to read the OUDEX IENOO (See Note 6) of the OEMMI of “The Lakes”, for it felt “weak and ill” (its speed was low, in the original text).
NOTE 6. -
OUDEXIONOO were monoliths of porous and very soft rock, shaped like rods, which were erected in the fields and on which our ancestors made inscriptions relating to “therapeutic recipes or advice”. They thus wished to perpetuate a medicine of an empirical-magical character. We still preserve some of those long columns.
That night it came down from the “deserts” and blew like a hurricane, terrifying the OEMMII, laying low the BAAYIODOVII (flora and animals) and filing away the rocks and the earth. But when dawn came and it was able to read the inscriptions, these had been eroded by the moving dust (the texts deformed), and so the IGOONOOI died (ceased to “blow”) by misinterpreting the writings it had half destroyed.
This myth can illustrate the drama of the OEMMII of UMMO. Aware that the WAAM we “contemplate”, that we “think”, is not the true WAAM generated by WOA, since the “thinking” function distorts and deforms its reality, the human being, and by extension any EESEOEMII (THINKING ENTITY), is condemned to erase the genuine healing inscription that would satisfy its gnoseological yearning.
Our ancestors successively discovered that scientific formulations elaborated under premises and conclusions based on a simplistic logic would lack the apodictic character [U-C Note: From the RAE dictionary – Apodictic: unconditionally certain, necessarily valid] that they had initially attributed to them. In the dynamics of the WAAM there were principles incapable of being approached under the qualifications you call “FALSE” or “TRUE”. Voices thus arose calling for a new logic capable not only of overcoming the limitations of some rudimentary forms of informative communication, but of enriching the range of possible AIGAEGAA (propositions). How else could one link to scientific phenomenology realities such as AMMIOXOO (MORAL EVIL), IUAMMIO DII (CRUELTY), YIISAOO (HAPPINESS, MORAL GOOD, INNER SATISFACTION), OANEEAOIYOOYO (Telepathic transmission), OENBUUAU (SOMA-PSYCHE link), all of them unable to be assessed analytically and inserted into the framework of objective reality alongside concepts such as GOODAA (liquid state of matter), IBOSOO UU (See paragraph devoted to the structure of the WAAM) or IBONEE (Radiations of very high frequency)?
It was necessary to free the OEMMII devoted to science from his unconscious tendency to tinge his conclusions with affective colours, thus perverting the awareness of reality.
New techniques thus arose for gaining access to phenomena that you would describe as “SPIRITUAL”, using a rigorously scientific methodology (in the sense you give to this word, that is: verifying the facts and formulating their laws analytically). Only one difference with respect to the scientists of EARTH: you accept a hypothesis, raising it to the category of rational explanation, when its postulates (stated in Aristotelian formulations) do not contradict the mathematically expressed law (generally of a statistical character), until newly discovered facts come into conflict with the old formulation.
Our “agnosticism” (as you would call it) not only impels us to refrain from defining and probing something as transcendent as WOA or AAIOODI, but, when we elaborate a theory and verify it, WE DO NOT ACCEPT ITS genuineness in spite of everything.
That flow of concepts, explanations and hypotheses serves us as mental gymnastics to purify our ideas constantly. When a thinker of UMMO formulates, for example, a new hypothesis concerning the influence of the UWAAM (twin cosmos), endorsed by the facts and by its analytical formulation, HE DOES NOT BELIEVE IT himself, nor does he ever accept it. The very dynamics of the thinking function matters more than the flat stage of a stagnant theory that generates a school, as among you. An example will illustrate what I am telling you, even if it is absurd. If Freud had had our UMMOENMII mentality, he would never have accepted his own Theory of the “Oedipus complex” dogmatically.
This pragmatic conduct, strange to you, is useful to us inasmuch as it avoids both the atomization into schools that divide the Social Network, provoking conflictive situations, and the narcissistic and non-objective stances of one who accepts his own mental creations as intimate truths, forgetting that another, more intelligent and expert oemmi of the future will perfect the preceding propositions, even without denying them. This is how our thinking oemii do not attempt to speculate about the “essence” of what is inaccessible to us (for example WOA and AAIODI).
