Part one. The First Step

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=97 BGCOLOR="#9999FF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Times New Roman" ><B>RationalPower.com</B></FONT><B>    </B><B> |     </B><A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="RationalPower.com"><U><B>home</B></U></A></div> <div> <B>Part one. The First Step</B>   |   <A HREF="id24.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Two: Beginning Rational Terms"><U>Part Two: Beginning Rational Terms</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id25.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Three: The Rational Term Goal."><U>Part Three:  The Rational Term "Goal."</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id26.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Four: The Rational Term Resolve."><U>Part Four:  The Rational Term "Resolve."</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id27.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Five: Building on the Distinction B"><U>Part Five: Building on the Distinction Between Rational Terms and Word Meanings</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id28.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Six: Love versus Like, Two Remarkab"><U>Part Six: "Love" versus "Like," Two Remarkable Terms</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id29.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Seven: Balance"><U>Part Seven: "Balance"</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id30.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Eight: Problem versus Symptom"><U>Part Eight: Problem versus Symptom</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id31.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Nine: Whats In It For Me?"><U>Part Nine: "What's In It For Me?"</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id32.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Ten: Bliss"><U>Part Ten: Bliss</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id36.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Eleven: Polarity"><U>Part Eleven: Polarity</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id39.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Twelve: Rational Balance"><U>Part Twelve: Rational Balance</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id42.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Thirteen: A New Term: Emoter"><U>Part Thirteen: A New Term: "Emoter"</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id34.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Listening Skills"><U>Listening Skills</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id35.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Intuition, what modern science knows"><U>Intuition, what modern science knows</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id43.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Memory Skills"><U>Memory Skills</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id33.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="EDITORS PAGE"><U>EDITOR'S PAGE</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id19.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Printing Help Page"><U>Printing Help Page</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id41.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Link to Rational Training Resources Site"><U>Link to Rational Training Resources Site:</U></A></div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=210 BGCOLOR="#FFCC66" TEXT="#080000" background="045d2b03.jpg"> <bR> <div> <A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="RationalPower.com"><U>Home</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id23.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part one. The First Step"><U>Part One:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id23.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part one. The First Step"><U>The First Step</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id24.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Two: Beginning Rational Terms"><U>Part Two:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id24.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Two: Beginning Rational Terms"><U>Beginning Rational Terms</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id25.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Three: The Rational Term Goal."><U>Part Three:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id25.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Three: The Rational Term Goal."><U>The Rational Term "Goal."</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id26.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Four: The Rational Term Resolve."><U>Part Four:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id26.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Four: The Rational Term Resolve."><U>The Rational Term "Resolve."</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id27.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Five: Building on the Distinction B"><U>Part Five:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id27.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Five: Building on the Distinction B"><U> Building on the Distinction Between Rational  Terms and Word Meanings</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id28.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Six: Love versus Like, Two Remarkab"><U>Part Six:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id28.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Six: Love versus Like, Two Remarkab"><U>"Love" versus "Like," Two Remarkable Terms</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id29.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Seven: Balance"><U>Part Seven: </U></A></div> <div> "<A HREF="id29.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Seven: Balance"><U>Balance</U></A>"</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id30.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Eight: Problem versus Symptom"><U>Part Eight:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id30.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Eight: Problem versus Symptom"><U>Problem versus "Symptom</U></A>"</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id31.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Nine: Whats In It For Me?"><U>Part Nine:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id31.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Nine: Whats In It For Me?"><U>What's In It For Me?</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id32.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Ten: Bliss"><U>Part Ten:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id32.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Ten: Bliss"><U>Bliss</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id36.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Eleven: Polarity"><U>Part Eleven:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id36.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Eleven: Polarity"><U>Polarity</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id39.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Twelve: Rational Balance"><U>Part Twelve:</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id39.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Twelve: Rational Balance"><U>Rational Balance</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id42.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Thirteen: A New Term: Emoter"><U>Part Thirteen: </U></A><FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" ><A HREF="id42.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Thirteen: A New Term: Emoter"><U>"Emoter"</U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> Life Skills for better tomorrows:</div> <div> <A HREF="id34.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Listening Skills"><U>LISTENING</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id34.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Listening Skills"><U>Skills:</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id35.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Intuition, what modern science knows"><U>INTUITION,</U></A></div> <div> what science knows.</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id41.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Link to Rational Training Resources Site"><U>Rational Training </U></A><FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" ><A HREF="id41.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Link to Rational Training Resources Site"><U>Resources links. </U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id33.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="EDITORS PAGE"><U>EDITOR'S PAGE</U></A></div> <div>  <form action="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr" method="post"> <input type="hidden" name="cmd" value="_s-xclick"> <input type="image" src="https://www.paypal.com/en_US/i/btn/x-click-but04.gif" border="0" name="submit" alt="Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!"> <input type="hidden" name="encrypted" value="-----BEGIN PKCS7-----MIIHHgYJKoZIhvcNAQcEoIIHDzCCBwsCAQExggEwMIIBLAIBADCBlDCBjjELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxCzAJBgNVBAgTAkNBMRYwFAYDVQQHEw1Nb3VudGFpbiBWaWV3MRQwEgYDVQQKEwtQYXlQYWwgSW5jLjETMBEGA1UECxQKbGl2ZV9jZXJ0czERMA8GA1UEAxQIbGl2ZV9hcGkxHDAaBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWDXJlQHBheXBhbC5jb20CAQAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQAEgYABXQBT6cW+x0qoAx/MxjAQnh+S/BrEMSXcx8Fs8j//qEEMQUbPRFnPNJdUVwjok25uSade8Vr3inTgQDHdTQOoEx0Kw27gcPRP5DxaDsjob4ycQxO0KEoIWFXD7ZIUfpX/wzuXETdGlpt4FOx4fHQjuPcGP6+C386hPZMar3viujELMAkGBSsOAwIaBQAwgZsGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAUBggqhkiG9w0DBwQIQrDEjHBnq8GAeL7MrM5RbJKMqAZ025FLnBkQYDue0t+ebpGBU1RMGHhdZs4Bn4vRtgQuaDKeHeQy5f9yuWKmsmRQp5vEW72G9cd0/2UtQaV+2iXRxOeACydAgmeS24GiIqGkwI/kx/MkW+ZGmMn8QZR5mqLo77GuM03mxpCyyCv1IaCCA4cwggODMIIC7KADAgECAgEAMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMIGOMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzELMAkGA1UECBMCQ0ExFjAUBgNVBAcTDU1vdW50YWluIFZpZXcxFDASBgNVBAoTC1BheVBhbCBJbmMuMRMwEQYDVQQLFApsaXZlX2NlcnRzMREwDwYDVQQDFAhsaXZlX2FwaTEcMBoGCSqGSIb3DQEJARYNcmVAcGF5cGFsLmNvbTAeFw0wNDAyMTMxMDEzMTVaFw0zNTAyMTMxMDEzMTVaMIGOMQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzELMAkGA1UECBMCQ0ExFjAUBgNVBAcTDU1vdW50YWluIFZpZXcxFDASBgNVBAoTC1BheVBhbCBJbmMuMRMwEQYDVQQLFApsaXZlX2NlcnRzMREwDwYDVQQDFAhsaXZlX2FwaTEcMBoGCSqGSIb3DQEJARYNcmVAcGF5cGFsLmNvbTCBnzANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOBjQAwgYkCgYEAwUdO3fxEzEtcnI7ZKZL412XvZPugoni7i7D7prCe0AtaHTc97CYgm7NsAtJyxNLixmhLV8pyIEaiHXWAh8fPKW+R017+EmXrr9EaquPmsVvTywAAE1PMNOKqo2kl4Gxiz9zZqIajOm1fZGWcGS0f5JQ2kBqNbvbg2/Za+GJ/qwUCAwEAAaOB7jCB6zAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUlp98u8ZvF71ZP1LXChvsENZklGswgbsGA1UdIwSBszCBsIAUlp98u8ZvF71ZP1LXChvsENZklGuhgZSkgZEwgY4xCzAJBgNVBAYTAlVTMQswCQYDVQQIEwJDQTEWMBQGA1UEBxMNTW91bnRhaW4gVmlldzEUMBIGA1UEChMLUGF5UGFsIEluYy4xEzARBgNVBAsUCmxpdmVfY2VydHMxETAPBgNVBAMUCGxpdmVfYXBpMRwwGgYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFg1yZUBwYXlwYWwuY29tggEAMAwGA1UdEwQFMAMBAf8wDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEFBQADgYEAgV86VpqAWuXvX6Oro4qJ1tYVIT5DgWpE692Ag422H7yRIr/9j/iKG4Thia/Oflx4TdL+IFJBAyPK9v6zZNZtBgPBynXb048hsP16l2vi0k5Q2JKiPDsEfBhGI+HnxLXEaUWAcVfCsQFvd2A1sxRr67ip5y2wwBelUecP3AjJ+YcxggGaMIIBlgIBATCBlDCBjjELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMxCzAJBgNVBAgTAkNBMRYwFAYDVQQHEw1Nb3VudGFpbiBWaWV3MRQwEgYDVQQKEwtQYXlQYWwgSW5jLjETMBEGA1UECxQKbGl2ZV9jZXJ0czERMA8GA1UEAxQIbGl2ZV9hcGkxHDAaBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWDXJlQHBheXBhbC5jb20CAQAwCQYFKw4DAhoFAKBdMBgGCSqGSIb3DQEJAzELBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHAYJKoZIhvcNAQkFMQ8XDTA0MDkxOTAxMTcwNlowIwYJKoZIhvcNAQkEMRYEFJ18lip34g7/ptk7kS32Np5I3tFWMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBAQUABIGAghdU0Xt+Jx+hT9ZkOM6eZxxqJFRc6K0E4xdzB9BZbb8ROu8UisJN3/0SXMzfGy2iDOrxxc4jx7FgXuT+ddvpmZAlhP3vRS0lkLfwkUGZA+a4LAUOzc/HopeSHz20v+ijloXoSC/cliVYvjLApDpo6UGIaO008+V1nagvESD7nc4=-----END PKCS7----- "> </form>  </div> <div> <A HREF="id19.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Printing Help Page"><U>Printing Help Page</U></A></div> <bR> <bR> <div> Being edited:</div> <div> <A HREF="id43.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Memory Skills"><U>Memory Skills</U></A></div> <bR> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" height=383 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <U>Part one. The First Step</U></div> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> <B>This and all other postings are WORKS IN PROGRESS.  Each selection is added to, corrections made, and questions asked are answered as needed.  I add new findings as they become available, </B><B><U>often before proofing</U></B><B>.</B></div> <div> <B>Thank you,</B></div> <div> <B> Ernest Earl Dennis.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Rational Thought --- </B><I><U>Part one</U></I></div> <div> Last edit and reposting on: August 1, 2006</div> <bR> <div> <I><B>The First Step</B></I><FONT SIZE="6" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" ><B>: </B></FONT><FONT SIZE="7" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" ><B> </B></FONT><FONT SIZE="7" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B>How you do it:</B></FONT></div> <bR> <div> <B>You may have heard that words are the “tools” your mind uses to process thought.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Without a word for something, your mind cannot fully lock onto it.  In translating languages, there are many instances in which a concept cannot be transferred to the destination language because there is “no word for it.”</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>It is important to consider the many possible “meanings” for words used in everyday conversations.  We select meanings </B><B><U>from the context of the discussion</U></B><B>.  The dilemma is that everyday word meanings are </B><B><U>unreliable</U></B><B>.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>The first distinction to recognize in the use of “thinking tools” is when we bring our unique power of rationalization to bear; the “tools” we use are </B><B><U>terms</U></B><B>, not the variable-meanings used in chitchat.  When a common word "meaning" is used in a rational context it may have an entirely different connotation when used in casual conversation, than its rational counterpart a term.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Next we add the understanding that the “</B><B><U>meanings</U></B><B>” or </B><B><U>values</U></B><B> of </B><B><U>rational terms</U></B><B> are the "tools” your rational process uses to furnish you with rational conclusions.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B><U>This is identical to the way you depend upon the meanings or values of</U></B><B> numerical terms </B><B><U>to do math</U></B><B>.  We call them “numbers” in math; however, in rational context they are numerical </B><B><U>terms</U></B><B>.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>We use TEN or less "numbers," one to nine and a zero, for the </B><B><U>foundational core</U></B><B> in math that forms and quantifies all totals that will follow.  And, much can follow from just these ten numerical terms:</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>No matter how large a total number you end up with, using just these ten mathematical terms, the total figure produced will never reach a sum so large that you could not add more to it.  Which is to say that just ten numbers can quantify into infinity.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>In a rational context we would say that basic math functions because each of these basic "numbers" has a </B><I><B><U>FACTOR</U></B></I><B> </B><B><U>VALUE</U></B><B>.  A “two” has a factor value of two; double that of “one,” and so on.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>We can access the rationally quantifying power in math, only because we know the numeration </B><B><U>value</U></B><B> of ten-or-less "numbers."  We know the number's FACTOR VALUES.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B><U>Factors</U></B><B> in math, and the </B><B><U>factor values of rational terms in your rational process</U></B><B>, are used mainly </B><B><U>to accurately define</U></B><B> </B><B><U>outcome</U></B><B>.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>A rational factor, such as in math, is "a factor" as it has a </B><B><U>universal value</U></B><B>.  This “universal value” is its factor value, which is stable to the point it mimics a universal law:  Do this and you get this outcome, no “ifs” “ands” or “buts.”  Jump off a cliff and the universal law of gravity says you will get…</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>For example in math, cooking for nine guests, we apply the factor value of “nine” to the plates, and have no doubt each will have their china; there will be no extras, no shortages, no doubts.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>In the process of rationalization, just as in math, </B><B><U>we use a basic foundational core </U></B><B>of </B><B><U>NO MORE than ten</U></B><B> </B><B><U>operational terms</U></B><B> in our personal rationalization.  These are the key terms </B><B><U>that mimic one of the universal laws of physics defining outcome</U></B><B>, such as the basic law of cause and effect.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>These ten-or-less rational terms' factor values are what you use for the logical management of your life.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>There are also other so-called “</B><B><U>common</U></B><B>”</B><B><U> rational terms</U></B><B> </B><B><U>not</U></B><B> part of the ten-or-less </B><B><U>core terms</U></B><B>, though “common,” they have “</B><B><U>formal</U></B><B>” meanings, which are strictly defined, and are also </B><B><U>not</U></B><B> subject to exceptions to their definitions.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B> Yet, it is the small core of ten-or-less operational terms that you will use to quantify all the multitude of “common” terms and “ordinary word meanings” that follow to form our thought questions when we seek a rational conclusion.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>“Common,” though formal, rational terms are used as rational “conversation terms.”  These common terms are used to define the various sub meanings used to construct the rational sentences presented for reflection, and then answers, at the rational level.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>We also use “ordinary word meanings,” other than terms, which are familiar to us, to fill in, and add context, to the flow of input for rational processing.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>In our personal lives we may use a mix of "meanings," and a mix of well-defined formal rational terms to arrive at a rational outcome, yet, even though this “word” count may have a vocabulary of thousands of “words,” </B><B><U>all depend upon the small core of foundational operating terms</U></B><B>.  Though these most basic terms number ten-or-less, everything else is "rationalized" by their factor values.  This is even more remarkable considering some individuals can live productive and successful lives </B><B><U>without using, or having need of all the ten core operational terms and their factors</U></B><B>.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>The rational terms one uses to quantify the rational process in their personal management, </B><B><U>especially the core terms</U></B><B>, are not subject to modification, or custom "tailoring" to suit the subjective whims of the individual.  These terms are defined to mimic a universal law for a specific objective, not for subjective modification, or a preferred interpretation by the individual for their convenience at that moment.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>There are some “common” rational terms, however, that are unlike the “written-in-stone” values of numerical terms.  This is because they are still embryonic and evolving as we add to their values and meanings as our level of knowledge further defines them.  An example of this would be medical terms, such as infections or genes, compared to their definitions a century ago.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>In all occupations, it is the denotative values and meanings of terms, which define the discipline, be it medical terms, legal terms, musical terms, mathematical terms or rational terms.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>One goes to medical school to learn the knowledge defined by medical terms.  For example, imagine the immense body of knowledge defined in medicine by the terms “infection,” “temperature,” “stroke,” or “artery.”</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>One then graduates to internship and then “practices” </B><B><U>the technology defined by their vocabulary of medical terms</U></B><B>.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Next it is on to a “practice,” not entirely of medicine, as it is often referred, but to a lifetime in which one practices, within a medical context, the meanings and factor values of such terms.  Many of these medical meanings and values will radically change and evolve as knowledge advances.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Yet in </B><B><U>other contexts and disciplines</U></B><B>, the four examples of medical terms given above, can just as easily be casual word meanings or professional terms, such as “infection” to a computer software designer, “temperature” in ordinary chitchat about the weather, a “stroke” of luck to an investor, and “artery” used to label a flow of traffic in highway engineering. </B></div> <bR> <div> <B>We depend on ACCURACY of definition for our core of basic operational terms to make correct judgments for assigning the level of value, and priority, to the decision or answer we are seeking.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>The quality of this adjudication or assessment cannot be left to assumption, but must be founded in universal standards and values.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>For these factor values to function for you, they must be proven and predefined before being installed in your basic processing core to forever-after function as administrative terms.  Only then can your requests be forwarded to their proper destination and return with accurate conclusions of outcome and rational "meaning."  Consider that you would be justly horrified, if upon learning of your "stroke," your physician congratulated you on your "stroke of luck.”</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>It helps to think of these ten most-basic terms as your rational level's operating system.  This is like the most-basic operations system (DOS) underlying a computer's entire range of functions.  The DOS is an application program, though not the observable one used to directly address the work at hand.  Rather, this basic disk operating system channels, directs, gives values and quantifies </B><B><U>all the directives and objectives sent out by the programs</U></B><B> you use directly.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>We often need rational insights at a personal level.  Here, especially, </B><B><U>without rational literacy, one will, always and ever, default to an emotional level</U></B><B>, and an </B><B><U>emotionally driven reaction, over a logical response</U></B><B>.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>A simple, “What should I do about this?” is often preloaded with an emotional charge, perhaps a child's request for keys to the car.  Or, on another level, whether to say, “yes” to a mate in an area where they lack resolve.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Though it could anger them, you could save them later anguish with a veto.  This leads us to but one example of how the basic terms determine all that follows.  In both instances, with your child and your mate, the term within our “rational DOS” that would avoid an emotional default would be found within the definition of the term “love” in rational context.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>“Love” is one of the most emotional words in the lexicon.  When love is used in a rational context, however, it becomes a term defining, among other things, an understanding of the “line” where “love” ends, and the objective defaults to subjective elements of self-interest:</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>This line is defined as when, rather than acting with the best long-term interest of “the loved one in min, the decision is subjugated to a level of emotionally driven reaction, defaulting to the emotional level of running a popularity contest, to being “liked,” even to what others will say or “think.”  There will be more on the term “love” later, when we identify and more fully define the ten core rational terms.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Defining how we use our ability to rationalize, even characterize the meanings of rational terms, such as the “love” example just given, should not be a problem today.  There is, however, a remarkable, profoundly troubling degree of absurdity surrounding this technology, of which you should be aware.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>It is the paradox that today's level of knowledge of rational function is a solution to a long list of everyday shortcomings in the cognitive process.  We also understand the lack of public access to this knowledge continues to underwrite the usual emotional landmines that have plagued people throughout history.  It is not lack of need, but of access to know-how that frames the dilemma.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>While some things seem obvious, such as when one has an awareness of rational process, they are actually oblivious prior to one being informed.  In some instances, new understandings are not taken seriously, such as was the new understanding for the need to wash hands to control disease, which only became a part of the culture with the passing of the prior generation.  There is not a clear connection to the level of intellect and education of the people defining this rejection.  It was physicians who most violently rejected the need for washing hands, including before surgery and assisting the birthing process.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>It is tragic that in spite of our finally having the keys to the “rational kingdom,” the unquestionable “magic bullets” for common voids in specific areas of personal potential, nearly 100% of the population has little or no awareness of the modern understanding of rational technique, as they have almost no access to the knowledge base.  Library shelves are filled with books defining the far more complex psychological aspects (particularly the symptoms) of emotion.  Also freely available are related magazine articles by the hundreds, television features, and so on.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Time will correct this void of public access, but this reality underscores the advantage of utilizing this forum to develop personal expertise in rational quantification.  Thus acquiring the ability to casually mute the emotional static that limits cognitive power, and the usual emotional defaults that drive the bulk of our generation's personal decisions.  Emotions are vested in the past.  The clear reality is when emotion drives one down life's highway; it does so looking into the rearview mirror.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Going back to man's beginning, the dilemma has been there is not the slightest possibility of learning rational technique by applying effort, or from a process of trial and error.  Defining the rational process, though deceptively simplistic, has taken longer to solve than splitting the atom or defining the laws allowing manned flight.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Perhaps the major reason for the length of the discovery process is the manifold use of words and how we incorrectly think about a word, standing alone, as having a valid meaning.  In rational thought, everyday chitchat, and every other application, here is the rule, courtesy of Gottlob Frege (1848-1925):</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>"The meaning of a word in not in the word; the meaning of a word is within the context of the sentence in which it is used."</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Which is to say we do not look first for meaning, but for context and take it from there. Then, to be rationally literate, you must know if the "word" is just that, or, is it also </B><B><U>a rational term with a </U></B><I><B><U>factor value</U></B></I><B>.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Frege was the first to define this former mystery in not more than two sentences.  Later, Ludwig Wittgenstein (The W is pronounced as a V.) pursued Frege's posit.  In his little-known work, “The Blue Book,” he opened with the question, “What is the meaning of a word?”  The entire book moves from that opening to the end, just to elaborate and define the profundity of Frege's remarkable pronouncement paraphrased above.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>So just how insightful was Frege's “meaning of a word” definition?</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Beyond question, Frege is regarded the greatest logician of the 19th Century (Tarski).  Frege was also a founder of symbolic logic, the first to use prepositional calculus, and one could continue on with his “firsts,” “discoveries,” and influential concepts at the very genesis of understanding the rational process.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Thanks to a long progression of individuals who could function as geniuses, the likes of Frege, over many centuries of thought, today, we know both how, and how-to.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>We also know that learning the rational process is so simplistic that it is perhaps the easiest skill one can acquire, which is, in and of itself, most remarkable as it empowers humanity's most powerful feature.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Even more inspiring is the assurance that all levels of society have the option of taking their reasoning process to the most powerful level of which we are aware at this time.  One could surmise this as the fact, not an opinion:  That learning to process rational thought is, out of reach of emotion, and at a purely rational level, to the mind what breathing is to the body.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Understanding your rational progression only requires you to understand its relatively few principals.  If, however, one wishes to apply the “wisdom” label to any one aspect of rational literacy -- wisdom that separates one from almost all of present-day citizens -- it would be the following reality:  Perhaps the most paradoxical aspect to rational technology is the curious awareness that rational terms are also among the most common words, the very words used frequently in all manner and levels of communication.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Outside of the context of rational computation, even the most critical rational terms will have various conceptual “meanings.”  These interchangeable meanings are freely defined by the individual and can even vary within in the same conversation.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Word definitions are infinitely variable and convey meaning subject to the moment, and, most of all, the individual's emotional condition.  Be totally aware that in a person-to-person conversation, the choice of words and their meanings are primarily defined by emotion.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Professions requiring extraordinary accuracy in interpreting meaning in a conversation, such as detectives, psychologists, sales people, even personnel executives, succeed where others would not have a clue, because they are trained to avoid the trap of looking for meaning in the words.  Rather, professionals purposely avoid getting distracted by the choice of vocabulary, and look at the entire sentences' statement, seeking the emotional message conveyed, not what is said.  </B></div> <bR> <div> <B>It is critical to be aware that this lack of distinction in definition is profoundly significant to you and your quality of life as it determines the integrity of your logic.  For example, imagine the result of deciding on a random and variable meaning of the numerical value of “9” to best suit the moment.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>It is also vital to fully comprehend the limitations to your reasoning capabilities from not knowing the value and the legal definitions of the basic core rational terms you use.  I say, "use,” as at some levels of culture, some individuals, throughout their lifetime never use more than five of the ten possible.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Also, in some cultures the language does not have one, or more, of the ten possible core processing terms, which are used in personal rational management.  Of particular interest to me is the Italian lexicon, as it does not have a “word” for one of the most common rational terms.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>That missing term, "responsible," will be defined when terms are covered.  However, that basic operational term is one that quantifies either “reaction” or “response” in specific areas of conclusion.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>In the United States "responsible" is almost </B><B><U>always</U></B><B> </B><B><U>incorrectly</U></B><B> used in conversation in lieu of "accountable," which is the correct word, term and meaning.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Briefly, the rational synonym for "responsible," as well as its primarily "meaning," is "personal power."  "I am responsible," is a statement of understanding the individual is "in charge."  An individual, should primarily, and almost always, only use it as a statement of being in charge or in power.  When used by that individual </B><B><U>directed to another</U></B><B> it should be in the context of "Are you responsible?"</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Whereas the general use of "responsible" is embarrassingly flawed in American culture to mean "guilty," "liable," "at fault," "the entity credited with bringing something about," and other such nonsense, rather than using the correct "word meaning" of "accountable."</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>One is accountable, guilty, liable and at fault for failure to be responsible.  As responsible is one of the basic operating terms of rational process, it is one of the few key terms everyone needs to process specific aspects of rational thought to outcome.  I profoundly wish the core rational term could be fully defined at this point, however, it cannot.  Just the same, especially in the conveying of news, notice that "responsible" is used often and always reversed with "accountable."</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Likewise, in some Asian cultures the western term that quantifies “time” in rational conclusions has an entirely different “meaning” than in the west.  The western definition of “time” in rational context is, essentially, nonexistent, and one reason so many in western culture are unable to frame “time” beyond next payday.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>To fully grasp the significance of knowing the objective meanings of the most basic terms, consider this: Think of the limits on civilization, the inability to make engineering decisions, to easily perform precise calculations without limitations; </B><B><U>before we added the rational context of the mathematical term “zero</U></B><B>.”</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>It is rightly said that understanding the rational context meaning of zero is accountable (not responsible) for our ability to take men to the moon, and bring them back.  Consider, also, how a computer, one of our recent “marvels,” was empowered with the power to quantify.  This ability is the result of being able to OBJECTIVELY define just two terms, “one,” meaning yes, and “zero” meaning no.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Were computers to function as if to mimic the rationally illiterate model, the output would be reactive over responsive, erratic, entirely undependable, and only the computer's physical structure would be of value, perhaps as a doorstop or paperweight?</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>This is because, rather than an objectively defined value of, essentially, yes or no; these basic quantifying values would mimic the emotionally subjective standard lacking rational objectives.  Each yes or no would be subjective, not objective.  Each choice of direction, value, and meaning, would be subject to the moment.  The decision would switch to a REACTION determined by the subjective emotion of the moment.  This, rather than a RESPONSE directed to a predetermined objective, which would be the goal or very objective of the process itself.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Let us add to your understanding of the critical comparison of the basic, underlying operating system of a computer to our rational process. Though a basic computer quantifies with only two quantifiers, its process exactly parallels how we use the ten, or less, rational terms forming the operating foundation of our rational procedure.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Whereas the comparison ends as the human model has the unique ability to quantify the Universe with an array of terms that include a rational term, "time," that functions as the equivalent of how “zero” functions in math.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Also, this basic, underlying, operating system is uniquely powerful and has no known equal to it in the Universe.  All this because it uses a universal standard (usually emulating a law of physics) that does not vary, compromise objectives, or check a logbook for possible justification to make exceptions.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>At the same time, the specific, UPPER programs that the basic operating system manages DO have </B><B><U>variable</U></B><B> objectives.  An individual may load a program to assist his goal of pushing verbs up against nouns.  Then switch to another to direct and "crunch" amounts through an accounting process, and so on.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>The upper programs are subjective.  This as, unlike the basic operating system, the upper program functions vary, and their standards and directives are entirely subjective to the function at the moment, just as the rational conclusions you seek are subject to the variations of each questions posed.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>The point is this:  In the programs computers run and in rational thought, all the computer programs, or rational queries, will have variable objectives and standards, sometimes numbering in the hundreds of thousands.  Yet, the outcome of all will depend upon the integrity of the immutable universal standards codified within values and standards of its most basic operational foundation, be it two quantifiers or the up-to-ten in our rational process. </B></div> <bR> <bR> <div> <B>Finally, the foundational terms used in your rational process parallel the basic mathematical “terms” zero through nine.  I would posit there are also no more than ten foundational terms needed to guide the rational process </B><B><U>on a personal level</U></B><B>.  Certain occupations and specific logical solutions may require specific terms added to the underlying operating system basics.  One brief example would be in quantum physics where "elsewhere" would be added to add a factor value not </B><B><U>normally</U></B><B> a part of the basic core operational term "time."</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Success at finding satisfying solutions at a rational level is determined by whether or not one learns the objective “meanings” and values of terms used in rational context to have the proper </B><B><U>RATION</U></B><B> of importance, value, and validity, and address.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>With no numerical value, it appears that zero is the least of the numerators.  Its lack of ranking stature would make it last in the line.  The social “pecking order” would dictate it know its place, which would be taking its position behind the least possible asset of  “one.”</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Yet, though easily mistaken as the least among its peers, Zero has become an equal without equal.  The lowly Zero is considered priceless to its partners of nine.  And is honored as a “Prince” for the uncompromising working principals the Zero defines.  One could say it was not an </B><B><U>outward</U></B><B> social rating that defined this path to greatness, but </B><B><U>a defining character</U></B><B>, one without </B><B><U>exceptions</U></B><B> to defend.  From the last in line, to the first in esteem, is best in steps:</B></div> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> <B>Choose know-how, not might.</B></div> <div> <B>Get your term meanings right,</B></div> <div> <B>then hold to them tight.</B></div> <div> <B>With knowing comes insight,</B></div> <div> <B>and answers just right.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>You mind needs to learn-how,</B></div> <div> <B>for answers that know-how.</B></div> <div> <B>Thoughts pose questions for answers you want,</B></div> <div> <B>it is solutions your thoughts want.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Yet the other-way-round you should know,</B></div> <div> <B>thoughts can use ultimate standards of knowing.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>It is know-how that shows-how, to be your own hero.  </B></div> <div> <B>Add rational power, as you did the meaning of Zero.</B></div> <bR> <div> © Copyright 2006 by Ernest Earl Dennis, all rights reserved.</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id24.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Two: Beginning Rational Terms"><U>Click Here to read </U></A><A HREF="id24.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Part Two: Beginning Rational Terms"><U>Part Two: Beginning Rational Terms</U></A></div> <div> © Copyright 2006 by Ernest Earl Dennis, all rights reserved.</div> <bR> <div> RationalPower.com will continue to define more rational terms and your questions. </div> <div> <B>Please lend me your hand by telling friends about RationalPower.com </B></div> <div> <A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="RationalPower.com"><U>Home</U></A></div> <div> I appreciate your letters.</div> <div>  </div> <div> Ernest Earl Dennis, Editor</div> <div> Post Office Box 1806</div> <div> Longview, WA 98632-8117</div> <div> <A HREF="mailto:ernest.dennis@gmail.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:ernest.dennis@gmail.com"><U>Email: Ernest.Dennis@Gmail.com</U></A></div> <div> Thank you!</div> <div>  </div> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>