Saturdays Lesson
Part 13
Axioms 38 to 42 
[There should have been a picture here: the front page title and bookmark.]
You may find it easier to work directly from the PDF file (an extract from the PDF book). The link directly below this will take you to the directory where you will find PDFs of all the parts we have studied. You want part 13. Otherwise below you find the same thing as far as I can conjure it up onto MailChimp!
HOWEVER — two items are referred to in this part, I have made a copy of them and put them in the members area BUT they are not linked n the PDF versions.
Link to Commentory on Axioms STUDY Section

And so we have arrived at “the truth axiom”:

Axiom 38. 1: Stupidity is the unknownness of consideration.

2: Mechanical definition: stupidity is unknownness of time, place, form and event.

1: Truth is the exact consideration.

  1. Truth is the exact time, place, form, and event. Thus we see that failure to discover Truth brings about stupidity.

     Thus we see that the discovery of Truth would bring about an As-is-ness by actual experiment.

     Thus we see that and ultimate truth would have no time, place, form or event.

     As Thus, then, we perceive that we can achieve a persistence only when we mask the truth.

   Lying is an alteration of time, place, event, or form.

   Lying becomes alter-is-ness, become stupidity.

   (The blackness of cases is an accumulation of the case's own or another's lies.)

   Anything which persists must avoid as-is-ness. Thus, anything, to persist, must contain a lie.

The reactive bank has been constructed by our considerations (thought) and by the four conditions of existence (mechanics) which produce engrams, secondaries and locks as well as analytical machinery. Every single forgotten consideration still exists, and every piece of extant mental MEST, with its precise time, place, form and event, is still on the thetan’s time continuum.

An event is a sequence of occurrences that are considered to form one Cycle of Action. When we run a single incident in Dianetics the pc defines it by its duration, demarked by beginning and end. An incident also has a significance, a label we assign to it and by which we recognize it. It can be a particular emotional quality or the kind of occurrence characterizing that incident. This significance can be common to a number of incidents or events which then can form a chain. The auditor identifies a chain by this significance, e.g. a particular somatic, attitude, label etc., which is common to all incidents on the chain - at least in the view of the reactive mind.

A somatic is, of course, itself a mass, but it can represent the engram chain and so be a symbol of it. If you are familiar with word clearing you are used to thinking of the word as a symbol with a significance and you have to relate it to the mass it symbolizes. But the symbol itself does have both mass (e.g. the ink on a page), meaning and mobility.

The auditor has to identify one chain, because any incident is filed in many ways, e.g. by similarity of sight, sound, pain, individuals, location, kind of event etc. Each of these is a different chain and that’s far too many chains to run in one session. So we want to stick with the one item that read on the meter and that the pc is interested in running. We run it until the chain erases or keys out. We run one thing at a time.

Things persist solely because we have forgotten our original postulates or primary considerations (Axiom 37). These are the as-is-nesses that were alter-ised or not-ised into persistence, and if we could, again, be fully aware of all these primary postulates the whole bank would be gone. Or we could self-determinedly cause any part of it to persist as analytical machinery (discussed under Axiom 16), or as acceptable is-nesses which we choose to have available in our Game of Life. Unrealities can turn into known is-nesses on a lower level, as mentioned under Axiom 37, and we need to back-track these things on a gradient.

Mechanics constitute the subject matter of Dianetics while Scientology operates more directly with the pc’s considerations. One might say that Dianetics works by creating perfect duplicates of incidents while Scientology works by changing postulates - but both really work because they make the pc change his considerations. By running an engram the pc comes to consider a healthy body instead of a sick body etc.

One should note that modern Scientology addresses a lot of mechanics which it didn’t in 1954 where one ran no locks, secondaries or engrams and little straightwire (recall processes) when one could avoid it. They were ignored and expected to be handled by the thetan once he was stably exterior and educated. The idea was that one would get a new set of engrams every time one took a new body anyway so the important thing was to make the thetan able to handle engrams, both now and in the future, not to run out just one set so he would have to start all over again next lifetime at the bottom of the bridge. This approach changed with Theory 67 which precipitated the development of what we now think of as the noninterference area and the modern bridge (HCOB 20 Oct 60: Theory 67. Tech. Vol. IV, page 166 LINK=

The result of as-is-ness is nothing in terms of mechanics: There is nothing left that one can weigh, measure or communicate with (by sending masses or energies over a distance to a receipt terminal), only the individual life static or a relatively static area where something was. What the person has run out may have vanished, but he may also have decided to change it for further use. An incident, once cognited on, may be transformed into an anecdote, an amusing story to tell to others or a valuable lesson. Cognitions are new knowledge that one never had before, and they may be reduced to knowingness with no location, time and form. As an example, you probably don’t recall where and when you learned that 2 + 2 = 4. This knowledge is not mechanical now, but you did learn it at a particular time and location and it may have produced locks, and even secondaries, and eventually you understood it.

But cognitions may also take form and become pleasant souvenirs that you remember with some pride because you discovered something important, got praise or simply were glad that you got useful stable data that you can still recall when you need to align something to them. Reminders can be useful, as when you have to remind yourself, for example, that the British drive on the left side of the road. You may still need to visualize the maneuver before you enter a roundabout i.e. remember how you used to do it.

This axiom summarizes Clearing. Clearing and playing are two different things. We need Clearing in order to de-bug The Game of Life so the thetan can remain a sane player and experience great spirit of play, or, in other words, have lots of fun on all dynamics. The thetan has to be fluent and flexible enough to create and destroy any mental MEST as well as being able to make, unmake and change considerations.

And another thing: In order to do this he has to know the basic principles of life so he can play wisely and not fight windmills because he’s ignorant of the rules of the game and of himself, which would reduce him to a mere piece, a pawn.

Section 5

The Way of Games

Subject: The Game of Life

According to Scientology philosophy life is a game. We engage in it for amusement in order to experience spirit of play, action, fun etc.

The better we understand something the better we can control it. The better we can control mechanics the less we need to run them out, and we can instead play with them which was their purpose in the first place. If we want to play The Game of Life we need a playground with freedoms and barriers as well as goals and co-players who act self-determinedly.

It’s a happy fact that the more we can view life as an interesting game, the more we tend to as-is anything undesirable around us simply by passing through. We can grant beingness to anybody and see things as they are so nothing unwanted persists.

By negative case gain, summarized in Axiom 38, we could probably run out the whole game and revert to a static state, but this is not our goal in Scientology. All games are aberrative but if we know and understand the rules of our particular game and the basics of games in general we can puppeteer the role or character that we have in the game, so to speak, while at the same time having all the fun and experience of knowingly being that beingness, pretending that we are it. And we can remain sane.

We can understand the nature of aberrations and run them out whenever they become a liability to our playing. It’s desirable to understand The Game of Life partially, namely to the degree that we can not only play the game from inside it, pretending it’s real, but also so we can also step out of it and take a theta view of it from outside and know that we are not actually the piece on the game board. This is the basic game of life, as stated in Axiom 48.

By “being a thetan about life” we can have our cake and eat it,

As we go down the Tone Scale we can no longer accept or admit that life is a game. We may protest and resent it but we nevertheless hold on to it in spite of everything. It bears repeating:

Factor 29. In the opinion of the viewpoint, any beingness, any thing, is better than no thing, any effect is better than no effect, any universe better than no universe, any particle better than no particle, but the particle of admiration is best of all.

This is not true at the highest levels of the scale. A thetan, totally cleared, has the choice to play or not to play. He is truly free to choose to play a game in MEST with co-players if he wants to, but he doesn’t have to. He can instead choose to remain completely static or he can choose to play all by himself in his own universe, amusing himself with his own mock-ups, experiencing great satisfaction. Lower on the scale this would be a substitute created as a solution to being an incompetent player and yet having to play, but at the top there is absolutely no compulsion to do one or the other, and you can only attain this level if you are able to confront, have and enjoy the game.

Once again: The way out is the way through, so you have to enjoy life before you can abandon it

Ron mentions this in the PDC lectures but decides to limit Scientology to tone levels up to 40.0, although, as he remarks in several places, the Tone Scale goes much higher (as indicated on The Chart of Attitudes from SOS). This freedom of choice is not mentioned explicitly in these axioms, for they are the basics we have all agreed upon concerning our present game in MEST, and we who are here are driven by a compulsion to play, as indicated in Factor 29 cited above.

I mention it here, again, so that you may know and compare your options in the game of freedom and make enlightened choices.

We can also rise above compulsions to alter-is and play in a rather serene state in our preferred roles:

Factor 27: There is beingness, but man believes there is only becomingness.

In other words we don’t have to alter-is or change conditions - others, ourselves and everything else - all the time, which is what we do when we play. We actually don’t need any is-ness or persistence. We can just be who we are being and play from that viewpoint. Actually, we don’t even have to crave a beingness (i.e. a havingness the thetan identifies with such as a mock-up, a self or a physical body; in other words: MEST). As one gets greater certainty of self, very little attention is required by the first dynamic; flow is common. The compulsion to change oneself (and other things) is common, but one can instead just be, relatively close to static (as defined under Axiom 1) while playing. We'll come back to this in Axiom 48.

If one can agree that thetans should have the right to be sane and the right to leave the game, the perfect game should be played by players who aren’t trapped in a game, but play it because they want to. The right to leave the game is one of the two rights of a thetan quoted in Overview of the six sections under Section 5.

So, having covered Clearing or negative case gain in Section 4 – eliminating the things that inhibit playing – we now come to the axioms that teach us how to play.

While Axiom 29 was the principle of automatic persistence of MEST, Axiom 39 states how to knowingly create a problem or goal that will initiate a Cycle of Action. The intention and urge to solve the problem, or attain the goal, provide the dynamic of play. Freedoms and barriers are selected or created by the thetan’s considerations and the essential method of playing is defined as an oscillation between a MEST and a theta viewpoint. These two may also be held simultaneously, which was the concept of Theta Clear i.e. a thetan stably outside the body and controlling it from outside. In other words, the player was being a thetan about life and livingness.

On a gradient one can be a thetan about life even while inside the body, too, by reflecting on (being aware of) what one is doing and keeping it in perspective. OT begins above 2.0, as stated above under Axiom 2 (ref. PAB 101).

Section 5, commented on below, contains the basic principles of The Game of Life, while the last section, Section 6, gives some general practical advice concerning the game that we are in at this time; this helps us remain sane.

Axiom 39. Life poses problems for its own solution.

Life is basically a static. A static doesn’t need solutions since it is nothing in terms of MEST, but once it has decided to enter universes it wants to create effects, create Cycles of Action and engage in games.

The game of man as a species is to survive on the first 4 dynamics; the game of thetans is to exist on 8 dynamics, but the purpose senior to both is the one expressed in Axiom 10: to create an effect. This can be accomplished by moving a pencil from the right side of the table to the left. Done! Now what? Well, the purpose remains the same: create an effect. Let’s move the pencil back from the left side to the right. Done! Now what? Move it to the left etc., etc., etc.

If you are not very flat on Opening Procedure by Duplication (“book and bottle”) you might soon want to do something else or, better yet, create a game that can last a long time with lots of varied activities and options. A good game has a goal, barriers and freedoms. A barrier can be any kind of obstacle i.e. a via or detour that one has to take in order to reach a goal, like a swamp, a mountain - distances too great to cross or too little time etc. Freedom cannot be understood except by comparison to barriers, just as the effort to survive is not easily grasped by an immortal god. Being omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent ends any game. All problems are overcome as easily as you or I can move a pencil from one side of the table to another.

A man was born. He lived. He died. The end”. But it’s all the things that happened on the road that make the story.

One complexity of barriers that many of us could do without is the reactive bank. We created it ourselves but it is composed of the unintended consequences of our postulates. It all too often doesn’t matter what we postulate now because it’s overruled by what we once thought. That’s the other way to end any game: in apathy and death.

GOALS: Life has solutions for many things. It has never had a solution for aberration until now. The target of the auditor is not simply the eradication of aberration. It is the relegation of aberration to the status of a solved problem.

Advanced Course. Data Sheet, April 10, 1954; Technical Bulletins, Tech. Vol. II, page 41

Aberration is no longer a problem because we can run out any aberration when it gets in our way. By exercising out abilities we can also be greater than aberration. What you can control is no problem.

Instead of making problems out of aberrations we can create something and pretend it’s a barrier, like pretending we can’t walk through a wall (which we certainly can as thetans), or that we can’t cross against a red light, just as we can pretend that the bishop in chess can only move diagonally. The fact is it cannot move at all, unless we move it.

But once aberration is solved as a problem we can use the game itself to restimulate engram chains or spot unrealities not yet as-ised, and recognize them as barriers to make life more interesting. We can then run them out and discover new possible freedoms that will bring us closer to our goals or let us have more fun by enabling us to move around in new ways, over or through barriers that used to stop us.

Randomity can be provided simultaneously by residual aberration, the laws of nature, local rules and the efforts of other players - who may be teammates or belong to groups with rules, goals and means different from our own.

Some routes to our goals are faster than others and some are so much fun that we don’t much care about the goal. Games are for interest, after all, while goals are spurious. Playing is fun; winning (or losing) is unimportant, only mildly interesting. A good game is never truly serious, although it can be fun to pretend it is.

The purpose of auditing is to enable the pc to change his mind, i.e. his considerations, self-determinedly, not because he’s persuaded by others or compelled by his reactive mind. This ability is native to him. If he cannot do it he is in a universe not his own: the physical universe, father’s universe, the body’s or some other universe.

In any universe one is subject to the postulates of the God of that universe. Therefore, when a preclear cannot be brought to change his postulates, he must be having trouble with other universes.


Mother’s universe is created by mother who is ”the God” of her universe. So if a pc is in mother’s universe, in her valence, it’s unalterable as far as he is concerned. Total ARC brings about vanishment of mechanics (Axiom 24), and understanding a universe rids one of dependence on that universe. If one is self-determinedly willing to be the viewpoint of another one can understand his universe. If a pc is out of valence,”mothers universe” is really only a copy. The mechanics that vanish are of course his considered reality on that universe; mother’s own universe won’t vanish for her.

But one can know the freedoms and barriers of any universe by being willing to take the viewpoint of its originator. One can then act self-determinedly and sanely in relationship to it, allowing the creator of it to be God in his universe while being at the same time God in one’s own. One is not, then, out of valence.

We can handle aberration. But valid theoretical knowledge is essential if one is to adjust to changing games, conditions, players and bodies. The particulars of games are enormously varied and complex but they are all based on the same basic principles which are relatively few and simple.

The Scientology Axioms can be seen as a manual to The Game of Life and this section goes beyond clearing and explains the basic principles of games. Specific knowledge applying to one game becomes obsolete when new games are made, but knowledge of the basics that are common to all games allows one to quickly go into ARC with any new game, adjust, set goals and so become a competent player.

This is how we become cause and create our own subjective time, different from the objective, agreed upon time marked by clocks & calendars (cf. comments under Axioms 7 & 29). By posing a problem one sets a goal, and if you don’t set a specific goal ...

... your whole life gets dragged out to an interminable place of endurance

PDC 40

A problem can be defined as something the as-is-ness of which cannot easily be obtained (PXL, chapter 16, page 189). We can make a problem by creating something and say that somebody else made it (Axiom 29); by not-ising an is-ness by force (Axiom 18) or by lying about something (Axiom 36). However, this kind of problem can only provide us with a playground with havingnesses in it, but not goals. We lose self-determinism unless we pose our own problems and set goals and thus create Cycles of Action that create subjective time. We may coordinate subjective time with MEST time, so we don’t forget time and are late for supper, but without subjective time we become time slaves (see comments under Axioms 9 & 13).

We can make it a problem how to recover self-determinism. This is what Ron did, and how Scientology came into existence. The four conditions of existence, for instance, are considerations but they are universally agreed upon in this universe. Scientology theory is a description of the agreements we all made long ago and they were rediscovered by backtracking apparent reality, is-ness, and unreality, and by sorting out the sequence of alter-is-nesses, not-is-nesses and earlier is-nesses in the minds of pcs. We needed to know the nature of the trap before we could learn how to get out of the trap.

Even the most basic principles, such as the four conditions of existence and ARC, do contain lies. It’s true that they were postulated; it’s a lie that they are real, i.e. necessarily true, just because they are agreed upon. We can do things by postulates that don’t follow these laws, certainly in our own universe, in our imagination, with mock-ups etc. We may imagine, for instance, that we, by forcing another to accept our reality, have caused his false ideas to vanish and that this has made him wiser and happier because he now “knows the truth”. Or we delude ourselves that everything will be fine if we find a good excuse or lie. It works well in our hopeful planning, and in this imagined future we have in fact managed to make it so - it does exist in our own universe – but then it turns us into fools as we try to realize it in physical reality where these axioms apply. In this manner we wind up with more persistency and greater complexities.

We are living in the MEST universe which is inhabited by aberrated beings so we need the knowledge of Scientology if we are to associate with them in a meaningful way. Since everybody is agreed upon these basics of life and MEST, whether they know it or not, they will remain true and persist unless we – all of us, or a considerable majority – change our minds about them.

Aberration is contagious. But fortunately, so is sanity.

I think we can have a good game here, if only we learn the rules by which the game is played. They have caused us much trouble because they were hidden and forgotten. Understanding them well you can apply your self-determinism instead of being fooled by them and oppressed by your own

considerations made once upon an early part of the time track.

As mentioned under Axiom 29, Axiom 39 is the axiom that gives our efforts direction, while denying responsibility for our creations disperses them and breaks their apparent promise to our fondest hopes.

Axiom 40. Any problem, to be a problem, must contain a lie, if it were truth, it would unmock.

An "unsolvable problem" would have the greatest persistence. It would also contain the greatest number of altered facts. To make a problem, one must introduce alter-is-ness.

This is true of problems offered by the reactive bank, of course, but in this section we are more interested in problems posed by the thetan to make life better and existence more interesting; problems posed to find the relative truths that can enable us to create new and better conditions in life and shape whatever game we are playing to suit us. These relative truths include the rules of our games as well as the many random ways in which we can change our environments and possessions, how we may align our activities with those of others with ARC = U, and other factors that make a game interesting.

A plot of a movie or novel is interesting because of the problems that need to be solved. Without problems the plot dies. “They couldn’t marry, but they did anyway”. The end. Add the whos, the whys, whens and why nots and it may become a romance, an epic drama, a feel-good movie or something entirely unheard of.

DAX 169. Any aesthetic product is a symbolic facsimile or combination of facsimiles of theta or physical universes in varied randomities and volumes or randomities with the interplay of tones.

This can include personalities, places and conditions, change of pace and  tions interacting, some things expected, others surprising.

You may not be particularly interested in story writing, movies or other art forms, but when you plan a Cycle of Action in life you are in fact designing a plot. If you are good at inventing problems you can make plans that will be really interesting to you with good challenges, exciting experiences, great accomplishments and so on. The Game of Life is an art form too.

If you don’t create your own problems the cycles you engage in may quickly become dull or end too soon, or you may contract problems posed by somebody else or by MEST, and you may not like to have to solve them. A good game must be motivated by your own interest. It’s by your own goals that life acquires meaning.

Grade I, the grade that deals with problems, makes the pc more able to invent problems regarding anything. An object, person or condition only becomes a problem when construed as one, i.e. a person has to pose or formulate the problem and decide how it could be a barrier for achieving one of his many goals. If he can create a wide variety of potential problems he can pick out the interesting ones – the challenges, the exciting games, the projects that may be difficult but at the same time immensely fulfilling - because they result in better ARC on the dynamics.

Examples of games of considerable interest and complexity could be how to reverse climate change, teach children to be thetans about their lives or design and create a society where the individual would be able to flourish while supporting others in doing the same. But a problem could also be simply to get well or to create a happy family. There are gradients to improve life at all levels of interest and ability. Increased ARC on one dynamic opens for better ARC on the next one up (DAX 167, quoted under Axiom 24).

Problems can seem to be unsolvable but can in fact always be analyzed into parts or elements. A common error is to see it only as ”one problem” (a solid; Axiom 6). To solve an “unsolvable problem” one can find the as-is-ness of a part of the problem, or develop knowledge that permits one to control that part. Or one may find out nothing about the part one is investigating but suddenly discover that one can now understand another part.

Eventually, as one continues this process, the whole problem either as-is-es or ceases to be a problem and dissolves into various is-nesses which one can control or relate to rationally. Note that this process is the opposite of an unreality degrading into a ”normal” and known is-ness on a lower level (comment under Axiom 37).

LOGIC 13: Problems are resolved by compartmenting them into areas of similar magnitude and data, comparing them to data already known or partially known, and resolving each area. Data which cannot be known immediately may be resolved by addressing what is known and using its solution to resolve the remainder.

This is how one achieves partial or total understanding by ARC. This method is the way to solve a problem within the game, i.e. it’s part of the game. But it can also be an important step toward finding the as-is-ness of an aberrated problem that one just wants to get rid of. In auditing this can happen by itsa, where the pc states time, place, form and event (Axiom 38), or by keying out something by looking at it as-is (Axiom 19).

Axiom 41. That into which alter-is-ness is introduced becomes a problem.

Ron gives the example of a child who has been moved around a lot, living in different houses (PXL., chapter 16, page 190).

Moving a piece of matter, moving things, does not amount to alter-is-ness for the primary postulate is not masked or obscured (cf. axiom 36). But a child being moved to various towns must change his considerations concerning his environment. The anchor points he was familiar with are now in another town and he doesn’t quite know where in the physical universe they are, yet he still tries to orient himself to them because they used to tell him where he was. When he is tired or confused, particularly, he has a clear impression that the store is around the corner and that his friend Cindy lives just across the street, even though he knows, analytically, that they are in another town.

You may experience such old anchor points even as an adult. You suddenly get the idea that you might pay a visit to your old friend Joe and then realize that he moved abroad last year; or you may reach out to take something out of a drawer in the desk you had when you went to high school. But a child who has been moved around a lot becomes a problem, first to himself then to others (ibid.) These kind of problems can cause miserable lives. As stated above, we do need problems otherwise there is no game, but, being Scientologists, we can get rid of the lousy problems we accidentally blundered into and pose some interesting ones instead.

Axiom 42. MEST (matter, energy, space, time) persists because it is a problem. It is a problem because it contains alter-is-ness.

What persists must be an alter-is-ness of a prior condition, otherwise it wouldn’t persist. It may involve pretending that there is space and form even though there is actually only a static, or saying that there is nothing where something is hidden, or lying about who created it etc.

Particularly, MEST becomes increasingly problematic when we try to make it vanish by force or to forcefully alter parts of it.

DAX 161: The control center* attempts the halting or lengthening of time, the expansion or contraction of space and the decrease or increase of energy and matter.

This is a primary source of invalidation, and it is also a primary source of aberration.

* the control center is the thetan

An individual may get stressed and try to hurry up in order to “stretch” time so he can finish a cycle before a deadline: he tries to squeeze too much into a suitcase; he tries to summon enough strength to lift it or to make himself lighter on the bathroom scale.

MEST in itself just is. It moves without mind or purpose according to natural law, and it has no volition or opinions about it. If we try to change this natural course of events, if we try to create effects and MEST doesn’t comply, we have this choice: We can resent it and become aberrated or we can accept what happened as a fact, find out why it happened, what rules apply etc., and change our approach accordingly.

In other words, by ARC we can find out what is possible and what is impossible for us in this game at the present (DAX 111, cited under Axiom 2). If we pose problems that suit our goals, tastes and abilities we don’t need much aberration to make life interesting; pretending that things are real and that what we do is important in the game will do. It’s not that different from a ball game. Professional players can become too serious; they work because they must. Amateurs can have fun and life is no different.

Resenting facts, feeling invalidated or stymied are varieties of not-is-ness, and the rubble never disappears except by as-is-ness. Rubble erodes or is moved away; some of it is buried, dust from old civilizations is carried all over the planet by wind and water. All molecules or atoms that went through the “destruction” are recycled, as are the persisting parts of the mind.

Engram chains may be keyed out but then they may be keyed in again. The individual uses unrealities to form new is-nesses. Thus aberrated patterns arise. The individual can use these new is-nesses in a self-determined manner; his thinking may be relatively sane, but his conclusions may be strange and may not make life easier - and it’s only too easy to think of them as “normal”.

We don’t need them!

Do send a comment for publication to members (including Nomen Nescis). Click on the button below.  Your email program will present you with an email ready to send, and all you have to do is to add your comment to it. 
Click or press here to send a comment or question.
Dear member of the Books Weekly merry band of Scientology axiom explorers.

We are now just past halfway through Nomen Nescis book which has been divided up into sections .

Can I ask you to give your overall opinion? Did you give up after the first two? I'd like to know if you did, if you're thoroughly ashamed of yourself you can send the letter to me privately and I won't tell anyone your name. Write to: .

Otherwise I'd just like to know your general feelings and any particular surprises or other gains you might have made.

Note that: 
A.Writing down your experience may make it more real to you and help you perhaps look more closely.
B. Other readers may find your comments helpful in getting them to have another look from another angle. Lookingness is a high toned thing. Did Nomen's work help you have further look at those awful axioms.

So here's another button for you to press giving you a subject which covers comments, cognitions and other new understandings and questions on the book so far.
Click or press here to send a HALF WAY Comment or Question
If you have a friend or friendly acquaintance who might be interested in this press the following button and fill in the form with a little explanatory message to your friend or acquaintance.
Forward this email to a friend
Books Weekly email archive (20 most recent items)
Books Weekly Members' Area
Books Weekly Members' Introductions ------ If your introduction is missing contact:
(picture of Antony]
Church IoW  by Leonard Dunn
Copyright © 2022 Antology (Antony Phillips), All rights reserved.

Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.

Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp