I think you are missing my point David. Certainly I argue not for a animationless Mind or intellect. Hardly. The Mind is the instrument of the Conscious Entity to tell the inheritance of the Earthen body how and what to perform. I also think Philosophy is not worthless, as Law, Medicine, Math, and Science has derived from it.

Your approach is fine, but you have accepted it for yourself through consent by your Conscious Self.

The problem I have with paper oaths is that I have no trust in the paper or the oath. How can I? I have no Personal knowledge of either. Today, many Men and Women who have taken oaths are not living up to them, they have vacated their offices, when in fact they do not even know they have, and still occupy them. They are in breach. The General assemblies I certainly do not trust. How can I? If no individual is imbued with with any Authority, then how can any group of individuals have any Authority? What individual living breathing Man or Woman has Authority over me? Would you please point them out so that I may address them. I have yet to find any that will take that liability.

As Kant in "Critique of Pure Reason", I too am uniting experience and reason to move beyond what I perceive the failures are of so called Law, which include the use of Philosophy.

Until I can prove with Personal knowledge anything beyond the three proofs I have empirically found, how can I agree with anything else in truth and Honor as existing? If I lay claim upon, and agreement with, anything beyond that which I can prove by empirical observation, then I commit fraud against myself.

"There are so many instances however when you get drawn into it as it does persist there even from the privacy of your own home."

Agreed. And that is the temptation. In many cases it is a violation that is occurring. Trespass. Again, by the systems own reasoning, no individual in imbued with any Authority to force themselves or ideas, concepts, philosophies, upon any other. Speaking of mythology. How do these individuals with no Authority then get together and imbue themselves with Authority?

Hmmm. Here is a thought. Im going to start an movement. This movement will abide by all Man created protocols in forming a General Assembly. We will take Oaths. Be will be bonded. We will vote. Our goal is to rob People of what we dont have inherently, because we would rather form a movement, get bonded, and take Oaths and vote to get what we inherently dont have at the expense of the sweat and labor of others that have it.

This happens every day. By what Authority do they claim? Consent? I dont Consent. If they say they need something, then have a bake sale, and let People buy cakes showing their consent in what is being said they need. A road needs building in the community, and my money needs to be taken to fund it. Really? Says who? You? The guy down the road? If "I" think a road needs building I would be the first to lend my sweat, labor, time, and resources for such. Otherwise others need to get their hands out of my pockets before I cut them off with my sword.

This is the system will live under. These delegations and assemblies the same.

Nature works differently. All one needs to do is go out into Nature and observe. Maybe our thinking is the reason the animals run from most? We are not in harmony with Natural Law, or the Lawmaker of Natural Law?

You see my People, the People in which I come from, my ancestors and blood line, have seen paper before. We have seen oaths. We have seen all of these things for 500 years now. An oath means nothing to the ones taking them it appears. The paper they signed means nothing to them. We have empirically observed time and again throughout the length of the Earth that anytime Man and Woman get together with Authority they dont have, they violate others in some form with that false Authority.

Is this not the empirical evidence in which you can observe? This system of doing things does not function properly because of the assuming of Authority by Men and Women, that was not imbued to them as individuals, or any group of individuals that come together out of common interests. Which mostly is observed as theft, and subjugation. Where is the proof otherwise?

If through empirical observation this can be presumed as a established fact, then what use is the system other than to steal and subjugate Men and Women of Conscious that are using the land by the very fact they are inhabiting the land?

Dismiss this if you may, but the reasoning still stands. It has Standing. Why? Because it is coming from me, and I have Standing. As all should and do.

I only see the perpetuation of a system of subjugation, theft, murder, and trespass. Common Law? These Principles were around much longer than 1,000 some years. Much longer.

Maxim (Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856): An established principle or proposition. A principle of law universally admitted, as being just and consonant with reason.

2. Maxims in law are somewhat like axioms in geometry. 1 Bl. Com. 68. They are principles and authorities, and part of the general customs or common law of the land; and are of the same strength as acts of parliament, when the judges have determined what is a maxim; which belongs to the judges and not the jury. Terms do Ley; Doct. & Stud. Dial. 1, c. 8. Maxims of the law are holden for law, and all other cases that may be applied to them shall be taken for granted. 1 Inst. 11. 67; 4 Rep. See 1 Com. c. 68; Plowd. 27, b.

3. The application of the maxim to the case before the court, is generally the only difficulty. The true method of making the application is to ascertain how the maxim arose, and to consider whether the case to which it is applied is of the same character, or whether it is an exception to an apparently general rule.

4. The alterations of any of the maxims of the common law are dangerous. 2 Inst. 210.
Even the system itself recognizes them, though it is becoming common place to discard them.

And yes, I am talking about the application of them. But all the rebut I receive is more paper is needed. I used to live in Japan, they LOVE paper, but paper does not solve the problem. It is much deeper than paper and oaths, and protocols. Much deeper.

Many talk today about returning the system to Honor. I through empirical observation have never known or seen ,or heard, or observed the system to be built upon Honor. If we take that further, and take hearsay from History book, and hearsay from the "History keepers" of the Tribes of old, then there is much evidence pointing to this fact further, that Honor has never been in this system.

Where is it? That which the reasons for such protocols and oaths, actions, etc.

It is supposed to be because of Honor. Thereby Authority is gained. With my eyes I see a scam. A fraud. A usurpation. I am not a minority in my believe is such a thing to be important. I dont believe in the majority/minority fallacy. I believe. I am. And that is sufficient for me. But that is not sufficient for many others. They feel the need to drive out into life and tell others how to "Be", and what they are. They seek to define others by their own subjective perceptions.

Self Government is my goal. I need not any other tell me what is wrong, for I inherently have it imbued upon me and my heart. I think most Men and Women do. Our Conscious tells us so. There are some without Conscious. Ironically many of them are in the halls of Government to begin with. Who else would seek a position as such? Isnt it those 'usually' without Conscious? If they do have Conscious, they loose it rather quickly when its time to perform the dictations upon other Consciousness.

That is what happens. That is what they do. That is the truth. They dictate through a majority. The majority gives them their Authority. A majority of individuals with no inherit Authority over others imbued to them. Its the "appeal to Authority" fallacy.

Who has expert knowledge as to how to handle my affairs other than me? No one. What Person of stable Mind is going to make such a Claim? What is the liability in such a Claim? What is the effects of such claims? Well, we can empirically observe the State of the Earth today, and what the continuation of Men and Women making such Claims upon others is upon our Species as a whole. Hell on Earth is what the effect is.

"Dominating Man to his injury".

We never were given Authority to dominate ourselves, only to fill the Earth and subdue it, and use everything upon it.

That was the Contract. Not from Mans Society; as in Social Contract, but from the Creator of the Universe.

Why are we still in breach?