Diogenes of Sinope

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diogenes_of_Sinope

Sometimes in my wandering and meandering blog I come to an end that wraps it up.  Then I move the end to the beginning: This is one of those times.

Diogenes wandered with a lamp holding up to each face to find an honest man.  In the Information Age the lamp is the World Wide Web.  It has the power of light to shed on the truth.  It also has the power to shed light on the fake, the false.  Light is the action word.  What it reveals is up to us to see.  The fake, the false will not identify itself other than proclaiming that is the truth.  Reason, logic and investigations of facts lead to judgment.  Emotions lead elsewhere.  The WWW tends toward emotion.  I think that people generally tend to be influenced by emotion rather than reason?  Good thing.  Bad thing.

Premise it initially on Israel/Palestine.  Carry it on to our election, Syria, Afghanistan, CIA, FBI, Russia, Aleppo, etc.  What is the truth?  Diogenes said something about look at what is done as a function of the Truth....or False.

It seems to me that beginning with an Not-True (False) product of a function its examination will lead to the Truth of a matter.  It is like a reverse engineering to discover where Higher Order Truth undergoes a function twisting it to Lower Level False to hide the over arcing Truth.

Conceptual Operating System Truth undergoes an Application Function that converts it to Un-Truth that serves as fact to support a sub-optimized objective of a Lower Level Operating System Objective.

I hope the preceding reminds me of what I intended to think about!

This is what started the thought this morning:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-15/cia-accusing-russia-doing-exactly-what-cia-does
Also the Russia hacking stories as well as White Helmets and Tulsi Gabbard, Aleppo and False News.

False News seems to be the News of the Day!

I am on the trail of something with this entry but I only had a vague idea of its substance and direction.  The trail seemed to reveal itself in a scenario of handing out dollar bills to people on the street downtown during this Christmas season and asking them to give the single dollar to someone in need of it or keep it if they need it.  This, of course would be offered to the upstream foot traffic of a downstream Salvation Army bell ringer.  How often would special interest of the receiver result in not putting the dollar to the pot?  And for what reasons?  I would only know if I could trace the specific unique dollar to a recipient.  Follow the money to where it either followed the intention to do good, found an alternate good or simply served the self interest of the recipient contrary to the intent it was given.

Aha:  Maybe this on a much grander scale is what I intend to illustrate by my plan to give $100 dollars downtown to the Salvation Army (or a guy sitting on the sidewalk with a dog and a sign).

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/12/the-story-that-russia-does-not-want-you-to-see-the-rosneft-share-sale-as-a-sham-transaction.html

Strange that this link was the next thing I looked at after initiating this blog entry!

Many a Slip between the Cup and the Lip!

The SubjectInitiator "Cup" and the intended ObjectReceiver  of its MessageMethod as expressed by a Message transmitted by a SubjectInitiator conveying a function to implement a functional relationship between Cup and Lip subject to condition an "Many a Slip" serving an intention other than the intent of the SubjectInitiator (or in fact serve it if it is sub-obtimized intention of a higher ParentLevel SubjectInitiator CoffeeDrinker to twist the intent of a proclaimed Child Level entities to serve an alternate recipient of the action CupToLip.

Bait and Switch?  Switch horses in midstream by design as the best way to get across the river but make it appear that the same horse carried the rider the entire way?

A slip between SubjectDonorDollar and intended RecipientObjectPot to a different ReceipientPot?

That is a relationship that can work both ways.  Benefiting a higher order Parent level for a GreaterGood:Common or an alternate LesserGood:SelfInterest.

The Philosophy:FreePrivateEnterprise:Republican is of course that each granular level SubjectInitiator through Methods to serve OwnSelfInterest implemented by functions MarketHand benefits the OperatingSystem:BestForAll.

What about Interests:Conflict???????

That is a big issue:  Conflicts of Interests.  Those conflicts may be resolved by Truth but what is the Truth when the truth of a lower order Thing and its actions does not serve the highest order Thing and its functions by virtue (???to whom) of Cup:Slip:Lip?