Finding Calvin Pt. 2 - 4 - Berriers Believed

Calvin:  Is the G-Man lore compatible with Christianity?  

Lamington:  Certainly.  Words are just ways to categorize phenomena.  But who is to say whether Christianity as you know it is a derived understanding of an ever-present reality or a contrived manipulation of it.  There are many people who write books and many years have passed.  And if the Devil is master of this world, then how can any book be trusted.  He's always tinkering and tuning, as we are told.  Still, these are just words, Calvin.

But there are many irrefutable truths in the Bible, consider Proverbs 11:7 - When a wicked man dies, his expectation will perish, and the hope of the unjust perishes.  

Now, people will immediately fact check and cross reference--which is a curious turn of phrase indeed--whatever they hear at face value to see if it makes sense--and in this case it does, and it's seemingly enlightening as well:  for it not only tells you an obvious truth, but it also expands upon that truth with the power of imagination: for is it not equally true that the expectation of the righteous perishes too when they die?  Common sense tells you, of course. But this truth is ignored.  Or is it?  Is the verse's omission rather an implicit admission that the righteous expect nothing—that in fact, they are G-Men: unfettered in the moment of being free from manipulative drives for self-acquisition.  Certainly, many would consider this visage gay in modern-day America, but gay as it is known today is a perversion and a put-on of the gay we knew in the past.  Before MTV....before industrialization...but after the Greeks and Romans....actually, not really until after the middle ages...gay was okay.  Gay was splendidly swell. Walks were gay. The weather was gay.  Even moms and dads were gay.

[Calvin]

Daesin

[Lamington]

Indeed, you're truly a chameleon, Calvin...

[Lamington]

But the thing with Christianity is that it cloaks responsibility through the concept of team.  In the West Christians are told that we're all part of the family of God and we're all simultaneously sinners.  So we should forgive and not judge—that is, unless you're in a position to judge.  This is a great cloaking tool for the Psychopath for they depend on the sincerity and modesty of true believers and the duality of the message to navigate power and the everyday landscape with ease.  So while others forgive and conform to structure trying to be ever-more like Jesus, Psychopaths lambaste and usurp their rivals for self-gain using the sheeple as mere stepping stones....It's a combination of sheep and people.  I heard a G-Man say it the other day.  Their inventiveness knows no bounds...   

So though many truths in the Bible are in and of themselves good, Christianity has cloaked and maybe has even been co-opted by Psychopaths, for is not obedience a mysterious bedfellow to freedom, and is not love doomed to be a deceptive liaison for those within an ultra-competitive first-world nation to have.  But perhaps that's why Christians make such good teammates for Psychopaths.

[Calvin]

You know, I never felt right asking for "forgiveness" for my sins.  I just don't like the verbiage.  I think the mind plays games with words.  In fact, I felt scolded by something inside once.  I dare not say it's a G-Noam, but maybe whatever the commons have.  So, instead, now I ask for God to for-give me not because I'm a sinner, but because I seek amazingness, for such a man deserves his rewards.  I feel the same about the word "concentrate."  I try to rely more on the word "focus" within my daily mantras instead, because I know how the novelty of words change once they've been incorporated into the everyday zeitgeist and reflected back.  It's like looking into a carnival mirror, it just doesn't seem quite right.  And I not only pray in Jesus' name, but also God's name—just in case.  

[Lamington]

Well, indeed, those are amazing insights Calvin--and an interesting turn of phrase. Perhaps you truly are a G-Man. 

[Calvin]

Do you really think so?  Can you have me tested?

[Lamington]

Of course. In due time... 

But yes, It is too my understanding that most of the time it's better to ignore negative behavior than addressing it with your children.  So, I understand your reasoning process.  Personally, I program myself upon waking with two or three desires I wish to exhibit or conjure.  With my mind's directive, I like to think that I'm subconsciously if not consciously pursuing those desires within the recess of my mind as I work through ancillary goals. 

[Calvin]

As Kierkegaard says, if prayer doesn't change God's mind, it at least changes the mind of him who prays. 

[Lamington]

Indeed...

Thoughts matter Calvin, and what happens in the mind, and more importantly what is believed by what happens in the mind is clearly the root cause of action.  Simply put, to control the Devil we must control the mind, and that's what everyone will have an opportunity to do, if they so choose—except for the Psychopaths of course, further constraints with chip technology might be deemed necessary.  But listen Calvin, we can accomplish what religion fails to.  We don't have to keep those waiting who fervently seek reconciliation with God.  They need not sin if they choose otherwise.   

Calvin:  But isn't choice the opposite of control.  How can you choose control when by doing so you lose the choice to choose.

Lamington:  When we settle the mind to have cake at 8pm even if we have a hankering for it at 5pm, we exhibit control.  That's the opportunity that I offer to those willing to accept it:  to tamp down the hankering.  Consider the chip as an appetite suppressant for the weak willed. 

Calvin: So the idea is to chip willing commons and Psychopaths?

Lamington:  In short, yes. 

Calvin:  So if the chip overhauls or suppresses the animalistic mechanism that leads to Psychopathic decisions, will that cure Psychopathy?

Lamington:  For now, we just know Psychopathy as a way of being, Calvin. If you cure the way of being, does Psychopathy actually exist?  For currently the technology that we have to confirm the presence of Psychopathy just confirms its symptoms.  It doesn't reveal when those symptoms appeared or why they're present.  And so far, we haven't been able to identify a Psychopathic baby--primarily because of their limited abilities as babies.  But if we start chipping the babies we'll be able to identify baby Psychopathy early and watch what they do with their higher-level functionality--and perhaps even confirm what I already suspect.

Calvin:  And what's that?

Lamington:  That Planet Henu exists. That they're born Psychopathic. 

[Calvin]

So you are going to chip the babies too--you were serious about that?

[Lamington]

Perhaps just the babies in Illinois, as that is currently what we discern to be the most accurate representation of the United States as a whole.

[Calvin]

Why the United States?

[Lamington]

The United States is like a playground.  What better place to test constraints on freedom.

[Calvin] 

So the chip not only suppresses Psychopathic inclinations but will also identify baby Psychopathy and enable higher-level functioning?

[Lamington]

That's the theory.  Remember, just like the cloaca, a thing can serve more than one purpose, Calvin.  But though I would just confuse you with the complexity of the science, here is what I gather for certain from my understanding.  In Psychopathy there's a correlation between the hyper-functioning left hemisphere of the brain and the hypo-functioning right hemisphere of the brain.  Identifying this in babies could confirm the existence of a precondition.   So though not confirmatory on its own it certainly hints at the probability of a Psychopathic gene or soul, as well as perhaps the existence of planet Henu.  

Think of the chip as a tool.  It can be used for many things if the technology is present.   But for further analysis you'll have to question one of our developers.  

[Calvin]

Can I see your tomes.

[Lamington]

 Of course, though they're written in Latin. But if you wish one of these nights, we will take a look.  

Calvin:  So you're going to chip the babies?

[Lamington]

Yes, Calvin.  Say, how about we get some ice cream...before we head back to the mansion.  

[...]

The quick ride over was silent

As Lamington seemed to observe

But Calvin had plenty to mull over

Before coming up with the words

Like is it wrong to chip babies
Does that not sound a bit absurd
But is it really wrong to do a wrong
To prevent a wronger wrong to occur

As they arrived at Fountainhead
They sauntered ahead of Mr. Berg
Though he wasn't always in sight
One could never really be sure 

[...]

Calvin:  I have to know.  How did you make your money?

Lamington: There's a certain wealth that makes itself.  A friend of mine once said, do anything you can to make your first $1,000,000.  After that, if you're wise, money makes itself.  But I don't work because I have to Calvin.  I work because I want to change the world for the better.  Everyone has to do something,  The world has a way of making you care. 

Calvin:  Do the G-Men know how important they are?

Lamington:  They don't even know they're G-Men, and they mustn't.  It would not be good for their ego nor their safety.  No, they just think they're just really unique, and that's why we let them in Fountainhead.  It's important that you don't tell anyone what I've told you.  Not even Sarah.  She knows a little but she doesn't know the truth. 

Calvin:  I see.....

What's the point of all this?

[Lamington]

What do you mean?

[Calvin]

If you want to remove appetites, why exist?

[Lamington]

I want to reform civilization, Calvin.  Appetites can exist with those responsible enough to use them responsibly, but they will never have the opportunity to choose if they're duped into irresponsibility by a system controlled by Psychopaths.  They cannot respond appropriately if they're encouraged to act inappropriately.  

Lamington: What flavor would you like Calvin?

Calvin: Ah, sherbert

Lamington:  I'll have vanilla.

Calvin felt duped 
Though he couldn't say why
For there were many flavors to choose
Besides what was chosen last time 

...

Calvin:  Dave!?

Dave:  Oh, hello Calvin. Mr. Lamington. 

Calvin: What are you doing here?  What happened to you at the park?

Dave: Oh, there was a minor misunderstanding between my roommates and I. However, it's been resolved.

Calvin:  Why are you talking like that?

Dave: Pardon?

Lamington:  The first colonizers had a unique accent.  It permeates the island in areas.  It tends to rub off on the highly suggestible, so consequently many within these walls exhibit its architecture. 

Lamington: So Dave.  How are your classes coming along?

Calvin:  There's a college around here?

Lamington:  Of sorts.  All around us are experts and those training to become them.

Dave: Superbly, Mr. Lamington, thank you for asking. 

Calvin:  What courses are you taking?

Dave:  Art Authentication 110

      Gastronomy 210

      Physical Well Being 115

      Defensive Driving 220

      And Scene Study 210

Calvin: Those are such strange choices. Why so random?

Dave:  I don't know.  I just kind of wanted to.  I can't really explain it.  I guess life is a lot easier when you don't have to worry about income.

Lamington:  What flavor did you choose today?

Dave:  Sherbert

Lamington: [laughs aloud] Of course you did. Great minds think alike, eh Calvin.  [winks at Calvin]

Dave:  Well, I must be off.  I have some meal prep that I need to work on.  

Calvin:  That's it?  When do you plan on leaving here?

Dave:  You know, I don't know.  I haven't really thought about it.  

Lamington:  Well, take your time, Dave.  There's no need to rush the future.  

Dave:  Well-put, Mr. Lamington.  It was great seeing you again, Calvin, Mr. Lamington.

...

Calvin:  How come you didn't tell me Dave was here?

Lamington:  To be honest, Calvin, I didn't think you cared.  Aside from the Pink Fairy that night I didn't really think you knew Dave.

[...]

While they were talking
A tune started to sound
Lamington picks his pocket
Where his phone would be found

Lamington:  Say, Calvin, I hate to cut our visit short, but we have to head back.  Apparently, I mixed up the dates for my nephew's derby race...you should come.  It would be great for you to meet everyone. It could open up possibilities. 

Calvin couldn't resist 
And he wasn't sure if he could
Lamington had a way to persuade
Apart from the meaning in his words

Calvin: Okay.  But I don't have the attire.

Lamington: Nonsense.  We'll have something waiting for you when we arrive.  

[Alone Calvin gazes at the sea off the side of the superyacht on the way back]

Calvin soon thought of the G-Man

And the ingenuity they're contriving 

And he thought of Mr. Lamington 

And the words he found delighting 

Then he thought of the Virginia Creeper

And he thought of the Boston Ivy

And how they were directionally challenged

Growing in any direction they were finding

But is he truly one of the G-Men

Or is he one of those that's worth despising

For not all blue berries are for nourishment 

In fact some are toxic and in hiding

[...]

Sarah playfully approaches
High on something other than life
And she wants to clear the air
And see what's Calvin's mind 

[Sarah]

 You're sweet, Calvin.  In fact you're rather dishy.  But try to keep a sense of humor about you.  You have a tendency to sulk and turn muppet faced. 

[Calvin]  

Sorry, I just have a lot on my mind.

[Sarah]

Pray tell.  What's the bother?

[Calvin]

I have my doubts about the derby, I'm afraid I failed to impress at the soiree last time.  What do you think it's going to be like?

[Sarah]

It'll be people being people Calvin, just in a proper way.  Just be present and you'll be fine.

Calvin: What do you mean?

Sarah:  It's good to think ahead, Calvin, but you can't be so occupied with the future that you don't express yourself in the present.

Calvin:  I just don't believe in unnecessary interactions.

Sarah: What! Do you know how telegraphic that is?  Conversation is the surest cloaking method of intent.  But if you only speak when you have an agenda you won't be fooling anyone.

Calvin:  So, what, I should just make something up, like the Riddler?

Sarah:  Jesus, Calvin, have you never engaged in small talk?

Calvin:  I just don't like it.  I think it's insincere.  

Sarah:  Yeah, but pleasantries lead to the sincere, or the insincere if that's your goal.  And, if you're worried about duping the sophisticated then conversation will have to appear to unravel naturally. It can't appear contrived, which it most certainly will with your lack of experience.  

Calvin: What do you suggest?

Sarah: I think that humor is the way beyond the honest face that you've been given

[Calvin]

Like you?

[Sarah]

Exactly. Though my humor stems from youth and privilege, and because I treat language like an art.  Plus, I think I'm better than convention.  And I'm rich enough to be most of the time. 

Calvin: To be honest, I've never been really funny.  

[Sarah]

Sarah: Not everyone is a comedian.  But you have eyes, you have perspective.  Just follow your intuition and weave accordingly.   For instance, take uncle for example.  He will go for the obvious, for though he is learned, he's more concerned with affability and progressing the conversation than parsing peas.  But his friend Wellington has a way to see past things, and he'll often remark on such.  Needless to say, he doesn't jest much, but when he does it quite profound, at least it seems so.  You'll meet him at the derby, I'm sure of it. 

Calvin:  What about you?

Sarah:  I kind of just go where the wind blows.  But I suppose if I had to categorize myself, I would say off-color references is my soup de jour.

Sarah:  But to impress your authoritative or intellectual betters you'll only want to speak when you can contribute something of worth 

Okay. Like, first rule, never say anything overtly stupid or annoying. 

[Calvin]

What do you mean?

[Sarah]

E.G. if they're holding a glass of red and they're eating a cheese puff, don't ask what they're eating or drinking--even if you truly can't tell.   It's a trite comment and it's irrelevant, unless the owner is hosting a potluck.  I apologize if that mention is insulting but I want to cover all bases for you... 

Second, avoid colloquialisms of the commons, like "weird."

For when you say something is weird what you're saying is that you lack the understanding of why that thing is taking place.  And don't say "gay" either, for that seems judgemental—unless you're gay, of course.   It's best to just say "interesting."   For that makes it seem like you recognize, appreciate, or are curious as to what is going on.  Your conversational counterpart won't know if you know what's taking place--so if they ask, simpatico, and they won't think you're being a prick about what you see either.  For obligation to normality is something that the commons abide, for they're constantly posturing for position inside of a system that they feel insecure within.  But we appreciate novelty and art, and we are never cruel about anything beneath us, instead we treat it with humor.  Talking with the commons is like talking to little children.  But not toddlers, more like fourth and fifth graders who have the way of things and who are on their way to defend the order they must abide.  So we humor them.    But if you feel you must opine, people, especially sophisticated people, appreciate specificity--for they're more open to learn than the commons.  So, if you can specify with grace—you'll sound smart, but if you rely on specificity too much, you'll start to appear autistic to some.  

[Calvin]

Like your uncle?

[Sarah]

What...no!...

I have a friend in the hills, new money, she's certainly not dumb but she talks like she when to public school.  It's okay to act dumb, but if that's your default starting point it will be a lot harder to transition to smart when you need to.  Pretending to be dumb is a lot easier than pretending to be smart.  In fact, I theorize that most of us act one or two notches stupider than we really are when in public, as a way to guard against knowledge or offending others.  Perhaps that's what she's doing.  But I don't know why, I'm not a threat.  

Anyway Second, if you think that the person is both hostile and more sophisticated than yourself, then you should seldom ask a question that subordinates you to your conversational counterpart—and never without purpose....but it's okay to flatter, but not too much, but it's a double-edged sword with the smug.  Just keep that in mind.  

But if you do feel compelled to say something out of ignorance, make it something roundabout, and preferably with humor.  With proper spin it could be mistaken for wisdom.  But if you're completely stumped subtly go "hmm," and pretend to have a profound feeling.  The last thing you want to do is reveal how ignorant you truly are.  In fact, it would probably be better just to walk away from the conversation entirely--instead of engaging.  In fact, do that.  Just pretend to have an emergency of some sorts if you have doubts.  Then come back with false flag information of sorts to transition away from the topic with ease.  People have short memories.  

[Calvin]

But what if they pry?

[Sarah]

Just make something up.  Remember be vague and profound. 

Eventually your pretend humor will manifest naturally....Yes, good and bad pretending as such is just a matter of skill.  Fake it till you make it.  

[Calvin]

I don't like saying something unless I really believe it.

[Sarah]

That's rubbish, Calvin.  You're telling me that you never lied to get your way. Or that you never had an imaginary friend growing up?

Calvin thought of the cakes
And the conversations they had
When he wanted his way 
But Chef bade him to ask

[Calvin]

Well, I suppose I just don't like lying when it truly matters—-unless I suppose I'm wrong and it truly matters.  I don't know.  

[Sarah]

Oh, God, Calvin you don't always have to bear your soul.  Most people just want to get through the conversation.  Besides, it's only really deceitful if you're trying to fool everyone. As long as you're honest with yourself then you have someone the inside, and it's like a practical joke.  I mean, have you ever thought about introductions?  Very few of them are sincere.  People just use them because they've been taught to.  In fact, I'm certain most people don't even think about their everyday speech and what it means.  But as long as you're thinking, then you won't be deceived by their pretending or your own. Plus, I mean, people who actually believe the thoughts in their head are mentally ill.  There should always be a reasoning process for and against what you think.  Then you just pick the one that makes the most sense...  

Most people just want to be secure in their ambition and keep the ball rolling.  For most people that's all that really matters.

[Calvin]

What's your ambition 

[Sarah]

I'm a teenage girl, Calvin, I want my cake and to eat it too, and it's a big cake. 

Calvin: I don't know..  It all just seems shallow

Sarah:  Yes, Calvin, most of the time it is.  And people will believe it as such—and that's the point.. 

You'll be fine, Calvin, and to be honest, you'll meet very few pricks in our company.  Uncle won't stand for it.  Besides, if they don't know yet, they soon will: you're his vassal now...

Oh, speaking of our Lord protector.  Come grace us with your wisdom.  I was just advising Calvin on how to converse with the sophisticated.

[Lamington]

What are you two talking about?

[Sarah]

I'm just teaching Calvin to converse with the sophisticated for the upcoming derby.

[Lamington]

Why?--You did so great last time. 

[Calvin]

I felt a little out of my depth, to be honest

[Lamington]

Well, as Freud said of Einstein, he understands as much about psychology as I did about physics, so we had a very pleasant conversation...

Don't worry about sophistic tricks, Calvin, just stay modest and be yourself.  You'll be fine. 

[Sarah]

That's what I told him, more or less.

[Lamington]

If you're really worried about it, try to bring up a point of contention among the group and then subtly excuse yourself--like the apostle Paul did with the Pharisees and Sadducees.

[Sarah]

Yes, I taught him many diversionary tricks Uncle, you'd be proud of me. I think the only ones he'll have to worry about are the smug, like Bridgerton or Baxton.

[Lamington]

Ah, yes, the smug.  They may think that they humor us, but we make sure that we humor them-- because we love them.  Same is true for unreasonable people.  Weather it stems from a disease of the mind or just a lack of intelligence, we humor them.  It's much easier to laugh with a monkey than to teach it algebra, after all.  But I wouldn't worry about Bridgerton too much.  His family lineage isn't as distinguished as he thinks; It's rather an inside joke with us.  

Because of the symbolic meaning,  I didn't want to restrict myself to colons or brackets, so I'm I'm using both.  Sorry if they're confusing.