Marx's concept of the alienation of humans from nature, each other and their modes of being in themselves resulted in a history of vast and complex problematic. Marxists point to Marx's radical superiority over all who preceded him in his coherent dialectical historicity about symptoms of the inadequacy of the prevailing mental operating system. They argue that his predecessors' weaknesses forced them to abandon the actual ground of history for the sake of some imaginary solution to the contradictions they may have perceived, but could not master ideologically and intellectually - even if history itself proved Marx wrong and that at a terrible price. In short, overcoming subjectivity rather than alienation from life, is the aim of the intellectuals and any topic at any price will do to demonstrate one's superiority in pretending to alienate one's own subjectivity...

Preoccupations with this problematic, in forms ranging from the Bible to literary works as well as treatises on Law, Economics and Philosophy reflect the personally neutral, objective trends of European development, from slavery to the age of transition from capitalism to socialism. So far intellectual influences acquire their publicly recognized significance only if they are convincing in a so-called objective framework of development, e.g. evolution and social Darwinism. Rooted in the underlying platonian mentality of this problematic, as well as the relative autonomy, the forms of its expression have thus become the prevailing focus for the intellect - and that in the name of humanity. Following their development in detail requires copious volumes, which keep the humanities busy in their thus closed-system approach.

Each of the following headings explains the meaning of the abbreviations and their meanings.

It all begins with the personal "alienation from God" (or having "fallen from Grace"), which is positioned in the realm of Judeo-Christian mythology, while in fact it is a suppression of the a=intuition mode of being! This would leave me, the author, with just t=thinking about MI within the F3-tangible framework confined by the prevailing intellectual taboos.

In content-free terms individual human life is a challenge to survive the 12 dimensions of life up to its fulfillment in terms of FA>PA...AF>FA...

On a personal neutral level, each human being can relate to each of those 12 dimensions via its input modes of iapI and its internal state modes of sfrS in order to develop conscience in view of applying the output modes of oedO in the one out of 1728 ways - such as the author's FA>PA>IC (9Pp>IC) life principle:

This leaves me, on a personally relevant level, to intellectually cope with the three emptyspaces/voids in
SP>HA>HC to reconcile my s=focus with my I=concepts in my PA with the p=perception that point to my PL with a belief (C3), that is potent enough for me to d=do something lifefulfilling in such a way that I can
RQ PL-p with a C3-science (APS®) that provides a sustainable hope based on an understanding of my p=perception that allows access to MI with my a=intuitively guided t=thinking in view of
SE>PR>IC of following my IC-o=call to love something or someone by making MI-at available in view of the AF as I f=feel them in their unhanded???(unbounded) consequences on a APS®-based platform (BCM).

If following my o=call thus allows me to confront my O=learning processes, that allows me to e=survive the AF in a lifefulfilling FA that deepens the corresponding relevance of APS® and substantiates my belief. If I would, however, I fear alienation and try to intellectually grasp its complexity, I would end up in the above indicated voids, which would no longer be challenges but traps, as did Plato and all his disciples with their footnotes, human history.

The messianic mission consists of rescuing man from this state of self-alienation, which he had brought upon himself. Calling this a mystery asks for a man-made reconciliation of the contradictions which made groups of people oppose each other as "strangers", "foreigners", "enemies". The practical application became universal when Christianity was philosophically perfected as a religion, in a theoretical fashion, alienating man from himself and from nature! This was achieved by encapsulating C3, the Creator, his Creation and his Creatures, including man himself, within philosophical established personal neutrality via theology. Philosophy in its "crude" realism pretended to reflect with a much greater immediacy the actual state of affairs, advocating a virtually endless continuation of the extension of its worldly powers, as Marx points out in settling for a man-made, "quasi-messianic" solution on earth: this is why the Pharisees of all periods in history are in no hurry whatsoever about the arrival of the Messiah using a theology of

Civil society reached humanistic perfection in the Christian world by personally neutral objectifying and separated itself completely from lifefulfilment that takes place in and through individuals. Instead it attributed fulfillment and other innate personal qualities to the state; severs all the species-bonds of man, establishes egoism and selfish need in their place, and dissolves the human world into a world of atomistic, antagonistic individuals. Despite the Christian claim to refuse to retain any discrimination between "any of my people", and "strangers" or "aliens", postulating in its place the "universal brotherhood of mankind", western society gave way to self-centered, internally cohesive, practical-empirical partiality, based on philosophy that thus triumphs over the original Christianity like almost everything everything else - at least in the eye of its world. Thus Christianity with its abstract theoretical universality simply served the purpose of preparing the ground for today's globalization. By establishing it as a set of "purely formal rites to balance the world of self-interest, the society is now encircling itself, for the sake of stabilization of a money driven c3-world. The price is paid in the illusory "reappropriation" of the "human essence" through a fictitious supersession of the state of alienation by its idealization. In that cause of history, according to Marx, Judaism and Christianity express the contradictions of "partiality versus universality" and "competition versus monopoly" : i.e. the internal contradictions of what has become known as "'the spirit of capitalism".

The historical novelty of Marx's approach consisted of defining the problem in terms of the concrete dialectical concept of "partiality prevailing as universality", in opposition to genuine C3-universality, which alone could embrace the manifold interests of society as a whole and of man not just as a "species-being" (Gattungswesen - i.e. man liberated from the domination of crude, individualistic self-interest, alienated/free from this C3-being, free to use c3 at will. It was this specific, socially concrete concept which seemingly enabled Marx to grasp the problematic of capitalist society in its full personally-neutral contradictoriness and to formulate a content-free program of a practical transcendence of alienation by means of a fusion of ideal and reality, theory and practice which could only be enforced by communist coercion. Specifically Marx had nothing to do with personally neutral "humanism"; he opposed it right from the outset as an illusion of abstract universality as a mere postulate, an impotent "ought" (ha ha - ort), a fictitious "reappropriation of non-alienated humanness". There is no trace, therefore, of what might be termed "ideological concepts" in the thought of the young Marx who was into content-free socio-economy, as is revived in the New Economy today...

HC-Human Co-operation for MONEY

James Buchan in Frozen Desires states: "The order of the stock market was introduced into the order of nature. The tulip began to loose the properties and charms...became a symbol interchangeable with a certain amount of money... However, that attenuation cannot be complete but can be reversed." The secularization of the religious concept of alienation had been accomplished in limiting life to its "saleability" via religious shell.

No thing can withstand this trend of converting everything into a saleable object, no matter how "sacred" it may have been considered at some stage. It allowed specialization and thus a great increase in productivity. Once you say "A", e.g. yes to a world of c3-objects, you have to say "B", saleability as the universal measure of content-freeness and to democracy as the process that works out personally neutral values, in short to a democratically market-driven society.

After the fall of the iron curtain, content-freeness and personal-neutrality, long lasting enemies, were finally reconciled under the heading of chaos. And that, chaos, can be achieved now much more efficiently in a fragmented world than under the limited confrontation of a polarized world that led to the stalemate of the Cold War! However, no matter how profoundly and truthfully any content-free and/or personally neutral way of modeling social life is, such as via "natural", evolution based science and idealizing humanities for the purpose of commanding it, controlling it and pacifying it with a corresponding mentality of communication, it remains a self-destructive distortion of life. Thus negating C3, is at best a mere utopia, an ineffective protest conceived from the perspective of a hopeless anticipation of a possible future man-made "life" without the Creator, his Creation and his Creature that also excludes oneself! But it is an easily grasped vision for which people can be organized and employed for money, which gives them a sense of living - on the frozen desires of others - and a sense of power - and all that without being unduly challenged - and ultimately with the freedom to chose between 25 different brands of toothbrushes...

AF>FA>PA - BCM-consultants e=willingly step onto the path to face the AF of the truth about the historical development to face the O=challenge of the inadequate FA to life and follow the o=call for its fulfillment in a PA to each human system with a corresponding business constitution:

The C3>c3 transformation that is caused by the prevailing platonian mental operating system happened in steps we need to understand to redesign its undesirable collective outcome within a reviving PA that allows PL>RQ: In the conditions of feudal society the hindrances which resisted the advance of "the (c3-)spirit of capitalism" were, for instance, that "the vassal could not alienate without the consent of his superior" (Adam Smith) or that "the bourgeoisie cannot alienate the things of the community without the permission of the king" (thirteenth century - today the manager). The supreme c3-ideal was that everyone should be able "to give and to alienate that which belongs to him" (thirteenth century). For that purpose the spirit of the time makes it obvious that the C3-social order which confined to "The Lord" the power to "sell his Servant, or alienate him by Testament" (Hobbes) fell hopelessly short of the requirements of "free alienability" of everything — including one's person — by means of some (personally neutral) contractual arrangement to which the person concerned would be a party. Land too, one of the sacred pillar of the outdated social order, had to become alienable" so that the c3-self-development of commodity society should go on unhampered. The intellectual self-justification for the c3-approach to HC =human co-operation has been frequently, largely unquestioned by PL=personal learning processes, the lack of a personally neutrally convincing alternative! This was achieved by mystifying the personally relevant C3-way of life by a content-free insistence that any solution to any problem is to be expressed, like anything else, in the man-made, personally-neutral platonian ideals of philosophy. That resulted at best in ways to displace symptoms, sublimating to the point of leading up to a war against a scapegoated enemy, ultimately God, distorting any meaningful solution. The continuing failure is then used as a "proof" the natural order of things falls short of being practical and serving life and that thus creation itself with all its creatures, including man, needs to be reengineered not just succumbed to man for his lifefulfillment, and this requires alienation, from the creator...

BCM-consultants truthfully p=perceive the symptoms caused by the prevailing mentality and use the thus obtained data to find the information that leads to a SP-knowledge - based on the identified OEGP that does justice to the human system in focus - until the gap between the t=thinking about of the individuals' concerned conscience and their p=perception becomes intellectually and logically coherently meaningful:

Arguments such as Kant's, that "the transference of one's property to someone else is its alienation" (Kant)." or Homer's Odyssey: "Stranger, will you become my thing, my servant?" (The current English translations, by contrast, characteristically reads like this: "Stranger," he said, "I wonder how you'd like to work for me if I took you on as my man, somewhere on an upland farm, at a proper wage of course.) and they merely obscure the hidden agenda of the intellectual blackart; displacing C3 with c3! Thus human alienation was accomplished through turning everything "into alienable, saleable objects in thrall to egoistic need and huckstering. Selling is the practice of alienation even of one's C3 nature or soul for the ultimate c3-measure, content-free money. No wonder to Goethe, the personally neutral blackartist protested "alles Vereinzelte ist verwerflich", "all isolated particularity is to be rejected", advocating in opposition to content-free "selfish isolationism" some form of "community with others like oneself" in order to be able to make a common "front against the world". This is the prototype of personally neutral blackart; using a utopian postulate to put others in the service of one's hidden agenda disguising it as a personally attractive solution" for all!

The intellectual argument can then proceed that the social order of "civil society" can sustain itself only on the basis of the conversion of the various areas of human experience into "saleable commodities", and that it can then follow relatively undisturbed its course of development. However a BCM-consultant understands, based on the meanwhile known history that this SP only works so long as its universal marketing of all facets of human life, including the most private ones, does not reach its point of global saturation, which it does in our time!

With today's saturated market the emphasis is on the fast dollar that makes money in itself into a more and more volatile stock exchange. "The best plan for one year is to cultivate grain; that for ten years is to cultivate trees; and that for hundred years is to cultivate people" (Chinese Proverb) with an appropriate constitution. That is where the BCM steps into the business world, which has so far been a yet another footnote of Plato struggling to get humanity away from his curse...

SP>HA>HA - BCM-consultants reflect the p=perceived operational know-how on the I=concepts of Applied Personal Science APS® in order to deregulate what is outdated, saturated and self-destructive, and what needs to be revitalized:

"Alienation" is an eminently historical concept, thus suggesting it to be the HA of the platonian mental operating system in order to maintain the underlying c3-philosophy: If man is alienated, he must be alienated from something, as a result of certain causes — the c3-evolutionary interplay of events and circumstances in relation to man as the subject of this alienation. Similarly, the "transcendence of alienation" is presented as an inherently non-historical concept. It is the c3-opposite because it achieves its fulfillment on the basis of C3-insights into, and relationship to a more than merely c3-sustainable cause in view of the otherwise unavoidable evolution into chaos. To disguise the underlying purpose or consequence of the c3-approach, chaos, the following arguments for this kind of HA are used: On a content-free level its is physics that triumphs over subjective tinkering and in a personally neutral context, it is democracy that triumphs over arbitrariness.

Of course without mentioning that what ultimately counts, on the personally relevant level, is C3-lifefulfillment which overcomes the unavoidable c3-death.

And that is left for the BCM-consultant to convey, for without acknowledging that missing link further work has no blessing, because c3 in itself is not sustainable - not for any mystical, or otherwise obscure reason...!

PL - The BCM i=needs consultants who can face the fact that the still prevailing platonian mental operating systems channels people's mind towards alienation! Only if it is replaced by a lifefulfilling one based on the OEGPs that do justice to those concerned can the above indicated symptoms of alienation be overcome. The situation is so grave that very few people (less than 20%) are capable for making that change in themselves because the majority depend on the collective and its trends, manifested by the OR=outriders. That is why the BCM aims at establishing a lifefulfilling platform in business secured with a corresponding constitution.

It is an important characteristic of intellectual history that those philosophers who achieved the greatest results in human history, are those who grasped the manifold complexities of alienation - the greatest of these philosophers was, of course Plato, with his alienation of life disguised as idealization, which set the path for all the other philosophers to become his footnotes. On the other hand, he who overcame death as the ultimate alienation of man from God has overcome Plato as the corresponding devil' prophet and whoever believes in this victory need no longer fear alienation and instead of trying to master its complexity only to fail, can focus on fulfilingl his or her life and contributing to that of others (MAT 20:26)...

In short, we are in this world, but not of it, and we thus need a c3-way upon which we as humans can overcome alienation in ourselves, between our is-modes and consequently between each other by acknowledging the C3-truth that alone allows lifefulfillment. But by simply c3-intellectually filling our void we alienate our C3-modes of being with all the outlined consequences...

RQ - Only BCM-consultants, who as C3-aware human beings have access to a=intuition, can witness the fact that what we mean by a=the possible creator-creature relationship, cannot be objectified by the C3-alienating intellect. It is a personally neutral truth, that only people with a C3-based MOS=mental operating system can consider their intuition in their s=focus and thus genuinely contribute to balance MANIPULATION / ORIENTATION < DEATH - it is thus the BCM-consultants job to demystify the a-s relationship in people's minds that has rendered people with a c3-MOS incapable of considering lifefulfillment. That explains not just the behaviour of hypocritical "Sunday Christians" , who just use church to sooth their still troubling alienation from their conscience, but also how the intellectuals, despite their devastating effect on humanity still get power positions, budgets, reputation and fame for replacing biological life with end-technology...

It goes without saying, say intellectuals, that the development in c3-history is by no means a simple linear one. At certain points of crisis when the possible socio-historical alternatives are relatively open, "it" creates a temporary "ideological vacuum" and favors the appearance of personally neutral utopian ideologies. On the other hand, in the field of ideology of an uncritical mass of positivism, it is easy to identify the objective characteristics of the emerging content-free social order. Populist politicians ride such trends. At a later stage by which time the necessities resulting from mass uniformity constrain life in ways we are all too familiar with, they use a scapegoat to secure their power position thus revealing their content-free hidden agenda; power for its own sake. Then we can only predict chaos or in material abundance, today's idealization, which has a tendency to make people miss the point of no return from c3-end technology.

RQ>MI>SE - Only BCM-consultants with an OEGP/as-RQ bases as made available on the BCM-platform and in the corresponding training on the job can d=do what it takes to harvest the MI - meaningful Innovation - made possible by RQed PL in view of the f=feeling of the possible SE=success experience, lifefulfillment.

At an earlier age, Aristotle gave a surprisingly concrete historical analysis of the inherent interconnection between beliefs and politico-social as well as family relations. The BCM has set out to overcome the dead end of the following history with an OEGP-based C3-breakthrough:

"The family is the association established by nature for the supply of man's everyday wants. But when several families are united, and the association aims at something more than the supply of daily needs, the first society to be formed is the village. And the most natural form of the village appears to be that of a colony from the family, composed of the children and grandchildren, who are said to be 'sucked with the same milk'. And this is the reason why Hellenic states were originally governed by kings; because the Hellenes were under royal rule before they came together, as the barbarians still are. Every family is ruled by the eldest and therefore in the colonies of the family the kingly form of government prevailed because they were of the same blood. As Homer says: 'Each one gives law to his children and to his wives."

Many hundreds of years had to pass by before philosophers could reach again a similar degree of concreteness and historical insight say intellectuals, while in fact what was required, was to internalize Aristotle's non-sequitur (as what does not follow logically) into the platonian c3-MOS to make it generally available for mass management! And yet, Aristotle's insight, .e.g. attempt to intellectualize RQ and alienate it from lifefulfillment, remained an isolated one: it could not become the cornerstone of a coherent philosophy of history for it was still based on life rather than its reengineering!

The intellectual reason for this was an overriding ideological pre C3-need which prevented Aristotle from applying a c3-historical principle to the analysis of society as a whole. In accordance with this ideological need it had to be "proved" that slavery was a social order in complete conformity with nature itself. Such a conception — formulated by Aristotle in opposition to those who challenged the established social relations carried with it bogus concepts like "freedom by nature" and "slavery by nature". For, according to Aristotle, "there is a great difference between the rule over freemen and the rule over slaves, as there is between slavery by nature and freedom by nature". The partiality of the ruling class prevails, postulating its own rule as a hierarchical-structural superiority determined (and sanctioned) by nature, the precursor to the c3-mind over C3-matter approach; this means that c3 is the outlet for all forms of selfishness which don't consider the nature of what is, trying to succumb it to one's prejudice and desire competing with the Creator who "formed man in his image" yet in an inappropriate way...

Thus the social contradictions which is insoluble if relevant PL is suppressed, leads philosophers like Aristotle to operate with self-contradictory concepts using non-sequiturs that miss any conclusive logic, covered up with convincing rhetoric, to justify them. Because of the partiality of his position, the open-ended dynamic and its underlying generative principles, OEGP of human systems must remain a mystery to Aristotle and the like. His postulate of a natural "duality" directly rooted, as we have seen, in the ideological need of turning partiality into universality - to save face in view of the underlying lies, makes it impossible for philosophers to perceive the manifold varieties of social phenomena in their alienating ways: Intellectuals speak of specific manifestations of an inherently interconnected, dynamically changing socio-historical totality. They thus obscure the genuine, challenging complexity within reach of understanding on the basis of a C3-MOS of interacting lifefulfilling principles. The result is in today's awesome complexity - another mask for the hidden agendas of intellectuals, displacing C3 with c3.

If you have the C3>c3 goal, then everything towards chaos works for you!

Philosophers hypocritically ask the fundamental content-free ontological question after they have laid the ground with a prejudgmental c3-MOS to cover up their hidden C3>c3 agenda: What is in agreement with "human nature" and what constitutes an "alienation" from the "human essence"? Such a question cannot, they say, be answered ahistorically without being turned into an irrational mystification of some kind. On the other hand, a personally neutral historical approach to the question of "human nature" inevitably carries with it some diagnosis of alienation" or "reification", related to the standard or "ideal" by which the whole issue is being assessed. This c3-duality between "structural" and the "historical" principles provides the inner dynamic for the man-made c3's innate self-destructiveness!

"Anthropological orientation" and mere historicity without genuine reference to the lifefulfillment of those concerned amounts to nothing more than mystification, whatever socio-historical determinants might have brought it into existence, ranging from medieval pseudo-anthropology to modern genome research. Thus "true" can neither be anthropological nor theological! Vico distinguished three stages in the development of humanity (of humanity making its own c3-history): (1) the age of Gods; (2) the age of heroes; and (3) "the age of men in which all men recognized themselves as equal in human nature". Herder, at a later stage, defined mythology as "personified nature or dressed-up wisdom" and spoke of the "childhood", "adolescence" and "manhood" of mankind, limiting even in poetry the possibilities by denouncing everything personally relevant as myth-creation under the c3-man-made non-sequitur of presenting the third stage as a matter of course, even if it does not stand the light of truth except on very trivial levels.

All these content-free versus personally neutral contradictions result in the production of "superfluous wants", "imaginary goods" and "artificial needs" as Marx refers to as the "artificial needs and imaginary appetites" produced by capitalism - up to far-away utopian community in which such contradictions as well as their consequences are unknown, genetically or neuronally eradicated: It was already Diderot who could not see any solution except the limitation of needs which should enable man to liberate himself from the crippling tedium of work, allowing him to stop, to rest and to finish working. Drugs and genetic manipulation seem to provide the "material force" now, which can turn such theories into social practice. Theory must no longer convert itself into its own solution; it can be c3-made! The uncomfortable C3- cause and substantialities seem within reach of being reengineered in man's image...

There is more to d=do to understand one's personal nature than seeing it as some fixed, personally neutral "human essence" a mere fiction as the philosopher's "original datum". Their aim is the ultimate liquidation of all historicity:

The whole issue is about alienating people from understanding the natural basis (the general laws of causality, etc.) and specifically personal human historicity to uphold the c3-illusory freedom.

Without an adequate grasp of the C3-natural basis, the "science of man" is simply inconceivable because everything gets ultimately dissolved into relativism. The "anthropological principle", therefore, must be put, by the work of the BCM, based on the corresponding MI, in its proper place, within the personal framework of a comprehensive understanding of lifefulfillment.

At this point it its time for YOU to get a feeling about the real aim of this paper. Why did it get so long to say it? For Plato and his disciples were let so long let free to conditioning people's mind with c3-MOS! Many people can at best only say, they have a faint awareness of some great (C3) quality beyond ourselves and that there is more meaning than we can - through the c3-MOS glass darkly - comprehend now. And in their inner panic to miss something when they are weak, lose their busyness and optimism and are striving to be hopeful and encouraging again, hope that there is, must be a greater picture. The question is how to be in touch when it is c3ed out of sight in the unhappy presence of the c3-MOS suggested failure of one's c3. The main meaningful innovation the BCM promotes is the APS® model of each of us as an individual law to give us a guideline and stress our uniqueness and authority about our own lifefulfillment and make it available to business. Making use of the offered C3-MOS we can become aware of what we personally need to fulfill and by adopting that focus, we can know ourselves enough in time to share it with the other unique partners in broader projects. Sadly enough, what works for a conscientious human being, might yet again have to be introduced via business it it has a chance at all in the c3-MOS run world. But the question is whether is has a chance in your mind to reach your consciences in view of expressing itself via a C3- rather than c3-MOS!

If what we are C3-here for is not achieved — if, that is, the personal anthropological principle remains only generally anthropological — there can be no hope whatsoever of understanding the personal life, which is determined by its own law, which imposes on an individual human beings its own patterns of productive procedure. Similarly, nothing can be understood about the c3-alienation of the C3-nature of life and how to overcome it. And that state of ignorance promoted by c3-MOS minded by intellectuals allows no personal life fulfillment and instead makes people give in to the fictitious postulates of "egoistic human nature" so dear to the heart of the political economists.

The socially dominating role of capital in modern history is self-evident. But only the fundamental laws of social ontology based on the participants' individual lifefulfilling principles can explain how it is possible that under certain conditions a given "nature" (the nature of capital) should unfold and how to put it into the service of the lifefulfillment of those concerned as we succumbed the laws of nature to the laws of money - which in itself is hardly worthwhile, because the latter money as a master is not better than the former, untamed nature - based on history, man cannot live on bread alone!

PR-The Personal Responsibility cannot be outsourced in any meaningful way!

PR>IC - The BCM and its consultants S=defocus their approach in view of awakening of the PR of those concerned in order to tune their t=thinking into their IC to keep the focus on redesigning c3 on the basis of C3 to allow a life-fulfilling reconciliation with the e=will beyond mere survival, to go on deregulating the c3-FA and revitalize the C3-PA to overcome any c3-MOS temptation to c3-alienation and its intellectual disguise in order to globalize it, chaos...

Every entity such as a company or a team is guided by an innate law such as each human being. By using it its position can be preventatively enhanced. Thus we cannot but follow our own inner laws of development, from its undeveloped form beyond its form of maturity, "without any regard to c3-society" towards its C3-fulfillment; except in the above mentioned void, where we seem to have some c3-freedom. Anthropological hypotheses, no matter how subtle, are a priori, non-starters in this respect. Equally, a simple socio-historical or biological hypothesis, even if it is based on the genome knowledge, is of no essential use for lifefulfillment; all c3 can do is prolong life, not fulfill it.

The success of the old market of the 20th century was in alienating PR from real people, first through the coercion of the mighty, then by the aroused masses and more socially, by providing a consumer market in which people can sublimate PR in order to leve RQ to the spirit of the time. The success of the New Market evolves in alienating real people from PR by relating everything, with online transparency, to the speedy change in a volatile global market manifested by the global stock exchange.

However, the issue at stake is understanding and applying the corresponding orientation knowledge, what lies at the roots of personal lifefulfillment as the ultimate ground of meaningful determination. Therefore it would be sheer circularity to indicate the changing historical circumstances as the fundamental cause of development of even capital itself. Capital, as everything else in existence, has — it goes without saying — its historical dimension and that has its roots in personal aspiration towards C3-lifefulfillment. Putting any other cause in the center is the source of alienation, e.g. sin and results in evil, e.g. chaos, death without fulfillment or results in all the types of damnation the c3-MOS allows!

Here we can clearly see the historically misleading thinking catastrophe of Marx that side-tracked intellectuals onto the dialectical relationship between ontology and anthropology: Its practical realizations in revolutionary programs opened up the human catastrophes of the World Wars and the following genocides up to the near global destruction in an atomic holocaust. As long as the social ground of this criticism cannot be spelled out and understood appropriately, since it is the prevailing c3-ground itself, we cannot move on. Thus trapped, we can, even after all the horrors of the 20th century, only side track further in other ways that could turn out even more disastrously since we cannot assess their consequences closed up in the c3-MOS...

That is why the BCM invests into I=concepts for the HC; Business Constitutions that update outdated social grounds...

Collective "Reason" is no longer a blank cheque; often no longer even valid retrospectively and never timelessly, sustaining the partial interest of its bearers, destroying the earlier historical achievements. And that happens by unconstitutional business in view of the achievements of constitutional states!

The insoluble dilemma of the whole movement of the Enlightenment is expressed in its mode of arguing, well before it assumes a dramatic political form in violent attacks. Thus the humanities have degenerated into mere reactions to the dilemma determined by the objective contradiction of subordinating the general interest to the partial interest of a social class or vice versa, suppressing lifefulfillment for, say, simplicity's sake. Thus no sooner were the achievements of the Enlightenment realized than they were liquidated. Everything still had to fit the narrowly and ambiguously defined model of "Rational Man". Only those aspects of alienation are recognized which can be classified as "alien to Reason", with all the actual and potential arbitrariness involved in such an abstract criterion. Historicity reaches only as far as is compatible with the personally-neutral social and content-free power positions that require these vague and abstract criteria as ground for criticism. The acknowledgment of human equality, on the whole, only makes sense in the abstract legal sphere. The same goes for the achievements in anthropology. Its extensions into other walks of life hamper the understanding of the laws of lifefulfillment!

The reasons for this ultimate failure of the c3-MOS seem very complex to a c3-MOS mind: Its ideological determinants, rooted in a social position dense with social contradictions that had to remain veiled from the thinkers concerned, have been mentioned already. Equally important was the fact that the underlying economic trends are still far from their point of maturity, which makes it virtually impossible to gain an adequate insight into their real long-term impact - even if they point to global chaos; Marx, like many modern economists, conceived his theories from the position of dead, outdated data. But the crucial point was, and still is, that the philosophers of the Enlightenment could only take - at best - some tentative first steps in the direction of the elaboration of a generalizing method; for more involves lying! They were thus limited by their rhetoric, not by their competence to grasp the fundamental laws of individual lifefulfillment: their

social and historical position prevented them from transcending their lack of integrity.

Paradoxically, history and anthropology helped one another up to a point, but turned into fetters for each other beyond that critical point. No materialist dialectic or brute force can show a way out of the impasse of this rigid c3-opposition. For the want of such a dialectic, however, the historical principle was either personal-neutrally dissolved into the pseudo-historicity of some repetitive cycle, or tended towards its own content-free absolutization in the form of historical barbarism or post-normally, relativism. The only possible solution cannot be some other c3-post-normal C3-sublimation with a further disguising synthesis of history and anthropology, in the form say, of of a comprehensive, materialist, dialectical ontology — having the concept of "self-developing human labour" or "man's establishment of himself by practical activity" for its center of reference or other philosophical sound niceties that can, which can anyway only reach those who can still listen; the others are now flooded with pictures with no demand on logic in the New Battle to get attention in the mind rather than in the collective...

The middle of the eighteenth century marked a turning point in the various approaches to the symptoms of alienation. As the contradictions of the emerging new society started to become more visible, the earlier "uncritical positivism" that characterized not only the school of "Natural Law" but also the first classics of Political Economy, c3, naturally ran into insurmountable difficulties getting nearer its saturation. In the previous period the concept of alienation had been used in regard to socio-economic and political phenomena in a thoroughly positive sense, insisting on the desirability of the alienation of land, political power, etc., because of the positivity of "profit upon alienation", on the rightfulness of procuring interest without alienating capital, on selling one's labor, on reifying one's person, and so on. This one-sided positivism could not be maintained, however, once the crippling effects of the capitalistic mode of production based on the general diffusion of alienation started to erupt also in the form of social unrest that did not shy away from the violent destruction of the much glorified and idealized "rational" machinery of increasingly larger scale manufacture.

Rousseau's system marks the transition to dense contradictions becoming socially acceptable and thus the turning point in the whole movement of the Enlightenment. The contradictions are in the social substance of his thought, as we shall see in a moment. In other words, they are necessary contradictions, inherent in the very nature of a "great" philosopher's socially and historically limited standpoint. The terms of the social compact between the estates of a rich and a poor man may be summed up in a few words that are stronger to most people than anything else: 'You have need of me, because I am rich and you are poor. We will therefore come to an agreement. I will permit you to have the honor of serving me, on condition that you bestow on me the little you have left, in return for the pains I shall take to command you. 'Nothing comes out of nothing', is as true of life as in physics : money is the seed of money, and the first guinea is sometimes more difficult to acquire than the second million. If this is the case, it cannot be surprising that the menacing shadow of an inevitable revolution appears not just in Rousseau's thought:

"Most peoples, like most men, are C3-docile only in youth; as they grow old they become incorrigible. When once c3-customs have become established and prejudices inveterate, it is dangerous and useless to attempt their reformation; the people, like the foolish and cowardly patients who rave at sight of the doctor, can no longer bear that any one should lay hands on its faults to remedy them". Yet the same Rousseau also asserts, talking about himself, in his Third Dialogue, that "he always insisted on the preservation of the existing institutions".

All this is the expression of the contradiction between the content-free and the personal neutral rhetorically suppressed by philosophers because they have unlearnt how to be personally relevant. The underlying lie carries with it a static conception, a self-destructive stalemate, that exploded in revolutions, genocides and world wars. In the last analysis: a purely imaginary transference of the problems perceived in society onto the plane of the moral "ought" which envisages their solution in terms of a "moral education" of men. The fundamental contradiction in Rousseau's thought lies in his incommensurably sharp perception of the phenomena of alienation and the glorification of their ultimate pseudo-cause. This is what turns his philosophy in the end into a monumental moral sermon that is supposed to reconcile all contradictions in the ideality of the moral sphere.

FA	PA	SP	HA	HC	PL	RQ	MI	SE	PR	IC	AF
		p		I	i	as		f	S	t
afM	tmp	R	!	v	S		hP	Jc		b	I
O	o						d				e

Instead of becoming personally aware of a=intuition (triggered by PL>RQ, f=feeling (PL>SE) and the M=maximally possible (SP>PR) and face the corresponding O=challenges by basically take PR for the PL in the scenario where the challenge takes place, as the BCM-consultants learn to do, most people such as Rousseau, just denounce alienation in many of its manifestations. That is an easy way to become a personally neutral trend speaker or write a bestseller book - but so what?

On the one hand he said: Man cannot alienate his freedom. On the other hand, he qualifies this statement by adding that there can be only one rightful way of disposing of one's inalienable right to liberty: "each man, in giving himself to all, gives himself to nobody" and therefore "in place of the individual personality of each contracting party, this act of association creates a moral and collective body. Doing that people gain "civil liberty and the proprietorship of all they possess". Furthermore, man also "acquires in the civil state, oral liberty, which alone makes him truly master of himself; for the mere impulse of appetite is slavery, while obedience to a law which we prescribe to ourselves is liberty". That is the way arguments are used to alienate C3- reality from c3-morality!

Rousseau, and meanwhile most people, can no longer envisage any solution based on the substantiality that is genuine in view of the seeming, man-made contradictions; they exclude the personally relevant for simplicity's sake, unaware of the long-term consequences. So what remains is appealing to the content-free idea of an obedience to a personally neutral law, which the French Revolution prescribed people in the general political framework of the assembly which radically transcends, in an ideal fashion, the "bad reality" of the established order, while leaving it, in its c3-essence, intact...

FA	PA	SP	HA	HC	PL	RQ	MI	SE	PR	IC	AF
		p		I	i	as		f	S	t
afM	ptm	R	!	v	S		hP	Jc		b	I
O	o						d				e

The BCM-consultants follow their o=call and seek the PA in order to become aware of tmp; in their shared t=thinking on the BCM-platform about the m=minimal requirement to meet the p=perceived data for a lifefulfilling living togetherness, and that is more than personally neutral simplicity, which breeds content-free frustration in those aware of the corresponding suppression that results in way nobody wants, except maybe the majority; this paradoxical trap can only be overcome in view of personally relevant, joyful R=(re)solutions, concepts that are congruent with the C3-path, truth, life. It is well known, that anything else, say merely insisting on a certain, culturally or timespirit dependent HA is not sustainable, and thus not a SP=success promising approach, but a fake that will blow up as a pressing problem that obscures the living presence. The corresponding HA-challenge of the BCM makes BCM-consultants aware, in their own HA of the mental !=confusion that usually takes the form of a polarization between content-free position power and personally-neutral mobbing in view of lacking personal relevance.

The c3-MOS approach on the other demands some kind of Sovereignty "being nothing less than the exercise of the general will, to be established in forms of positions of power of men over men tending to their politically correct equality, which in the end is nothingness in view of the nobodyness of the collective, condemning individuals to a particular will that is partial and the general will to become universal which completes man's c3-alienation from his C3-nature, as summed up by Rousseau as follows:

(a) "Everything is good when it leaves the hands of the Creator of things; everything degenerates in the hands of (his Creature) man. It is civilization which corrupts man, separating him from nature (Creation), and introducing "from outside" all the vices which are "alien to man's constitution". The result is the destruction of the "original goodness of man" - and this contains the subliminal message that there is something flaw in the arrangements of C3, which has to be morally rectified up to socially induced neuronal and genetical manipulation, genocide, war...

(b) In this development — away from nature by means of the vehicle of civilization — we can see a "rapid march towards the perfection of society and towards the deterioration of the species"," i.e. this alienated form of development is characterized by the grave contradiction between society and the individual human being

(c) Man is dominated by his (SP-)institutions to such an extent that the sort of life he leads under the conditions of institutionalization cannot be called by any other name than slavery : "Civilized man is born into slavery and he lives and dies in it: . . . he is in the chains of our institutions."'

(d) Vice and evil flourish in large towns and the only possible antidote to this alienation, country life, is increasingly under the dominion of the big towns: "industry and commerce draw all the money from the country into the capitals ... the richer the city the poorer the country." Thus the dynamic vehicles of capitalistic alienation — industry and commerce — bring under their spell nature and country life, ever intensifying the contradiction between town and country.

(e) The acquisition of artificial needs and the forced growth of "useless desires" characterizes the life of both the individuals and the modern State. "If we ask how the needs of a State grow, we shall find they generally arise, like the wants of individuals, less from any real necessity than from the increase of useless desires." Corruption in this sense starts at an early age. The natural impulses and passions of the child are suppressed and replaced by artificial modes of behavior.

The result is the production of an "c3-artificial being" in place of the natural, "C3-original" human being; the former self-destructive to the point of wiping out the human resources available for life-fulfillment...

FA	PA	SP	HA	HC	PL	RQ	MI	SE	PR	IC	AF
		p		I	i	as		f	S	t
afM	ptm	R	!	v	S		hP	Jc		b	I
O	o						d				e

As we can see, in all the philosophical points of such penetrating, but otherwise impotent diagnosis of prevailing social trends are based on a platonian idealization of nature prior to its "enlightened" alienation, revealing the philosophies purpose using c3-idealization; C3-alienation. Thus in conventional terminology its father Plato, can be rightly called the prophet of the devil, philosophy his footnotes and all the methodologies and technologies derived from it, death and end technologies! The above analysis a Rousseau based on the BCM-I=concepts, was made aware of by understanding the v=value BCM-consultants learn to find in suffering. In this way they are able to address the i=need to overcome it, made aware by the BCM S=relaxing from emotional dramatizations, in view of considering it an experimental situation, that prepares the ground for C3-insights relevant for reconciliation: In the BCM's d=doing, its consultants become aware of the h=living space/szenario in which the P=essence/relevant OEGP can be identified that allows a MI. When that is recognized as relevant by the customer, the ground is prepared for the BCM-consultant's awareness of the appropriate J=self-justification that allows coaching the c=constraints of the identified business constitution. That process PL>RQs the situation, as a Federal Court does in establishing constitutional rule to serve the constitutionally safeguarded values; here the lifefulfillment of those concerned.

In his denunciation of the roots of alienation, Rousseau on the other side simply attributes to money and wealth the principal responsibility, disregarding that in their content-free nature both have no ability to respond whatsoever - the subliminal message being, that people are even less able - than nothing! His notion that it is permissible to alienate oneself in the form of giving one's life for a noble purpose, but that it is absolutely forbidden to alienate oneself in the form of selling oneself, suggests that we have that freedom. This devaluates the life-fulfilling principle to a mere option. In accordance with this principle Rousseau insists that the first and absolute condition of an adequate form of education is that the laws of the market should not apply to selling ones c3-freedom; thus displacing one's C3-being from public attention! The subliminal agenda of this kind of philosophy is that setting up noble causes to make people sacrifice their life for has to maintained in view of the undeniable power of money and wealth; and Hitler did just that and about 100 million murdered people embellished his suicidal lifestyle on the ground prepared by Rousseau and the like!

The good tutor, Rousseau said, is someone who is "not a man for sale" and he is opposed to the prevailing practice that assigns the vitally important function of education "to mercenaries". However, without the C3-grace of lifefulfillment, human relations at all levels, including the intercourse of nations with each other, are subordinated to the only criterion of deriving profit from the other, and consequently they are impoverished beyond recognition: "Once they know the profit they can derive from each other, what else would they be interested in?"

Rousseau has sharpened people's eyes for the manifold phenomena of alienation and dehumanization so that Marx, Stalin and Hitler could herd them up in it, having lost the focus on lifefulfillment denounced as utopian. As long as the understanding of the causes of alienation is confused, the only way people can go on to reveal the truth about human life it to dramatize the prevailing c3-MOS that lead to all the devastating c3-human catastrophe of the otherwise technologically embellished 20th century.

In short, a philosopher can teach a politician to tell his people to got to hell in such a way that they look forward to the trip...

A BCM-consultant can coach managers to make their staff return from such trips before the point of no return to their outplacement and through synergy create a competitive advantage. On that basis a BCM-consultant can convince the business leader(s) to decide on the implementation of an appropriate business constitution that allows a preventative position enhancement based on those concerned lifefulfilling and thereby self-organizing sustainable substantiality.

FA	PA	SP	HA	HC	PL	RQ	MI	SE	PR	IC	AF
O	o	p		I	i	as	d	f	S	t	e
PL take place in real people and should not be merely intellectualized even if that is all some people are able to do, due to their mode distribution:						It is politically correct to alienate interactions beyond PA to leave the SP-judgment to the market; but what if, say, your s=focus is on SP? Then you might try to manipulate the market...

FA	PA	SP	HA	HC	PL	RQ	MI	SE	PR	IC	AF
O	o	p		I	i	as	d	f	S	t	e
Any MOS that does not aim for PR is bound to fail, even if it manages to get global attention! There are global c3-MOS experiments that can be done only once! Thus the BCM does not aim for global, but for personal attention.										The source of all evil is alienated PR - the last line of defense* of the devil!*

FA	PA	SP	HA	HC	PL	RQ	MI	SE	PR	IC	AF
iSe	Is		d		p		at			o	fO