Magical Advice - Pt. 9, From Mysticalgod

Untitled Document
INTRODUCTION
I write another lesson out of inspiration. As you may know through knowledge or wisdom,
I gain my knowledge and skill to write my poems and lessons out of inspiration, and I am
guided by a voice or feeling deep down inside of me. I know that my doing so is part of a
bigger equation. As Joseph Campbell pointed out, as in the writings of the vedas, a person
can feel inspiration in such a way that it rises from deep within and speaks the words of
Gods, through means of that person being in tune so much as to sense the rhythmic pulse of
nature. In doing so, the very words created by such a person when inspired, also attracts the
Gods. And to me, this feeling is out of this world.
The magical advice lessons are not like the "two dimensional" magical books you've
experienced in the past. My lessons are fully four dimensional, and they are geared to rapidly
build your magical power, while addressing the fundamental spectrum of elements that must
be illuminated to you.
In an earlier lesson, MA-6, we covered "reality shifting" through means of consciousness.
file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (1 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

Untitled Document
In this lesson, we will go a little further, or rather wider, in this area, and we will focus on a
more personal level. The subject of our attention will be "you". We have a working knowledge on
how to draw upon the Light (the power) but now we want to concentrate and focus it more
intensely on exactly what we want to achieve, like a magnifying glass focusing sunlight into a
single beam to create heat and then fire.
Our technique for doing this falls into various matters concerning things which directly
influence you. Those things include your hand writing, your clothes, your gestures, your
temperament, your actions, your identity, and much more. Ultimately, our goal here will be to
guide you into sculpting yourself into the powerful wizard or witch you've dreamed you would
be. This information will be found in the section titled "Become Magical".
In this process, you will lose your old self, and replace it with your new self. You've
heard this from churches a lot. But, this concept is much older than the church. This process
is necessary in order for you to achieve better success in magic. You cannot be two people at
the same time. You are either a true wizard or witch with magical potential all of the time, or
not at all. Success in magic is not an accident. It happens because of "who you are".
As in times of ancient, when you make this transformation, you are performing a natural
rite of initiation. In this case, it becomes an initiation into magic.
I've given you a center from which to begin your journey. It is our group, Magical 333.
Magical 333 is a source for you to gain an identity, or strong association with magic. But there
is more to this name than you may realize. It is a method and style of magic. In this lesson,
we'll cover some 333 magic. 333 isn't here, or there, it is within you,and it moves outward, to

Untitled Document
form the group. Unlike other groups, there isn't a clubhouse that you must go to, to join.
This will be the place where God/magic/spirit begins in you your new self.
In order to sculpt your new identity, you must understand how your magical life is set
apart from the nonmagical life. You must discern how to see life as magical. If a nonmagical
person should ever point out that they live a perfectly happy life not knowing magic, you
should be prepared to remember that a man may be happy the way he is, and not need to
understand magic. In the same manner, A dog can be perfectly happy with his own life, not
needing to understand, or be concerned with, the things of man, but keep in mind that it is
only a dog's life. Not that those who don't live as magical beings are dogs, or are in some
way derelict. But, to bring this point closer to you, I only need to show you how people live
when they are taught to act as men or beasts, rather than as magical beings. There are wars,
violence, selfish acts, and aggressiveness. People are magical/spiritual beings, and they
"should" strive to understand, and live as such, as much as possible for them.
Don't let your magical life become like those whose spirituality is comprised of only an
hour of church, once per week, or when a first aid spell is needed. If you live as such, I'm
certain that not only will you see much failure in your magic, but, more significantly, you will
not be happy with your magical self. However, when you can see yourself as the magician
you have worked and labored hard and long to create, you will be very pleased with yourself
and your abilities, even if you encounter some failed spells. This subject will be discussed in
"The Source". This segment will cover the technique for raising/exchanging power/energy
and where it comes from.
The concept of magical 333 can now begin to manifest as a form for you, since you have

Untitled Document
learned enough up to this point. If you haven't read, and practiced, the previous lessons, MA-
1-8, please stop here, go back, and read the previous lessons. Previous training will be
required to proceed, as this material is complex, college level if you will, and it will require
time to understand and to practice. Without previous training, it might make you a bit dizzy.
In this part, we'll look at examples of what magical 333, or 333 magic is. You'll learn
about the fundamental medium for the energy of 333, as well as how to construct your own
magic based on 333 magic. This part will be called, "333 Magic".
This advanced lesson will take you to a new dimension of building magical power for
yourself. Let's begin. Fasten your mental seat belts, because you are about to go for a
seriously winding ride. You might have to read this book at least twice.
BECOME MAGICAL
In ancient times, priests could turn sticks into snakes, turn enemies into zombies, capture
the souls of enemies, make food appear in empty baskets, bring life to inanimate objects,
cause lightning to appear on clear days, hypnotize and command wild lions and tigers, raise
sand storms by speaking a few words, cause water to spring from rock in a desert, create fire
with their bare hands, and many more things.
Today, a housewife sits in her closet, with three candles, successfully invoking a
powerful dark spirit who will soon change the lives of those in a gang that's been troubling her

Untitled Document
neighborhood. Not far from there, a preacher wishes for greater donations, while he raises
his robed arms high and speaks the words of a spell cast upon four green ribbons that he'll tie
to the donations basket the day before church service. On the other side of the world, an
army officer is destined to return home early to his family due to an unexpected end to the
war, but only after the army officer performed a private ritual in a cave when he had an hour
to spare, seeking to reunite with his family. His family will sit down with him to eat a meal that
contained food from a farmer who was going broke because of a lack of production on his
farm, but who was able to reverse his losses be going into his barn, despite the dirt and odors
and rain leaking through the roof, and by clearing an area to work in, to perform a ritual which
lasted two hours. Soon after, he was the richest farmer in his county.
All such people who perform successful magic had become magic, by creating a new
identity and becoming the wizard or witch they believed they could be. I once told a minister
that God talks to me, but not in human words. He laughed without much thought, but then he
cleaned it up by reciting trite words about how God speaks to believers. I couldn't help but to
see through him. He laughed because he didn't have faith that such a being really was a part
of his reality. My point is that you must become that which you believe in, if you want to see it
manifest your wishes in life. An "act" isn't sufficient enough to produce results.
I used to believe that whatever I did had no meaning. I know now that whatever I do
affects everything, psychologically, biochemically, and metaphysically. This section is to point
out how to use that to benefit yourself in a way which increases your magical power, protects
you, guides you, and possibly gives you a greater purpose in life, depending on what person
you choose to become.

Untitled Document
Your first goal is to have a solid idea of the person you wish to become. You don't have
to be very specific, and you shouldn't be. The person is magical, and the person is who you
naturally feel you should be. The energetic wizard. The quiet, creepy witch. The
compassionate healer. The animal empath. The wizard and friend of the dead. You can
always change later, but if you do, you'll have to start over.
For a better understanding of the effects biochemical states, please read the article in the
section titled, "The Biochemical Connection", which you'll find below.
The next step is to regularly practice behaviors or acts which are associated with the new
magical you. There are unlimited ways to express this, many of which can be subconscious
actions.
You might have noticed that my hand writing in my book Liber Dominatio has strange
barbs on the tips of the letters and numbers. Now some of my letters look either like gothic or
heavy-metal (rock) font. I began writing this way when I noticed feeling energy coming from
the letters, especially on the ends of each letter. It was as if I was blocking the energy of each
letter from getting out, in order to control how the words affected the future. This helped to
shape my magical self. The dominating state of my body chemistry is much different than
what it used to be, and I carry much more power than before.
Examine these scientific perspectives:
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) lets scientists "see" local blood flow
changes in the brain. This figure illustrates activation detected in the brain area called the
amygdala in subjects who were shown pictures evoking strong emotions. See image below.

Untitled Document
Below, this figure shows functional magnetic resonance images, fMRI, (top row) and
positron emission tomography, PET, images (bottom row) from two individuals. Information
from the fMRI helped identify the precise location of the area of the brain called the amygdala
while data from the PET scan revealed activity in the amygdala.

Untitled Document
This image below demonstrates biochemical effects of emotions. Negativity affects your
brain. When people view emotionally negative images, their brains respond in a specific way.
The orange "clouds" in the image here show areas that are activated in response to negative
images, relative to a baseline of viewing neutral images. (Movie courtesy Terry Oakes, Lab
for Affective Neuroscience, UW-Madison)

Untitled Document
Concerning techniques of behavior you can practice to initiate a permanent change in
yourself, these are only examples of some that you can use as a starting point. You'll have
to manufacture your own ideas of what will work for you:
> your hand writing

Untitled Document
(a) your writing can hold power
(b) your writing can attract energies, spirits, demons, angels, and Gods
> your clothes
(a) your clothes can hold power
(b) your clothes can attract energies, spirits, demons, angels, and Gods
> your smile
(a) your smile can instantly shield you from all manner of danger. A smile done right, can
even stop bullets from harming you, granted it's accompanied by magical laughter.
> Your inner view of yourself; How you imagine yourself when visualizing or fantasizing.
(a) some people never fully imagine themselves, or rarely imagine themselves
as beautiful. Is your image of yourself an image of a stick figure, fat, or strange?
> your lucky color
> knowing your present self
(a) do you know yourself enough to reshape yourself?
> your music and other entertainments (I limit aggressive music, such as metal, because
random bad things happen when I listen to too much of it )
> your walk
> your habits (especially. important: designate how and when and how much)
> daily associations
> how you control your mood

Untitled Document
> how you see things around you (important: the see-feel connection)
> how you view your left hand path (that of the individual as opposed to the society)?
(a) Do you know what mask you wear in your own mythology
(b) what antithetical mask do you wear?
To make this concept clearer for you, imagine yourself as a part in your computer. You
have an internal structure that plays a role in the entire function of the computer. Depending
on your internal structure, you will do different things "in the computer". As a person, your
internal chemistry changes with your moods, and actions/behavior. Your moods are
influenced by what you do, no matter how subtle. The chemistry in your body influences the
universe. This fact is clearly demonstrated in astrology. When you experience a certain
emotion, it will correspond with the movements of the stars, planets, and such. Control these
things, and you will in fact become a new person.
However, in order for it to directly affect your magical self, you must make the connection
between your action and the magic you want to become.
Make the association of 333 a part of your life in a way you are proud of it. One mark of
practicing 333 magic can be seen by those who paint their small nail black. If you already
paint your nails black, then paint the other nails another color, not as a chore, but as a
method. Another mark can be seen as three 3's in the triangular symbol of water. 3 3
There is a state I've developed to allow you to follow if you choose. We may call it the

Untitled Document
"Trine State", or "a state of 333", in relation to 333 magic.
The method for achieving a state of 333 and maintaining it. The state, like any state,
causes a unique biochemical transformation, which is evident by how your body and mind
feel. No doubt, this is a process that takes time, but it is well worth the pilgrimage.
(Pilgrimage, means, "a journey to a secured place):
(a) Avoid extreme emotions, unless it has a purpose in your intention
(b) Keep your mind under control at all times, using the tools of kindness and patience
(c) See everything with magical eyes, through your feelings
(d) lose the meaning of doubt forever
(e) don't eat gluttonously, but eat only what you need, and perhaps a little more
(f) always show inward appreciation for life energy in all things, then outwardly honor it
(g) visualize receiving energy and signs from 333 (the center of this state, of course).
I mentioned "magical eyes" in previous lesson, but I'll refresh your memory. This is the
ability to look at ordinary things and see them as being magical. You will know it's happening
when you feel it inside. A beginner in this art should use this tool: ASK a question when you
observe something, or when you observe an event -- If you can answer that question with a
magical answer, you are perceiving it with magical eyes. For example, you smell flowers,
"what is that smell?" "That's the scent of the goddess coming to witness my walk in the
park." ....or "Why is traffic moving so slowly?" "Traffic is moving slow because it's telling me to
appreciate the mountains I drive by everyday without noticing."
Remember, to "feel" it.

Untitled Document
Emotions play a significant role in cause and effect in biochemistry, which can be
manipulated to cause magical events to occur. I've included an article for your reading
assignment, and it's in the section below titled, "Emotional Cause and Effect".
After practicing these training procedures for one week, changes will begin to occur in
your life, and you will be glad. Keep in mind that all of this 333 talk is merely a training "tool"
for you. In time 333 will be second in priority to other magical goals, but the training will have
become part of you. And what ever 333 rituals and spells you created, they will go with you.
Like the master who has his apprentice carry buckets of water everywhere he goes, there is a
reason, and I will give you things that I feel will strengthen you. I'm certain.
This technique for making yourself stronger will be very effective, and it, like other
techniques in this lesson, will have to be monitored carefully for power overloads. Signs of
power overloads can range from mild headaches, to having to go to the hospital for asthma
that you never had before. The human body must be trained to handle heavy loads of energy,
by gradually getting a feel for it and releasing the pressure when it becomes very strong.
There are many methods for releasing excess energy. Research which ones work best for
you. I find that quartz crystal works well for me, when I meditate the excess into the ground. I
visualize white light energy flowing from me into the ground, until I feel comfortable.
This is also a practice for removing negative energy you inadvertently accumulated from
others throughout your day.
These new habits must become automatic and regular. You will, and must see
everything as a wizard or witch, or essentially, as a magical being.

Untitled Document
Understanding the importance of living a magical life sets apart a magician from the
ordinary man. A man may be happy the way he is not needing to understand magic. In the
same manner, A dog can be perfectly happy with his own life, not needing to understand, or
be concerned with, the things of man, but keep in mind that it is only a dog's life. Not that
those who don't live as magical beings are dogs,or are in some way derelict. But, to bring this
point closer to you, I simply need to show you how people live when they are taught to act as
men or beasts, rather than as magical beings. There are is violence, selfish acts, and
aggressiveness, all of which are demands that the world outside transform rather than the
inward world transform. Man does not and cannot, through nonmagical means, control the
world around him. He, or she, must start within himself, through a magical journey. People
are magical beings, and they "should" strive to understand, and live as such, as much as
possible for them.
Don't let you magical life become like those so whose spirituality is comprised of only an
hour of church, once per week.If you neglect your magical self, I'm certain that not only will
you see much failure in your magic, but, more significantly, you will not be happy with your
magical self. When you see yourself as the magician you have worked and labored to create,
you will be very pleased with yourself and your abilities.
And the ability to have this inner drive is what sets real wizards and witch apart from
those who are not.
A magical life will no longer be an event, but t will become a journey. This journey is a
transformation. This transformation is also called an initiation It is the universal symbol of
initiation into a magical dimension.

Untitled Document
All events that catch your attention, anything from a flower floating on still water to a
lightning storm in the mountains, will become sacred events. Nothing will be without meaning.
And why is initiation of this type important? Because it will reveal the true magicians.
True magicians will pass through many tests and succeed only through magical/spiritual
inspiration, not through will, blood lust, or greed. Just as I've received knowledge whispered
to me by spirit, the answers will also be given to those who are true magicians. They will then
have the abilities to succeed in magic. This is the real initiation into magic.
To transform into a magical being, you must shed your old body and dawn a new one,
symbolically. This represents a death and rebirth. Such a death and rebirth is seen in nature
when God/gods lets part of himself die, fall to the ground, and be reborn in springtime. You've
heard this theme before, but I should point out that this is a means to strengthen your power .
Besides being a means to strengthen powers, why else is this important? It is also important
because this is a type of second birth. It is an initiation into the realm of true magic/spirit/God.
To dwell too much on whether you should do this, or why you should do that, is to miss
the point. It's value lies in the POWER of its symbolic value. Symbols of your identity carry
great powers. These things must become sacred to you and a way of life, because they play
a major role in the world of the unseen, as there are to realities, those you see (physical) and
those you do not (magical).
Then all that you do will become magical to you. And like true myth, your daily activities
will cease being ordinary, and your actions will become a series of rituals. Hence, your
temple rituals will have more force. This power will flow from the realization that whatever you
do flows from your connection

Untitled Document
,or relation, to nature.
Your magical life shouldn't be an obsession, just as being a horse isn't an obsession for
a horse. You do whatever you do, but it will seem to have something magical about it. Simple
and natural. As it should be pointed out that people are naturally inclined to perform magic.
Some would argue against this. But look at what a person does when he wants something.
Doesn't he or she "wish for it"? That is magic. It may not be in a ritualistic form, but it has the
same element. When a person is mad at another person, doesn't he or she sometimes
"point" a finger, directing energies at the other person? That's a magical act.
The next step to consider is where this magic coming from? Is it something I'm creating,
reflecting, or receiving?
The human body has a lot of energy, which seems to be produced by the body itself,
through electrochemical processes. But think about it, the energy had to originate in "some
form" somewhere in the universe. To assume every person creates themselves would be too
presumptuous.
On the premise that God/Spirit/Nature is woven in all things in our universe, we can
assert that the root source of energy/magical energy comes from God/Spirit/Nature. The
energy is then transformed into different things, on different planes of existence.
We would be at a great advantage to believe this. Not to believe this, and to believe on
some concocted "scientific" theory is beyond any scientists capacity of this age. Logically
speaking, by believing in a deific "source", we allow our subconscious mind find the answers
and fill in the gaps.
Examine the image below, as it applies to the above section and the following one.

Untitled Document
THE SOURCE
This topic can be vague and elusive. So, in order to prevent some people from being
misguided on what they might presuppose, I will clearly state the concept of this section, then I'll
proceed to expound my points one at a time.
1. The magical power from the source comes from a place deep within you, a place that
cannot be visited by your conscious mind. It is a real place, and it is full of magic. When a
person dies, this place will live on.
2. The only link to this place for the conscious mind is in the medium known as "faith". All
interactions with this place, whether traveling there in meditation or magic, or whether raising
power from it to direct into a ritual, has to be done by the right "intention".
3. Communication to the source is through this place, and not through made made
"words". Words are only a shadow of true language. Elements of these lessons have been
created from powers which traveled from this place within myself. It is up to you to find your
role in the message, it's likely more important than you realize.
There is a corridor between you and the Gods/God/Spirit, and it is a means for travel,
communication, and energy with the Gods/God. It "cannot" be done with worldly words or
thoughts. It must be done through these means that define you. Do you want to know the

Untitled Document
ancient language of the Gods/God? I can tell you that it is constructed by substance of faith.
Not the faith that comes from performing some man made task several times a day, or by
starving yourself, or punishing yourself, but it comes from deep within yourself. Ever notice
when you are very sad, that the pain come from deep within yourself? It doesn't come from
your toes, or your head, or your tongue. So whether you pray or cast a spell, why should it
come from these places that have nothing to do with your true magical/spiritual self? Let the
Gods/God speak to you and through you.
Want to know what pure "creative" God energy feels like? Ever get burned? Do you
remember that feeling? Ever get shocked? Do you recall that feeling? Well there is a physical
feeling associated with God energy. Every state has a biochemical equivalent. Every
biochemical state has a frequency which resonates on a channel that permeates the
universe, just as radio waves do on earth, except that these frequencies are far more
influential. The creative, God energy is the state of love. Keep in mind that this is not the love
expressed by words or thought, but only by that which is beyond words and thought. This is
"the great void" (which you may have read about), or transcendence. Just like when you are
crying very hard, all you can do is babble, "boyaahaahaaahhh haa hhahoooyaa". In that
state, the spirits hear you just as if you are standing right before them. No human thoughts/
words can reach God/Goddess/Spirit. It can't be fabricated. It must be genuine. In magic, this
is done though practice and faith. Sorry if this sounds like it will be a lot of work, but those
who achieve success, especially in magic, do so through hard, strong effort. After a while, it
will be no harder for you than it is for a fish to breathe in water. And why should you bother
having "faith", after all, it sounds too religious. The answer is already with you. Every time you

Untitled Document
look for the answers to something from your God, and you say, "I don't understand". You
don't understand because you are on the wrong channel. The natural, spirit ability for action
and communication is through faith, and it begins with intention.
What do I mean by intention? Let me explain. So people go through great lengths to
define the meaning of a dream or the meaning of symbols or to adhere strictly to "particular"
symbols in a ritual. But they don't understand the key important factor. That symbols are not
what is important but the intention the intention of the symbol. The symbol itself is only a medium
or vehicle for the message/energy. It is not the vehicle/medium that matters, but the source or
intention. Does it really matter what you eat when you are starving? Your intention is to eat.
Likewise it is with magic. It isn't a matter of how you perform a particular ritual, or whether
your spells are not working, or whether you are following all of the rules. It is a matter of living
a magical life. How you live will reflect and effect your intentions. This is the right intention if
you are to grow in magic. Use no other measure.
Want to know the biggest shortcomings of the world's leading religions? It's wholesale
spirituality. Spirituality "CANNOT" be quickly packaged and mass distributed. It is a process
meant only for those who are ready. The same applies for magical arts.
Some people are so bound by greed, that when they practice magic, they are blind
towards the right methods to use because they fail to express and feel the right intention.
Avoid this trap. Don't be stuck on only focusing on end results, or you will be blinded. Magic
can be very rewarding and often, at times, glorifying. Yet no matter how magnificent the end
result may be, as your instructor in this science, I cannot stress enough the importance of
properly learning by experiencing the methods taught in each lesson, to study the nuances of

Untitled Document
this art, and to discover a few on your own. It is not the end result that shall be useful to you,
but the journey itself. Remember. Focus on building your magical 333 education from the
ground up. (Initiation is not true without it.)
If you become fixated on just achieving results, you will enter the magical arena and
perform as one who is short sighted in magic, not having an adequate depth or feel for what
you are trying to achieve. And I could appear as having fallen short of providing you sufficient
training.
This concept of what to focus on can also be applied to dreams, symbols, and "magical
eyes": don't get lost on the symbol, and don't let it blind you, but focus on the "message" of
the symbol. From that, you will have the ability to extract the power from the symbol/event/
object.
This method is applied to everything, what you do, how you see things, what symbols
mean to you. For example, I could perform a ritual for money because deep down, I would
know that I need it, and I would see success, OR I could perform a ritual for money simply
because I want to see if the magic will work, and I would end up seeing no success from the
magical ritual.
Whether looking for the right messages, or the right powers, you must look deep within
yourself first. Then you may take the first step towards what you seek.
Our group symbolism, 333, and style of magic can help give you focus and cohesion to
your own magical constitution. It is your magic, your style, your group. The doors are always
open, and all are welcome. Success is up to those who walk through the doors. And for those
who benefit, they are forever part of the reality (or "game," if you want a more abstract term).

Untitled Document
There is a price for intention, just as there is a price for "truth". Tell a lie, pay later. The
law also applies with 333 magic. If you benefit from it, you are indebted to it. It gave to you,
and you will give back to it, whether you choose to or not.
This is a very powerful process, and you might attract a creature, or being, who admires
your intention, and becomes fond of you. You would do well to honor the path you took to get
there.
Some people pick up God in whatever religion, and play with God as though God were a
cool cigarette habit, and then they might quit God, or switch to another "Brand" (religion)
whenever it suited them. Life/reality isn't this way. If you get into big trouble because of a lie,
can you say, hmm...."I think I'll undue the fact that I lied"? No. You can't. It is with you forever.
So remember this. Open the box, enjoy the power, and forever be part of the game. This is
our magic, our reality, our world. And hopefully, it will result in many good things.
Simply put, practice as the lessons as instructed, using the magic in the ways suggested, and
contribute. Contribute in ways that will be helpful to others.
Moving onto the magical 333.

Untitled Document
333 MAGIC
What is 333? Well here's what we know for certain: It is a number, and therefore it exists.
It has something to our group, and therefore it must have a connection to us. I received the
number via psychic impression, therefore it must have a meaning which it is destined to fulfill.
It is a symbol. It has it's own vibration and powers, as does any number. It is a name, as all
names are numbers. Like all numbers, it existed before the foundations of the world. Like all
numbers, it played a part in our creation. Like all numbers, it played a part in our history, and
it will play a part in our future. It has the power to fulfill our requests and make our dreams
come true. It has consciousness. It is everywhere and nowhere. It speaks to us in our dreams
and in the wind and in the water. It is the name which binds our group, each of us, into one.
One Sign, One Group.
Now here's what you might not know. It is connected to water. Water is a symbol and
medium for this number. Its shape is the sphere. It transfers power well through these things
and especially through symbolism utilizing three things times three. For example, three bowls
with three offerings in each, or a word written three times on three different colored papers.
There is no limit to the variations you can create. Likewise, water or spheres work also. For
example, a ball with your wish written upon it, then consecrated and cast into the ocean.
In an abstract way, you could assume that our group manifested from a sphere, and it
formed a sphere of magical 333. Sorry if my degree of abstract thought seems too profound.

Untitled Document
Our would is an illusion cast upon the face of a sphere with the true powers moving and alive
beneath. This which is beneath is "magic". Science in a million years might finally realize that
those who believed in magic were essentially right.
Water is was the first symbol of magic to man. It had been used in ancient rituals, and it
is used today in rituals which date back more than 4,000 years, such as sacred bathing in
india, in Benares, or in Mesopotamia (rivers Tigris and Euphrates), or in the Indus area (rivers
Indus and ganges), or in the China area ( rivers Yeller R. and Yangtze), or in South America
(the Amazon rivers).
Water gave life to civilization and knowledge of technology, places which began "near
water", such as Cavin and Olmec (A member of an early Mesoamerican civilization centered
around Veracruz that flourished between 1300 and 400 BC.). Spirits of water whispered to
men in ancient words of within and languages, ideas, and rituals were born. In these places,
astrology and hermetics were born.
I am giving direct passage to the source of a magnificent power via these methods. Your
previously learned skills, as taught in previous lessons will carry you well through this
dimension of learning. You will know how to develop spells, rituals, and states of
consciousness based on this information.
Satisfy your desires. But also keep in mind that which I believe: there is no wrong in
"magic for personal gain". If you are thirsty and want extra water, you are not harming
anything to take it. But DON'T do so in a manner which harms or hinders another person, and
hence, yourself. Next consideration is to give back for whatever you receive, through

Untitled Document
whatever charitable act you choose. This is for your own good in more ways than I will take
time to explain here. Do so with "caring", not as if throwing away trash. Why? Intention, as
we've discussed.
Life was intended for you to take, and to take abundantly. This is nature. Look at so
many living creatures around us. What are they doing? They are unendingly taking that which
they need from the universe. They also give back something, and they don't harm nature in
the process.
Now concerning water. If you are to properly use the power of water in relation to 333, I'll
want to tell more about the ancient, magical properties of water, from the standpoint of
magical 333.
Water may be in liquid, air, and space. A well kept secret is that water is pure
consciousness. It is where we get our sense of being from. Most living things which have
water in them, including trees, are conscious. We may have brains to give us a "particular"
sense of consciousness, while trees, flowers, and other plant life, have their own sense of
consciousness. They sense the light that comes from the sun, and some plants can turn
toward it, and they probably sense the light from our bodies, and know how you feel, when
you experience emotions.
The names of Gods/God/Goddess and any spirit, is spoken by water. Water speaks, and
it does so by change, which is not only "change" but also "state", at any given point in time.
Water is never entirely still, and it speaks sacred words of the most ancient language on
earth. The next time you get a chance to observe water, gaze at the ripples. Notice how the
ripples, like words, express a certain uniqueness. The patterns formed upon the surface of

Untitled Document
water are not controlled by randomness, but intelligence. The changes are subtle, and the
key is in the fact that no one wave can be made to do exactly the same thing. If you toss a
stone into still water a thousand times, in exactly the same place, at exactly the same
velocity, at exactly the same angle, the results will show a series of patterns that behave
differently each time. It is a mode of pure consciousness. You are not getting human words
(which are really sound waves, which travel through a medium of part water, called air), but
you are getting pure consciousness, the likes of which our power of thought originated from.
Our universe was conceived through by the medium of consciousness in water. As any
thought will manifest something concrete, whether action, energy, or matter, it manifested our
planet and our lives. What about spirit's role in this? I sense that in some way, water is the
medium for spirit. Haven't you ever felt something different whenever in water? It's as if there
are things in the water that you cannot see. In deep water, I can feel many beings beneath
me. Go to a pool, and gaze into the water. You'll walk away with a new sense of perspective.
Water can now be used in your rituals and magic and prayer with this in mind.
For example, anytime you feel troubled, tired, or sick, you can call on the magic of 333
through water in a bath, or shower, for help, and you will receive the healing you need. Or,
use water to evoke happiness by playing with, or in, it. Then remember this happiness, and
use it for protection and good fortune, simply by saying "333" and recalling that particular
happiness. Doing this daily will make your days better, through habit of connecting the
symbol to the feeling, which in turn will manifest as a presence in your life. Not as a God, as
you might not be ready to pray to water, but as a magical energy to create the circumstances
you want.

Untitled Document
Spheres had been mentioned, so let me touch upon that matter briefly. Magical 333 has
another symbol known as a sphere. This reference is not solely referencing the "shape", but it
also is reference to it's behaviors/state. This is important because when you perform magic,
you will be able to symbolically recreate the "state of the sphere". What is the state of the
sphere? It is the separation of one element "within" another (others/plural), by "it's difference.
For example, look at the shape of air bubbles in water, or water in space, or cells in blood,
and so on. Also note that sound/words, light, energy, etc., travel outward in the shape of a
sphere from their centers. One medium of one density surrounded by another, takes on the
shape of a sphere, in many "significant" cases.
Incidentally, I've been working on a theoretical concept that asks the question, "can
spheres in reality ever be considered flat?" Our universe was recently determined to be flat.
Why?
Our group evolved from the sphere of 333, a magical center of great power. Because it
is a power that is separate from its surroundings, it takes on the shape of a sphere.
May it bring you closer to our group.
Another way to bring the power of 333 closer may also be done through association. As
taught in a previous magical lesson, the closer an object, or symbol, plays a part in your life,
the more it's power will be a part of your life. One form of association to 333 you could have is
in adopting a title connected to it, such as the following examples:
*** Via Type of Magic or Magical Mind:
1. You have 333 consciousness

Untitled Document
2. you perform triple three magic
3. you are guided by the spirit of triple threes
4. You were aided by 333 magic.
5. You are casting a circle of three threes
6. you are shielded by magical threes
7. may God and Goddess send you power of three threes
and so on.
*** Via Magical Names or Identities:
1. The Storms Wizards/Witches
2. The Water Wizards/WItches
3. The Triple Three Wizards/Witches
4. Wizards/Witches of Water
5. Wizards/Witches of Three
6. SEM, or WIzard/Witch of SEM (Sun, Earth, Moon)
The rule of 333 Magic is guided by the principle that the magic vibrates with the calling of
3 symbols/objects 3 times in (by purest method), or by using symbols that represent these
three numbers. This is NOT three hundred and thirty three. This IS three things/three times,
or three things that symbolize the power of three. For example, the 12 spheres ritual
implements three groups of four spheres, which utilize a power in "3" to activate the power for
the ritual. The first calling ritual uses three spirit force symbols above three pillars. Getting the
idea yet? You can now begin to perform your role in 333 magic by designing your own rituals

Untitled Document
using magical 333 powers. Magical 333 has been with you longer than you realize.
Another method of 333 magic can involve MAGIC SQUARES OF 333:
These are squares which may be added to three in any direction. For example:
To create Harmonizing and recharging particles around you, place a candle (of your
color, if possible, but not necessarily) on each of three triangles, with the following numbers
written upon paper or candles and placed at three points around you, forming a triangle. Sit in
the center, and meditate. Alternatively, you could write the numbers upon three triangles of
paper, place them on the ground, and place a candle upon each, and sit in the center.
MEDITATE on yourself being recharged and doing well.
Spirit of the Unborn(Future)
Placed upon candles, or objects, this can be used to affect matters to occur in the future.
102
210
021
Spirit of the living(present)
Placed upon candles, or objects, this can be used to affect yourself, or another living thing.
300
003
300
Spirit of the dead(past)

Untitled Document
Placed upon candles, or objects, this can be used in spells which react, or correct, matters
that had taken root in the past.
111
111
111
Just a note concerning spirit of the unborn. Ever wonder if spirit is created when a person
is born? Many take the origin of spirit for granted. The spirit of any living thing exists before it
is born. It doesn't learn anything it didn't already know. It is already that which it shall
become. In life, it will experience only "an expression" of that which it is. For example: sheet
music is music on paper, and it already exists. When the musician plays the music from the
sheet, it is an expression of that music.
Next you should consider the outcome of your magic and what that should mean to you.
It's important for you to allow yourself to be shaped, not hindered, by your experiences in
magic. There will be many times when your magic does nothing. This is a part of any good
wizard's magical life.
If you ever perform magic, and you see that your magic seemed to fail, you should
remember one thing. Remember that your magic, if it had been properly performed, did not
fail. It did work.You naturally have the ability to perform magic and have it work for you. The
reason the magic "seemed" to not work is because it was blocked or impeded by another
being, human or not human. Often the being working against you is your natural, spiritual
adversary. You may have more than one. Alternatively, it's possible you were blocked by a

Untitled Document
friendly spirit trying to protect you from what you cannot see, since your vision of the future
might be terribly shortsighted.
If you don't get the results you want, within the time frame you desire, or expect,
contemplate whether you really need it, or whether it is rightfully your position to seek it. If
you conclude that it is right for you to have your wish come true, then approach the wish
again with an entirely different spell. I try to never use the same spell twice for the same
need. I suggest you avoid this also. It might annoy The Source.
I've formulated theorems from some, not all, of the points we've learned from this lesson:
Some Magical 333 Theorems:
MA-9(1) How you live will reflect and effect your intentions.
MA-9(2) True magical energy is that which precedes all words, not vice-versa.
MA-9(3) To be the magic, you must create the magic, by creating who you are
MA-9(4) The tree of magical power grows deep within you, and it where your faith is rooted. It
naturally gives and receives magic.
MA-9(5) The trine state maintains a vibration which maintains a biochemical state which
conducts limitless magical power
MA-9(6) Magical Eyes are blind in this world, yet see infinitely all things
MA-9(7) Magical power attracts spirit adversaries/opposites, which can be overcome and
transmuted into positive power (symbolized by life eating life to sustain life).
MA-9(8) The answers are all around you, in symbols and signs, not in words
MA-10(9) Magic makes the act a reality, not vice-versa

Untitled Document
These can effectively build into postulates, but it isn't necessary at this point. I don't want
to want to build law but rather give you some guides to casually help you along. Let them
illuminate which way to go. Now for some reading assignment to broaden your perception of
relevant topics. Please don't take everything in these articles literally, since I don't agree with
some of it. I'm not using everything stated as a means to support my lesson. For example,
one of the articles tries to disprove "the soul". A very amusing aspect of the article. It should
make you laugh. But as you read it, logic should indicate what is applicable to this lesson.
Please enjoy.
THE BIOCHEMICAL CONNECTION

Emotions Without Souls: How Biochemistry and Neurology Account for Feelings
www.Human Truth.info
TruthCulture & SubcultureSexualityOtherLifeSoul TheorySelf HealthThe Future
Emotions Without Souls

How Biochemistry and Neurology Account for Feelings
By
Our emotions are physical in nature. The effects of brain damage, tumours and brain disease show us that biological
factors can have deep and profound effects on our personality, memories, free will and character. Neurology and biochemistry have
delved deep into the brain and discovered many of the specific parts of the brain that generate our emotions and drives. When these bits
are tinkered with, severe changes to personality can be made. The way that biological change affects our personality is surely proof that
consciousness and emotions are all physical, with no need for soul theory.
1. The Basis of Qualia in Neurology: The Brain is the Inner Us

2. Depression and Mood Disorders are Biological
3. Brain Damage Can Change Personality
1. Clive Wearing
2. Phineas Gage
4. Psychosurgery
1. Henry Molaison
5. Degenerative Diseases
6. Prosopagnosia
7. The Limbic System
8. The Emotional-Experience Cycle
9. Conclusion
1. The Basis of Qualia in Neurology: The Brain is the Inner Us

In Neuroscience, professors Bear, Connors and Paradiso (1996)1 introduce the book with a little history of
research into the brain. Several Greek scholars in the 4th century BCE, 2400 years ago, believed that the brain
was the center of sensation. Hippocrates, the great pagan philosopher and physician (called the 'father of
medicine'), correctly taught that not only was the brain our sensing organ, but it was also the seat of our
intelligence. But then, a progression of religions and cultures asserted that the heart is the source of mind - the
Christian Bible is full of such references. Christians later in history were even to be found repeating Aristotle's
(394-322BCE) belief that the brain was merely a radiator.
Since then, biologists, neurologists, doctors and psychologists have amassed a wealth of evidence that tells us
clearly and comprehensively that the physical brain is the center (and producer) of intelligence, creative thought, willpower, moral
thinking and emotions. What is the point of calling our minds souls when we know that all our experiences derive from the physical
actions of neurones, neurotransmitters and hormones? Not only that, but they very formation (and loss) of memory is purely physical in
nature. Brain damage results in loss of memory; it must be that the soul either doesn't have any memories, or doesn't use them.
“ Our memories and habits are bound up with the structure of the brain, in much the
same way in which a river is connected with the river-bed. The water in the river is
always changing, but it keeps to the same course because previous rains have worn a
channel. In like manner, previous events have worn a channel in the brain, and our
thoughts flow along this channel. This is the cause of memory and mental habits. But the
brain, as a structure, is dissolved at death, and memory therefore may be expected to be
also dissolved. There is no more reason to think otherwise than to expect a river to persist
in its old course after an earthquake has raised a mountain where a valley used to be.”
"Why I am not a Christian" by Bertrand Russell (1957)2
Russell's watery metaphor highlights the fact that there is no apparent mechanism for a soul to influence
the brain, or for the brain to influence a soul. It is as if souls do not exist, and they apparently carry out no function. If the soul copies
memories that are imprinted on to the brain, then, brain damage that affects memory will also affect the soul, and it appears that brain
death itself would also remove the memories of the soul. The same occurs with emotions and personality. The resolution of such
philosophical problems lead to an immensely complex and improbable theory of how souls work. It is much more realistic to admit that
file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/Owner/Desktop/addendums/emotions.html (1 of 6)1/23/2010 12:54:10 AM

the idea of a 'soul' makes no sense: Neurology and science has enabled us to understand the brain to such an extent that such an ethereal
concept is no longer needed to explain anything. Below are several discussions and examples from various fields of medical science
which are all only possible if emotions are physical, not spiritual, in nature.
2. Depression and Mood Disorders are Biological

The neurotransmitters serotonin and norepinephrine are both related to our mood, and their flow causes changes in mood. antidepressants
such as tricyclics and monoamine oxidase inhibitors increase the effect of certain neurotransmitters, and thereby alter mood.3. Mood
disorders are inheritable4. This means, before a person is even conscious, they are predisposed to suffer from a neurotransmitter
dysfunction that causes certain moods and even some mental disorders. Free will and choice cannot overcome biology. When these
symptoms become serious, depression can be lifted by the correct medication. All this shows that moods are biological in nature. If there
is a soul, it is not the source of the feelings of happiness, sadness, depression, etc, and that these things can even be beyond our conscious
control at all.
3. Brain Damage Can Change Personality

If things happen to our bodies that we do not choose (such as the progression of Alzheimer's disease, which causes senility and dementia)
5
, we are forced to change our behaviour and feelings. The cases and examples below document many occasions when disease, accidents
or surgery have directly altered a person's character and personality, their life memories, their moods, and their consciousness. This is
only possible if character and personality, moods and consciousness, are all biological in nature. A biology textbook concurs thusly:
“ A small amount of damage [...] might even cause rather dramatic changes in your personality. Why?
Because your brain is the seat of your self-awareness, the locus of your intelligence, your compassion, and
your creativity. All of your mental activities - your thoughts, emotions and feelings - and all your bodily processes
are affected by the functioning of your brain.”
"Understanding Human Behavior" by James V. McConnel (1986)6
3.1. Clive Wearing
As a result of encaphalitis resulting from a cold virus7, Clive Wearing cannot form any long-term memories.
“ Clive Wearing [...] lives in a snapshot of time, constantly believing that he has just
awoken from years of unconsciousness. For example, when his wife, Deborah,
enters his hospital room for the third time in a single morning, he embraces her as if
they had been parted for years, saying, 'I'm conscious for the first time' and 'It's the first
time I've seen anybody at all'.”
"Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour" by Richard Gross (1996)8
“ He is so impaired that he cannot remember what happened more than 5 minutes

before, with the result that he is convinced he has only just recovered
consciousness. He keeps a diary and records this obsession - page upon page of
records indicating the date, the time and the fact that consciousness has just been
regained. When confronted with evidence ... he denies the evidence, even after many years of being in this
condition [...]. Whenever his wife appears, Clive greets her with the joy appropriate to someone who has not
seen a loved one for many months. She only has to leave the room for two or three minutes and return for the
joy to be repeated, and always expressed in the same way.”
From 'Your Memory' by Alan Baddeley
Deborah Wearing, Clive's wife, says that "even if I just leave the room, he doesn't know if he's seen me just 10 minutes ago or 10 years
ago"7. He is capable of showing all the emotions of any person, including his strong emotions for his wife, who he constantly misses. The
brain damage that he suffered has caused all this, what are the implications for those that study the soul? Clive Wearing shows us that
there is no 'soul' which is responsible for our emotions; or, if there is a soul, it is completely overridden by physical biochemistry. There is
no part of Clive Wearing's emotions that are not affected by his brain damage. No 'soul' emerges as being responsible for those emotions.
Life is purely biological and not spiritual.
3.2. Phineas Gage
In 1848, an explosion at work sent a metal pole shooting through Phineas Gage's head. He survived. The damage to his frontal lobes
radically altered his personality and character. Previously he was conscientious, upright, respected. After the accident, he was suddenly

abusive with profanity, irritable and had become irresponsible. Neurologists know that the front parts of the brain are associated with the
tempering of impulsive behaviour, goal-setting and other areas of abstract thought.9. These ideals and aspects of personality therefore
come from a biological source, not from something like a soul that is interacting with the brain.
4. Psychosurgery
Psychosurgery includes medical procedures on the brain that are intended to change aspects of character. Procedures include lobotomies
and leucotomies. They were used regularly from the 1930s for severely disrupted patients. Since then highly accurate and specific
stereotactic tractotomies, stereotactic limbic leucotomies and the like have been developed, allowing the destruction of very small parts of
the brain, normally locating particular pathways between one part and another in order to change specific aspects of behaviour and
symptoms. For example, a cingulotomy is occasionally used against obsessive and compulsive patients by destroying 2-3cm of particular
white matter. An amygdalotomy destroys the brain's neural connection between the amygdala and the hypothalamus and is normally used
on patients who suffer from episodes of unstoppable violence and terror.10. What all this shows is that the physical structures and
chemistry of the brain can control large portions of our chosen behaviours, experiences and feelings.
4.1. Henry Molaison
Henry Molaison suffered from increasingly devastating epileptic fits. He was known anonymously in medical case studies as "H.M." until
his death in 200811. 55 years earlier, when he was 27, his constant fits had made his life unlivable so doctors operated on his brain, which
stopped the fits. Unfortunately, a side-effect was that his memory was damaged and he lost 12 years of memories, and could not form new
declarative memories. He would re-read the same magazine over and over. His motor memory was fine and he could learn new skills,
although he didn't consciously know that he knew them until he was asked to try them. His knowledge of words and language was
intact.9. Damage to his amygdala had damaged his ability to process emotion, and damage to his hippocampus resulted in the new-
memories dysfunction. We learn from this that emotions which result from memories are completely dependent on the physical brain, as
are learning. There was no 'soul' that reminded Henry Molaison that his favorite Uncle had died three years ago: each time he was told, he
was upset all over again. Emotions, memory, and the physical brain are all purely physical, and interconnected only by the neural
pathways in the brain.
5. Degenerative Diseases
There are many degenerative brain disorders. They gradually wear away a person's brain and mental health, and many of them alter
personality and mood by interfering with the biochemistry of the brain. There are countless case studies available, documenting the onset
of these diseases and the reactions of their victims. Take Alzheimer's disease, the most common form of dementia. Its incidence increases
with age, affecting "about 10% of the population aged over 65, and as many as 45% over 85"12. It results in loss of function in every area
of cognition, including an inevitable severe alteration of personality. Patients who have displayed a life long devotion to a religion tend to
lose interest in their religion as a result of the disease13. It is eventually fatal. The main symptom is the loss of neurones and an
accumulation of deposits of toxic amyloid plaques in the brain12.
Degenerative diseases have implications that extend into the realm of spirituality and religion. That these purely physical ailments can
change a person's personality to a severe extent is proof that the personality itself results from physical biology, rather than from a soul or
spirit. Also, the way that the accumulation of genetic errors and protein-processing mistakes can result in toxic plaques is an indication
that our genetic make-up is not particularly well designed. Richard Dawkins, the foremost evolutionary biologist, points out that this is
because our genes only have to get us through to the age at which we can reproduce, and support grandchildren. Beyond a certain age,
there has been no evolutionary pressure for genes to keep a body functioning. This is why so many diseases are associated with old age.
Some say this is all evidence for unintelligent design.
6. Prosopagnosia
An agnosia is a type of brain damage that results in a loss of knowledge. Symptoms can be very specific. Prosopagnosia is the loss of
recognition of faces. A patient can still identify faces and talk about them, but, does not recognize anyone by their face. It is caused by
damage to the lower posterior temporal lobe, typically in the right hemisphere. This loss of knowledge only operates consciously;
subconsciously their autonomous nervous system still reacts subtly to the presence of people they know. It is their conscious recognition
itself which is damaged.14. If there was a soul integrated with the brain, and the soul contained our real selves, and had our life memories
then our conscious self would still recognize people and experience relevant emotions, so damage to the brain couldn't cause these
symptoms. Prosopagnosia, like many other forms of brain damage that effect consciousness, is proof that there is no soul that controls our
experiences or emotional reactions.
7. The Limbic System

“ A network of ring-shaped structures in the center of the brain's neocortex perched on top of the
brainstem, associated with control of emotion and behavior - especially motivation, gratification, memory,
and thought. [...] The limbic system's [...] neural function and connectedness of the limbic system are
fundamentally similar in all mammals. [...] The most common symptoms of damage to this area of the brain
include abnormalities of the emotions, including inappropriate crying or laughing, easily provoked rage,
unwarranted fear, anxiety and depression, and excessive sexual interest.”
"The Brain Encyclopedia" by Carol Turkington (1996)
“ If we, as Humans, had to consider one part of our brains to be the core of our personal consciousness, it
would be the Limbic System and, especially, the interaction between the limbic system and the cortex.”
"The Limbic System" by Vexen Crabtree (1998)
The Human Limbic system is the most advanced known of all animals, more complicated than even those of our closest biological
relations. What separates us further from other animals, though, is the complex association-areas of the cortex and their links to the limbic
system. Our 'higher functions' reside within the cortex, our emotions within the limbic system, and our 'experiences' and 'consciousness'
reside in the interaction between the two.
8. The Emotional-Experience Cycle

The physiological role of the limbic system and the rise of consciousness in the processes between it and the cortex result in the emotional-
experience cycle. We take into account the situation and the levels of our hormones, etc, and then conclude that we are feeling a particular
emotion. Once a conclusion is reached, our limbic system assists us in reinforcing the resultant experience.
1. We interpret our state of physiological arousal. Each emotion does not 'have' a particular physiological state, so, our various states
are interpreted rather than read15. Experimenters have taken, or manipulated, our hormone and arousal levels and found that people
easily mis-interpret their causes.

2. We experience the most appropriate emotion depending on context and previous experience. If we are anxious we interpret this as
an emotional response to our situation (even if the real reason is the drug that an experimenter has given us).
3. Biofeedback: Once our cortex and limbic system is primed that a particular emotion is occurring, our limbic system inhibits and
excites the correct pathways in order to orientate our bodies for the correct response. If we are afraid, then we pump blood even
faster. Even if the real reason our heart initially started pumping was the result of manipulation by a neurologist, if we interpret it
as a fear response, our emotions and body then take on a fear response which reinforces our initial guess.
4. We then take in our changing surroundings, observing and thinking about what is happening, although much of this may be
subconscious it still results in autonomous changes in our body's state of arousal and alertness. So, we might start to sweat in
response to heat (or due to an injection of adrenaline). We then proceed round to step 1, in a continuous cycle of interpretative
emotional-experience.

To illustrate this with a simple behaviour, take the study reported on by the sociologist David Myers. "Sarah is hypnotized and told to take
off her shoes when a book drops on the floor. Fifteen minutes later a book drops, and Sarah quietly slips out of her loafers. "Sarah," asks
the hypnotist, "why did you take off your shoes?" "Well... my feet are hot and tired," Sarah replies. "It has been a long day"16. The
hypnotist knows that this is not the real reason why she acted - but - if we examine the emotional-experience cycle in the light of general
behaviour, we can see that she has (1) analysed her state, and then (2) concluded subconsciously about the reasons. She doesn't know that
this process goes on, and, she herself believes in her interpretation of the cause of her behaviour. We would probably find that after giving
this answer, she then displays other symptoms of being tired, in accordance with cognitive dissonance theory, and thus step (4) will have
her interpret other internal states as being consistent with her new feeling that she is hot and tired.
The qualia of our experiences are heavily based on these biochemical and cognitive processes. Our very consciousness results from
biochemistry, and can be tricked by experimenters. If there is such a thing as a soul, then it seemingly has no input at all on the emotional-
experience cycle, and no input on our conscious experiences. Indeed, it is as if souls do not exist. If souls do exist for some reason, they
must have an experience of life so completely different from ours (not being effected by all the physical chemicals that affect our brains,
emotions and consciousness), that they are more like alien observers than parts of ourselves.
9. Conclusion
Do emotions result from us having a soul, or merely from the laws of nature? Degenerative diseases of the brain that erode personality,
and cases where brain damage causes sudden changes in character, are both only possible if character itself is biological. Mood disorders
and mind-altering drugs indicate that the sources of feelings are biochemical. Inherited mood disorders and developmental diseases show
us that personality is driven by biology. Depression, love, niceness, politeness, aggression, basic drives, abstract thinking, judgement,
patience, considered behaviour, instincts, memories, language construction and comprehension, and every emotion, have turned out to
have biochemical causes, not spiritual ones, and can all be radically affected by brain damage and brain surgery. If there was a soul, brain
damage could not also damage our emotional feelings, but it does. If memory, behaviour and emotions are all controlled by the physical
brain, what is a soul for? It seems that there isn't anything for a soul to do - it certainly does not control behaviour or character, and, any
free will it exerts is promptly overridden by biological chemistry, hence why so many diseases have an uncontrollable effect on
personality. Modern science proves that the idea of souls is misguided.
Read / By
Write Vexen
Comments References: (What's this?) Crabtree
2009
Nov 22
Bear, Connors and Paradiso. "Neuroscience" (1996). Published by Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, Originally
published
Maryland, USA. The Amazon link is to a newer version. Mark F. Bear Ph.D. and Barry W Connors Ph. 1999
D. are both Professors of Neuroscience at Brown University, Rhode Island, USA, and Michael A. Nov 08
Paradiso Ph.D., associate professor.
Crabtree, Vexen
"Evolution and the Unintelligent Design of Life: Inherited Traits, Genetic Dysfunction and Artificial
Life" (2007). Accessed 2009 Nov 22.
Davison & Neale. "Abnormal Psychology" (1997 Hardback 7th ed). Published by John Wiley & Sons,
Inc. Amazon link points to a newer edition than the one I've used here.
Gross, Richard. "Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behaviour" (1996 3rd ed). Published by
Hodder & Stoughton, London UK.
McConnel, James V. "Understanding Human Behavior" (1986 hardback 5th ed). Originally published
1974. CBS College Publishing, Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York, USA.
Murphy et al.. "Learning and Language" (2004). A neurology textbook by Kerry Murphy, Peter
Naish and Daniel Nettle. Published by the Open University, Milton Keyes, UK.
Myers, David. "Social Psychology" (1999 6th 'international' ed). First edition 1983. Published by
McGraw Hill.
Russell, Bertrand (1872-1970). "Why I am not a Christian" (1957). Quotes from Fourth Impression of
1967 edition, 1971, Unwin Books.
Skeptical Inquirer. Pro-science magazine published bimonthly by the Committee for Scientific
Inquiry, New York, USA.

Toates, Romero & Datta. "From Cells to Consciousness" (2004). A neurology textbook by Frederick Toates, Ignacio Romero and Saroj
Datta. Published by The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.
Turkington, Carol. "The Brain Encyclopedia" (1996). From 1999 paperback edition published by Checkmark Books, USA.
Notes
1. Bear, Connors and Paradiso (1996) p4.^

2. Russell (1957) p74.^
3. Davison & Neale (1997) p240, 246-7.^
4. "Evolution and the Unintelligent Design of Life: Inherited Traits, Genetic Dysfunction and Artificial Life: Inherited Personality
Traits" by Vexen Crabtree (2007)^
5. Bear, Connors and Paradiso (1996) p19.^
6. McConnel (1986) p28.^
7. Deborah Wearing speaking on Radio 4 (2005 Jan 26, 21:30hrs).^
8. Gross (1996) p288.^
9. Frederick Toates in Toates, Romero & Datta (2004) p2-4. And Kerry Murphy & Peter Naish in Murphy et al. (2004) p18-19.^^
10. Gross (1996) p821-823.^
11. The Economist (2008 Dec 20) obituary for H.M, p146.^
12. Kerry Murphy & Peter Naish in Murphy et al. (2004) p18-19.^
13. Marcello Spinella and Omar Wain in Skeptical Inquirer (2006 Sep/Oct Vol 30:Issue 5) p35-38. M. Spinella is an associate
professor of psychology at the Richard Stockton College of New Jersey, USA. O. Wain is a graduate student in biomedical
sciences at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, USA.^
14. Saroj Datta in Toates, Romero & Datta (2004) p146.^
15. Gross (1996) p130.^
16. Myers (1999) p137.^
© 2009 Vexen Crabtree. All rights reserved.

Untitled Document
E M O T I O N A L C A U S E and E F F E C T

Feelings and Emotion, as published by Review of Metaphysics (1984)
FEELINGS AND EMOTION*
STEPHEN R. LEIGHTON
One question asked about the relationship between feelings and emotion is
whether feelings are a feature necessary to constitute emotion. Answers vary from
James’s assertion that they are so central as to be emotion, to Bedford’s and
Solomon’s insistence that they are irrelevant to emotion. More moderate answers,
however, have emerged, views in which feelings have a place with regard to
emotion—at least some of the time. Assuming that feelings do have some status
with regard to emotion, a further question is to be asked. When feelings are a
feature relevant to emotion, what is their status with regard to the (other) features
of the complex that are said to be emotion?
Modern analytic philosophers seem to adopt a two-part solution. First,

when feelings are relevant to or constituents of emotion, they depend upon other
factors for their identity and nature. Second, they depend upon judgments.1 I shall
call these the dependency and judgmental theses respectively.2
My purpose is to criticize both parts of this solution.
* This paper is held in copyright by its author and the Review of Metaphysics. I would
like to thank the latter for the right to reprint this paper here.
1
Although judgments are the usual subject of dependency, theorists often move
indifferently among judgments, evaluations, beliefs, etc. For purposes here, I shall do the same.
The important claim is that the subject of dependency is something cognitive.
2
I should emphasize that my interest is in the identity of the relevant feelings, not a
concern for the source, cause or genesis of feeling. Is what a feeling is a feeling of determined by
the feeling itself or something else? If something else, what exactly?
1
We must begin with the alleged agreement within modern analytical

philosophy on a two—part solution. William Lyons makes it clear that feelings are
never independent enough to individuate emotion when he says:
For, as I will argue later in detail, behavior and feelings need not be present
on all occasions of an emotional state, but, even when they are present, they
do not form any sufficiently consistent and distinct patterns which would
enable one to distinguish different emotions by reference to such patterns.
(p. 81)3
Rather, evaluations are in control.
Emotions are not specified by their objects or targets but by what the
subject of the emotion thinks of the object or target. Your emotion will be
fear if you believe that you are in danger of being exposed by this woman
as a thief and a liar and this belief causes your emotional reaction. It will be
embarrassment if you believe that the woman knows that you are the one
who rejected her application for compassionate leave, and in consequence
you believe the situation to be one of extreme awkwardness, and this belief
causes your emotional reactions. Your emotion will be love if the reaction
3
W. Lyons, Emotion (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1980). The view that feelings
themselves can determine the emotion present, I call the determinator thesis. In holding the
judgment and dependency theses, one must (and Lyons does) reject the determinator thesis. In
holding the determinator thesis, one must reject the judgment and dependency theses. One can,
however, reject the judgment and dependency theses without being committed to the determinator
thesis, or reject the determinator thesis without endorsing the judgment and dependency theses.
We shall speak further about the determinator thesis: its rejection is often bound up with
an endorsement of the judgment and dependency theses; its adoption will undermine the
dependency and judgmental theses.
2
is caused by your belief that this woman is the most perfect person you
have ever met and could possibly meet. (pp. 48—49)
Lyons allows that feelings may be present; they may be part of the emotional
reaction. But that which determines the reaction and the whole state as one of, say,
fear is the judgment(s) relevant to fear. Consequently, that which determines the
feelings present as feelings of fear must be the judgment(s). The identity of the
feelings present is no more independent than the rest of the emotional reaction.
Both the dependency and judgmental theses have been adopted.
Although Anthony Kenny’s position on the matter is considerably different

in detail, he too endorses the dependency and judgmental theses. According to
Kenny, important constituents of emotion include motivated behavior and
symptom. The feelings present depend upon these.
For it is not just an unfortunate accident of idiom that we use the same
words, such as “love,” “anger,” and “fear,” in the description of feelings as
we do in the attribution of motives. The two uses of an emotion-word are
two exercises of a single concept; for it is through their connection with
motivated behavior that feelings are identified as feelings of a particular
emotion. (p. 38)
But the existence of characteristic expressions of emotion itself provides a

further link between emotion and sensations: for the expression
characteristic of each motion—e.g. weeping—is itself felt, and this feeling
is a genuine sensation. (p. 59)4
So far, it looks as though Kenny holds the dependency thesis only. But if we look
further, we shall see that his position also entails the judgmental thesis. Motivated
behavior and symptom rest on the third strut of his analysis, circumstance.
4
A. Kenny, Action Emotion and Will (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1963).
3
The occasion on which an emotion is elicited is part of the criterion for the
nature of emotion. Merely to investigate behavior or its physiological
accompaniments, without reference to the occasions on which these occur,
is to treat something which is essential to establishing the nature of what is
being investigated as if it was a dispensable laboratory circumstance. The
tears which we shed while watching films, the shudders which we give
while reading horror stories are real tears and real shudders; but the
surroundings are not those of real grief or real horror. We do not want the
film to stop, or put the book down. (p. 49)
Thus whether the emotion and feeling elicited is of fear or of some other emotion
seems to rest on the circumstances that elicit the motivated behavior and symptom.
The significance of the circumstance, however, is itself determined by the
evaluations made of it. Thus of ultimate importance are the judgments of the
emoter.
For an animal to be genuinely afraid, it is not necessary nor sufficient that

he should be in danger; he may be in danger which he does not know about,
and so not be afraid, or be in no danger, but be afraid because he thinks he
is. (p. 50)
…for it is not in general possible to identify an emotion without identifying

also its object; and where, ex hypothesi, an emotion takes the form of a
feeling which is not acted upon, the connection with the object can be made
only by the thoughts which surround the sensation. (p. 64)
Thus Kenny, too, holds that the feelings present and the emotion present depend
upon the judgments made of the circumstances. Once again, the nature of feeling
depends upon judgments.
These analyses have left no room for the feelings being what they are
through their own nature or able to help determine the emotion present. Roger
4
Trigg, while reviewing some work of A. R. White, considers something like the
latter view—one in which it is the nature of the feelings that determines the
emotion. Trigg comments:
How could we say that we felt pangs of anxiety, if the pangs were all that
there were to anxiety? White, of course, could envisage pangs which had a
distinctive ‘anxiety-quality’. When I had them I would know I was anxious.
If I did not, then either I was not anxious, or I had forgotten my anxiety.
However, the main difference between a pang of anxiety, a pang of fear, a
pang of disappointment, or a pang of any other emotion would seem to be
their contexts. It is because they occur in certain situations that I attribute
them to various emotions. A pang of anxiety, for instance, would occur in a
situation which I viewed as disquieting in some way. (pp. 97—98, my
emphasis)5
Although sceptical, Trigg grants that there may be noticeable differences among
different pangs, i.e., feelings. Still, whatever these differences come to, a
consideration of them is not sufficient to distinguish even among the feelings.
Trigg’s requirement of context means that the feelings are ultimately determined
by one’s beliefs about the situation, not by what one might want to say about
feelings independently of these beliefs.6 Feelings remain dependent, and
dependent upon judgments. From the failure of feelings to be independent, it
follows that differences in terms of the feelings are insufficient to distinguish
among emotions (contrary to the determinator thesis). The situation and,
ultimately, the beliefs determine the nature of the feelings and the emotion present.
5
R. Trigg, Pain and Emotion (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970).
6
That the significance of the context relies upon beliefs we saw in Kenny and see here
with the importance of how one “views” the matter. For a fuller discussion of this relationship see
Lyons, p. 35.
5
It is interesting to notice that even when feelings do appear to be

independent of context and judgment, a consideration of those feelings would still
not help to determine the emotion or even the feelings present.
We have already seen how it is possible to be anxious about the

significance of a pain, because one thinks it is a sign of the onslaught of a
fatal disease. Such anxiety would be defined by our belief about the pain,
and not by any pang which might occur apart from the pain. Indeed, even if
I felt no special pangs, I might still be said to be anxious. If pangs which I
recognize as being like those I might feel when anxious occurred when, for
example, I had just received news of some personal failure when I had
hoped for success, I would not say I was anxious and not disappointed. The
situation was one of disappointment, whether they were similar or not to
pangs of anxiety. (p. 98, my emphasis)
Even should it initially appear that a feeling is independent of judgment, still what
the feeling is a feeling of is not to be found in the feeling itself. For one’s beliefs
about the situation determine the emotion and, in turn, the feeling present.7 Feeling
remains dependent upon judgment.
7
One might argue that this conclusion is too strong, the fallacy of division. The emotion
and judgments are those of disappointment while the pang is not simply like one of anxiety but is
one of anxiety. This suggestion seems plausible if we are maintaining that the pang is not, after
all, relevant to the disappointment. What we have, then, is disappointment without any feeling—a
possibility admitted by Trigg— and quite incidentally a pang of anxiety. Yet given the
importance placed upon context how does one account for the identity of this “independent” pang
of anxiety? Appeal to how it feels, we learned above, is of no real help. More importantly, the
case we are discussing seems to be one in which the feeling remains intimately connected with
the disappointment. In this case, either the pang must really he that of anxiety or it is of
disappointment. Again, given his earlier remarks on pangs and context, it is clear that Trigg must
maintain that the feeling is one of disappointment. Indeed, the alternative, that we have
disapointment with a pang of anxiety as part of the disappointment, seems fairly incoherent. Thus
an apparent distinctiveness of feeling will not be sufficient to establish that said feeling is a
feeling of anxiety.
6
Some consensus concerning the dependency and judgmental theses

certainly exists.8 Without bothering ourselves further with the particular
subscribers to these views, let us see whether the theses are true.
II
One striking feature about emotion is that the cognition appropriate to a

given emotion may be overruled or trumped in such a fashion that the emotion
present is other than what the judgments would suggest. Instead, the emotion
present is what it is by virtue of the feelings present (the determinator thesis).
Take shame and embarrassment. Concerning the doing of something judged

to be bad, shame requires the judgment of responsibility whereas embarrassment
admits involvement but not responsibility.9 Yet I am often embarrassed by, not
ashamed of, things I know and take to be my fault, for example, through
carelessness spilling a drink over my host. Contrariwise, one can be ashamed
though realizing that the matter is not one’s fault. Lord Byron is said to have been
ashamed of his foot. He could have been so, though knowing that he was in no
way responsible. Similarly, one raped or otherwise abused could be ashamed,
though being well aware that the abuse was not his or her responsibility. In each
8
It should be observed that the adoption of the judgmental and dependency theses by
analytical philosophers is general rather than universal. For example, remarks J. Shaffer makes in
“An Assessment of Emotion,” American Philosophical Quarterly 20 (1983):161—62 suggest that
he holds neither of these theses.
9
See, for example, Bedford’s discussion of a Mr. Davies’s embarrassment rather than
shame upon discovering that he was the model for Peter Pan, E. Bedford, “Emotions,”
Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 1956—57, p. 116, or Solomon’s discussion of the
embarrassment or shame had if unknowingly versus knowingly going to a party with torn pants,
R. Solomon, The Passions (Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1977), p. 305.
7
case, the emotion that the judgments suggest is not present; and the way one
determines what emotion is present has to do with the way the thing feels.10
If this is right, then we have proof both that feelings in emotion need not be
dependent upon or secondary to the judgment(s) present and that feelings in
emotion may be independent and be determinators. This overthrows both the
dependency and judgmental theses. That the emotion present is determined by an
appeal to the nature of feelings in spite of judgments to the contrary shows how
significant the independency of feelings can be.
What might be said to avert these conclusions?
An analysis of the subjects’ judgments might help. One could argue that the
person who says that he/she is ashamed when clearly the situation and judgments
are those of embarrassment (or vice versa) lays claim to the emotion through (1)
conditioning, (2) the possession of contrary judgments, or (3) a muddled mind.11
Each option is meant to circumvent the objection to the judgmental and
dependency theses. Let us consider each in its turn.
Conditioning (1) suggests a case in which the person is ashamed for a good
period of time and then learns something which alters his or her judgment.
Although a change in judgment has occurred, the original emotion persists.
Conditioning, then, is meant to explain the continuance of the original emotion,
and thereby to explain how, say, a person remains ashamed, though now
judgments appropriate to embarrassment are made.
Although the explanation is plausible enough, it does not diminish the force
of the objection. First, it is not always going to be the case that a person ashamed
10
Elsewhere I have used this observation to object to cognitive analyses of emotion (“A
New View of Emotion,” forthcoming in American Philosophical Quarterly). Here I want to show
what role feelings can take when they are constituents of or relevant to emotion.
11
These explanations are adaptations of some remarks Lyons makes about the
appropriate analysis of reflex emotions (cf. pp. 76, 88—89).
8
though having judgments appropriate to embarrassment did change from

judgments appropriate to shame to judgments appropriate to embarrassment. For
example, Byron’s shame or my embarrassment do not rely on one having an
emotion corresponding to certain judgments, and then changing judgments but not
feelings or emotion. The explanation, then, is not universal in its scope. Second,
even when something like this does occur and we do want to give a role to
conditioning, this description, albeit correct, does not invalidate the objection. For
feelings still determine the emotion present in spite of judgments to the contrary.
The feelings are not dependent upon judgments; the feelings are independent and
determine the emotion.12 If anything, conditioning explains rather than explains
away the trumping by feelings.
Option (2) shows more promise. Two sets of contrary beliefs are held by
the person. One set of judgments, which evaluate the person as responsible (those
appropriate to shame), lead to the feeling and underlie the emotion, while he
(wrongly) supposes that it is the judgment that he is not responsible (the ones
presently “in mind”) that lead to the emotion. He is, then, self-deceived, a victim
of repression or unconscious beliefs, or some such thing. In these cases, it is right
to say that the person is ashamed but misleading to say that the judgments are
those of embarrassment. For the judgments that, in fact, cause the emotion and are
apposite are those of shame. That the emoter does not fully understand the
situation explains why he is misled and misleads us in holding that he does not
take himself to be responsible, but still is ashamed.
No doubt this explanation has its place. Indeed, we might later learn that
the person was only trying to convince himself. Really, deep down, he took
himself to be responsible, and that is what caused his emotion. In such cases,
12
A critic might suggest that this objection to the dependency thesis is epistemological
rather than ontological. However, the point is not simply that one knows that it is the emotion it is
by an appeal to feelings, but rather the feeling present determines the emotion present— and this
determinator is not dependent upon the other factors relevant to emotion.
9
option (2) serves us well, canceling our objections to the judgmental and
dependency theses.
Yet we cannot suppose that all cases will be resolved in this way. Where
the person never finds the “deep down” beliefs, insists even years later—and is
found to have no axes to grind— that he never took himself to be responsible, we
should accept his word. We have no reason to suppose that he must be wrong. The
only pull to the contrary is an inclination to combine a psycho analytic explanation
with the presupposition of a judgmental alignment. But we have no right so to
presuppose. For the judgmental alignment is under discussion here. Thus even
though the second option illuminates some cases, there is no reason to suppose it
illuminates all cases—and good reason to think that it does not, e.g., my own
embarrassment at spilling my drink through carelessness.
Where the option of being muddled (3) is not a further appeal to the second
explanation, it suggests either that the person has an inadequate grasp of the
language or that the person cannot recognize his own emotional state. Of the
former, there is no reason to doubt that such things occur. These occurrences, how
ever, are of little interest. The examples I have used to generate the problem for
the traditional analytic account of feelings have not relied on the subject being
linguistically inept. Of the latter, namely the inability to recognize one’s own state,
we do want to appeal to it. Should the person be extraordinarily agitated even for
one in such circumstances, should the person seem terribly confused, should there
be some deep rooted psychological problem, etc., we might surmise that he is
simply confused about his emotions. When so, even without hypothesizing
contrary sets of judgments, we might be justified in claiming that though he says
he is ashamed, really he is embarrassed.
These surmises, however, could be wrong. Although we can have evidence

to doubt his word, he remains in an advantageous position with respect to his
feelings, judgments, and emotion. At his disposal is powerful evidence with which
10
he can oppose our claims. As with the second explanation, if years from now he
maintains his position, then our presumption that it was really embarrassment
becomes quite implausible. Moreover, where the person is not confused, is not
extraordinarily agitated, etc., yet claims to be ashamed, there our doubts about his
ability to recognize his own emotional state are without justification. As before,
though we want to admit that the explanation is possible, we must insist that it will
not help with all the relevant cases.
While option one is unhelpful to subscribers of the dependency and

judgmental theses, options two and three do have application. Yet neither is
necessary, nor do the two suffice to explain all the relevant cases. For my
embarrassment, Bryon’s and the abused person’s shame need not be explained in
any of these ways. The appeal to a special explanation does not cancel the
objection. Feeling may trump judgment; the determinator thesis is true; the
supposition of the judgmental thesis and the dependency thesis is quite mistaken.
Hence we must give feelings a more significant role than heretofore granted—and
that is the end of the modern view about the nature of feelings in emotion.
Well, not quite. Those who claim that judgments do all the individuating
may simply deny the plausibility of the examples. The trumping by feeling is not
to be explained away: it is denied. If we try to be sensitive to our experience of
emotion, I think that this will be seen as a move of desperation. Nevertheless, this
course might be taken; the result would be contradiction but no argument. To help
us out of such a predicament, we must seek further demonstrations of the
independency of feeling. This will bolster our rejection of the judgmental and
dependency theses.
III
11
Suppose one made the evaluations relevant to grief and this leads to or
causes the person to feel vaguely as one does after an orgasm. Whatever is
experienced, it would hardly count as grief. The judgmental thesis is wrong,
mistakenly identifying the feelings, and even the emotion, as being of grief.
The reason we are reluctant to call this emotion grief is that it does not have
the right “feel” about it. Evidently, the feeling of grief is identifiable enough such
that one can say: “That is not the feeling of grief, whereas something like this is.”
Moreover, the feeling is independent enough and significant enough to make us
discount the emotion as one of grief.
One’s abilities here rest on the nature of the feelings, not the context, not
the factual or evaluative judgments, not the behavior, not the symptoms. The
judgmental and dependency theses must make room for an independency thesis.
Although one might respond that such cases do not, as a matter of fact, occur, this
will not do. For they do occur, though perhaps in a less extreme fashion.
Moreover, there is no conceptual difficulty with their occurrence, even if it has not
happened yet.
We should notice that this argument does not rest on a peculiarity of grief.
Take a much simpler case. If we assume Aristotle’s characterization of envy and
indignation, then the former is a certain pain at the good fortune of another, while
the latter is a certain pain at another’s undeserved good fortune. Were one pleased,
or at least not pained, one would not speak of envy or indignation. Again, rather
than expecting judgments always to carry the load, we must be more sensitive than
the modern tradition has been to the place and nature of feelings.
Now perhaps the force of these objections can be nullified with a slight
modification in the tradition’s position. Instead of speaking of the feelings that
arise as a result of certain judgments, one might speak of the feelings “typically
associated” with the relevant evaluation. Feelings of grief are “typically
associated” with judgments of grief, whereas vague post—orgasmic feelings are
12
not. Thus one need not maintain that the feelings (described above) are those of
grief, or that the emotion is grief. Furthermore, the case of shame/embarrassment
could be dealt with in a similar fashion. Since shame feelings are not “typically
associated” with judgments of embarrassment, one need not insist that
embarrassment and feelings of embarrassment are present. With only a slight
modification in the account, we may be able to preserve the modern analytic
conception of feelings.
But this modification will not really do. First, though one avoids insisting,
contrary to fact, that the emotion is grief or embarrassment, one is left unable to
identify the emotional state. This may be apt when judgments of grief spawn
feelings similar to those felt after an orgasm. However, regarding
shame/embarrassment, the inability is a liability. For the point there was not
simply that it was misguided to insist that the emotion was embarrassment. Rather
the emotion was identified as shame. The modification, then, fails to account for
the trumping of judgments by feeling, and thereby fails to account for all that it
should.13
Second, and most important, the modified analysis works only through an
unacknowledged assumption that the identity of feelings can be independent of the
context, judgments, behavior, symptoms, etc., of emotion. For the modified
analysis must assume that feelings and (given shame/embarrassment) the
corresponding emotion can be individuated (epistemologically and ontologically)
in terms of a consideration of the feelings themselves: otherwise one is in no
position to identify or distinguish the atypical from the typical cases. That is, the
13
One might, then, take the “typically associated” claim differently, arguing that since
feelings of embarrassment are typically associated with these judgments, the emotion is
embarrassment—no matter what the individual happens to feel at the time. That is to reassert
something like the position considered in the earlier discussion of shame/embarrassment. It
simply overrides what the person feels and says. Moreover, it revives an absurdity by implying
that judgments of grief which spawn post-orgasmic feelings constitute grief. Thus this revision is
not plausible.
13
feeling would be grief (or embarrassment) unless feeling does not depend on its
context, surroundings, causal ancestry, etc. for its identity. Since the feeling is not
grief (or embarrassment), the identity of the feeling must depend on the nature of
feeling itself.
Thus while the modification of the theory seemed slight, in fact, it is quite
radical, abandoning both the judgmental and the dependency theses. And these
theses are what modern analytical philosophers are keen to maintain in their two-
part solution.14 Certainly, we must conclude that what a feeling is a feeling of may
well have to do with the nature of the feeling itself. The tradition’s espoused view
still fails.
To avoid any confusion about the role of context, etc., let me observe that it
is no wish of mine to deny that the context of the emotion may be necessary in
order to learn which feelings are which (a genetic remark). Nonetheless, my
arguments are designed to show that the identity and identification of certain
feelings as being of a certain sort and even emotion is independent.15 Feelings can
be ontologically independent.
The conclusions we reach are the following. Whether an emotion is present

and what it is may rest not only on the assumption of certain cognitions (where
appropriate) and the presence of a feeling, but also upon the presence (where
appropriate) of an apposite feeling. Feelings are wrongly portrayed as having to be
secondary and dependent.
14
I remind you of the (earlier quoted) remarks of Kenny concerning the difference
between identity of substances in laboratory experiments and identity in emotion, and Lyons’s
remarks on whether the emotion is fear or love or embarrassment, and Trigg’s concern for
whether the pang is one of anxiety or disappointment.
15
Because modern analytical philosophy holds that judgments determine the emotion and
feeling present, they do not allow themselves to distinguish adequately the questions “Of what
sort is the present feeling?” and “To which emotion does the present feeling belong?”—or at least
they take the latter question to be prior to the former, to be determined by an appeal to judgments,
and to answer the former. I am suggesting that this is all quite mistaken.
14
These conclusions find further confirmation through the following thought

experiment. Even if we or Martians or any other thing always felt as one does after
an orgasm as a result of making the evaluations relevant to grief, this still would
not be grief. We probably would have an emotion, but not grief, not even grief by
another name. This emotion is conceptually distinct from grief because part of the
concept of grief involves what we call feelings of grief, not simply feelings.
‘Feelings of grief’ does not pick out whatever happens or typically arises when
making judgments of grief, but may pick out an independently identifiable and
apposite (set of) feeling(s).16 Thus the picture modern analyses offer of feelings in
emotion, even the modified version, is surely false. Feelings need not be
secondary and dependent upon judgments or anything else. Their place in emotion
may be wholly independent, having a nature of their own. What is more, that
nature may determine the emotion present. Indeed, it may trump what the
judgments would suggest.17
IV
Certain views popular among philosophers, though not directly involved in

the issues here, could undercut our conclusions. For example, some argue that we
cannot attain certain concepts if the concepts refer only to feelings. For a feeling is
16
Again, these arguments do not rely on a peculiarity of grief. For though this may he a
particularly convincing example, the same point can be made concerning embarrassment, anger,
etc.
17
Here and elsewhere I use the word ‘may’. For (1) I do not deny that sometimes feelings
are classed by virtue of the judgments, behavior, etc. For example, being in love seems to admit
quite a number of different feelings. Most anything that comes along with the rest of the structure
will be considered a feeling of love. Although Polonius may have been mistaken about whether
Hamlet’s feelings were those of love, he was not mistaken about feelings of love. Moreover, (2)
even in emotions such as grief, in which certain feelings are apposite and independent, that itself
does not mean that these feelings need be the only ones relevant or even that such independent
feelings must always be present.
15
something private; and neither teacher nor learner could be certain that the right
feeling was had while learning the expression. The absence of a public check on
feeling is fatal. Thus any rejection of the dependency thesis—though not
necessarily the judgmental thesis—is wrongheaded, because it tries to give
feelings an independent identity and recognizable status.
This is a version of the private language argument, holding, for example,

that in regard to the concept of pain there has to be something that is publicly
observable if we are to have (and given that we do have) the concept pain in the
language. This argument has been used by Bedford to show that feelings in
emotion must be incidental and dependent. If this is right, then my analysis is
mistaken.
The private language argument, however, has received a good deal of

inspection and criticism. I shall discuss one line of thought that is particularly
useful given my purposes.18 We begin with pain and then move to emotion.
Trigg distinguishes the sensation of pain from the behavioral distress

common to pain. The sensation of pain is held to be of a certain quality. That there
is a difference between the distress and the sensation of pain is clear since not
everything that distresses is painful. For example, electrical shocks from faulty
circuits certainly distress, yet they are not properly included within our concept of
pain. For they do not have the right feel about them. Conversely, not everything
that is painful need distress. For example, some medical patients who are not
distressed do report the sensation of pain when asked to report their sensations.19
18
See Trigg, esp. pp. 64-79.
19
Since it is agreed that knowledge here is immediate, when the witnesses are reliable,
unconfused, and sincere, we must assume that it is pain that they feel. It should be noted that
feeling for the pain of an aching tooth and, perhaps, the pleasures of masochism seem to be
different types of cases in which the painful sensation and the distress are not aligned.
16
With this distinction in mind, one can respond to the private language
argument’s concern for and account of the language of pain by claiming that we
can and do learn the language of pain just because we are typically distressed at
pain. Although this connection is contingent, it remains the usual case. A child
acquires pain language and the concept of pain through the conjunction of pain
sensation with distress. Having acquired the concept of pain, being able to
recognize the pain quality, one can, on touching a faulty electrical connection, find
oneself quite distressed yet note that the sensation is not quite that of pain. In
contrast, someone congenitally insensitive to pain cannot un derstand pain as
anything but being distressed. Such a person should (and does) fail to appreciate
electrical shocks not being pains. Thus we can have the sensation of pain (and
thereby the pain) without the distress, or the distress without the sensation.
Trigg’s argument is correct, keeping distinct what is necessary for one to

learn the concept (where a sort of dependency seems to apply) versus what must
be present for the concept to be fully in place (where such a dependency need not
follow).
These considerations can be applied to the role feeling must take in

emotion. To the claim that there cannot be an independence of feeling and the
claim that matters must always depend upon behavior in a context, we reply that it
is certainly true that through behavior in context (like the distress), we first learn
to identify feelings of, say, anger (like the pain sensation).20 However, from this it
no more follows that anger must not involve the feeling and/or must not be
identified with or by the feeling but rather must (in part) be constituted by the
behavior and/or must be identified with or through the behavior or some other
factor, than it followed that pain must not be the sensation and/or must not be
identified with or by the sensation but rather must (in part) be constituted by the
20
I choose behavior in context only to keep the analogy with Trigg’s discussion. One can
substitute judgments, physiological changes, etc., here.
17
distress and/or must (in part) be identified with or by the distress. Of course, my
point is not to suggest that emotion is feeling or that distress is not part of our
concept of pain. Rather I want to show that the private language problem does not
prevent the pain being the sensation or the emotion being the feeling, but even
more importantly, to show that we have been given no reason to believe that
feelings need adopt the dependent role in emotion that they have too often been
cast in.
It seems, then, that the objection centered round the idea of a private
language fails to detract from our earlier analysis of feelings in emotion. Not only
can feelings have an independent nature of their own, but also they can play an
individuating role.
Gilbert Ryle, one of the originators of the modern analytic conception of

feelings, also offers considerations which would have us revise our analysis. Ryle
holds that feelings do not come prelabelled as to what they are feelings of. One
labels them as feelings of something only by sorting out a cause, e.g., the pin
sticking in the pained thumb. Hence we find the dependency thesis combined here
with a more general causal theory rather than the more specific judgmental thesis.
But the point here being made is that whether we are attaching a sensation
to a physiological condition or attaching a feeling to an emotional
condition, we are applying a causal hypothesis. Pains do not arrive hall-
marked ‘rheumatic’, nor do throbs arrive already hall-marked
‘compassionate’. (p. 105)21
21
G. Ryle, The Concept of Mind (New York: Barnes & Noble, 1949).
18
Of course, there is a trivial sense in which nothing comes with a label

attached. After all, labels are ours to give. But clearly this is not what Ryle is
rejecting when he speaks of the “already hall-marked.” Rather, Ryle wants to
suggest that any sensation’s or feeling’s identity is dependent upon its cause. Now
we can agree that finding a needle in oneself, associating it with pain, relieving it
by sucking seems to be a matter of identity through causality. Ryle’s claim,
however, is meant to cover all sensations and feelings. I suggest his conclusion is
hasty.
Trigg observes that shooting or stabbing pains are not matters of causal
hypothesis. For we do not have to know what it is like to have been stabbed or
shot in order to properly characterize a present pain as shooting or stabbing.22
Shooting or stabbing describes how the pains feel, their nature. It is this nature that
determines how they are described. This is considerably different from the way a
pin in the thumb is meant to yield a causal hypothesis. Thus we can say, contrary
to Ryle, that some feelings do come hall-marked, that some feelings are
independent.
Therefore we need not assume that the feelings involved in emotions are
dependent. To return to our earlier example, a feeling of grief does not stand as
such only because it is caused by evaluations appropriate to grief or because it
arises in settings of grief, but because this feeling is apposite to grief. And this is
but another way of supporting our conclusion that should Martians feel quite
tickled upon making the evaluative judgments appropri ate to grief, we might not
deny that they experience emotion, though we would deny that they experienced
grief. Equally, our considerations of shame and embarrassment indicate that there
too apposite feelings come hall-marked.
22
Similar points can be made about nipping, biting, racking, and piercing pains.
19
Now some qualify Ryle’s position that all sensations are hall marked
through causal hypothesis. Taking Ryle to be on the right track, Lyons adds that
some of the language is loaded, i.e., tacitly revealing hints as to what sort of thing
the feeling so labelled is likely to be of.23 So, we call something a “downcast”
feeling because we have already guessed that the context is, say, remorse.
Certainly, this sort of thing occurs with respect to our language of feelings
and sensations. However, if Lyons maintains (as seems to be the case) that the
“loadedness” does not reflect on the nature of the feeling itself, then we must
consider whether his conclusion is hasty. Even should we grant that the feeling
called “downcast” is so called through tacit reference to its context, that does not
rule out others being labelled by reference to the way they feel— as Trigg’s
considerations on shooting and stabbing have shown, and as our reflections on
feelings of grief (and, we can add, joy, elation) suggest. Indeed, we may ask
whether the “downcast” feeling or a “throb” or a “pang” is found in other
emotions or sensations, though perhaps under a different description. If they are
not, then these feelings are candidates for an analysis analogous to that of shooting
and stabbing pains. And I should have thought that the pang often spoken of in
grief is like this.
We should appreciate (1) that some of our language of the felt is dependent
for its identity on its cause, (2) that some makes tacit reference to its context, (3)
that some is descriptive of the feeling, not parasitic or causally hall-marked. The
richness we see enhances our conclusion that individuation need not solely rely
upon judgments. It often relies in a nontrivial way upon what is felt.
There is another point to be made concerning Ryle and the tradition

following him. Even if we were to accept that the genesis of the language of
feeling arises entirely through the context or cause of the emotion, it would not
follow that it remains tied permanently, reduced to a secondary, consequential
23
Lyons, p. 136—37.
20
role. Even were feelings genetically on the coat-tails of the context, they would
not have to stay there. As we saw when considering the private language
argument, having learnt the language one would be able to do some distinguishing
between the cases (unless one just stipulates that there never is or can be a
consistently recognizable distinction in feeling among any emotions) in terms
other than context, behavior, and judgments. We are in a position to say: “This is
not grief—though the judgments may be right, the feeling just isn’t.” Too often
modern thinkers have supposed that an apparently secondary role for feelings in
the genesis of the child’s language entails a secondary role ontologically. But there
is no such implication.
VI
If it is now agreed that regardless of context certain feelings can be ruled

out as feelings of grief while others are allowed to be appropriate, then we admit
that certain feelings are identifiable through their own nature. They are not what
they are simply through the judgments they may be associated with or the context
in which they arise. This can occur at a rather general level: grief does not have
the feelings present in an orgasm. As well, it can occur at a much more specific
level: this feeling is not that of shame but of embarrassment. It is clear that not just
any feeling when combined with and caused by the relevant judgment will count
as appropriate to remorse, rage, despair, grief, joy, sadness, fear, shame, delight,
etc. Moreover, the feeling itself may deter mine the emotion present.
The arguments I have offered do not seem to rely on the emotions cited
being somehow peculiar or eccentric. They tell us something about feelings and
emotion, not just an odd one or two. What they tell us is that the judgmental and
dependency theses are far too strong. We must allow for the independency of
certain feelings.
21
Now in allowing that feelings may be ontologically and epistemologically

an individuating factor, we need not doubt that there is much to be gained by
referring to factors other than feelings. Much is to be learned from context,
behavior, judgments, etc. It would appear that, in some cases, e.g., being perturbed
or cross or peeved or upset, if there is any difference here, the presence of a certain
feeling is not enough to convince us that one emotion is present rather than
another. In addition to the appropriate feeling, judgment may also be necessary
and the determinator of the emotion present. For all that, the point remains that the
nature of feelings present need not be secondary or derivative, and that feelings
seem capable on some occasions of trumping judgments. Certainly the modern
analytic view has drawn too simple a sketch.
22
Untitled Document
BIOCHEMISTRY DEFINED

Biochemistry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Biochemistry
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Biochemistry is the study of the chemical processes in living organisms. It deals with the
structure and function of cellular components such as proteins, carbohydrates, lipids,
nucleic acids and other biomolecules.
Among the vast number of different biomolecules, many are complex and large
molecules (called polymers), which are composed of similar repeating subunits (called
[1]
monomers). Each class of polymeric biomolecule has a different set of subunit types.
For example, a protein is a polymer whose subunits are selected from a set of 20 or more
amino acids. Biochemistry studies the chemical properties of important biological
molecules, like proteins, and in particular the chemistry of enzyme-catalyzed reactions.
The biochemistry of cell metabolism and the endocrine system has been extensively
described. Other areas of biochemistry include the genetic code (DNA, RNA), protein
synthesis, cell membrane transport, and signal transduction.
Since all known life forms that are still alive today are descended from the same common
[2][3]
ancestor, they have generally similar biochemistries.
It remains unknown whether alternative types of biochemistries are possible, or practical,
given the chemical elements composing the matter of the Universe. An emerging thesis,
called "carbon chauvinism," holds that only carbon-based compounds are available to be
part of a real biochemistry.
file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Biochemistry.htm (1 of 24)1/28/2010 4:54:07 PM

Contents
● 1 History
● 2 Monomers and Polymers
❍ 2.1 Carbohydrates
❍ 2.2 Lipids
❍ 2.3 Proteins
❍ 2.4 Nucleic Acids
● 3 Carbohydrates
❍ 3.1 Monosaccharides
❍ 3.2 Disaccharides
❍ 3.3 Oligosaccharides and polysaccharides
❍ 3.4 Use of carbohydrates as an energy source
■ 3.4.1 Glycolysis (anaerobic)
■ 3.4.2 Aerobic
■ 3.4.3 Gluconeogenesis
● 4 Proteins
● 5 Lipids
● 6 Nucleic acids
● 7 Relationship to other "molecular-scale" biological sciences
● 8 See also
❍ 8.1 Lists
❍ 8.2 Related topics
● 9 References

● 10 Further reading
● 11 External links
History
Main article: History of biochemistry
Originally, it was generally believed that life was not subject to the laws of science the
way non-life was. It was thought that only living beings could produce the molecules of
life (from other, previously existing biomolecules). Then, in 1828, Friedrich Wöhler
published a paper on the synthesis of urea, proving that organic compounds can be
[4][5]
created artificially.
The dawn of biochemistry may have been the discovery of the first enzyme, diastase
(today called amylase), in 1833 by Anselme Payen. Eduard Buchner contributed the first
demonstration of a complex biochemical process outside of a cell in 1896: alcoholic
fermentation in cell extracts of yeast. Although the term “biochemistry” seems to have
been first used in 1882, it is generally accepted that the formal coinage of biochemistry
occurred in 1903 by Carl Neuberg, a German chemist. Previously, this area would have
been referred to as physiological chemistry. Since then, biochemistry has advanced,
especially since the mid-20th century, with the development of new techniques such as
chromatography, X-ray diffraction, dual polarisation interferometry, NMR spectroscopy,
radioisotopic labeling, electron microscopy and molecular dynamics simulations. These
techniques allowed for the discovery and detailed analysis of many molecules and
metabolic pathways of the cell, such as glycolysis and the Krebs cycle (citric acid cycle).

Another significant historic event in biochemistry is the discovery of the gene and its role
in the transfer of information in the cell. This part of biochemistry is often called molecular
biology. In the 1950s, James D. Watson, Francis Crick, Rosalind Franklin, and Maurice
Wilkins were instrumental in solving DNA structure and suggesting its relationship with
genetic transfer of information. In 1958, George Beadle and Edward Tatum received the
Nobel Prize for work in fungi showing that one gene produces one enzyme. In 1988,
Colin Pitchfork was the first person convicted of murder with DNA evidence, which led to
growth of forensic science. More recently, Andrew Z. Fire and Craig C. Mello received the
2006 Nobel Prize for discovering the role of RNA interference (RNAi), in the silencing of
gene expression
Today, there are three main types of biochemistry. Plant biochemistry involves the study
of the biochemistry of autotrophic organisms such as photosynthesis and other plant
specific biochemical processes. General biochemistry encompasses both plant and
animal biochemistry. Human/medical/medicinal biochemistry focuses on the biochemistry
of humans and medical illnesses.
Monomers and Polymers

Main articles: Monomer and Polymer
Monomers and polymers are a structural basis in which the four main macromolecules
(carbohydrates, lipids, proteins, and nucleic acids), or biopolymers, of biochemistry are
based on. Monomers are smaller micromolecules that are put together to make
macromolecules. Polymers are those macromolecules that are created when monomers
are synthesized together. When they are synthesized, the two molecules undergo a

process called dehydration synthesis.
Carbohydrates
Main articles: Carbohydrates, Monosaccharides, Disaccharides, and
Polysaccharides
A molecule of sucrose (glucose + fructose), a disaccharide.
Carbohydrates have monomers called monosaccharides. Some of these
monosaccharides include glucose (C6H12O6), fructose (C6H12O6), and deoxyribose
(C5H10O4). When two monosaccharides undergo dehydration synthesis, water is
produced, as two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom are lost from the two
monosaccharides' hydroxyl group.
Lipids
Main articles: Lipids, Glycerol, and Fatty acids
A triglyceride with a glycerol molecule on the left and three fatty acids coming off it.
Lipids are usually made up of a molecule of glycerol and other molecules. In triglycerides,
or the main lipid, there is one molecule of glycerol, and three fatty acids. Fatty acids are

considered the monomer in that case, and could be saturated or unsaturated. Lipids,
especially phospholipids, are also used in different pharmaceutical products, either as co-
solubilisers e.g. in Parenteral infusions or else as drug carrier components (e.g. in a
Liposome or Transfersome).
Proteins
Main articles: Proteins and Amino Acids
The general structure of an α-amino acid, with the amino group on the left and the carboxyl
group on the right.
Proteins are macro biopolymers, and have monomers of amino acids. There are 20
standard amino acids, and they contain a carboxyl group, an amino group, and a side
chain (or an "R" group). The "R" group is what makes each amino acid different, and the
properties of the side chains greatly influence the overall three-dimensional confirmation
of a protein. When Amino acids combine, they form a special bond called a peptide bond,
and become a polypeptide, or a protein.
Nucleic Acids
Main articles: Nucleic acid, DNA, RNA, and Nucleotides

The structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), the picture shows the monomers being put
together.
Nucleic acids are very important in biochemistry, as they are what make up DNA,
something all cellular organism use to store their genetic information. The most common
nucleic acids are deoxyribonucleic acid and ribonucleic acid. Their monomers are called
nucleotides. The most common nucleotides are called adenine, cytosine, guanine,
thymine, and uracil. Adenine binds with thymine and uracil, thymine only binds with
adenine. Cytosine and guanine can only bind with each other.
Carbohydrates
Main article: Carbohydrate
The function of carbohydrates includes energy storage and providing structure. Sugars
are carbohydrates, but not all carbohydrates are sugars. There are more carbohydrates
on Earth than any other known type of biomolecule; they are used to store energy and
genetic information, as well as play important roles in cell to cell interactions and

communications.
Monosaccharides
Glucose
The simplest type of carbohydrate is a monosaccharide, which among other properties
contains carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, mostly in a ratio of 1:2:1 (generalized formula
C H2 O , where n is at least 3). Glucose, one of the most important carbohydrates, is an

n n n
example of a monosaccharide. So is fructose, the sugar that gives fruits their sweet taste.
Some carbohydrates (especially after condensation to oligo- and polysaccharides)
contain less carbon relative to H and O, which still are present in 2:1 (H:O) ratio.
Monosaccharides can be grouped into aldoses (having an aldehyde group at the end of
the chain, e. g. glucose) and ketoses (having a keto group in their chain; e. g. fructose).
Both aldoses and ketoses occur in an equilibrium between the open-chain forms and
(starting with chain lengths of C4) cyclic forms. These are generated by bond formation
between one of the hydroxyl groups of the sugar chain with the carbon of the aldehyde or
keto group to form a hemiacetal bond. This leads to saturated five-membered (in
furanoses) or six-membered (in pyranoses) heterocyclic rings containing one O as
heteroatom.
Disaccharides

Sucrose: ordinary table sugar and probably the most familiar carbohydrate.
Two monosaccharides can be joined together using dehydration synthesis, in which a
hydrogen atom is removed from the end of one molecule and a hydroxyl group (—OH) is
removed from the other; the remaining residues are then attached at the sites from which
the atoms were removed. The H—OH or H2O is then released as a molecule of water,
hence the term dehydration. The new molecule, consisting of two monosaccharides, is
called a disaccharide and is conjoined together by a glycosidic or ether bond. The
reverse reaction can also occur, using a molecule of water to split up a disaccharide and
break the glycosidic bond; this is termed hydrolysis. The most well-known disaccharide is
sucrose, ordinary sugar (in scientific contexts, called table sugar or cane sugar to
differentiate it from other sugars). Sucrose consists of a glucose molecule and a fructose
molecule joined together. Another important disaccharide is lactose, consisting of a
glucose molecule and a galactose molecule. As most humans age, the production of
lactase, the enzyme that hydrolyzes lactose back into glucose and galactose, typically
decreases. This results in lactase deficiency, also called lactose intolerance.
Sugar polymers are characterised by having reducing or non-reducing ends. A reducing
end of a carbohydrate is a carbon atom which can be in equilibrium with the open-chain
aldehyde or keto form. If the joining of monomers takes place at such a carbon atom, the
free hydroxy group of the pyranose or furanose form is exchanged with an OH-side chain

of another sugar, yielding a full acetal. This prevents opening of the chain to the aldehyde
or keto form and renders the modified residue non-reducing. Lactose contains a reducing
end at its glucose moiety, whereas the galactose moiety form a full acetal with the C4-OH
group of glucose. Saccharose does not have a reducing end because of full acetal
formation between the aldehyde carbon of glucose (C1) and the keto carbon of fructose
(C2).
Oligosaccharides and polysaccharides
Cellulose as polymer of β-D-glucose
When a few (around three to six) monosaccharides are joined together, it is called an
oligosaccharide (oligo- meaning "few"). These molecules tend to be used as markers and
signals, as well as having some other uses. Many monosaccharides joined together
make a polysaccharide. They can be joined together in one long linear chain, or they may
be branched. Two of the most common polysaccharides are cellulose and glycogen, both
consisting of repeating glucose monomers.
● Cellulose is made by plants and is an important structural component of their cell
walls. Humans can neither manufacture nor digest it.
● Glycogen, on the other hand, is an animal carbohydrate; humans and other animals
use it as a form of energy storage.

Use of carbohydrates as an energy source
See also carbohydrate metabolism
Glucose is the major energy source in most life forms. For instance, polysaccharides are
broken down into their monomers (glycogen phosphorylase removes glucose residues
from glycogen). Disaccharides like lactose or sucrose are cleaved into their two
component monosaccharides.
Glycolysis (anaerobic)
Glucose is mainly metabolized by a very important ten-step pathway called glycolysis, the
net result of which is to break down one molecule of glucose into two molecules of
pyruvate; this also produces a net two molecules of ATP, the energy currency of cells,
along with two reducing equivalents in the form of converting NAD+ to NADH. This does
not require oxygen; if no oxygen is available (or the cell cannot use oxygen), the NAD is
restored by converting the pyruvate to lactate (lactic acid) (e. g. in humans) or to ethanol
plus carbon dioxide (e. g. in yeast). Other monosaccharides like galactose and fructose
can be converted into intermediates of the glycolytic pathway.
Aerobic
In aerobic cells with sufficient oxygen, like most human cells, the pyruvate is further
metabolized. It is irreversibly converted to acetyl-CoA, giving off one carbon atom as the
waste product carbon dioxide, generating another reducing equivalent as NADH. The two
molecules acetyl-CoA (from one molecule of glucose) then enter the citric acid cycle,
producing two more molecules of ATP, six more NADH molecules and two reduced (ubi)

quinones (via FADH2 as enzyme-bound cofactor), and releasing the remaining carbon
atoms as carbon dioxide. The produced NADH and quinol molecules then feed into the
enzyme complexes of the respiratory chain, an electron transport system transferring the
electrons ultimately to oxygen and conserving the released energy in the form of a proton
gradient over a membrane (inner mitochondrial membrane in eukaryotes). Thereby,
oxygen is reduced to water and the original electron acceptors NAD+ and quinone are
regenerated. This is why humans breathe in oxygen and breathe out carbon dioxide. The
energy released from transferring the electrons from high-energy states in NADH and
quinol is conserved first as proton gradient and converted to ATP via ATP synthase. This
generates an additional 28 molecules of ATP (24 from the 8 NADH + 4 from the 2
quinols), totaling to 32 molecules of ATP conserved per degraded glucose (two from
glycolysis + two from the citrate cycle). It is clear that using oxygen to completely oxidize
glucose provides an organism with far more energy than any oxygen-independent
metabolic feature, and this is thought to be the reason why complex life appeared only
after Earth's atmosphere accumulated large amounts of oxygen.
Gluconeogenesis
Main article: Gluconeogenesis
In vertebrates, vigorously contracting skeletal muscles (during weightlifting or sprinting,
for example) do not receive enough oxygen to meet the energy demand, and so they shift
to anaerobic metabolism, converting glucose to lactate. The liver regenerates the
glucose, using a process called gluconeogenesis. This process is not quite the opposite
of glycolysis, and actually requires three times the amount of energy gained from

glycolysis (six molecules of ATP are used, compared to the two gained in glycolysis).
Analogous to the above reactions, the glucose produced can then undergo glycolysis in
tissues that need energy, be stored as glycogen (or starch in plants), or be converted to
other monosaccharides or joined into di- or oligosaccharides. The combined pathways of
glycolysis during exercise, lactate's crossing via the bloodstream to the liver, subsequent
gluconeogenesis and release of glucose into the bloodstream is called the Cori cycle.
Proteins
Main article: Protein
A schematic of hemoglobin. The red and blue ribbons represent the protein globin; the green
structures are the heme groups.
Like carbohydrates, some proteins perform largely structural roles. For instance,
movements of the proteins actin and myosin ultimately are responsible for the contraction
of skeletal muscle. One property many proteins have is that they specifically bind to a
certain molecule or class of molecules—they may be extremely selective in what they
bind. Antibodies are an example of proteins that attach to one specific type of molecule.
In fact, the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), which uses antibodies, is

currently one of the most sensitive tests modern medicine uses to detect various
biomolecules. Probably the most important proteins, however, are the enzymes. These
molecules recognize specific reactant molecules called substrates; they then catalyze the
reaction between them. By lowering the activation energy, the enzyme speeds up that
reaction by a rate of 1011 or more: a reaction that would normally take over 3,000 years
to complete spontaneously might take less than a second with an enzyme. The enzyme
itself is not used up in the process, and is free to catalyze the same reaction with a new
set of substrates. Using various modifiers, the activity of the enzyme can be regulated,
enabling control of the biochemistry of the cell as a whole.
In essence, proteins are chains of amino acids. An amino acid consists of a carbon atom
bound to four groups. One is an amino group, —NH2, and one is a carboxylic acid group,
—COOH (although these exist as —NH3+ and —COO− under physiologic conditions).
The third is a simple hydrogen atom. The fourth is commonly denoted "—R" and is
different for each amino acid. There are twenty standard amino acids. Some of these
have functions by themselves or in a modified form; for instance, glutamate functions as
an important neurotransmitter.
Generic amino acids (1) in neutral form, (2) as they exist physiologically, and (3) joined
together as a dipeptide.
Amino acids can be joined together via a peptide bond. In this dehydration synthesis, a

water molecule is removed and the peptide bond connects the nitrogen of one amino
acid's amino group to the carbon of the other's carboxylic acid group. The resulting
molecule is called a dipeptide, and short stretches of amino acids (usually, fewer than
around thirty) are called peptides or polypeptides. Longer stretches merit the title
proteins. As an example, the important blood serum protein albumin contains 585 amino
acid residues.
The structure of proteins is traditionally described in a hierarchy of four levels. The
primary structure of a protein simply consists of its linear sequence of amino acids; for
instance, "alanine-glycine-tryptophan-serine-glutamate-asparagine-glycine-lysine-…".
Secondary structure is concerned with local morphology. Some combinations of amino
acids will tend to curl up in a coil called an α-helix or into a sheet called a β-sheet; some
α-helixes can be seen in the hemoglobin schematic above. Tertiary structure is the entire
three-dimensional shape of the protein. This shape is determined by the sequence of
amino acids. In fact, a single change can change the entire structure. The alpha chain of
hemoglobin contains 146 amino acid residues; substitution of the glutamate residue at
position 6 with a valine residue changes the behavior of hemoglobin so much that it
results in sickle-cell disease. Finally quaternary structure is concerned with the structure
of a protein with multiple peptide subunits, like hemoglobin with its four subunits. Not all
proteins have more than one subunit.
Ingested proteins are usually broken up into single amino acids or dipeptides in the small
intestine, and then absorbed. They can then be joined together to make new proteins.
Intermediate products of glycolysis, the citric acid cycle, and the pentose phosphate

pathway can be used to make all twenty amino acids, and most bacteria and plants
possess all the necessary enzymes to synthesize them. Humans and other mammals,
however, can only synthesize half of them. They cannot synthesize isoleucine, leucine,
lysine, methionine, phenylalanine, threonine, tryptophan, and valine. These are the
essential amino acids, since it is essential to ingest them. Mammals do possess the
enzymes to synthesize alanine, asparagine, aspartate, cysteine, glutamate, glutamine,
glycine, proline, serine, and tyrosine, the nonessential amino acids. While they can
synthesize arginine and histidine, they cannot produce it in sufficient amounts for young,
growing animals, and so these are often considered essential amino acids.
If the amino group is removed from an amino acid, it leaves behind a carbon skeleton
called an α-keto acid. Enzymes called transaminases can easily transfer the amino group
from one amino acid (making it an α-keto acid) to another α-keto acid (making it an
amino acid). This is important in the biosynthesis of amino acids, as for many of the
pathways, intermediates from other biochemical pathways are converted to the α-keto
acid skeleton, and then an amino group is added, often via transamination. The amino
acids may then be linked together to make a protein.
A similar process is used to break down proteins. It is first hydrolyzed into its component
amino acids. Free ammonia (NH3), existing as the ammonium ion (NH4+) in blood, is toxic
to life forms. A suitable method for excreting it must therefore exist. Different strategies
have evolved in different animals, depending on the animals' needs. Unicellular
organisms, of course, simply release the ammonia into the environment. Similarly, bony
fish can release the ammonia into the water where it is quickly diluted. In general,
mammals convert the ammonia into urea, via the urea cycle.

Lipids
Main article: Lipid
The term lipid comprises a diverse range of molecules and to some extent is a catchall
for relatively water-insoluble or nonpolar compounds of biological origin, including waxes,
fatty acids, fatty-acid derived phospholipids, sphingolipids, glycolipids and terpenoids (e.
g. retinoids and steroids). Some lipids are linear aliphatic molecules, while others have
ring structures. Some are aromatic, while others are not. Some are flexible, while others
are rigid.
Most lipids have some polar character in addition to being largely nonpolar. Generally,
the bulk of their structure is nonpolar or hydrophobic ("water-fearing"), meaning that it
does not interact well with polar solvents like water. Another part of their structure is polar
or hydrophilic ("water-loving") and will tend to associate with polar solvents like water.
This makes them amphiphilic molecules (having both hydrophobic and hydrophilic
portions). In the case of cholesterol, the polar group is a mere -OH (hydroxyl or alcohol).
In the case of phospholipids, the polar groups are considerably larger and more polar, as
described below.
Lipids are an integral part of our daily diet. Most oils and milk products that we use for
cooking and eating like butter, cheese, ghee etc, are composed of fats. Vegetable oils are
rich in various polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA). Lipid-containing foods undergo
digestion within the body and are broken into fatty acids and glycerol, which are the final
degradation products of fats and lipids.

Nucleic acids
Main article: Nucleic acid
A nucleic acid is a complex, high-molecular-weight biochemical macromolecule
composed of nucleotide chains that convey genetic information. The most common
nucleic acids are deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and ribonucleic acid (RNA). Nucleic acids
are found in all living cells and viruses. Aside from the genetic material of the cell, nucleic
acids often play a role as second messengers, as well as forming the base molecule for
adenosine triphosphate, the primary energy-carrier molecule found in all living organisms.
Nucleic acid, so called because of its prevalence in cellular nuclei, is the generic name of
the family of biopolymers. The monomers are called nucleotides, and each consists of
three components: a nitrogenous heterocyclic base (either a purine or a pyrimidine), a
pentose sugar, and a phosphate group. Different nucleic acid types differ in the specific
sugar found in their chain (e.g. DNA or deoxyribonucleic acid contains 2-deoxyriboses).
Also, the nitrogenous bases possible in the two nucleic acids are different: adenine,
cytosine, and guanine occur in both RNA and DNA, while thymine occurs only in DNA
and uracil occurs in RNA.
Relationship to other "molecular-scale" biological sciences

Schematic relationship between biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology
Researchers in biochemistry use specific techniques native to biochemistry, but
increasingly combine these with techniques and ideas from genetics, molecular biology
and biophysics. There has never been a hard-line between these disciplines in terms of
content and technique, but members of each discipline have in the past been very
territorial; today the terms molecular biology and biochemistry are nearly interchangeable.
The following figure is a schematic that depicts one possible view of the relationship
between the fields:

Simplistic overview of the chemical basis of love, one of many applications that may be
described in terms of biochemistry.
● Biochemistry is the study of the chemical substances and vital processes occurring in
living organisms. Biochemists focus heavily on the role, function, and structure of
biomolecules. The study of the chemistry behind biological processes and the
synthesis of biologically active molecules are examples of biochemistry.
● Genetics is the study of the effect of genetic differences on organisms. Often this can
be inferred by the absence of a normal component (e.g. one gene). The study of
"mutants" – organisms which lack one or more functional components with respect to
the so-called "wild type" or normal phenotype. Genetic interactions (epistasis) can
often confound simple interpretations of such "knock-out" studies.
● Molecular biology is the study of molecular underpinnings of the process of
replication, transcription and translation of the genetic material. The central dogma of
molecular biology where genetic material is transcribed into RNA and then translated
into protein, despite being an oversimplified picture of molecular biology, still provides
a good starting point for understanding the field. This picture, however, is undergoing

revision in light of emerging novel roles for RNA.
● Chemical Biology seeks to develop new tools based on small molecules that allow
minimal perturbation of biological systems while providing detailed information about
their function. Further, chemical biology employs biological systems to create non-
natural hybrids between biomolecules and synthetic devices (for example emptied
viral capsids that can deliver gene therapy or drug molecules).
See also
Main article: Outline of biochemistry
Lists
● List of biochemistry topics
● List of biochemists
● List of biomolecules
● List of geneticists & biochemists
● List of nucleic acid simulation software
● Important publications in biochemistry (biology)
● Important publications in biochemistry (chemistry)
Related topics
● Biological psychiatry
● Biophysics
● Carbon chauvinism

● Chemical ecology
● Computational biomodeling
● EC number
● Hypothetical types of biochemistry
● International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
● Metabolome
● Metabolomics
● Molecular biology
● Molecular medicine
● Plant biochemistry
● Structural biology
● Stoichiometry
● Small molecule
● Veterinary
References
1. ^ Campbell, Neil A.; Brad Williamson; Robin J. Heyden (2006). Biology: Exploring Life.
Boston, Massachusetts: Pearson Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-250882-6. http://www.phschool.
com/el_marketing.html.
2. ^ Smith E, Morowitz H (2004). "Universality in intermediary metabolism". Proc Natl Acad
Sci USA 101 (36): 13168–73. doi:10.1073/pnas.0404922101. PMID 15340153. http://www.
pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=15340153.
3. ^ Romano A, Conway T (1996). "Evolution of carbohydrate metabolic pathways". Res
Microbiol 147 (6–7): 448–55. doi:10.1016/0923-2508(96)83998-2. PMID 9084754.

4. ^ Wöhler, F. (1828). "Ueber künstliche Bildung des Harnstoffs". Ann. Phys. Chem. 12:
253–256.
5. ^ Kauffman, G. B. and Chooljian, S.H. (2001). "Friedrich Wöhler (1800–1882), on the
Bicentennial of His Birth". The Chemical Educator 6 (2): 121–133. doi:10.1007/
s00897010444a.
Further reading
● Hunter, Graeme K. (2000). Vital Forces: The Discovery of the Molecular Basis of Life.
San Diego: Academic Press. ISBN 0-12-361810-X. OCLC 162129355 191848148
44187710.
External links
● The Virtual Library of Biochemistry and Cell Biology
● Biochemistry, 5th ed. Full text of Berg, Tymoczko, and Stryer, courtesy of NCBI.
● Biochemistry, 2nd ed. Full text of Garrett and Grisham.
● Biochemistry Animation (Narrated Flash animations.)
● SystemsX.ch - The Swiss Initiative in Systems Biology
● Biochemistry Online Resources – Lists of Biochemistry departments, websites,
journals, books and reviews, employment opportunities and events.
Major families of biochemicals
Saccharides/Carbohydrates/Glycosides · Amino acids/Peptides/Proteins/Glycoproteins ·
Lipids/Terpenes/Steroids/Carotenoids · Alkaloids/Nucleobases/Nucleic acids · Cofactors/
Phenylpropanoids/Polyketides/Tetrapyrroles

Categories: Biochemistry | Chemistry | Subjects taught in medical school
This page was last modified on 22 January 2010 at 11:48.Text is available under the Creative
Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Contact us

Untitled Document
CONCLUSION
As member of our group, you should realize that there is no "main coven" or "HQ" or
"head church" for our group. It is the collective group of people who simply believe they are in
a group, or magical system, called magical 333, who practice a particular style of magic also
called magical 333 or 333 magic. This is contradictory in that it "is" and it "isn't", but that is
how it IS, because it IS a magical group. It's roots evolve from my "style" of teachings, and
yet my teachings came from it. WithIn me it created itself, yet it existed long before I ever
was, or am, or shall be.
We take our world for granted, and if I could sweep all of you up and show you this world
as I see it through my eyes, it might change you forever. But I think these lessons will suffice
for a peek into my looking glass.
Peace, prosper, and contribute. One Sign, One Group.
Your Magical Wizard and Friend,
Mysticalgod 1/29/2010

Magical Advice - Pt. 9, From Mysticalgod

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Magical Advice - Pt. 9, From Mysticalgod

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Untitled Document

Gods. And to me, this feeling is out of this world.

In an earlier lesson, MA-6, we covered "reality shifting" through means of consciousness.

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (1 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

single beam to create heat and then fire.

rite of initiation. In this case, it becomes an initiation into magic.

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (2 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

and where it comes from.

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (3 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

with their bare hands, and many more things.

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (4 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

affects everything, psychologically, biochemically, and metaphysically. This section is to point

you choose to become.

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (5 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

section titled, "The Biochemical Connection", which you'll find below.

Examine these scientific perspectives:

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (6 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (7 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

for Affective Neuroscience, UW-Madison)

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (8 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

Concerning techniques of behavior you can practice to initiate a permanent change in

to manufacture your own ideas of what will work for you:

> your hand writing

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (9 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

(a) your writing can hold power

> your clothes

(a) your clothes can hold power

> your smile

as beautiful. Is your image of yourself an image of a stick figure, fat, or strange?

> your lucky color

> knowing your present self

(a) do you know yourself enough to reshape yourself?

random bad things happen when I listen to too much of it )

> your walk

> daily associations

> how you control your mood

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (10 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

(b) what antithetical mask do you wear?

things, and you will in fact become a new person.

between your action and the magic you want to become.

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (11 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

(Pilgrimage, means, "a journey to a secured place):

(a) Avoid extreme emotions, unless it has a purpose in your intention

(c) See everything with magical eyes, through your feelings

(d) lose the meaning of doubt forever

appreciate the mountains I drive by everyday without noticing."

Remember, to "feel" it.

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (12 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

others throughout your day.

everything as a wizard or witch, or essentially, as a magical being.

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (13 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

possible for them.

you will be very pleased with yourself and your abilities.

those who are not.

transformation. This transformation is also called an initiation It is the universal symbol of

initiation into a magical dimension.

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (14 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

those you do not (magical).

do flows from your connection

file:///C|/magical%20advice/mysticalgod/Magical%20Advice%209.html (15 of 34)1/28/2010 5:27:09 PM

,or relation, to nature.

energy is then transformed into different things, on different planes of existence.

and fill in the gaps.