New entries for this page are still being developed: 1/16/25.
Sections:
AI Part I: AI defendants cite Urantia Foundation vs. Maaherra
AI Part II: The nature of and some historical perspective on study aids
AI Part III: Apply AI to etymologies, please. That should be easy for AI, right?
AI Part IV: The Urantia Papers are the new “King’s English.”
AI Part V: New topical study: Andonic tongue, English language, and Havona harmony
AI Part VI: Beyond analysis to intents and purposes.
AI Part I: AI defendants cite Urantia Foundation vs. Maaherra (12/11/24)
Wisdom may be in the questions, but author-ity is in the answers.
These excerpts are from a December 10, 2024 Boston Review article:
“Forty years later, on the other side of the personal computing revolution, a woman named Kristen Maaherra started distributing the sacred text on floppy disks. She gave them away: she wasn’t trying to make a profit, only to spread the good news. Before long the Urantia Foundation—a group Sadler’s followers had established to safeguard and promote the revelations of the Book—caught wind of Maaherra’s activities, and it took a dim view of the unauthorized distribution of the text whose sales provided the movement’s main source of funds. In short order the foundation filed a lawsuit for copyright infringement.
“Maaherra freely admitted she had copied The Urantia Book verbatim and defended her actions with a curious legal argument. Authorship, she contended, was something only humans could possess; since the papers were a direct transcription of the infallible revelations of an ensemble of celestial beings, the notions of authorship and copyright didn’t apply. The case reached the Ninth Circuit court of appeals, which ruled against her. Without questioning the extraterrestrial origins of the book’s revelations—both parties agreed about that, after all—the judges ruled that the utterances had been mediated by human beings before they reached print, constituting just enough of a human element to trigger authorship protections under the relevant copyright statute.
“The court emphasized one kind of mediation, in particular: Sadler and the Forum “chose and formulated the specific questions asked.” These questions, the judges reasoned, “materially contributed to the structure of the Papers, to the arrangement of the revelations in each Paper, and to the organization and order in which the Papers followed one another.” Thus they found that “the ‘extremely low’ threshold level of creativity required for copyright protection has been met.”
…
“The fourth possibility is the Urantia solution: ownership lies with the users who coax, prompt, wheedle, or out-and-out trick the AI into producing its specific output. Certainly, prompt engineering is a carefully honed skill, and perhaps one day could be recognized as a genuine art form; a lengthy, detailed, novel prompt might contain enough of an original idea to merit the granting of copyright on the resulting image or text to the prompter.”
Imagine how we might have progressed had a direct application of this wisdom been followed:
(159:2.1) Jesus went over to Gamala to visit John and those who worked with him at that place. That evening, after the session of questions and answers, John said to Jesus: “Master, yesterday I went over to Ashtaroth to see a man who was teaching in your name and even claiming to be able to cast out devils. Now this fellow had never been with us, neither does he follow after us; therefore I forbade him to do such things.” Then said Jesus: “Forbid him not. Do you not perceive that this gospel of the kingdom shall presently be proclaimed in all the world? How can you expect that all who will believe the gospel shall be subject to your direction? Rejoice that already our teaching has begun to manifest itself beyond the bounds of our personal influence. Do you not see, John, that those who profess to do great works in my name must eventually support our cause? They certainly will not be quick to speak evil of me. My son, in matters of this sort it would be better for you to reckon that he who is not against us is for us. In the generations to come many who are not wholly worthy will do many strange things in my name, but I will not forbid them. I tell you that, even when a cup of cold water is given to a thirsty soul, the Father’s messengers shall ever make record of such a service of love.” [Emphasis added.]
The article has some length and I highly recommend reviewing all of 159:2.1 because there is more there of great importance to the subject of trying to control the revelation with lawsuits. So, I will not comment much at this point and will instead use this to start a series of AI related emails.
Please consider the idea that the copyright on the Urantia Papers never needed to be materially fought for with lawsuits any more than Jesus needed to be fought for with swords. Just doing the work would have adequately protected the truth about the book’s origin. Not protecting the copyright with lawsuits would not open the door for others to get a copyright already granted to the Foundation. No one can stop the Foundation from providing a Foundation-published copy to those who value having one. And there is nothing to interfere with the Foundation’s ability to foster other people and organizations of its choosing, as it was originally designed to do.
Generally speaking, this perspective applies equally as well to translations.
AI Part II: The Nature of and some historical perspective on study aids. (12/17/24)
Fostering scholarship and study vs. making power plays.
What are the lanes? Why are they important?
In reviewing the history of scholarship on the Urantia Papers, reflect on the following questions:
(1) Is a particular type of scholarship more naturally suited to being an individualized or institutional effort? Are any organizations especially obliged to take on such an effort?
(2) Will the work need a lot, a little, or no updating?
(3) To what degree is the effort more objective and factual vs. subjective and creative?
(4) To what degree has external social pressure (eugenics is a good example) influenced the development and promotion of scholarship?
(5) To what degree has social disharmony influenced the development and promotion of scholarship?
Consider that study aids fit into three categories:
(1) Within the four corners of the text.
(2) Beyond the four corners of the text.
(3) Translations, plus translated study aids. The first translation was done by Jacques Weiss. At first, there was cooperation with the Foundation and he had Doc Sadler’s approval. Then he got sued.
Within the four corners.
Three study aids, by their nature, would have been properly provided by Urantia Foundation:
(1) A pronunciation guide. Consider that an effort easily enough could have been made at the time of publication to at least get this process started. But the importance of providing such an aid at the time of publication was overlooked. (See 1962 Pronunciation Guide. See 1992 Memorandum of the Special Projects Committee.)
(2) Paragraph numbering. Consider that this easily enough could have been done and should have been done at the time of publication.
(3) Correction of typographical errors. Note that this could have been done by adding end notes or an appendix to the book, thus preserving the original text INVIOLATE.
Additional study aids within the four corners of the text, but not well suited to organizational efforts due to their subjective and creative aspects, include:
(1) Cross-referencing. Index, Concordex, etc. Consider how the nature of the revelation (size, once-words, coined terminology, etc.) makes a standard index project unwieldy and impractical as a hardcopy publication. Consider how search engines were the inevitable technological advancement to the process. Keeping in mind how hard it was to do scholarship back in 1976, before computer technology and printers came along, consider the problems Clyde Bedell had with trying to get the ONLY substantial study aid of its kind to be fostered by the organizations. The link is the tip of an iceberg. Consider that the Foundation sued the first mover to provide an electronic search engine for both copyright and trademark violations.
(2) Topical Studies. Examples: Eugenics, Sex Differences, Next Magisterial Mission, etc.
(3) Creation of charts, timelines, and other visual aids.
Beyond the four corners.
(1) Identifying the source of quoted material.
(2) Comparing parallel Biblical passages.
(3) Documenting how new discoveries and scientific advances to verify the history.
(4) An Historical Society.
(5) Source Materials.
(6) Topical Studies, etc.
In upcoming emails I will go into more detail about how technology has influenced scholarship. Please take the time to reflect on these categories and how they are suited to different types of efforts. Then consider what it means for individuals and organizations to foster efforts that need to be made on an individual level vs. an institutional level.
AI Part III: Apply AI to etymologies, please. That should be easy for AI, right? (12/18/24)
Etymologies: a litmus test for the movement.
The brilliant beings who wrote the Urantia Papers coined words with etymological roots. The coined words are a curiosity and a stumbling block for new readers.
How much do we show respect for the intellectual creativity of the authors and the ignorance of new readers by doing etymological work and sharing it?
I hear a lot these days about AI being an awesome new tool. Great. Would the people promoting AI for study of the Urantia Papers please tell the machine to kindly provide etymologies for all the coined words in alphabetical order, plus by topic?
I do etymology work when I want to do some scholarship that is relatively easy and fun. The work does not require much education or experience. Just interest and a willingness to get after it. If it is easy work for a human, AI should be able to knock this out in no time, right?
As far as I know, only Chris Halvorson and I have taken this on as a project during the almost 70 years since publication. Initially, I used his work as a reference, then went well beyond what he provided both in terms of the number of etymologies and the references. (Jon Greer wrote a paper on the general subject.)
What does it mean that this most basic aspect of scholarship on the Urantia Papers has been neglected for so long? What does it say about the leaders of organizations and projects, who do not share the substantial amount of work (60+ etymologies) that has been done so far?
You are allowed to use your voice on this issue. You are allowed to contact organizations and people with projects and encourage them to share my etymological efforts as a matter of common courtesy towards new readers.
Now that you have taken this in, please take the time to make a difference. Thank you.
AI Part IV: The Urantia Papers are the new “King’s English.” (12/21/24)
There are tools; there are tasks.
There are capacities; there are intentions.
Brainstorming study aids that are related to supporting broad, deep, and efficient study of the Urantia Papers gives us a way to assess our efforts. The wonderful thing about technological advances is that we can see how people and organizations use these tools to do (or not do) and to foster (or not foster) the development and provision of study aids. We can grade ourselves on how we have done over time with respect to any type of study aid, the development of technology, and the nature of our originating institutions.
Ever since the split between Urantia Foundation and Urantia Brotherhood, there have been ongoing talks about the importance of unity. Some people speak in terms of a “correcting time.” Consider that reflection on the creation, fostering, and provision of study aids provides a context for understanding the work that needs to be done by individuals and organizations and how individuals and organizations need to relate to each other.
Naturally, when it comes to creating study aids, the expansive and sophisticated aspects of the Urantia Papers generally favor stronger intellects and advanced education. But only a mediocre intellect is needed to appreciate the types of study aids that support reading the Urantia Papers. And some of the most basic types of study aids are not an intellectual exercise.
This new effort to systematically review the nature and history of study aids and technology starts by addressing paragraph numbering, pronunciation, etymologies, and corrections.
1) Paragraph Numbering
Consider that it was not for the revelators to direct or even suggest certain types of specific creative options, like paragraph and sentence numbering. I am not suggesting that sentence numbering would have been a good idea, only that it should have been on the table as a consideration.
People were aware of how important numbering is to Bible study AND general culture. Consider how “chapter and verse” references are used to summarize thoughts. I have never read anything in the history that suggests numbering options were considered. I wonder why?
Unfortunately, paragraph numbering was not managed by the Foundation from the beginning, as a fundamental study aid tool that would best be provided by a publisher. Note that numbering is not a technological issue. And it is not something that should change over time.
2) Pronunciation Guide
The Urantia Papers are the new “King’s English.”
Along with providing valuable information, perspective, and wisdom, the Urantia Papers are also here to help us enhance our cognitive and communicate skills. The revelators are giving us lessons on how to better use the English language, along with a BIG reason to get unified in this respect. This is an extremely powerful influence on the development of culture. Nothing like the “prime directive” from Star Trek at all!
Consider that a powerful undercurrent is activated with the creation of a pronunciation guide because this relates to the importance of evolving towards a common language. A common language supports all types of true cultural development. Resistance towards accomplishing this goal is lazy and selfish. We need to learn how to speak and write so that we are easily understood by all. This is what peace and love actually looks and sounds like.
If an epochal revelation in book form with a bunch of etymologically rooted, coined terminology does not make the point that it is high time for EVERYONE to learn the English language well, maybe some people just do not want to get the point. I am not aware of how any Urantia organizations are emphasizing this obvious aspect of the revelation. I wonder why?
When the Urantia Papers were published, the technology was sufficient to manage the development and publication of a Pronunciation Guide. But the importance of providing such an aid at the time of publication was overlooked, apparently. (See 1962 Pronunciation Guide. If anyone knows of something earlier than 1962, please let me know. See 1992 Memorandum of the Special Projects Committee.)
A Pronunciation Guide lends itself reasonably well to being done by a small committee. But it especially needed input from the Contact Commission to be done both well and authoritatively by the publisher of the new words.
Consider how the audio aspects of modern technology can help us become linguistically unified.
3) Etymologies
A new name for our planet is provided with obvious etymological associations. It is used in the title whether we use Urantia Papers or Urantia Book. After we learn how to pronounce the new name for something that already has a name, what is the next obvious thing to do about that particular fact?
Books on etymology were readily available well in advance of publication. However, the Forum members, who were allowed to review the material prior to publication, were not allowed to take notes. Developing prepublication study aids was not an appropriate activity. But identifying what would need to be done post publication was obvious enough well in advance.
Even though the roots of the words do not change, education, experience, and creativity play a part in doing etymological work. This work was not something for Urantia Foundation to do directly.
Sad to record, the Urantia Brotherhood, the Urantia Brotherhood School, and not even the Boulder School for study of The Urantia Book focused their efforts in this direction. If UBIS or Urantia University cares about this issue in some particular way, I am not aware of it.
At this point, because I have developed this work more than anyone else, will continue to do so, and readers do not seem particularly competitive or cooperative about participating in the project, the question becomes whether my work gets referenced. If not, why not?
4) Corrections
The second printing came twelve years after the first, plenty of time to decide how to deal with changes to the text. Making typographical corrections and preserving the text inviolate never needed to be a controversial issue. An appendix for notes related to typographical errors could have been considered the best practice and still can be considered as the best practice.
Corrections are controversial, as you can see from my response to the first “correction” made at 0:1.24. But putting opinions in an appendix opens up conversation in a friendly way that allows all voices to be heard on an issue. Would that not be a more unifying way to manage the problem?
AI Part V: New topical study: Andonic tongue, English language, and Havona harmony (1/1/25)
Havona harmoy’s human tongue
My review on the relationship between the Urantia movement and technology led to the creation of a new cross-reference study aid: Andonic tongue, English language, and Havona harmony.
The process for the plan requires respect for the wisdom that has been provided—learn English as a global first language.
Previously in this AI series, a pronunciation guide and etymology work were identified as fundamental to the process of learning the meaning of and how to verbalize the newly coined terminology.
Dialects make it difficult for people who speak the same language to understand each other. Standardization of pronunciation is important and recording technology was available at the time of publication.
Today, Urantia Foundation is still in a position to prioritize the value of a pronunciation guide in a written and recorded format.
Old recordings could be used as a guide for doing a new comprehensive approach and/or they could be provided directly for reference by clipping the coined words from the talks that were given. But it would have been so much better had the Contact Commission taken this on from the beginning as a proper study aid for Urantia Foundation.
Pronouncing words the same way IS social harmony! Let’s harmonize with each other!
AI Part VI: Beyond analysis to intents and purposes. (1/15/24)
Project vs. organizational vs. financial leadership.
When I introduce the Urantia Papers, naturally, I also inform people about UBannotated. Can you imagine how strange it would be for me to tell someone about the Urantia Papers and not mention my efforts to make the text and study aids immediately available to them at no cost!?!
They hear that, after almost twenty years now, I have created a broader and deeper range of study aids than anyone else. They learn that UBannotated also incorporates notable academic efforts by others and that some of my reports were produced in cooperation with people who have related expertise. I tell people it is the most focused, efficient, broad, and deep study aid tool for the Urantia Papers on the planet. Do you think I have earned the right to say that? If you do not think so, please tell me why. If you do, what does that mean to you?
For me, it means that I next have need to explain why my work is only marginally respected and no longer financially supported. This problem is no fun at all. It reflects being unsuccessful with my community relationships and it distracts me in all kinds of ways from creating quality study aids that best serve the present and future needs of the revelation.
I know that when people simply search Urantia, UBannotated does not come up early. They will see trademark symbols associated with the name and the concentric circles. And this will make them think about a MONEY<>RELIGION connection. That is bad and wrong.
Curious people will see multiple covers and multiple publishers. This also is bad and wrong; it reflects commercialization of something that should be given away in the spirit of loving service, especially to bookstores. Then they can price it however they like. Generally speaking, true religious commitment inspires giving that far exceeds any issues related to the publication costs of a book, especially with modern technology.
I want to see a unified effort to literally re-introduce the Big Blue Book. This worked well as a reference across the spectrum, from completely unfamiliar with the text to reader-believers. It conveniently transcended pronunciation and etymology issues. The Big Blue Book was user friendly in all kinds of ways. Destroying the use and value of this common phrase for identifying something that has a coined name was marketing idiocy. But in fairness, it probably would have never occurred or even been thought of, if Urantia Foundation was not being so divisively overcontrolling about issues related to copyright and trademark.
Putting a trademark symbol on the circles and the name Urantia (no matter how the text is stylized) is antithetical to the way religious culture is respected in this country and around the world. This symbol is embarrassing from a religious outreach perspective. It is questionable from a legal perspective. It is divisive from a reader-believer perspective and rightly so!
What are my intents and purposes and what gets in the way?
I want to be able to stay focused on enhancing UBannotated and I want the community to operate in a manner that helps me share my efforts most effectively. Staying focused requires funding. Sharing most effectively requires a community that is generally in order.
I do not wake up wanting to be critical about how the community functions, historically or currently. I wake up wanting to create study aids and share them effectively. But I am a part of an evolving community and need to own my own role and relationship to it … somehow.
Reviewing the history allows us to appreciate that the problems we are facing today have been around since publication. My successes and failures at managing certain types of relationships are part of a bigger picture. This helps me relate to it all a bit less personally and I hope it does the same for you. The more we can focus on shared objectives, the easier it is to get ourselves out of the way and to be more forgiving and tolerant towards others.
Urantians are faced with three perennial issues:
(1) How should we organize ourselves?
Simple answer: The original organizational structure, if reconstituted, would be an expression of cooperative unity. Anything else, at best, is an expression of competitive cooperation.
(2) What should we do?
Simple answer: Share the revelation with others. Provide study aids for efficient, broad, and deep study of the text. Have fun together.
(3) How are we going to get it done?
Simple answer: We need to harmoniously balance the tensions between project, organizational, and financial leadership.
Naturally, the wide range of information provided in the Urantia Papers will lead to religiously held opinions and convictions across a wide range of subjects. Those who step into either project, organizational, and/or financial leadership positions have a greater influence on our culture. The failure of our leaders to harmonize these respective roles is our biggest problem and always has been because this is a perennial problem, a dynamic tension that pushes us forward.
The brief review of the issues that Clyde Bedell (author of the Concordex), Jacques Weiss (author of the first translation), and Kristen Maaherra (distributor of free searchable electronic copies) had with Urantia Foundation speaks to the inappropriate, unproductive, overcontrolling, and overly protective attitudes at Urantia Foundation since the time of publication.
If we are going to enjoy unity and harmony, first and foremost, we must stop treating the revelation like an owned product that needs to be controlled and protected from abuse and misuse. The revelation IS a fundamental aspect of our religious heritage and our religious progress which needs to be foster to promote social harmony.
Generally speaking, when people wear more than one hat, then focused expertise is lost and the culture suffers. We are not supposed to do it all ourselves; we are supposed to learn to harmonize by respecting what others bring to the table.
If the organizations are led by the rich, then the average person (financially speaking) becomes disinclined to contribute and feels disenfranchised as a practical matter. If a project leader is financially independent, projects are less likely to be responsive to and balanced with immediate and future interests. When project leaders become organizational leaders, then personal opinions become confused with organizational positions and can unduly influence the relative allotment of limited resources.
(100:4.2) Religious perplexities are inevitable; there can be no growth without psychic conflict and spiritual agitation. The organization of a philosophic standard of living entails considerable commotion in the philosophic realms of the mind. Loyalties are not exercised in behalf of the great, the good, the true, and the noble without a struggle. Effort is attendant upon clarification of spiritual vision and enhancement of cosmic insight. And the human intellect protests against being weaned from subsisting upon the nonspiritual energies of temporal existence. The slothful animal mind rebels at the effort required to wrestle with cosmic problem solving.
(50:6.4) Culture presupposes quality of mind; culture cannot be enhanced unless mind is elevated. Superior intellect will seek a noble culture and find some way to attain such a goal. Inferior minds will spurn the highest culture even when presented to them ready-made. …
Please consider passing this along with your thoughts to organizational and financial leaders.