The Limits of Understanding: A Critical Exploration of Human Thought and Resistance to Change

So, you've found my research papers. Maybe they're a groundbreaking revelation, or maybe they're an overcomplicated mess. Either way, my research has always been driven by the pursuit of truth—understanding humans and why they think the way they do. It’s not about recognition or profit, but about guiding society toward something better—a society governed by us, not by a party.

Originality

We live in a culture of regurgitation—true originality comes from only a few. You may try to fact-check these, but you won’t find what you’re looking for. Ask an expert in the field, and I’m confident they’ll agree. But in the end, the decision isn’t mine, theirs, or anyone else’s—it’s just a starting point to start a conversation.

If you believe you do not uphold the status quo, ask yourself how comfortable you would be exploring ideas like gravity being based on inertia instead of mass or Pluto being the heaviest planet in the solar system; seeking to win and walk away with a fact is not how we progress—we must be more fluid. This is an exploratory that I guarantee you won't find elsewhere.

Feel free to skip down to the Papers if you feel like you're reading to dive into it, and do not require to ease in.

The Exploratory Nature of Understanding

Each of my selected papers below will have their core details and key takeaway presented as a single sentence—each paper explained in no more than that—accompanied by the DOI for those who seek depth; I warn you, however, that this method looks like the sentence you're reading now.

Introduction

You are not as different as those on the other side. We are all human, and if political affiliations were never discussed, you would never be able to tell who supports whom. Assumption is a cognitive bias, just like prejudice—to judge before understanding. Another is invulnerability bias—the belief that “I am not like them; I wasn’t affected.” Ironically, outright denial of this, without honest consideration, is often a sign of being affected, while those who immediately question the possibility and explore it further are more likely to have remained unaffected.

Humans are easy to understand—until you look at them individually; we are all far more alike than we realize, the thoughts we suppress, the habits we hide, the ways we cover our tracks—many others do the same, and they see it, but there is an advantage of being able to understand a portion of others by understanding yourself.

We live in a world driven by fanaticism, pitted against each other, unable to see ourselves in one another, yet there is no real difference; the cognitive rigidity I have observed exists on both sides, and acknowledging that is uncomfortable—you may even be looking for a reason to stop reading—but it doesn’t have to be, and even knowing this, I must still practice it—when confronted with something I strongly disagree with, I take a deep breath and remind myself that listening does not harm me, that if I am wrong, I have the chance to gain insight; and that to challenge my own beliefs, I must attempt to see the other side—not to concede, but to prove myself wrong if needed—because there is no greater competition, nor greater victory, than overcoming my own limitations; the goal is conversation, but if I lash out, I know a Cognitive Impasse has been triggered, that my instinct to respond with anger, avoidance, or disruption is merely a byproduct of Standardized Obedience.

Introduction

Understanding has always mattered more than recognition; my research was never meant to be buried in academia, tangled in jargon, or locked behind university walls—it has always been about guiding thought, about uncovering what humans truly seek: both breadth and depth, the big picture and the fine details, without needing a Ph.D. to decipher it; I have yet to present my work to the established authorities because I was not ready, but now, after a decade of study, I’ve learned that knowledge without accessibility is wasted, and so, I will give both—no fluff, no pretension, just what matters. I analyze, evaluate, and observe, but I neither predict nor prescribe.

My focus is on researching the mind and the mechanisms of thought, not on offering therapy, medical advice, or personal recommendation. While I can predict what humans can do, I could not predict what a human could do. My work is rooted in understanding cognition, not in intervention. I can help you understand the mind, but I cannot help you understand your own mind. I can only provide tools with which to do so.

I do not know who you are, and that, too, reflects a challenge of our time. Readership today is vast, as it should be. But this breadth brings with it an expectation—that writing must conform to the individual, that it should shape itself to fit each reader’s perspective. If that is what you seek, I invite you to find it elsewhere. I will not shape my words to satisfy all, nor will I diminish them to accommodate any single mind. I will write as I find sufficient for myself in which I prefer a less strict and academic tone. Why are we judged by the conformity of a style and not by the insights shared.

Intro. II — Self History

I once stood as an avid anti-theist, rejecting any notion of the divine, and even now, my emotions still get the better of me when I think of the harm religion has inflicted on children, the world, its people, and the injustices left unpunished under the guise of forgiveness; yet I can no longer dismiss the possibility of a god, not because I believe, but because it would be ignorant to assume I could understand such a thing—if such an entity exists, it is not of this Earth, nor has it ever spoken or written to us through any man or bush, but rather it would be beyond comprehension, indifferent to humanity, connected not by scripture but by the very fabric of existence—light, as elusive as understanding time, the universe’s balance, or how chaos gives rise to order.

Religion is mostly man-made, shaped by culture, control, and the search for meaning, yet some ideas persist not because they are true, but because they resonate, and while doctrines crumble under scrutiny, concepts like reincarnation or awakening elsewhere in the universe seem possible when viewed through the lens of thought; there are no strict paths to understanding, but perhaps fulfillment lies in balance, where we let go of certain beliefs as others do the same, where deserved pride of self gives way to change, not unity but true individualism, and where, if consciousness is fundamental rather than isolated, death is not an end but a transition we have yet to define.

The Papers

I once believed knowledge was within reach. But the deeper I searched, the more it slipped away. What once felt certain now dissolves into ambiguity, and every answer unravels into more questions.

The more I write, the more it fractures—because understanding demands nuance, and without it, ideas become distorted. Some foundations must be laid before a concept can be grasped, yet those same foundations can be misinterpreted, creating more confusion than clarity.

After years of relentless study and reflection, 33,000 hours of self-guided research—of extrapolative trial and error, of relentless questioning and revision—I’ve realized: understanding isn’t about collecting facts—it’s about confronting the limits of what can ever truly be known, and realizing that in the end—it is pointless: which gives inspiration to pursue truth for the next who come.

Below is a selection of my papers. No lengthy explanations, no unnecessary fluff—just the key insights that matter. Let’s start with understanding why things are the way they are.

Lizard People

Lizard people were historically backstabbing crooks, much like a snake is today; countless heads of state were called various reptiles or lizards, and throughout time, different reptiles represented different religions; however, the basilisk wasn’t just a mythical creature but a political jab—an allegory by Pliny dissing Rome, tied not to Catholic Basilicas but to the Roman Basilicas that existed long before them. (13 pages)

10.6084/m9.figshare.28016237

Mass-Violence

How a culture of rigidness and over-correctiveness fuels mass violence and school shootings, rather than surface-level issues like guns and predisposed mental health—the very article you are reading is an attempt to alleviate the underlying issues that drive it. (133 pages)

10.6084/m9.figshare.28030013

Feelings of Guilt and Doom from the Effects of Cognitive Hardening

We are not oppressed by the system; we are the system enabling this oppression, as the unchanged education system for fourteen hundred years instills guilt, doom, headaches, and nausea when confronted with subconsciously sensible evidence against our current understanding; both nonsense and plausibility irritate and cause laughter, but stronger plausibility incites anger, as seen with Semmelweis, a Hungarian physician dismissed by colleagues, terminated by his employer, banned by the community, and institutionalized after falling into insanity while proving how countless lives could be saved, ultimately dying from the same bacteria, then-unknown, he warned against—all because his research showed that handwashing significantly reduced deaths during labor and other medical practices. (54 pages)

10.6084/m9.figshare.27367785

Humans Resisting Change

Cognitive impasse manifests as a self-sustaining cycle of mental rigidity, where learned behaviors and biases—rooted in an education system dating back to the fourth century CE in Rome—reinforce societal stagnation; this cycle, driven by cognitive defenses like avoidance, dismissal, anger, and laughter, ensures that even in the presence of new evidence, the human mind remains its own true puppet master, resisting change while believing itself free. (21 pages)

10.6084/m9.figshare.28014626

The Causes of Laughter

We laugh at comedy, at belief interference, at death—we laugh at what we can’t believe; in comedy, it’s the unexpected breaking our predictions, in mockery, it’s the clash between seriousness and unexpected information, and in grief, it’s the mind stalling reality, showing that even in death, laughter is rooted in cognitive dissonance—first as a defense to delay pain, easing discomfort through laughter, then shifting into rejection, avoidance, and belief perseverance, where the mind desperately clings to the presence of the lost, some laughing as a last effort to hold onto what is no longer there; while most eventually accept the truth—especially if they laugh which is eventually followed by a breakdown of sobbing eventually—in the rarest of rare cases, belief perseverance succeeds which causes the brain to fail at reconciling reality, dumping or repressing the conflicting information of death leading to a belief their loved one is still among the living; where any attempt to remind them are met with massive hysteria, deranged laughter, and often extremist behavior, and proving that facing dissonance is not just important, but necessary for healing. (11 + 173 page above / below)

doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28014581

Major Educational Crisis

School was never about making us think—it was about making us obey; through endless memorization, rigid rules, and fear of mistakes, we’re taught that intelligence means repeating what we’re told, not questioning it, leaving us with a society that resists change, punishes curiosity, and clings to authority, all because a system built over a thousand years ago made sure we never learned how to think for ourselves—conditioning us to equate obedience with morality, mistakes with failure, and intelligence with memorization, as if knowing facts makes someone a genius rather than understanding, reasoning, or creating something new; but this system was designed to self-perpetuate, which is why most who changed the world did not follow traditional education, forcing us to ask: how does one change the system when they must first rise to the top of it, only to find that in doing so, the mind clings to its abuser—the system itself. (56 pages)

10.6084/m9.figshare.28015913

Humans Resisting Change Resisting Change

No one wants anyone else to succeed because the moment someone does better, it reminds us of what we could have done but didn’t; instead of using that as motivation, we mock, dismiss, or tear them down to protect our pride, creating a cycle where we hold each other back, project our own insecurities, and stay bound to the same chains we refuse to admit exist. (11 pages)

10.6084/m9.figshare.28015913

The Effect of Rigid Education and Frameworks

Rigid frameworks make humans reject challenges to the status quo, mocking those who question, yet self-awareness can free us; a simple framework indicator (S) for the standard method and (C) for the canonical method removes laws created to fix misunderstood concepts, eliminating square root syntax for a clearer exponential form, as the Canonical Order resolves inconsistencies by removing imaginary numbers, redefining roots as fractional exponents, and applying consistent logic to negatives—challenging two centuries of ingrained biases and potentially enabling mathematicians to correct fields like trigonometry and quantum physics, all due to overlooked parentheses and misunderstood laws; the negative sign discrepancy, where (-5) = 25 and -5² = -25, persists, and was found half of any given population was unaware of the difference and many—ironically—insisting that Google, Wolfram Alpha, and other calculators are incorrect rather than believing those likely ridden with lead poisoning centuries ago—who made up new laws to bridge the gaps the old laws handled—were wrong: (-5)² = (-5¹)² = -5¹*² = -5² = -25. (56 pages)

10.6084/m9.figshare.27661734 [GitHub, Application]

Entrenched Beliefs

Selective-mindedness—thinking we’re open while locking ourselves into echo chambers; we claim to embrace diverse views, but only those that align with our in-group beliefs—be it religion, politics, or ideology—creating a false sense of inclusivity that reinforces intellectual rigidity; this bias, deeply ingrained from early conditioning and societal norms, fosters cognitive inertia—making us resist new ideas, cling to old ones, and reject anything that challenges our comfort; the crux of this is cognitive impasse, a state where ideas trigger a defensive reflex—laughter, anger, or mockery—as the mind fights to preserve its established worldview; the first-learned beliefs, ingrained by education systems and societal structures, act as cognitive bedrock, resisting any attempt at change and limiting intellectual growth—creating a feedback loop of dismissal, skepticism, and stagnation. (22 pages)

10.6084/m9.figshare.27642519

Mistranslations Bent by Will.

The Bible never condemned homosexuality—it condemned the exploitation of minors; in the original texts, masculus (Latin), arsen (Greek), zachar (Hebrew), and Knaben (German) all referred specifically to young males, yet in time, these terms suddenly and were deliberately altered or generalized—Latin’s masculus, originally denoting boys or lesser males, lost its age distinction, as it only refers to the young male gender—what men are born as—when paired with a modifier such as 'gender,' and the same applies to Greek’s arsen—broad enough to be reinterpreted, just as Hebrew’s zachar shifted under rabbinic tradition, but the most blatant change was in German—where interpretation could not alter Knaben/knabe (young boys/young boy), so it was outright swapped for Mann (man), erasing the original meaning entirely; these weren’t translation errors—they were deliberate, retroactive edits, reshaping doctrine to align with evolving social biases, turning a law meant to protect children from exploitation into an excuse to target consenting adults; a centuries-long lie, upheld by those who weren't willing to fight against the insane; for it is one thing to have a god who guides you, it is deplorable many think their imaginary friend must guide us. How sad and broken their faith. (54 pages)

I accept that people can believe what they want to believe, unless what they believe causes them to hurt others—which because of these entrenched beliefs and unwillingness to change or stand up against the established status quo, it has drastically affected the world.

10.6084/m9.figshare.27936774