This is the blog by me, by Vaccinius, that is Anders Woje Ellingsen, as the creator of Trixnix. All content on this blog, and all content by me elsewhere on Trixnix, is by me as a private person. I do not represent any state, any church, any organization or any community. Google, and by Google the company Blogger, is responsible for the technical presentation of the web sites on Trixnix, and benefiting from the service, I respect the terms of use as any other individual using the services of Google does. I love the services of Google.

Saturday, 14 September 2019

Distance to sin

I see a cup with coffee in
and think about relief from sin.
The cup is hot, that is for sure.
It gives, though, the advice for cure.

The cup is cup of water, not.
I do not drink the coffee hot.
And as my eyes do more than sweep,
I see it is perhaps though cheap.

I strengthen focus, with my eyes,
for to observe where secret lies.
And as I do, I take a nip,
and handle it by fingertip.

How can that be, that sin so bad,
that bitter taste, so making sad …
It is as if by neck I take
that thing, and make it void, that sake!

[ This poem is made a link to at the blog hop of dVerse here ]

.·: † :·.

Friday, 6 September 2019

To the English

What aI will say to Englishmen
is that one might do well with pen.
There are some rules for one to learn,
and having done, to action turn.

And, when by pen, that is a work,
to notice, and give love, as perk.
So, make your word the written word,
and strangely foreign when it's heard.

Make it the word of poetry.
Make it the word of mastery.
And give the world a chance to see
the eye, the I, the island free!

[ This poem is linked to on dVerse at OpenLinkNight #250. ]

.·: † :·.

Thursday, 5 September 2019

The history of ideas

The historical epochs in human history, in the university of Oslo made a study, called idea history, might be perceived as a growth to something unknown, though improving mankind. Those historical epochs can, though, also be perceived as a dialectical fight between some kind of romantics and some kind of rationality, making a new feeling, that is, an epoch of romantics. This understanding is not revolutionary. Scientists oriented towards theory have pointed at it, in the local. Ai have stated the historical epochs from Christ up to the times of ours is my body, being the Girl, and so, and aI have approved the historical epochs by their labels, as taught in Norway.

In that latter sense, that is by a dialectical understanding, we have reached a climax, so to speak, in the times of ours. This is marked by the technology of data, by which that pure intellectual and instrumental orientation seems to have a certain power in itself, and by which a devastating relation to the soft kindness is produced, being either by or relieved from.

What man ought to have in mind, is that those producers of that new technology are means. And, that by a little creativity, God given, it is proven that any of those imbeciles forcing one to acknowledge their superiority are plain idiots, and evil, since they commit adultery on the idealistic level. What will come after this, is a new romantic epoch. That is for certain. And, it will be quite interesting, since mankind has reached this climax, so to speak. Are we heading at an conceiving of mankind? Or, is that diversion between woman and man as romantics and intellect much to simple to accept that thing? Myself, being a man, aI think the woman is a pretty thing.

That dialectical understanding of history one might perceive everywhere, aI believe. Is there not a connection between Homer and Vergil, for instance? Not to speak about Platon and Aristoteles? Platon came after Homer, and aI believe Homer, and his lot, was the ones carrying that Greek gods. Myself, when studying Aristoteles, aI thought he was stupid and wrong, by his orientation. Thinking about it, having giving up the studies, aI came to the conclusion, though, he was up to something. Which Marx later built on, in fact, and which the Jews relied on, as a matter of fact. And which constitutes Norway. That materialistic way of thinking. The problem with Aristoteles, aI came to, is that he did not believe in God, as the Jewish people did, and that his pursuing of matters of fact lead to what ridiculous is.

.·: † :·.

Monday, 26 August 2019


Ai have come to think about perceiving and interpreting, which can be considered to be an activity, and when so, a way of acting, and when so, a subject for science. In science the perceiving and interpreting is called hermeneutics, and great books have been written on the subject. It is clear to me one can distinguish between two orientations, in that tradition, and that is fearful activity and peaceful activity, and this is a bit awkward, since by it to speak about activity is exactly awkward.

In my mind, there is a clear distinctions between getting it, and taking it, and having it. This insight might be seen two ways. One is to see a row of happenings, or circumstances, maybe, by which one develops in the succession get – take – have. This is the easy way of understanding hermeneutics, in my mind, since everyone will agree this makes sense. The other way is a bit more formal, and insanity comes to mind. We can distinguish between

A. Getting it and taking it
B. Having it

There is an ocean of difference between people capable of memorizing and people capable of learning, when those two verbs are seen as opposites. In modern school, and at universities today, specifically, with curriculum, exams in writing, and master degrees, it is the memorizing which is anticipated, and called for. So, even if one is capable of learning, one easily understands the way to get grade is to memorise suggestions, assertions and terms, as they are, and to play with those, as one cunning, bit by bit. In traditional science this would be called the ecclesiastic way, and in traditional science this was condemned. The way of seeing why, may perhaps be to remember the commandment of God condemning adultery. In Norwegian, one will easily see there is something worth thinking about, pondering on the words “skjønne” and the expression “få det med seg”, for instance. In English, “to get along with” a fact or a statement is not that obvious, aI believe, and even so, there is something to it. “To see,” in English, is not exactly to mirror.

It is a bit complicated, aI believe, this science called hermeneutics, since obviously, anxiety is involved in most instances of adultery, and even so, one has to acknowledge there are individuals who deliberately are simple in pursuit of evil intent. And, in traditional psychology, there is this fundamental distinction between sensing and intuition as orientations. Anyhow, to anticipate “to know me is to love me” is the stairway to heaven. And, if one thinks one by possession and adultery makes it, one is either a complete idiot or a devil, and the two of them are one and the same.

.·: † :·.