Creating Reality as we go along

A version of the uncertainty principle is: "the observer always interferes with the phenomenon under observation". This is merely stating what many spiritual thinkers already know: you are, at least partially, responsible for the reality that you are observing or experiencing. When investing money, you become an observer, but also people on the sidelines become observers. We all become observers of each other's actions. Some observers are neutral, and just observe. However, there are those who observe with biased interest. yes, you have got it, those folks who like to tell you: "I told you so." One wonders if the group sentiment does not often cause the situations such as the one, we the investors, now find ourselves in. After having invested with Edwafin, I read about journalist Vic's warning about the dangers of such investments. Too late, of course, but the seed had been sown, and my subconscious did the rest: I had become one of the observers of the demise of 4000/1400 (take your pick) investors, as the possibility of a bad outcome constantly plagued my mind.

Let us now take the exercise a step further and we have a bit of a conundrum. In our experiment we start with one observer of a phenomena:

A observers phenomena X and exerts an affect

then we add another experiment with another observer:
B observes [A observers phenomena; exerts an affect]; exerts affect

we repeat this experiment with observer C, thus:
C observes {B observes [A observers phenomena; exerts an affect]; exerts affect} exerts affect

and again we do another experiment in which:
D observes (C observes {B observes [A observers phenomena; exerts affect]; exerts affect} exerts affect); exerts affect

And now I'm clean out of dissimilar brackets, so we will stop at this point. However, the point is clear: ultimately, the last say seems to be with D, and his creativity could ultimately overrule those of C, B, and A. Unfortunately, C, B and A are not always aware that D has been around to influence their life, nor would they like to admit that somehow they have handed over control over their lives to another - that is, until matters go pear-shaped. Of course this happens when one abdicates one's responsibility for one's own existence to other influences and other awarenesses of reality. Some would call it the blame-game.

I suppose it to happen at some time or other. Yes, some of the directors of Edwafin have spoken out. No, I didn't mean that they said anything, I said they spoke out - slight difference there. Some of the other directors have wisely kept their silence, lest they utter unintelligentias. Let's face it, we as human being just love making sounds with our mouths - the more the better. Whether such noises actually mean anything or are pertinent, is beside the point. Let's take the to-and-throw between Carole and Patrick for instance: Is anybody any the wiser? If you are, please inform me poste-haste. As far as I'm concerned their sputtering compares to the pointless gargling of my ex-wife: a horrible cacophony but does not reduce the stink. These folks have messed up big time, but always remain within the framework of human creative collective thought, they have, like all of us, no option in this respect. So, to be quite fair, they are mere instruments in the greater creative structures of the universe.

In our experiment above, observer A is unaware of the influence exerted on the experiment by observers, B, C, and D, and therefore are at a loss for words as to why the situation came about the way it did. Because of the lack of a logical explanation, we start looking for extremes and illogical reasons why things happened as they did (in the meantime D is chuckling in his sleeve [I told you so]). So enter Carole and Patrick (the other directors are seemingly still searching for words, or know that they are at least partially responsible for the mess we find ourselves in.)

Carole's statement first. Again she cannot neglect to state that she also has lost money in the venture. Now, does anybody out there feel better knowing Carole has lost money as well. Let's face it she collected the money, and continued to do so after she had resigned and had been asked to stay on. The reasons were purely for financial reasons. Well, obviously, not so? So while she was clearly aware of the difficulties the company found itself in (that is why she resigned to begin with), she continued collecting a salary nevertheless. How convenient it is to say, after the fact, that Patrick took everybody for a ride - pure patheticism, and this from someone who would otherwise maintain that she is an intelligent person. Must be, otherwise she would not have made herself available for the various roles she played in the company, even a CEO of Edwafin.

The extent to which Carole was aware of the troubles at Edwafin is born out by the fact that she suggested a debt-consolidation company. Now, if I had not known that this was straight from the horse's mouth, I would find it astounding: as I said before "first we help to get you in debt, and then when there is no more sugar in the pot, we will help you reorganize your life." It appears that Carole has taken her own suggestions seriously, now that the cookie has crumbled. Of course she did not intend for this service to be free, but one would have to pay the company for it should you require their service. The reader would agree that it is blatant and cunning and is all about getting your money, getting your money, getting your money, after she has got it from you all already.

She then admits:

"At that point I was trying to do anything that would generate enough cash to cover the salaries or rent," she said.

So she was quite aware that the company was in trouble and then admits that she continued to collect on behalf of the company to get money to pay for her own salary and office space! This is a beauty: "Patrick needed somebody to share the responsibility with." Hoola, Hoola, Hey! Don't look at what I did, but listen to what I say!

Then she goes on, hypothesizing about Patrick's role in the Puritan investment issue. You may remember that Carole accused this blog of rumouring and speculation. The same Carole who now blatantly adds to the rumours. No, Carole, not good enough. What I find so astoundingly amusing is that this lady has shown no remorse whatsoever for the losses of all those investors in which she had a hand extracting money from - it is all about herself. This is of course true for all the directors of Edwafin and subsidiaries. They have seemingly little empathy or regret for the investors whom they relieved of their money and is an indication of the callousness of these human beings. At least, some have been totally silent, but the loudest are talking the most and are merely being repetitive of empty utterances or semi truths, called splutterania.

Of course Patrick had to respond. He is one of those beings, that one hopes would rather keep his peace lest he makes a spectacle of himself. One-dimensional, I tell you, one-dimensional. True to himself he uttered again.

Again we have the story of the bad economic conditions. Again he refuses to admit that by August 2008 he had already squandered R200,000,000 of the investors money. Again he admits that he was running some kind of Ponzi scheme as no new investments came in to finance the existing debts. Again he hammers on about the DMC project as the saviour of Edwafin, which the liquidators have now shown is basically worth nothing (no reflection on the quality of the car, which is probably very high). Again he admits appointing someone to help get more money to finance the creditors account. Remember at the time he vehemently denied that the company was bankrupt. And then he tells us that as CEO of Edwafin, he had little to do with the overseas derivative. This from an educated, supposed to be, intelligent being who only has darkness surrounding him. Patrick, why not just admit that you are a pathetic businessman, in which honesty is hidden deep within your pant pockets.

Ignorant people, aren't we? Pathetic, aren't we? But it is all D's fault, we the observers and the observed.