My first response to this is "Nope." Why? Because you waved a red flag right in front of my face, metaphorically speaking.
This is the conceit of all subjective logic: If there's not a flaw in the subjective logic as presented, then it must be _more_ objectively worthwhile / true / etc.
Unfortunately it is a really commonly-abused fallacy. It's used to perpetuate all kinds of proposals which, while "logical" as expressed, end up being objectively unreliable at best.
We went through a hell of a lot of this kind of stuff while Trump was in the headlines.[1][2][3]
While the general topic is interesting, I really hesitated to read the rest of the PDF because it's like someone is reinventing that particular wheel.
But I did anyway & you're welcome I guess!
> "Schizophrenia", besides being a similar but more elaborate puzzle that (among quite a few things) yields the phrases "I'm sane" and "Drs. are very crazy", is an anagram of:
What this write-up demonstrates (repeatedly) is a deep interest in one's own personal life & logic. Almost to a sort of stuck-ness. Do you see that here? The writing continually comes back to the same general method, the way of developing judgments on things.
I always wonder after reading write-ups written from this particular perspective--emphasizing similar approaches again and again--do you feel like you are amenable to specific, outside feedback?
Do you notice a tendency to shoot the feedback-carrier/messenger, when you get outside feedback?
Do you search out counter-logic? Or related countering phenonena?
I'm curious to know your thoughts & respect your need to express yourself.
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qs6mBh2uXRM&t=281s
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gematria
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isopsephy
(If you've ever been in a cult, maybe specifically as a leader, you may have learned: Gematria seems like a "fixed deritative" method to the uninitiated, but is in fact a knob you can turn to get any answer you want in order to control the narrative--it just takes a little creativity.
Oh and btw. Seems there are plenty of Gematria fans interested in A) popular social events where B) numerical statistics for subjective leverage purposes are found in abundance. I wonder why that combination is so helpful in making Gematria interesting? :-) The Superbowl is a great example. https://www.reddit.com/r/Gematria/