You can’t be rooted unless you’re free and you can’t be free unless you’re rooted L. Ingalls Wilder

Constructive Recollection Philosophy Application

Finding Truth In Science, Justice And Journalism





"How far you gonna go before you lose your way back home?"1 A spinning, although otherwise immobile gyroscope, suspended in three gimbals aboard a spaceship, is to indicate which direction was home. The outer- and inner components operate independently of each other, even when together they comprise one system. Independence of components is essential to its functionality. Any friction would cause the central component to lose its original direction, away from home.

Object and subject, our sources, will be called here the environment/other/reality and the organism/self/belief. They must be independent, to stay on track of truth and ethics, indicated by one source's independent confirmation of the other and followed as predictable truth, calling for ethics. This duality is essential to faith and reason, separating materialism from spiritualism in religion or what can be doubted from what cannot be doubted (Descartes 1644) in philosophical Modernism.

Kant, the central figure of Modernism (Rohlf 2010), discovered that the organism/self/belief (also) creates space and time itself. Hegel and the Post-Modernists then discarded objective space and time without regret ("too bad for the facts", Hegel 1801), replacing dualism for monism, the object or noumenon for inter-subjective pheno(u)menology, and the unknowable thing-in-itself for the "self-conscious subject, recognized as self-conscious subject", whom "we know so easily" (Hegel 1830).

This proposition takes up philosophical Modernism, to articulate dualism or duality of origin (Bergson 1932) again, before Post-Modernism "revolutionized" it back to Pre-Modernism. Sensibility and understanding grow naturally from "sensing what-is-sensed" and "knowing what-is-known" in (1) Coordinated Reflection of these two sources, finding (2) Independent Confirmation between them and their opposite's reflection, for instance, by the application of (3) Constructive Recollection.


1. Coordinated Reflection


The environment/other/reality reflects itself in the organism/self/belief as what-is-sensed in sensing. All living beings reflect nature, in their perceiving and being. By sensing what-is-sensed, the source consisting of space, time and matter, expresses itself on two sides at once, one being nature itself, and the other "the mirror-image of nature" (Rorty 1979), environment and organism, other and self, or reality and belief. Sensing and what-is-sensed grow into complete sensibility.

The organism/self/belief reflects itself in the environment/other/reality as knowing in what-is-known. Most clearly in our dreams, we construct our knowledge about the world outside us, from lifelong recollection. It is the source consisting of space, time and that which is immaterial, impressing itself from two sides at once, one being the organism, self or belief, and the other side being the environment, the other or reality. Knowing and what-is-known grow into complete understanding.



figure 1


When sources reflect themselves, in space-time, materially and directly by perception, or immaterially and indirectly by aboutness (apperception), then the "here and now" between one source and reflection should be the same as between the other and its reflection. Therefore, between sensing what-is-sensed and knowing what-is-known, there must be one and the same "here and now" in space-time, where the sources meet their opposite source's reflections to fuse with, to be as one.

Each source reflects itself "here and now", which position moves in any direction all the time. When sources and reflections have shared enough "here and now", there is a chance that when the other source meets the self-reflection of the one source in that position, sensing what-is-sensed from the one in material space-time "after the fact", will fuse with knowing what-is-known from the other in immaterial space-time "before the idea", when both space-time frameworks are the same.


figure 2


The "here and now" between our two sources and their reflections expands: now - from here to there in all directions and here - from now to then in the past and then in the future, as cultural history. Space and time can be thought as one in space-time, or spatialized time and temporalized space, in both sources as "duality of origin" (Bergson 1932), fusing into different yet compatible space-time frameworks and functional structures (Bergson 1922, Dooyeweerd 1935, Sanders 1976).

Behavior recollects what-is-sensed by sensing, "after the fact" and "before the idea". Cognition constructs what-is-known by knowing, "before the fact" and "after the idea". From the periphery to the depth, what-is-sensed shapes sensing, as from the depth to the periphery of being, knowing shapes what-is-known. We believe form (sensing and knowing) will fit the content of our world (what-is-sensed and what-is-known) intuitively yet precisely, until we realize our dream, or -mistake.



figure 3


Knowing what-is-known takes place in construction by one source, before it is externalized in behavior. Sensing what-is-sensed takes place in recollection by the other source, before it is internalized in cognition. What the opposite's reflections have brought to both sources, is then internalized and externalized simultaneously. Temporalization of space in recollection and spatialization of time in construction, between the sources and their opposite's self-reflection, fuse into one space-time.

Temporalization of space is like tonating what-is-sensed into sensing, or content shaping form, while spatialization of time is like detonating knowing into what-is-known, or form shaping content. Reflections reflect all aspects of their sources both in recollection and construction multiplicitly, optimizing their chances for fusing with the opposite source, in a continuous cycle, internalizing form at the depth of being in cognition and externalizing content at the periphery of being in behavior.

figure 4


2. Independent Confirmation


Content shapes form in recollection, before it is internalized at the depth of being, in the source itself and in its reflection, by negative or parried falsification of knowing by sensing, for validity. Form shapes content in construction, before it is externalized at the periphery of being, in the source itself and in its reflection, by positive verification of what-is-known by what-is-sensed, for reliability. This is how independent confirmation internalizes behavior and externalizes consciousness.

The sensed environment/other/reality cannot be known ("noumen-non") and the knowing organism/self/belief cannot be sensed ("phenoumen-non"), before ascending from subliminal awareness by knowing what-is-sensed and sensing what-is-known. Terms for dualism since the dawn of Christianity, from heaven and earth to subject and object, are noumenon and phenoumenon in philosophical Modernism (Kant 1781). Monistic Post-Modernism talks exclusively pheno(u)menological.

If and when sensing what-is-sensed (noumenon) and knowing what-is-known (phenoumenon) independently confirm each other, then knowing what-is-sensed (realizing what-is-realized) and sensing what-is-known (intuiting what-is-intuited) emerge, followed by intuiting what-is-realized (valuing what-is-valued) and realizing what-is-intuited (trying what-is-tried), followed finally by trying what-is-valued (reacting what-is-reacted) and valuing what-is-tried (acting what-is-acted).


figure 5


Externally, from the periphery to the depths of being, sources and their opposite's reflections recollect or shape form by its content, as internally, from the depths to the periphery, they construct or shape content by its form. From recollection to construction, shaped form is internalized in cognition, as from construction to recollection, shaped content is externalized in behavior, building a socially interactive cycle, looking for independent confirmation, and looking after it when found.

Independent confirmation between shaped form in recollection and shaping form in construction, is negative falsification for the validity of constructed content, internalized through cognition. Independent confirmation between shaped content in construction and shaping content in recollection, is positive verification for the reliability of constructed content, externalized through behavior. Sources thus feed content to form for processing it internally and transferring it externally.

Content may continue to be recollected and constructed, while independent confirmation in behavior is still internal to the organism/self/belief and remain unnoticeable to the environment/other/reality, as long as the chance of being positively verified seems dim yet is expected to brighten up. Thus, recollection and construction 'tonate' content before 'detonating' it as social belief, in social reality, once validity of form and reliability of content are believed to be independently confirmed.


figure 6


Both the external source or the environment/other/reality and the internal source or the organism/self/belief, have their external- or internal self-reflection. The reflection of the external source seeks independent confirmation for validity of the internal source by negative falsification, in cognition at the depth of being, while the reflection of the internal source looks for independent confirmation for reliability from the external source by positive verification, in behavior at the periphery.

If and when sensing what-is-sensed and knowing what-is-known independently confirm each other, as form and "what-is" content, then sensing negatively falsifies knowing and what-is-sensed positively verifies what-is-known at the first stage of four in the cycle. Form shaped by content in knowing what-is-sensed and content shaped by form in sensing what-is-known, are two new forms, realizing and intuiting, and two new contents, what-is-realized and what-is-intuited, emerging.

New forms and contents emerge at the next stage, both in recollection and construction, if and when independent confirmation happens between them. At every next stage, content and form include and expand content and form of the previous layer and are reducible to it. The four stages comprise a cycle, reaching from one source to the other and back, starting at any stage and restarting after the fourth. Every consecutive cycle is the next phase in sources' (social) interaction.


figure 7


Dualism is needed to detect independent confirmation, if and when the external source or the environment/other/reality fuses with the internal source's externalized reflection and the internal source or the organism/self/belief fuses with the external source's internalized reflection. Independent confirmation is the negative falsification between forms in cognition at the depths of being for validity, and the positive verification between contents in behavior at the periphery for reliability.

Both sources recollect what-is-sensed in sensing and construct what-is-known in knowing. By doing so, they include the other source "in-itself" in social belief, for which independent confirmation from the other is still necessary in social reality, for truth and ethics. However, social reality also allows the opposite, dependent rejection, for power and politics, to create a power-distanced (Mulder 1973), hierarchical social order in which "some people are more equal than others" (Orwell 1945).

Dependent rejection or rather the threat thereof, drives people into seeking safety and recognition. "Self-conscious subjects seeking recognition as self-conscious subject" was Hegel's replacement for Kant's "unknown thing-in-itself", by which he appealed to Marx and unleashed collectivism, socialism and communism, where every subject allegedly is like every other subject, a call for prejudice against enemies and cronyism for friends, or independent rejection and dependent confirmation.


To confirm another strengthens independence, while independence is a necessary prerequisite to confirm another. - See more at:

figure 8




3. Constructive Recollection


About the environment/other/reality, the organism/self/belief senses what-is-sensed as facts and knows what-is-known as ideas. Facts are content shaping form in recollection, before being internalized in cognition, while ideas are form shaping content in construction, before being externalized in behavior, if and when facts independently confirm ideas, at four different stages from sensing and knowing to reacting and acting, like the four stages of the empirical cycle (De Groot 1966).

Social interaction, or social reality in recollected reaction plus social belief in constructed action, consists of content that is reducible, to what-is-valued and what-is-tried, then to what-is-realized and what-is-intuited and finally to what-is-sensed and what-is-known or fact and idea. Each of these layers or stages of independent confirmation has added a new form to content, guaranteeing that relations within-facts-between-ideas maintained truth and eventually could still be unentangled.

Independent confirmation internalizes form shaped by content in reflected recollection as cognition while it externalizes content shaped by form in reflected construction as behavior. Shaped form and shaped content then move to the next stage, processing pre-existing form into content and adding it to pre-existing content, alternately, since the two sources swapped contents or forms, turning stages into phases of social interaction between sources responding to each other and themselves.

"Here and now", between the two sources or the environment/other/reality and the organism/self/belief, content is both recollected and constructed, at each level of constructive recollection, for each source. They seek independent confirmation internally, between recollection and construction, before they do externally. When content is externalized in behavior by one source, the other may recollect and internalize it in cognition, to construct and externalize it in behavior, as a response.


figure 9


Sources internalize external content or facts and externalize internal content or ideas. Social interaction, or one's reaction in response to the other's action and action in response to his own reaction, also happens within each source separately, in this case including the same responses in the other source as social belief, still in need of independent confirmation from social reality. Externalization in behavior may not or not yet be social or noticeable to the other, until it is, honest and unmasked.

Sources feed content to form, thus making content shape form and form shape content, to and from the highest possible level of independent confirmation, which is social interaction unless social interaction itself finds independent confirmation between Self and Significant Other. The one's content-shaped-form is or is not able to positively falsify the other's unshaped form, validating it or not, for a sensibility to- and an understanding of life itself, in its own duality of origin, shared with us.

Independent rational-, emotional- and/or passionate confirmation between Self and Significant Other, means sameness in spite of independence and difference in spite of confirmation. When the environment/other/reality is the Significant Other and the organism/self/belief is the Self, then independent confirmation is no longer necessary, since truth has already been found. Being someone's Significant Other in itself is the greatest independent confirmation or Truth the Self could aspire to.

Pair-bonding between Self and Significant Other is coordinated reflection by content shaping form in recollection and form shaping content in construction, plus independent confirmation which internalized the other's reflection of form validly by negative falsification in cognition at the depth of being, and externalized one's reflection of content reliably by positive verification in behavior at the periphery, for all states, stages and phases in social belief and -reality, due to duality of origin.



  figure 10


The environment/other/reality and the organism/self/belief coordinately reflect themselves, to independently confirm each other's self-reflection, for constructive recollection of facts, internalized after recollection in cognition at the depths of being, and ideas, externalized after construction in behavior at the periphery of being. Sources interact in four phases of a social cycle, continuously acting in response to their own reacting (A+C) or reacting in response to the other's acting (B+D).

Facts develop in behavior from sensing what-is-sensed to reacting what-is-reacted if and when facts positively verify ideas and ideas develop in cognition from knowing what-is-known to acting what-is-acted, if and when facts negatively falsify ideas, in stages of independent confirmation. Independent confirmation should reliably turn constructed ideas into facts to-be-recollected through behavior and should validly turn recollected facts into ideas to-be-constructed through cognition.

Forms in both sources process content "here and now", at the highest possible stage, which is ultimately social interaction in four phases. Every phase consists of four states and every next phase moves one state forward. Each state participates in all four phases, whether it has just started, just finished or in between. Four states cycle through one phase and four phases cycle through one interaction. Higher stages necessarily include the lower ones yet lower stages not necessarily higher ones.

Content shaping form in recollection, internalized in cognition after negative falsification, is a recollected idea, adding to-, yet never replacing, authentic or unshaped form of the person-in-itself, who we know and do not sense (phenoumenon). Form shaping content in construction, externalized in behavior after positive verification, is a constructed fact, adding to-, yet never replacing, authentic or unshaped content of the thing-in-itself, which we sense and do not know (noumenon). 


figure 11


Contrary to claims often made, morality and religion are not closed and static in philosophical Modernism, nor are they open and dynamic in Post-Modernism (Bergson 1932). Within-ideas-between-facts, relations may all be trusted, expected, presumed, predicted, believed and intended as they are. Still, when they cannot be translated, as they automatically are anyway, into relations within-facts-between-ideas, then Post-Modern immanent dialectics is closed and static only by itself.

Independent rational-, emotional- and/or compassionate confirmation indicates factual truth of ideas, whereas dependent rejection by the threat of excommunication or homelessness indicates the need for solidarity, safety and security. Intrinsic motivation within-people-between-groups grows open morality and dynamic religion, which is very good, while extrinsic motivation by fear grows closed morality and static religion within-groups-between-people, which should only be very bad.

Both power and truth predict what happens, therefore both politics and ethics are accountable. Yet, power and politics are only self-interested, while truth and ethics are non-selective. Truth is detected by independent confirmation, while power is strengthened by reinforced conditioning in politics, media and marketing. When power is not comforted by truth, it changes facts instead of ideas. Power and politics may look like truth and ethics, even when their worlds are incompatible.

Open morality and dynamic religion make sure that relations within-groups-between-people and within-ideas-between-facts, do not get entangled when they (automatically) translate into relations within-people-between-groups and within-facts-between-ideas. These entanglements and complexities call for socioses (Van den Berg 1956) at the sociological level and for dissociation disorders such as derealization and depersonalization, at the psychological level (Dell and O'Neill 2009).



figure 12


Philosophical Modernism is dualistic, acknowledging the external- and the internal source (noumenon and phenoumenon), while Post-Modernism only recognizes pheno(u)menology, ignoring the noumenon. Social interaction is therefore believed to be either dualistically interactive between two sources, or monistically and imminently dialectic within a single source. Over time, social reality should independently confirm either Post-Modernism or Modernism as philosophy or social belief.

Power and politics motivate extrinsically, within-groups-between-people, as truth and ethics motivate intrinsically, within-people-between-groups. Extrinsic motivation is either externally normative or internally normative, as one dominates and the other submits. Intrinsic motivation is both externally normative and internally normative, for the one to independently confirm the other and untangle the more complex relations within-people-between-groups and within-facts-between-ideas.

Groups are formed and society is ordered, by truth and ethics or power and politics. Intrinsic motivation to independently confirm (significant) others, by (forward) paying and earning or offering and accepting, freedom to choose, can be against one's own interests. Extrinsic motivation to escape dependent rejection by dependently confirming friends (cronyism) and independently rejecting enemies (prejudice), creates a power-distanced hierarchy and is always in one's own group interest.

Normativity is either external or internal in a hierarchical, power-distanced society, where people dialectically dominate or submit others. Ultimately, extrinsic motivation by power and politics, within-groups-between-people, causes dissociation between organism and environment, self and other or belief and reality. By independence bias or prejudice, all progressively dominate as one submits, when by confirmation bias or cronyism, all conservatively submit as one dominates.



figure 13


Intrinsic motivation within-people-between-groups could beat extrinsic motivation within-groups-between-people in the end, since minority influence may be strong when consistent over long periods of time and not dividing the majority’s attention (Moscovici 1974). When relations are entangled by closed and static ideas reusing the same facts without opening up about their central assumptions to each other, then facts may still be strong enough to untangle themselves, if consistent.

Ideas stem from beliefs and facts stem from from reality. Within beliefs, facts are related simply by logic, chronology or association, while in reality, ideas are related by truth or power. To disentangle relations within-facts-between-ideas they may be reduced, from actions and reactions to what-is-sensed and what-is-known or their building-block facts and ideas, to grasp the linking-pin functions between ideas, forced to be con-fused or be loyal to one idea, not the other or both.

Facts and ideas may accumulate, however they remain facts and ideas, no matter how big or small. Relations within-ideas-between-facts are constructed by the organism/self/belief, while relations within-facts-between-ideas are recollected by the environment/other/reality. Thus, facts and relations between ideas are what-is-sensed, what-is-realized, what-is-valued and what-is-reacted, as ideas and relations between facts are what-is-known, what-is-intuited, what-is-tried and what-is-acted.

Relations within-ideas-between-facts are constructed within-groups-between-people, in social belief and maybe in social reality. These relations are logical, chronological or associative. When groups are closed and static, no criticism and only a priori "truth" is allowed, remaining dogmatically untouched. When groups are open and dynamic, within-people-between-groups, social reality and social belief untangle within-facts-between-ideas, by the application of constructive recollection.





Philosophy Application


figure 14




Two centuries ago, philosophical Modernism changed from dualism to monism, as Post-Modernism, to reconvene the needs of the elites. It had been and still is the most articulate received view and it could even accommodate and assimilate space-time relativity later on. Post-Modernism had replaced subject-object dualism by subject-subject monism, currently called imminent dialectics or phenomenology, which denies the object, thing-in-itself or facts, thereby entangling its ideas.

Social order based on intrinsic motivation by truth and ethics or independent confirmation, should replace social order based on extrinsic motivation by power and politics or fear of dependent rejection, driving people into groups, held together by different ideas, confusing them. Constructive recollection supports being independent individuals, unconfuse or untangle relations within-facts-between-ideas or within-people-between-groups, to solve imminent sociosis or dissociation.



Berg, J.H. van den (1956). "Metabletica of leer der veranderingen. Beginselen van een historische psychologie" p125. Nijkerk: Callenbach.

Bergson, H. (1907). "La Pensée et le Mouvant". New York: The Citadel Press.

Bergson, H. (1911a). "Creative Evolution". New York: Henry Holt and Company.

Bergson, H. (1911b). "The Perception of Change". Oxford: Clarendon.

Bergson, H. (1922). "Durée et Simultanéité". Paris: Félix Alcan.

Bergson, H. (1932). "The Two Sources Of Morality And Religion" p79. London: Macmillan And Company Limited.

Bergson, H. (1939). "Matière et mémoire. Essai sur la relation du corps à l’esprit". Paris: Les Presses universitaires de France.

Bergson, H. (1946). "The Creative Mind: An Introduction to Metaphysics". New York: Citadel Press.

Boekestijn, C. (1978). "De psychologie van relaties tussen groepen". In: Jaspars, J.M.F.; Vlist, R. v.d. "Sociale Psychologie in Nederland". Meppel: Boom.

Campbell, D.T.; Stanley J.C. (1963). "Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research". Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Dawkins, R. (1976). "The Selfish Gene". New York City: Oxford University Press.

Deleuze, G. (1991). "Bergsonism". New York: Zone Books.

Dell, P.F.;  O'Neil, J.A. (2009). "Dissociation And The Dissociative Disorders: DSM-V and Beyond". New York: Routledge: 750.

Derrida, J. (1992). "Force of Law”. In: D. Cornell, M. Rosenfeld, and D. G. Carlson "Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice". New York: Routledge.

Descartes, R. (1644). "The Principles of Philosophy".

Dooyeweerd, H. (1935-36). "The Philosophy of the Law-Idea". Amsterdam: H.J. Paris.

Duijker, H.C.J. (1980). "Psychopolis". Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

Festinger, L. (1957). "A theory of cognitive dissonance." Evanston: Row, Peterson & Co.

Gendlin, E.T. (1997). "A Process Model". New York: The Focusing Institute.

Gilens, M.; Page, B.I. (2014). "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens". Cambridge: Perspectives on Politics.

Girard, R. (1961). "Mensonge romantique et vérité romanesque". Paris: Grasset. 

Gould, S.J. (1989). "Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History". New York: W. W. Norton & Co.

Groot, A.D. de (1966). "Methodology. Foundations of inference and research in the behavioral sciences". The Hague-Paris: Mouton & Co.

Hegel, G.W.F. (1807). "Phänomenologie des Geistes”. Bamberg und Würzburg: Joseph Anton Goebhardt.

Hegel, G.W.F. (1830). "Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften Pt. I". Von eigener Hand.

Kant, I. (1781). "Kritik der reinen Vernunft". Riga: J.F. Hartknoch.

Kant, I. (1793). "Kritik der Urteilskraft". Berlin und Libau: Lagarde und Friederich.

Lawlor, L.; Moulard, V. (2004). "Henri Bergson". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Lewin, K. ; (1945). "The Research Center for Group Dynamics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology". Sociometry 8 (2): 126–136.

Meertens, R.W. (1980). "Groepspolarisatie". Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

Meertens, R.W. (2007). "The Hofstadgroep".

Marx, K. (1867). "Das Kapital". Berlin: Verlag von Otto Meisner.

Moscovici, S.; Zavalloni, M. (1969). "The group as a polarizer of attitudes". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 12 (2): 125–135.

Moscovici, S.; Nemeth, C. (1974). "Social psychology: Classic and contemporary integrations". Oxford: Rand McNally.

Mulder, M.;  Veen, P.;  Rodenburg, C.;  Frenken, J.;  Tielens, H. (1973). "The power distance reduction hypothesis on a level of reality". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 9 (2): 87–96.

Orwell, G. (1945). "Animal Farm". London: Martin Secker & Warburg.

Ouweneel, W.J. (1984). "Psychologie”. Amsterdam: Buijten & Schipperheijn.

Popper, K. (1935). "Logik der Forschung". Vienna: Julius Springer Verlag.

Redding, P. (2010). "Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Rohlf, M. (2010). “Immanuel Kant”. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Rorty, R. (1979). "Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature". Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Rotter, J.B. (1954). "Social learning and clinical psychology". New York: Prentice-Hall.

Sanders, C. (1972). "De behavioristische revolutie in de psychologie". Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

Sanders, C.; Eisenga, L.K.A.; Van Rappard, J.F.H. (1976). "Inleiding in de grondslagen van de Psychologie". Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

Sanders, C.; Rappard, J.F.H. van (1982). "Tussen Ontwerp En Werkelijkheid". Amsterdam: Boom Meppel.

Shotter, J. (1984). "Social Accountability and Selfhood". Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Shotter, J. (2005). "Moving on by backing away". In G. Yancy, "Narrative Identities: Psychologists Engaged In Self-construction". London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Shotter, J. (2011). "Draft: ‘Spontaneous Responsiveness, Chiasmic Relations, And Consciousness – Inside The Realm Of Living Expression’",

Simon, H.A. (1971), "Designing Organizations for an Information-Rich World". In: Martin Greenberger, "Computers, Communication, and the Public Interest". Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins Press.

Turner, M. (1968). "Psychology and the Philosophy of Science". New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Wit, H.F. de (1991). "Contemplative Psychology". Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.

Žižek, S. (2012). "Less Than Nothing: Hegel and the Shadow of Dialectical Materialism". London: Verso.

Other u2_1991 gyroscopegimbal1 gyroscopegimbal2





Send Feedback