Hyper-Cubism and Intellectual Avant-Garde

2012-01-30T12:57:00.000-08:00

I have taken steps to self-publish a book project I have been working on.

This is exciting.

More about this later. It may be available on Amazon in the next three to five months.

I'm revising my nathancoppedge.com website to suit authorship and publishing.

The Age of the Mitochondria and Space Exploration

2012-01-11T11:35:00.000-08:00

It seems, upon some recent science fiction musings, that we have entered an age of the Mitochondria; Refueling space-ships that travel between stars will require a vast amount of fuel; The obvious source of energy for this fuel is the sun, but situated so far from the sun as the earth, that energy is not fully available; Although eventually such energy might be "quantum teleported" into the fuel tank, or back to earth, in what might seem like the near future to the industrial space agencies, the sun might be used like a solar generator for sun-orbiting satellites or local spacecraft, even before exploration moves beyond our solar system.

As it is known, various "capsules" have already traveled the distance of Mars, and I believe one even went to Pluto; A new generation of scientists is currently working on a manned spacecraft to travel to mars---as reported in Popular Science; What this might be called is the age of the Mitochondria, the power generator for individual animal's cell structure;

Suitably, philosophy of this period could become highly advanced, beyond mere "postulations" into an age of "active, dynamic information;" I'm excited, as I feel some of these 'advents' have direct social applications that may appear in cafes or other public areas vis. 'modular citizen' and 'virtual capital'

Also see my comments at Esther Dyson's technology column at http://www.project-syndicate.org recently, "avant-garde information" and in other places, "digital marketing devices" and the correspondence between games and society.

Ideas and Society

2011-10-14T12:54:00.000-07:00

Thoughts of agenda are like technology: they work on a microcosmic and macrocosmic level; There is a technology of the citizen and a technology of government, which are integrative; Applications are the new paradigm of "interface interfacing," (interface being the razor of metaphysical circumstance in a time of technology); Applications create function-based concepts of knowledge and experience, much like the Dadaists influenced perspectives on writing during the second world war; Such perspectives are deeply intuitive;

Small seeds, germinations of thought, become very capacitous in their state of reference, such as through paradigm-definition, or through variable-mobilization, in the sense of presenting a new pretext for pseudology, that ground where new ideas emerge;

There is a "transcendant" level of this interfacing, a vertical or hierarchical structuring creating node-based corroborations of thought experiments which may be termed the "animals of the applications;" From the most dynamic idea comes an "upshot" a transcendental isomorphism to use logical terminology, through which some mysterious "delineation" dominates and prospers; This idea suggests that we should allow very small pieces of information to influence large networks, if only the standard of application is perfectible; The result, on the obvious level, is hierarchical information (not persons, importantly, at least there is an ambiguity there); Also, there is a kind of poetics to commerce and communication that serves personal psychology imperatively; It is a new paradigm of "superficial chemistry" served via the easy influence of images upon intellects;

Beyond the "Ouroboros" or self-swallowing snake of applications-singularity, and the architectural plotting of aggregate information storages (as though by color, or perfection, or complexity), there is an applications-or-input paradigm of personal dynamic;

This depends on cultural support for interface-nature, either minimalistically (hints of information) or elaboratively (via applications-based public programs); For example, psychological tests can define superficial agendas like the appearance of walls, and sophisticated programs can create a new kind of artwork based on electrode surveying;

The role of the artist merges with the role of the bureaucrat, through simple questions, and bases for authority; Higher principles become common principles, and higher paradigms may rely on the input of the common citizen;

But moreover, there is a need for applications-aesthetic ideas, the call of the philosopher, not just in terms of economics, but in terms of the "superficial" variables that imitate economics; With electronic screens, the city has a new obligation to mystery, both in marketing, and as a dynamic for psychological and systematic functionality;

The role of ideas in such an environment is quite open and expressive; The first step is not to relate money with ideas directly, but the last step is to award many valuable ideas with small cash; This creates a structural program that deserves reflection in sophisticated systems;

Finally, there can be major programs (like book projects, only electronic) that compose aspects of digital culture, organizing them into mystery-functional control and applications networks; That electrode caps should be implemented in a survey framework that already has common appeal, and serves the interest of public networks and benefits should be taken-for-granted;

The subtlest level is the appeal of the public philosopher, and the genius of teenagers, who have the most irrational and at that same time unconventional and inspiring motivation::

Technological Paradigms

2011-10-14T12:32:00.000-07:00

Something should be said in the future about the nature of the modular citizen in relation to concepts of government, and intellectual categories; I find this stimulating in relation to combinatorial thought, and social science. Much is underused in the boundary between social thinking and technology and philosophy--- the typical answer is to be a generalist to the point of nausea, but that is not the only warranted response---there is another category, of the intellectual integrator, or perhaps "process mechanist" that is not always hard science, but interprets qualities for their influences within scientific or logical domains; This influence is broadly sociological in its capacity, but not its source of thought;

Some writers have abandoned the epiphany as a source of reference and relavence; Simple tools like rhyming and categories can inspire ideas like "the second zero" which may seem redundant, but are actually powerful tools, like the drill or the hammer (not to speak stupidly of these, but rather to use them as political thought experiments).

What is not notorious about the most notorious genius serves utilities beyond common sense, and still extraordinary, still, as if by ultimatum, ordinary: Nietzsche is like this; I find his aphorisms have a sociological sense that was not well reflected while he was alive. Madness is a tool for thought, he understood better than many others; it is this kind of double-negative resourcefulness that prospers in the field of "pseudo-culture"; that formative path where philosophy may prosper as a way of life::

A Writing Project

2011-08-10T12:50:00.001-07:00

I've completed some pages of my undisclosed writing project. My father recommends self-publishing.

2011-07-18T13:07:00.000-07:00

I found a blog about fusion power, which exists in England (as distinguished from cold fusion, which has been termed impossible);

http://mynuclearfusion.blogspot.com/2010/12/darwin-vs-sun.html
Energy is broadly inspiring for hyper-cubic artwork, which I have continued to give away for free with the hope that others will re-sell the work after framing it themselves.

It would be a divine snafu if I found a means to invent a perpetual device following counter-intuitive rules, this would be very inspiring for artwork and philosophy, but not as much for the nature of history.

History is a perverse feat of numbers. Theoretically, anyone who has an original idea of numbers can win at history. But this is not what everyone believes.

There is one theory that the decimal system ends at 49 because of squares and inclusiveness. It seems arbitrary to some. I think its a neat idea. Along with the second zero, which in depth may have the potential to change mathematics---e.g. many theories overstepped the concept of zero significantly.

Techne

2011-07-06T13:13:00.000-07:00

I've posted some technological commentary at Esther Dyson's Technology Column at Project-Syndicate.Org

Sites like that are so rare on the web - - -

Content on the Web

2011-06-04T15:17:00.000-07:00

I've added some of the few interesting websites I've found to the links list to the left of the blog.

Sites like meta.org and isms.com haven't been used by anyone. Its disheartening that there wouldn't be a wide-spread use of psychological testing, and encouragement of electrode caps by now.

First step is public installations of screens that can respond to emotional profiles.

Another possibility is the use of virtual products or local-area marketing schemes for casual photographers and literary writers.

The "Literary Writer" is a new idea. In the future some individuals will be paid small sums of money to submit koans and haiku, or a miniaturized novel. Eventually corporations will own key examples of much of the world's theoretical literature. Then it will be up to philosophers to coin a new literary form.

Concordia Paradoxica

2011-05-23T18:03:00.001-07:00

I'm working on a new book of paradoxes

Israel has good air conditioning

2011-05-23T17:16:00.000-07:00

The most Israeli photo in the world

I went to Israel once with a friend of mine, although I'm not Jewish or Christian.

Technology and Psychology

2011-05-23T16:07:00.000-07:00

Electrodes are existentialism, they need to proliferate. I went to an electrode-based test once over a mental health issue, and they used electrodes, I thought it was so cool.

The thing is, they need advanced functions to map psychological impressions. Unless impressions are captured, they cannot be oriented towards real-time responsiveness with visuals or psychological cues.

Combining real-time, visuals, and psychology could make life into a series of rather simple and enjoyable games.

I look forward to how it is integrated with architecture, as a visual medium. It should take off. Electrodes by themselves seem very affordable. Shaved heads can become very popular. Speaking in a humanitarian tone, its about time.

Definition of Axiometry

2011-04-07T12:31:00.000-07:00

1. In Plato, a dialectical dualism or contingency of positions.
2. In categorics or objective coherentism, the use of a Cartesian diagram for the inclusion of qualia as absolutes.

Coherent Objectivism

2011-04-07T11:21:00.000-07:00

I have posted at several blogs with the idea of starting a typological philosophy, "objective coherentism":

In traditional coherentism, statement p is true if it meets conditions S, where S may be contingent.

In Objective Coherentism,

Coherentists are those who hold that for n equivalent statements, organization S is valid when n is ennumerated.

So before a statement is determined to be invalid or subjective, it may be seen that it is either:

A. A difficult claim in a particular organization

B. A difficult claim based on the perfection of evidence

Stated in these terms, coherentism can be a form of objective philosophy.

Hyper-Cubism

2010-08-25T14:03:00.001-07:00

is a kind of omega of philosophy, to the metaphorical thinker

2010-06-17T09:44:00.000-07:00

I have 1 small book project amongst many titled <<17 Systemic Works>>, detailing the expansiveness of systemic theories by graphical diagram

I have heard recently that publishing even at the traditional press called Ex Libris is by fee

Discouraging

The Ontological Argument of Proof

2010-04-24T09:15:00.000-07:00

A categorical (axial) view of Thomas Aquinas' ontological argument

A Quadrant Structure of Categorics, Example

2010-04-24T08:34:00.000-07:00

The drawing gives an example of how to solve doubt of capitalism, apart from considering demonics (a medieval conventionism)

With resources, a figure may be found in resourcefulness, with a natural reticence in Nature, for example Hegemony, which may be capitalistic

Otherwise, Capitalism is a consideration of capitalism, or resourcelessness

The cosmos

2010-03-07T10:03:00.000-08:00

The cosmos and categorics is an undisciplined discipline

The Black and White Elephant

2010-03-07T09:56:00.000-08:00

The Black and White elephant, less common than the White Elephant of African fame

The white elephant is visible at http://www.nathancoppedge.com/Perpetual_Motion.html

2010-03-07T09:53:00.000-08:00

Examples of the psyche are rarish anhowever worth visiting

This is a sample of how I may investigate publishing occult materials

I had a brief contact with a Crowley on the web (there is a Crowley famous for publishing occult materials, although I don't know how much money he recieves, he should receive more)

His name is August Crowley or something like that, it is in many commercial occult libraries

My next encyclopedia

2009-10-24T12:02:00.000-07:00

is under progress

Encyclopedias

2009-09-08T15:29:00.001-07:00

I may author up to 12 encyclopedias in a categorical scheme

The first title is Symbolism, Linguistics, Sidereality, and Acoletics

Complete but unpublished, 256 pages

For those interested in an unprecedented categoric encyclopedia, contact me:

drypress@yahoo.com,
contact@nathancoppedge.com, or
terrapin@impossiblemachine.com

Based on quadrant theory, originally Descartes, formalized by a kind of Kantianism

Distribution

2009-04-05T15:48:00.000-07:00

Bullet Books in a discursive list-type format have been disbursed at local cafeterias

See the following if you're lucky:

Not to Speak of Three Minds: a Miniature Psychological Treatise
The Little Manual: a Ladder of Proofs
Terrapin's Quotidiams Epigrams
PithAegis: The Transcept of Reason
The Ismic Codex: Several Dotologies
The Poeitic City of Berets and Plumes
The Book of Apertures: on Metaphorical Architecture

Also, The Book of Simple is a one-page document on the secret meanings of vegetables

Economy Secrets and Volitional Proportionitics are each 12-page documents on secret information, egg what Euclid or Greenspan won't teach you

A MORAL TRACTATUS OF SORTS

2009-01-06T20:03:00.000-08:00

(begin page)

I

[[[[consider with whole-paper graphical accuracy in American English for relevant reason]:]]]

[[[Rules as Real Law, to Explain]:]]

[[1 if DEVIL matters]:]

[1 also if of DEVIL as of others, if seperately judged, [as others in themselves seperately from one another]:]

[1 not for devil as anything except what is [Good or good] for the devil: Good or good must be very well]

[1 Devil extreme case [of a being-as-devil]]

[[[[[line of local relevance defined conceptually by numeral to logical limit of brackets thus:]]]]]

(end page)
(begin page)

II

[[[[consider with whole-paper graphical accuracy in American English for relevant reason:]]]]

[[[Logic of the Reality of Sin-Judged]:]]

[[[line concept is relating concepts:]]]

[[if context is sin]:]

[sinners sin by virtue]

[virtue is virtue [imperative]]

[[[caveat:idea:]]]

[[problem with above graphics statements: sin conflicts with virtue by resembling or denying virtue]]

[[idea: inherent problem of sinners is false-'good-being' or 'disintegrated good-being' or 'absence of the good']]

[[[[[line of local relevance defined conceptually by numeral to logical limit of brackets thus:]]]]]

(end page)
(begin page)

III

[[[consider with whole-paper graphical accuracy in American English for relevant reason:]]]

[[One Logic Item for Any Good Life, Idea]:]

[[line concept is relating concepts]]

[[hidden costs substantiated by injustice in precedent alone may be substantiated in some reason by progress, only when progress is justified['in' or within justice]'with reason'[reasonably, by thought of reason that works here by this reason explained]]

[in such a case as above 'individual' or ['personal-self effecting harms by injustice'[premise: demanded]] may be specifically and [premise: exclusively] substantiated by the justice of transcendence [conceived by 'progress' and 'self-being-process-of-being-selves']]

[[[[line of local relevance defined conceptually by numeral to logical limit of brackets thus:]]]]

(end page)
(begin page)

IIII : IV

[[consider with whole-paper graphical accuracy in American English for relevant reason:]]

['justice of now' is not sometimes conceived as just if justice is not justice]

[justice is justice[imperative]]

['the just of now' requires at least the qualification of 'justice' and 'now' when 'just' is qualifier of 'justice']

[[[line of local relevance defined conceptually by numeral to logical limit of brackets thus:]]]

(end page)
(begin page)

IIIII : V

[[[consider with whole-paper graphical accuracy in American English for relevant reason]]]

[[Moral Inherency Determines Morals by Cleanliness of Principles]]

[the principle of moral humility is confusion on the subject of pride with clear feeling]

[the principle of good begging is to ask what is desired by beggars alone]

[the greatest moral perview of thieving is to take what begs to be taken]

[a view of law that is not immoral is that those that are just may be crazy when they are good]

[[[[line of local relevance defined conceptually by numeral to logical limit of brackets thus:]]]]

(end page)

Tangerin et Veridienne

2008-12-22T17:27:00.000-08:00

A Miniature Manifesto on Hypercubism (Hypercubics, the application of categorics as a media)

2008-12-22T17:20:00.000-08:00

Landscapes of hyperdimension illuminate that limnus or litmus between the geometric and poetic ideal, in the interest of woodblocks and vignettes sine quo non in ink and watercolor form

A conceptual scene produces contexts of contrast and realization; dimensional loops, smooth sides and bending angles in which a thought experiment or religious icon may be at home

On an earlier article concerning Qualific Operators

2008-11-11T14:53:00.000-08:00

It may serve to clarify that the earlier article on qualifics deals not essentially with the death of mathematics in any erroneous or far-blown poetical sensibility (although it is a poetical sensibility; to say it is poetic for the sake of destroying mathematics would be erroneous or even specious by induction) so much as with categorics as an interpretive system akin to philosophy, that is dealing inhensively--inherently and iteratively or correlatively--with words, thereby replacing in one frame of vision a context for holistic systemology with a context for the holistic systemologization of methods comparable or analogous to math and math systems;

Where in one context a few pieces may be moved to make a beautiful battlefield of math operators as chess pieces, in a further frame of reference initial pieces are partly defined solely by the field of play; if a field is itself an operator, it is arbitrary and erroneous to pick one field alone; this isn't to say that math isn't real, but rather than the just field of correspondence is a 'mutualization' of context-concepts in a balanced manner; otherwise field may fail to define the operator;

Rejecting this previous discourse as in some way typical and fallible (under the context of math itself), the conclusion becomes under a simplification that a math of fields or math of maths is to be emphasized in defining math per se; it could be that my experience is limited enough that these things are real as a prefigurement of any real math concepts; in another framework, the framework of the previous article-as-valid, theory-concepts such as thought experiments may be the higher form of a ground for math itself; it may be that small initial compromises, seeming small, create drastic errors such as the notorious unsolvability problem;

In that context, the proposition of the 'death of math' is not so much a declaration against the validity of numbers and number-theory as it is a dismissal of conclusions drawn under the espousal of 'towers' of theory dependant on a ground that is not theory-consistent; the self-devouring logic is of two faces then: one in which it gains two faces by dependence on 'fundamentals' as a ground (with the acknowledgement of variance at high levels) and another in which theory-coherence or field-coherent thought at basis provides a ground for the contextualization OF contextualization at high levels of thought; in the second case contextualization is already prefigured by the addresal of the contextual idea in the contextual pretext; in the first case there is a duplicity between the presumption of the fundamental and the erratic brilliance of stepping beyond 'ground's idea' so posited;

By positing that the basic is basic, from a certain perspective coherence is compromised; the addresal of coherence is also the addresal intrinsically of fundamental coherence, that is the field-specificity of original idea, at the most pithy level afforded; this is not to say that the operator is divine or describes all math (because inherently math is more holistic than its terms, or may lose reality) instead rather that system in some forms embodies an equivalence to its operators; it is not that system is extensible with the right tools, instead rather as systems and tools gain specificity or perfection, a gain is made in proportion to equivalence, perhaps via the relavence of field or field-coherence;

As an idea I don't know how this applies except through a dimensional and categoric framework I've called Motism or Hypercubism (the second closer to artwork than anything systemic); its possible ideas of beauty embodied in Eridianism or Limnics in their brightness are coherent with systems thinking, however the connection has been limited consciously to me only to symbological representations and not anything strictly rational, except as a sort of poetic game;

Thoughts as Natural Objects

2008-11-04T08:33:00.001-08:00

STONE THOUGHTS

[it was brilliant, here is the shell: the carapace is a math for something poetical]

IRON THOUGHTS

[here is the machine, what does it do?: the entire idea was a scheme on paper]

SILVER THOUGHTS

[I found it there: it was as an idea of place]

COPPER THOUGHTS

[it was like that: as of a found object holds the idea]

RIVER THOUGHTS

[it was participant in an eclectic scheme]

Geometry of Intellectual Caveat

2008-11-04T06:46:00.000-08:00

1. Conciliation

While you assume this, I disagree, yet by my reasoning yes

2. The Eventuality

Self consciousness requires a loop of self-reference whereby it validates its will when it knows

3. The Epiphany

What is inherent is real by its own authority

4. The Schism

Sometimes weakness & strength as of other conventional opposites are not comparable (are not consistent)

Nate Coppedge & Hypercubism

2008-10-28T06:24:00.001-07:00

Nate Coppedge: Hyper-Cubist

A work titled Corruscated Clock soon available as a giclee print or something similar; the ArtistRising website has me hopeful, even if art isn't gambling

I've decided to use my standard name for art advertising, since everyone in my family prefers this name;

Errors, Ideas, Philosophical, Of

2008-10-17T13:54:00.000-07:00

Newton: universalizable principles are not always applicable to every case (meaningfully or in simplicity; reversed ad absurdium) there are examples, such as 'balloons float'[although something of that mass does not normally levitate] or 'wheels move heavy objects great distances, even on a slope' [applique lever to initial height]

Descartes: in diagrams, the argument following within the blogscript, Differing Systems and Counterproofs

Hume: inherency of causation: if something else happens, something else is there, empirically in terms of law; how else does one determine what is real except by law? [if: there is no law] how may one be certain of the ground at all for unprinciple? [hume ~ we don't know] How can on esay expereince has not found a ground to exist? If so, if it has a ground, is not the inherency of causation evidence of law via its own foundation? Not-knowing, experience still may be unknowable; yet with a ground for self, it may know, or the knowable may be the unknowable; fallacy in idea that experience does not know by unknown other [the "eye" or "you fucked me" fallacy, put in the lowest words] In higher thought, knowledge may well be a worldly experience, yet knoweldge that is not qualified by its own experience ahs teh opposite problem, which may not be validated by mere paper in either way__

Rawls (justice theory): there are few articulate principles of blindness, and one must know that one is being principled to be just [best application, 'razor' for unqualified jurors] assumes limited results

Modularism: ensures consistent gains, yet may deny archetypal states, suited to archetypal fields in which fields must themselves be archetypal or denied

Differing Systems and Counterproofs, Criticis of Arithmatic

2008-10-17T12:47:00.000-07:00

Paradoxica Amelioratora: not a bullet poem: extensis

Initial thought:

0 + 1 should be 0 not 1 (else -1 + 0 = 1)

(that when 0 is not a-axial with one, it must be axial)

AND

questioning 0 + 1 - 0 = 1 because 0 is less than 1

(that 1 is neither negative nor positive)

qualifics

--Eucaleh

QUALIFIC OPERATORS 'QUALIFICS' / DIFFERING SYSTEMS AND COUNTERPROOFS [EXTENDED]

Consider the basis for mathematics, a notion of one and zero, being and nothing, value or void;

Although operations with the analogical one and zero are basic to mathematics, the use of non-numerical signs implies
that numbers are subset within a systemic context; although we need not conclude anything about this pre-condition,
one may go so far as to say that there is a slipperiness in operators:

For example, we may simultaneously posit that:

1 + 0 = 1 not 0 AND
1 - 0 = 1 not 0

[10 = the Scales, thus 10 is not 1,0 ; to posit gain is to posit complex gain in numbers]

In the context of the digital, comparing the set 1, 0 to the number 10 creates a schism;
the first is pared until it requires systemic referrant, while in the second case the system
becomes accretively both ambiguous and complex

Questioning the view that 0 + 1 - 0 = 1 because for example 0 is less than 1 creates the idea that
earlier statements might be redefined (dangerously) with unexpected results. One might look also
at two other related expressions:

One might then claim that 0 - 1 = 0 not -1 (else 1 - 0 = 1/2)

Evidence might be cited in the equivalent expressions [(1 + 1) - ( 0 + 0)] = 2 not 1 yet [(1 - 0) - (1 - 0)] = 0 not 1,
the first is said to equal 2 and the second zero; simultaneously it is held that two positives amount to positive,
and two negatives amount to positive, however in this case that isn't true. If it is not negatives
operating, how may one explain that one expression is greater than the other with approximately identical terms?
(e.g. how is the extension [(1 + 1) - (0 + 0)] + [(1 - 0) - (1 - 0)] > [(1 - 0) - (1 - 0)] + [(1 - 0) - (1 - 0)] + 1 ? ad infinitum?)

Also, 0 + 1 should be 0 not 1 (else -1 + 0 = 1)

Responding to this, notation may be altercated such that:

1 balanced = 0 [1--> + <--1 = <--0-->] AND
1 unbalanced = 0 balanced [1--> + 1--> = 0--> or 1--0-->]

This view, although not elaborated, meets greater adequacy in geometry, for example that the digit two is not
more axial than one, but rather an extension of number through zero

Considering briefly what such a mathematics would entail, one might suppose that
any additional one is a separate entity, thus by identity all ones are opposed unless via unifying;

hence here non-unified 1 + 1 + 1 = 0{3 (this might be equivalent to space divided in three portions)

also, unified ones do nothing to the strength of 0

hence (1 + 1 + 1)--> = 3{0 (this might be equivalent to a non-spacial qualitative value of 3)

the expression x{y might be compared to 'x root y' or 'x stem y' superficially but doesn't entail any operation specifically so much as a context-point within which operations may occur

saying that 0{3 is 1/3 would be wrong, for its implicit here that 3 is a subset of 0 that still has for lack of a better term quantitative value
(the best conclusion may be that there is an implicit non-spacial geometry depending on concepts of distinction-as-variable)

also, saying that 3}0 is 1 or 3 in a traditional sense is misleading; the distinction between 2{0 and
3{0 may be seen in the same way as 2}0 + 1}0 = 3}0 in the sense of piling coins, however it is more accurate to say that systemically 0{0 is of greatest importance,
while qualifically 99{0 is like a mobile operator and 0{99 a matter of many dimensions as yet unqualified

Standard Arithmatic

1 + 0 = 1 not 0
1 - 0 = 1 not 0

so logically 0 - 1 should be 0 not -1
else 1 - 0 = 1/2

proof: [ (1 + 1) - ( 0 + 0 ) ] = 2 not 1
however, [ ( 1 - 0 ) - ( 1 - 0 ) ] = 0 not 1

if 1 - 0 = 1/2 and 0 - 1 = 0, then

[(1 + 1) - ( 0 + 0 )] = 2 and
[( 1 - 0 ) - ( 1 - 0 )] = 0

in the first case 1 + 1 = 1/2 + 1/2 (unity)
and 0 + 0 = [( 0 - 1 ) + ( 0 - 1 )]

however, we already know that
-1 -1 = -2 not 0, else

[ (1 + 1) - (0 + 0) ] should = 1

in either case 0 + 0 = 1
and 1 + 1 = 1/2 + 1/2

it has the fortunate conclusion of solving the dilemma of

0 - 1 / 1 - 0 = [ ( 1 + 1 ) - ( 0+ 0 ) ] / [ ( 1 - 0 ) - ( 1 - 0) ]

-1 / 1 = (0 - 1) / (1 - 0) = ( 1 + 1) - (0 + 0) / (1 - 0) - (1 - 0) = 1 / 1

else (1 + 1) - (0 + 0) / (0 - 1) + (0 - 1) = 2 / -2

since
(0 - 1) + (0 - 1)
if = 0 not= -2

while (1 + 1) + (0 + 0) = 2

yet -1 + -1 = [(0 - 1) + (0 - 1)]
even if -1 + -1 = -2

furthermore a comparison may be made where

(1 + 1) - (0 + 0) / (0 - 1) + (0 - 1) not= -1 / 1

because [ (1 + 1) - (0 + 0)] not = [(1 - 0) - (1 - 0)]

in the context of the premises 1 + 0 = 1 and 1 - 0 = 1

thus either

(1 + 1) - (0 + 0) / (1 - 0) - (1 - 0) not= (1 + 1) - (0 + 0) / (1 - 0) - (1 - 0)

or -1 / 1 = 2 / -2

or -1 / 1 = 1 / 1

[note: for sanity's sake, perhaps geometry precedes #, I suspect this]

since the last equation seems completely false ( -1 not= 1)

we must approach the idea that -1 / 1 = 2 / -2

Deliberating over previous equations, the conclusion is then that in the first place
(-1) + (-1) = -2

However, this means (0 - 1) + (0 - 1) = -2

Thus (1 - 0) - (1 - 0) not= 0

because logically

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 = 0

However, if 1 - 1 not= 0
this flies in the face of traditional arithmatics

The conclusion then is that 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 0

OR

[(1 + 1) - (0 + 0)] = [(1 - 0) - (1 - 0)]

However, in the view that

1 + 0 = 1 and 1 - 0 = 1

we know that

(1 + 1) - (0 + 0) = 2

and

(1 - 0) - (1 - 0) = 0

although these seem reasonable,
we know either

[(1 + 1) - (0 + 0)] = [(1 - 0) - (1 - 0)]

or

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 0

if (1 + 1) - (0 + 0) = 2, it is
not= (1 - 0) - (1 - 0) = 0

Thus, either we may question the premises
1 + 0 = 1 and 1 - 0 = 1

OR

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 0

according to (1 + 1) - {(1 - 0 / 0 - 1)+( 1 - 0 / 0 - 1)} = 0

[equivalent to (1 + 1) - (0 + 0) = (1 - 0) - (1 - 0)]

2 - 0 = 0 if 0 + 0 = 0

AND 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 = 0, however

Since we know either 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 0
or fundamental premises are false,

2 - 0 is not 0, rather

(1 - 0 / 0 - 1) + (1 - 0 / 0 - 1) = 2

or the premises are false [here begins a second notebook titled MXC3 arbitrarily
it might be considered whether this system extended confutes unknowability / unsolvability vis. Godel]

Since (1 - 0 / 0 - 1) + (1 - 0 / 0 - 1) = 2

or 1 + 0 not= 1 and/or 1 - 0 not= 1

The conclusion according to traditional arithmatic is that

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 1 - 0 / 0 - 1

(else 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 1 - 0 / 0 - 1)

However the conclusion here is that 1 / -1 = 1

and 1 - 0 = 1

if 1 / - 1 = 1 then

(1 / - 1) + (1 / -1) = 2

( 0 - 1 ) + ( 0 - 1) = -2 or -1 not= 1 (according to previously)

then (if premises hold), 1 / -1 + 1/ -1 + [(0 - 1) + (0 - 1)] = 0

if (1 / -1 + 1 / -1) + [(0 - 1) + (0 - 1)] = 0

Then according to traditional basics, 2 - 2 = 0

[However, according to the logic followed as a basis for comparison _ _ _]

since

[(1 + 1) - (0 + 0) not= (1 - 0) - (1 - 0)]

the 2nd equation may be translated as:

1 / -1 + 1 / -1 not= not= 0

since we know by (1 + 1) - (0 + 0) = 2
that also 2 not= (1 - 0) - (1 - 0) = 0

so that

[(1 + 1) - (0 + 0)] not= [ 2 = 0 ]

if 1 / -1 + 1 / -1 not= not= 0 [NOT AN ERROR: EMPHASIS]

then 1 / -1 + 1 / -1 = 0

or equivalent

if so, then

(1 / -1) + (1 / -1) not= 2

thus 1 / -1 not= 1

However, according to previous arguments, the only conclusion flies in the face of traditional arithmatics:

posing 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 1

then either 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 1 - 0 / 0 - 1

OR

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 0 AND (1 - 0 / 0 - 1) + (1 - 0 / 0 - 1) not= 2

Since it runs agianst all rationality to claim a statement is not itself,

The conclusion is that since 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 0

AND

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 + 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 2

thus

1 + 0 not= 1 AND/OR 1 - 0 not= 1

Since this flies in the face of fundamental mathematics, the most rational thing is to refigure at the primary equations in a manner suiting to resolution_ _ _
The initial assumption was that 1 + 0 = 1 and not 0
and 1 - 0 = 1 and not 0

YET 0 - 1 is -1
AND 0 + 1 is 1 and not 0

Considering on the surface these four entities (surrounding a zero point),

the quadrants are (counterclockwise) 1 + 0 = 1, 0 + 1 = 1, 0 - 1 = -1, and 1 - 0 = 1

The total is 3 and not 0, although they are situated axially around a point of no value--this in itself ought to bring criticism.
(0 - 1 = -1 is the only negative box of four).

Reconsidering, it cannot be concluded that 1 + 0 is other than 1, if zero is actually nothing, nor may it be concluded that one
minus 0 is anything other than 1, if 0 is merely a loss of nothing

Then if the premises may be questioned, it is only in two statements, namely

if 0 - 1 = -1 and
if 0 + 1 = 1

(essentially in my belief these were popularized by Descartes and the Cartesian diagram)

If 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 0

AND

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 + 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 2

if 0 - 1 = - 1 and
1- 0 holds as 1
then (1 / -1) + (1 / -1) not= 0 or 2

However, since 1 / 1 and -1 / -1 are conceived as = 1

and 0 / 0, 1 / 0, and 0 / 1 may be equal to 0

the statement that

1 / 1 - 1 / 1 [equiv. to (1 / 1) + (-1 / 1)]
- [(-1 / 1) + (1 / 1)] = 0

seems to vindicate that two terms, technically opposite, amount to zero

While this isn't startling,
it now comes to the fore that

-1 / 1 + 1 / -1 = 0

[since otherwise opposite terms would not cancel]

Thus saying that

[(1 / 1) + (1 / 1)] - [ (-1 / 1) + (-1 / 1)] = [(-1 / 1) - (-1 / 1)] - [(-1 / 1) - (-1 / 1)]

isn't valid under the arguments

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 + 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 2

and

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 not= 1

[

if (1 / -1) + (-1 / 1) not= 0 then according to arguments [ [(1 - 0 ) / (0 - 1)] + [(1 - 0) / (0 - 1)] / 2] not= (1 - 0) / (0 - 1)

THUS

[(1 + 1) - (0 + 0) = (1 - 0) - (1 - 0)] is true

since the two halves of the basis [(1 + 1) - (0 + 0) = (1 - 0) - (1 - 0)]

are equivalent to

1 + 0 = 1 and 1 - 0 = 1 respectively,

and (1 - 0) / (0 - 1) not= 1

and (1 - 0) / (0 - 1) not= 0

[and [(1 - 0) / (0 - 1)] + [(1 - 0) / (0 - 1)] not= 2]

the avg. [ [(1 - 0) / (0 - 1)] + [(1 - 0) / (0 - 1)] / 2 ] in equivalence to 1 - 0 / 0 - 1

substantiates the following: if 1 / -1 = 0

then (tentatively)

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 + 1 - 0 / 0 - 1 = 1/2

and

1 - 0 / 0 - 1 = 2

However, the clear conclusion here upon simplifying terms is that

1 / -1 + 1 / -1 = 1/2

and

1 / -1 = 2

Although easily reproofed under conventions, under the earlier arguments these serve to substantiate
criticism not of the first premises ( 1 + 0 = 1 and 1 - 0 = 1), instead the 2nd two

[1] That 0 - 1 should be 0
and not -1
(else 1 - 0 = 1/2
since (1 + 1) - (0 + 0) = 2
not 1 yet (1 - 0) - (1 - 0) is 0 not 1)

(1 - 0) + (0 - 1) = 1/2 or (1 + 0) + ( 0 - 1) = 0 in spite of 0 + 0 + 1 + 1 = 2 and 0 doing no operation :: vis. the earlier example of equivalent terms
yet (1 + 1) - ( 0 + 0) not= (1 + 0) - (1 + 0)

AND

[2] 0 + 1 should be 0 not 1
(since -0 + 1 = 1)
else -1 + 0 = 1
(cancellation of signs)
else pending argument of the validity of positive or negative numbers since the view of zero as a canceller is promoted in these methods, yet also in the concept that -0 + 1 = 1 in the context of cancelling operators [EMPHASIS]

This altered view, although utterly insane by most standards, suggests an alternate approach to mathematics in which an attenuated proportion within the traditional graduated system (e.g. for example integral numbers redefined in terms of fractions or geometry) provides a foundation for a calculative method

Maybe sometime it will be determined for a childhood like mine, that calculus was too diabolical, we needed a diabolical calculus

[18th 5 X 7" page in a day, 6/11/2008]

Ismics

2008-10-17T10:03:00.000-07:00

Polyptics: the most arrogant people cease to know that they don't know; the most humble find ignorance to be the ground of truth (somehow by opposition, the most opposed things approach a middle ground and remain as unbalanced as themselves)

Limnics: there is no wall in my eyes to keep me from swallowing the voices of birds (evoking birdsong)

Hyperdimensionism: higher thoughts take form, lower forms return to return (like a hypercube, there is an interstasis between formation and shape; both an idea and an activity)

Eridianism: the aperture of miscellany is ideal (philosophical beauty)

Isometry: a resemblance varies by value

Adding & an Addendum

2008-10-12T08:54:00.000-07:00

Recent events: (amen) drawings given freely to Yale School of Architecture [maybe preserved? or student-taken?] (breth) Philosophy project succeeding again (coda) website discovered at artistrising.com taking images etc. [some work involved] (degre) symbolic interest thriving, developing composed pages on parchment paper from Kinko's (ept) can afford sandwiches again thanks to my mother's reduced rent requirements (fear) intent emerging to consider perpetual motion seriously again, although psychologically this has been very disheartening--a concept can seem like gold and I utterly lack the impetus to develop it (goda) some things seem to click--I've found a health drink, a possible therapist, I may move out of my parents' house, my projects are developing, my public image is improving, and flirting is occasionally possible; new zones of serendipity or trial seem feasible (haleh) much depends on the life of system e.g. a book or art presence that seems real (iten) as a product-oriented talent I need reassurance that something may be marketed e.g. results emotionally and financially (jend) a public voice or interest may do wonders; I may push noteriety successfully via the web, radio, or a print article (kamen) having a substrate of dependable factors is reassuring when true (levend) when I find shui I give shui, as best I may (mend) personality changes seem much more possible now, to good effect life-willing (namen) formulas may create results (omen) signs of fortune seem like incredible fangled wonders of variegate light (preh) self-law permitted, I must only sustain myself to work wonders or apparent wonders (quit) by default, when things are out of place I may remain with new poems and boiled cocoa (rela) maybe eventually I'll find that college that takes people for books and art, not murder or sex (sola) some emblems or accoutrements work wonders on their own--radiant coils of light, watches and handbags (tredna) maybe the least of wonders is to find myself amongst different architecture (uter) words vary yet vary in their results--important moment of fact (vivend) good things may come not as death (wish) zones of principle sometimes have life, even from above (xilla) sometimes wisdom or shrewdness is the aperture between a material place of accomplishment and a definite feeling of the known (yew) I look for outlooks (zona) sometimes it is enough to compose a desk with small stones [say it isn't death by drugged zen]

Notebook project

2008-09-30T05:54:00.000-07:00

I've found eleven errors of reasoning--widely known as fallacies--that fit neatly into a concept-project for a 400-pg. book; so far only 49; maybe realistically its a sixth so that's progress, however I often go rather far with an outline before leaving it in its fishbones as something that ought to have lived

As an additional note, punctuation may be rhetorical with some equivalence to frequent boolean operators (such as "and", "if", "ifthen", "yet", "or", "when", "is roughly", etc.)

,, may denote extensis of reason into a proceeding element, as of a rhetorical pause

_ _ _ the dashed ellipsis (maybe solipsis) may connote a continuing trend rather than an awkward dream

| | | | caesura dividers have a quality of categorality lending itself to || good quotes ||, | element | s |, and l | eve | l ||| di | st | in | c | t | ions as of paper games or the mysterious wave variance

colors may also denote in the same manner as letters an implicit cohensis or scriation to the process of expositing language as though it were spoken with the tongue

You-Tube Extrannea

2008-07-10T15:24:00.000-07:00

A rare clip of simple PM theory may be found at You-Tube [formerly perhaps u-tube]

http://youtube.com/ETerrapin

The Coquette Type 2 is a supposition on an antipodal difference in the weight-distance ratio in leverage

See diagrams at:

Coquette Diagrams

Bastions_for_Motists

2008-07-10T11:16:00.000-07:00

Motists like Cynics might be bastards of the world: e.g. as old men are fools or cynics dogs Motists accrete negative terminology expressing their terrible compensatory lack of character in one department: 'philosophical_animals'

in this case 'bastion' is a philosophical construct, a fortress from which the stones of truth are flung [in all complicit drama: e.g. with the extravagence of holy fools]

Eucalehscript_Numeration

2008-07-10T11:08:00.000-07:00

My earlier runescript known as Aemenbreth might be supplemented with numerals as such[symbological]:

Color-Scripting as Emotional Language

2008-07-10T10:53:00.000-07:00

Plan_Aggendum_July_2008

2008-07-10T10:50:00.000-07:00

Inkling_July_2008

Relating to Moral Philosophy

2008-06-07T13:45:00.000-07:00

Assuming the consequence; an expression I see in terms of the logical fallacy of 'begging the question';

instead of proving terms by themselves, its possible that in a systemic case (terms being requisite) that something may follow from a position of balance or appreciation; the fallacy in this case or potential fallacy is that a factual or systemic basis is extended into resolution; e.g. insofar as no factual or systemic change is made, one cannot rightfully conclude that deductions are real

Moral philosophy in the context of the idiosyncracy of Heideggar, incl. the emergence of a western concept of being and becomingness (in my mind mirrored in eastern philosophy, perhaps with greater success) points towards the idea that in the context of assuming the consequence, the fallacy of becomingness is not inherently the fallacy of being: the basis for truth is not simply fact or validity, but the way in which a logic, whether moral or otherwise, consequents the trend of seeking universals or the identity of individual systems or coherents;

That is, while begging the question implies circularity and non-substance (in which case the fallacy is that the argument is specious), assuming the consequence has the same error, with the exception that the problem is that an implicit system assumes a system will follow; in fact, either the system has no basis, or the process of reasoning must be as balanced and logical as the system or framework adopted

In relation to categories, one may say for example that in the first case spheres are circles but not all circles spheres (via typology) [it would be begging the question to say spheres are circles because circles are spheres] however one cannot say that a circle will roll on a two-dimensional plane counterposing it, whereas the sphere seems adequate; likewise in systems, dimensionalism implies singularity; the circle-ness of spheres becomes more adequate in representing the class circle within the context of two dimensions conceived in the experiential sense of being pan-dimensional

Similar themes occur in the seemingly sadistic work of the founder of semiotics, who says very little about any related field

Extranea

2008-06-03T16:36:00.000-07:00

life may improve in skill without great reward; yet reward at all may be an improvement; in this case, is skill called mastery? Or in such a position, must one know that this is a simplification to 'I suffer, I must beg', as a a poet at first must find some verse false, and find his heart in his voice, or no life walking in the world?

writing bones isn't always finding the print that drips in others' eyes I find, as though by winding my way through forests of transcience, or some selfish declaration I'm mostly missing my own breath, unless by words I mean a garden, or in speaking I've already accomodated a heart that hurts willingly, or knows the war of following after something more significant than this, as though I know others' voices in my mind, not that they are mine, but rather that my voice follows therefrom, and cannot steal them or attribute its own voice to its mouth, or a mouth it seeks, yet knows commonwise there are ways to fall into a mold in which I speak and do not feel, others finding my garden only bones, which are fragmented from their own path in following a trail beneath the most perfect winters which I'm convinced at times give birth to love 'love rose from winter like a garden'

as much as few know both fish and abyss, the place of attributes and logichems is as rote in idea as one cannot know inspite of following some great storm

so much from inscriptions

Pragmatications

2008-05-28T18:19:00.000-07:00

'where is the beginning of being' one might ask
in relation to persona;
for example in representative
identification what precisely would
replace the view that staring at an
office printer and determining simply
'I am a printer' or 'I
identify with this printer,
therefore I see it'?
Is it automatically a failure
of perception to not see printer
as 'I-am or of- of-printer'?

In other words, with greater clarity,
there are several alternatives:

1. Integrity of being is a thing-in-itself independent of confirmation in objects, vis. their reality or affirmation or symbolification of self-feeling or law-concept

2. When objects do not affirm self, self-concept disintegrates, independent of the origin of self-authority

3. Self-authority via authority finds affirmation, or objects affirm a principle of authority in a modal approach to experience

There is health though occassionally in ideas [what is now seen as 'sanity' was once termed 'logicum']

. character gives life
..some situations are more enchanted than others
...there is nothing deadly about an idea that doesn't kill

Theme concerning self-nature and manifestation

2008-05-25T10:54:00.000-07:00

On the theme of Descartes and Hume (e.g. what one can and cannot know), the authority one seeks in knowledge or manifestation (considered in the abstract as a given end) is the same authority that grants that one seek it; thus how may one claim there is a basis in knowing or manifestation when the authority comes from what it seeks, rather than the process of seeking in-itself? Further, if the seeking prefigures understanding, its as though the authority came utterly from nothing.

Although this is evasive, seeking is predicated on an absence or a trend that lives in itself; its object, defined as the reality does away with the authority of seeking it apart from itself; if object becomes seeking-trend, one might on one hand say the seeking has swallowed object, while on the other that process has gained credence as authority, yet the thought or knowledge preceding a given point of realization is not founded on what it finds, necessarily, unless process is truth-as-object, which in itself may be dubious. However, the equation of truth-as-object may be justifiably as just as life inherent in manifestation, proving the point that without life it is difficult to justify a system, however valid (perhaps not every philosopher would go so far).

The quotidian angle is that thought is motivated by a desire to know what one does not; with knowledge one might assume there is no motive to think, however, the life of knowledge depends on the life of mind; valid systems may well promote mind without life or life without mind (considering things under one rubric or another) yet in principle they are interlinked on the subject of the motive and basis for understanding.

Unless being is equated with knowing, life or mind may exist in its own majesteria within which the life of a trend exists independent of the consciousness of the effective law or source of its engenderment.

temporary note for sake of blog record, blog failing somehow, blame someone

Dualistic Isms

2008-05-25T07:48:00.000-07:00

Optimism-->Happiness: what is conceived as optimism is really an 'ismization' of the very personal and valuable desire or consistency of happiness or the nearest thing

Positivism-->Optimism: the simple notion of positivism as scientific rigor (albeit with principles of application) may be conceived in terms of the meaningfulness of the trend of finding results, or the systems or methods implemented and their relation to a concept of self; in this sense it would be conjoined with optimism as a trend that is not objective in the sense of assuming valuelessness is the null

Objectivity-->Positivism: what is often known as truth-finding may be translated into an existential mindframe adapted to experience in terms of symbols, modes, and archetypal concepts of self (positivism)

Philosophy-->Objectivity: philosophy as it relates to truth may translate into ideas-as-objects (discrete elements or identities) or objectivity

A Miscellaneous Argument Concerning "Eversleep"

2008-03-15T14:16:00.000-07:00

If not patient in considering 'eversleep', it may suggest fatalism.

If not, realism

Thus if not a realist, romantic fatalism or romantic idealism, thus distinguishing realism from romance in general-->

'eversleep' indicates counterpart to transcient wakefulness a pseudonym for 'now', thus fitting the Motist technique of forming a holism from dual categorical opposites;

('in the Vennicular', that is in relation to Venn diagrams, imaginatively:)

Solipsistic fate --> realism --> romantic fatalism --> romantic idealism --> perpetuity of time

('solips --> realisme --> rome --> idealle --> chronn')

suggests romantic or personal zones / mandalas

stages such that

[ q. of self
q. of form
q. or role
q. of ultimate
q. of endurance ]

This provides a sort of 'schematic' of existential application, creating an order of operations in resolving various questions of motive and need within experience.

Although vague, one may consider for example that solving in an absolute sense the question of whether one may endure is not often entirely broached until one has lost all endurance. Similarly, life in general is predicated on having a self, yet the self may not be fully defined, creating weaknesses in the application of self-life.

Although form is a precedent for role in many contexts, form may have flaws, weaknesses, or its own prerogatives before motive truly comes into play. Although the ultimate is seen as having great importance, its really only approached in the context of all other considerations, including the one following: endurance.

Individual entities may be considered in terms of self, form, role, ultimate, and endurance, complicating the matter of how presumably distinct things interrelate. Another approach is to consider how each concept exists overall, without referring to any distinct thing. In the second approach a categorical method could be used to determine general categories implicative of a more complete logic of the relation of entities.

Although this is a precis, I would like to carry this logic further in my future parsing of categorical logic. There is something in this sort of thinking, whether a circle is made of two or four or seven segments that implies a better world, or a more wholesome inhensiveness in the relation and integration of thought and world.

Eclectika / Ecclectika

2008-03-15T12:41:00.000-07:00

"One asks if time is a river, and one returns as much as the river returns, and if there are answers, and there are always answers, and practical answers perhaps, and things being conceived always as a consolation, to which I must be consoled"--reflecting on Heraclitus, I sound like Li Pi or someone - - -

Latin quotes:

Ex relevantum, relevanta (from the relevant, relevance)
Est in principia ad infinitum (in principle, it is with eternity)
Pathos mente est et eternum (mind-heart together are eternal, with eternal feeling)

"Five-of-twenty-six" a name for the sword Zade, which makes grace of distinctions without any physical cutting; razorsmoke

Only a nothing can make nothing of himself, as himself

Obscurantist poetry, example 1

a brother my shadow
a sister my sibling flame
"wars" and "roses" in subtle arts
which betray their tools
and beckon towards a ghost

Themes like nechomachy (shadow-fighting) and feng shui (subtle aesthetic of landscape-energy) suggest a poetic view of intellectualism as a quasi-magical experience accomodative of a stylish, discerning reenvisionment of the landscape of being, dynamics, and experience. This sort of view is reflected to various degrees in some commercial ventures and products, such as the logos of printing presses, cafes with winding iron staircases, shops that sell stationary and art books, or elements of treasured experience: old fashioned college towns, gardens with sculptures and quotations, homes with herb gardens or sheltered grottoes, etc.

These aren't often accessible to everyone, or even everyone who seeks them or is in a given economic bracket. Nonetheless, they serve a role to reinforce the poetic and intellectual imagination, independent of ownership, the nature of one's work, or the future of the world. Repeatedly sanctuaries of a certain frame of mind are the sole holding chamber for a given mode of thought; those that cherish them find words to represent what they saw.

The Subtle Systemic Character

2008-02-29T10:57:00.000-08:00

Considering a diffuse field, as may be formed in considering the distance between a given actual mode and its apparent manifestation (a view within which the object of truth is not strictly its reality, or if so, not the character of experience and or articulate communication, vis. nomenclature or noumena) there are three constellations of thought which come to mind, bearing on the character of thought considered systemically:

1. Life as a graph, a case in which the reality of matter comes out of certain effocacy, e.g. "material statistics", while existence is a matter of the certain effocacy of concern for such reality, vis. "existential parsing". Although this is a view that is both cold and animalistic (and in a pejorative sense), considered as a system, life becomes metaphorical for a greater life, hence the mind may be freed from the restriction of viewing object-as-life, rather than object-as-symbol. This bears on the possibly correct assumption that mind is concerned primarily with essence or spirit and not matter.

2. Finite finitude, defined intuitively as a limit to uncertainty; e.g. apart from the assumption that a given quality is redundant in comparison to its object, finitude in fact implies a limit even to the finitude it describes. This might be correlated with the idea of "death dying", although not proportionately or cleanly. In the sense that "life lives" is a definition, there is the notion of life and death as seperate things which coexist in a mortal. Mathematically (speaking in a very foggy manner, since I really have no higher math training), finite finitude is a way of describing laws of limitation as a context for (what I want to call "meta") dynamics.

3. Systemic attributes, symbolic codification of trends or systems. The idea that a symbolic object is a perspective on an abstract or ideal theme; e.g. like a thought experiment, it has an archetypal bearing on the role of system to identity.

COUNTERVALENCES, The Ways Order Folds Away From Life

Considering deeply, in a mood I do not often cross, on the subject of paradox and the order of the world, I accomodated in my mind five ideas of the contradiction between seeking life and seeking form; each is an element in an implied hierarchy of the play between individual essence or character, and the changeable and perhaps less flexible necessity of basic manifestation.

Conceit of Standing: (vis. Singularity)
that to take a form is not always to hold a form, to accomplish a given thing is not always to be the greatest in this accomplishment, to be manifest without character or intent may be less than to be nearly manifest in intent and character

Conceit of Formation: (essence and intent)
conundrum that formative clay (as an emblem of a fundamental nature) is without inherent purpose or dynamic--ash-like, dust-like

Conceit of Reflection:
conundrum of seeing what sees oneself with oneself or seeing without being all

Conceit of Locus:
conundrum that the spiritual center is not always one's own center, perhaps

These four may be interpreted as mandate or legitimacy, life form, absoluteness, and pith or deferrence.

Without legitimacy life form, absoluteness, and pith become hollow or deferrant.

Without life, legitimacy absoluteness and pith may hold value, but are not central.

Without absoluteness, legitimacy is a charade, life form nominal, and pith unexceptional. Yet a simple absoluteness (considered in any manner) could not be achieved by a simple character, or a complex one for that matter which has not taken form, without becoming something else altogether. Could a complex person aspire to be a very evokative fixture in space? Dynamic change is obviously not a matter of simply turning on a lightbulb.

Without pith it is as though legitimacy, life form, and absoluteness are shrunken and floating in space, purpose always subsumed ridiculously in things with greater power.

Motist Artwork

2008-02-20T09:54:00.000-08:00

Skeerie, ink on paper 2008

Chairns, ink on paper 2008

Carcatta, ink on paper 2007

Muir, ink on paper 2007

Impertures, ink on paper 2007

Works primarily in ink may be viewed at Machina Aesthetika

Motist commercialism

2008-02-20T09:39:00.000-08:00

I've considered marketing posters on symbolism, a Metaph cartoon in the form of a graphic novel, The Motist manifesto itself (being revised gradually), artwork of an adequate scale, or art objects / jewelry / games / sculptures based on symbols or systematics.

Clearly enough the popularity of this blog does not point in that direction, however commercial marketing of laminated posters may be an easy way to supplement my income.

The artwork is developing. I have nine ideas for graphic novels based on the aesthetic of dimensional expressivism. I've had a number of ink drawings transfered to large-scale canvas 18 X 24", resulting in something more adequate to a legitimate showing.

A General Procedure of Thoughtful Modes

2008-01-07T11:19:00.000-08:00

I've noticed a certain methodology in my creative process, working roughly in a system of checks, returning or reiterating unless conditions are met:

1. Compelling: feng shui, attraction, prescient sense, seeking the inexorable, health

2. Fixation: ideal of "vicarious rapture" for justice/ beauty/ articulation/ joinery

3. Object of Importance: an element expressive of a dynamic, or holding a logic

4. Excursion: borrowing impetus, carried by an idea, nurturing patience and concern

5. Expression: action compelled from concern; discovery of a form for fixation; i.e. a second layer of compelling

6. Worlding: enduring modes and concerns compelled from fixations, as discovered in the expressive mode; a second layer of fixation

7. "Fascination": technical term for comparing "worlds", modes, symbols, or impressions, metaphorically or analogically. A second layer of object

8. Departure: erratic or fearful search for new foundations or passions, roughly as rational as all foundations already relied upon. A second layer of excursion

(compelling, fixation, object of importance, excursion, expression, worlding, fascination, departure)

Interpreting under a categorical loop:

1. life of method,
2. method of madness,
3. madness of form,
4. form of an idea,
5. an idea compelled,
6. compelling fixed,
7. fixate forms,
8. formal excursions

Or, roughly (a practical summary):

1. Enthusiasm
2. Consideration
3. Formalism
4. Living with it
5. Recognizing and identifying
6. Mode-as-symbol
7. Scrying life
8. Adventure / Diversion

For the sake of the perpetuity of system

2008-01-05T15:10:00.000-08:00

I'm posting a chart demonstrating a deductive method of Unity, explicated in my book, The Motist. I would reserve this strictly for my published material, but I find at this point that publication is uncertain and holds few certain merits.

The diagram shows an evaluation in qualific terms of a "meat factory", considered categorically in terms of one specific form of deduction, to point a categorical hierarchy of qualification.

The diagram follows. Enlarge by clicking directly on the image

This is a snapshot of a linear-degenerative or strictly linear form of the IEOC method, in which "Spending" is the fundamental nature of the chart, "Loss" is the process or effectiveness, "Process or Fear/Pain" is the objectivity, and "Horror or Butchering" is changeable (reflecting Identity, Effectiveness, Object, and Change).

IEOC Method

2008-01-05T14:50:00.000-08:00

The Identity-Effective-Objective-Changeable division of unity may roughly be titled the "IEOC" Method.

It may roughly be divided into several levels of comparison, running from an iterative-degenerative linearity, to strictly linear and macro-cyclical.

Hierarchies in triplet sets such as "precept --> method --> ennumeration" and "holism --> relation --> solution" provide a basis for determining the precise nature of comparisons leading to concise and totalistic evaluations of dichoto-nominal circumstances, or bases for categorical situations.

A pan-systemic evaluation of methods is due when I finish my recent book project: Motism: the Ninesquare Notebook.

I've stopped building my latest perpetual design

2007-12-30T19:51:00.001-08:00

out of a kind of mortal terror that it will work.

The chasm between a 'divinely inspired' schema (or one I would megalomaniacally perceive as such) and one with design flaws is intimidating.

The idea that there are abysses of history without an example is itself a terror.

More rationally, I might pretend that my handicrafts are at fault, that a working design is no economic solution to my life, that physicists would actually want to shoot me, that I'm not the person for the job, or I was soon to discover something completely wrong with my thinking (similar to balancing my expenses last week).

To ask the best has so far not been to know the path.

Latest Drawings

2007-12-30T19:37:00.000-08:00

"Silky Form", ink on paper, 2007

"Hectic Flirri", ink on paper, 2007

No news from the reporter

2007-12-24T06:23:00.000-08:00

about possible marketing. Perhaps this will be a long-term commitment.

New Volitional Concept Under Construction

2007-12-11T11:12:00.000-08:00

For the first time I notarized an original document, with the intent to keep the design secret even from potential computer vulnerabilities.

The design marks 1 year and four months from the formation of my website at nathancoppedge.com, indicating that some published designs are no longer patentable, even with evidence of priority, workability, and a good lawyer.

Recently purchased materials from Hull's Hardware may allow me to build a model of the latest design in the next several days, whatever its merits. I have been eager to post photos or even a movie clip of a design or my experiments with it for the purpose of promoting the website or generating wider audience appeal.

I have even considered that a device functioning by one measure or another, or applicable as a non-perpetual toy of one kind or another might be marketable as a sort of trinket or novelty without patent protection. The urge to tinker with these materials is not inherently an urge to find a windfall of cash (some might say the opposite. For me the materials have a value similar to ink, that in certain forms an art object is produced, which seems valuable to me apart from its saleability. Maybe this points towards a hobby or career direction as I mature).

News or photos hopefully when this takes a sufficient form, however until then science indicates there's nothing to get excited about. I'm suppressing notions that some government agency would appropriate it into the "secret" energy program, as part of an effort to promote the foolish urges of future pseudo-inventors. To some extent my lack of interest in this sort of approximate delusion suggests that there are things wrong with the world, if only because free energy has been so much a pipe dream, that laws can be taken for granted outside of philosophy.

I have sent

2007-12-10T17:57:00.000-08:00

A revised introduction to a reporter who has offered to assist me in marketing my work. Otherwise there have been few obvious strides in Motism lately.

I continue to operate a Motist art gallery at Machina Artistika: Part of the Impossible Machine

The photographs in Cycle 2 (most often updated) are now ordered according to the most recent appearing.

I have a few potent projects which depend on signs of success to grow.

I've considered forming a website called The Terrapinian as a platform for authorship, with Motism in mind. However, its so contingent now its a little irrational to think its of the greatest importance. But how to plan ahead in these endeavors?

When I consider the Terrapin who would sell books, I feel like so much more of a person. Life in cafes and little bookshops could begin to mean something. I'd be a smeller and breather of ink. I'm even working at a library. I'm so contented with bits of my introduction, part of me is apprehensive that I'm just setting myself up for unexpected failure. The same feeling has existed to various degrees for several years. The things that are gold to me! To think it isn't folly!

Logical Generalizations

2007-12-05T10:45:00.000-08:00

Its interesting sometimes to look at logical statements in how they refer to themselves. There is a popular belief that if you look deep enough, nothing is there. However its my view that this is a mistake based on the notion that to look at something exclusively in terms of logic is to avoid content. This is not to say either that logic is empty or that any content that might appear is empty because of logic. Instead, logic is a context for finding meaning in statements which have substance, even while logic itself may seem colorless and tasteless.

For example of this (what led up to this posting) I'll present a simple series showing what statements imply about themselves, and some things that may be deduced, according to a series of degrees of qualification, the first (degree 1) being solid by assumptions, the second (degree 2) by clear analysis, the third (3) by extensible or contingent logic (still logical, but perhaps by multiple premises), and the fourth (4) completely baseless. As you will see in these cases I may discard degrees 2 through 4 within my conclusions.

Premise 1 (P1): This statement makes sense
Premise 2 (P2): It would make sense if we knew it
Premise 3 (P3): Knowing knows it knows
(Q1): This statement (P1) is a basis for knowledge if it is true (if we premise it)
Degree 1, vis. to not know it makes sense is not sensical.

(Q2): Thus, the statement only makes sense by a higher degree if we know and the knowing makes sense.
Degree 1, vis. those who consider are more sensible; knowledge reflects consideration.

(Q3): Vis. just because the sensical leads to or promotes knowledge does not mean that all knowledge is sensical, speaking logically.
Degree 1, vis. knowledge is knowledge; it would make sense even if the sense was that it didn't make sense ('{p} knowledge' that doesn't make sense is often assumed to be qualified by the senseless, when in fact it may have a senseless logic apart from the individual, for example inequality or differing pragmatic imperatives); hypothetically there are objects as truths that do not make sense even to extreme discernment; in a certain sense finding them may be equated with discernment, but not to the undiscerning.

This sort of thinking could be summarized within a Venn diagram within which the sensical (equated with conscious analysis) is a small part of the knowable/knowledge (equated with experience). In a more discerning fashion, the same situation is expressed in a cross-like diagram in which an axis unreason-paradox passes through a scaleable "datum of the sensible", with an axis ignorance-antiparadox passing diagonally, demonstrating how a trend towards confronting paradox is reasonable, however unreasonable a paradox may seem in itself.

Although by comparison to unreason philosophy is then not strictly reasonable, in the context of the datum of the sensible it becomes quite definitive in relation to ignorance, (esp. if ignorance is equated with unreason or death-by-paradox, the latter being only half a joke since speaking dramatically fatal flaws and ironic unexpected turns are themselves somewhat paradoxical, and not always yet archetypes).

"Impertures" a Motistical ink drawing

2007-12-05T10:00:00.000-08:00

"Impertures". 5 X 7" Unframed, Ink on Acid-free Paper, 2007

You can always click on the drawing for a closer view.

Interpreting Glyphs

2007-11-26T12:18:00.000-08:00

A view of glyphs of a cross or key construction

A kind of compass rose formed of keys:

News lately, and apologies

2007-11-26T10:17:00.000-08:00

I failed to follow up on my blog activity in October, due to hiccups and developments of various kinds, however I'm returning to it now. Partly I was responding to the limited results of press activity.

My latest pursuit concerns the symbolism of glyphs, which suggest a geometrical nature to categorality. I'm not at the point of interpreting Mayan, but have clear and sudden impressions of the nature of line variations, within certain set forms.

The Motist has not yet been published. I continue to correspond with Phil Hall about eventual suitability, most currently about revising the introduction.

Perpetual motion has taken a backseat. Unless some virtue is seen in my posted designs it doesn't seem like anything will come of them. I'm still interested in automata, which play a special role as expressions of enginuity (e.g. Rube Goldberg devices, self-executing series, machine-as-metaphor, toys as thought experiments, etc.) but lately my concepts have remained concepts without resulting in anything commercial or demonstrative.

It was a jealous dissapointment to find an artist's wire structures in a boutique; one device operated by a crank was made to look fancifully like leaping fish, mounted on a wooden stand, pricetag $300. I was amazed I hadn't seen these before, yet also fascinated at the design. Its simple enough, and yet has such wonderful effects. True perpetual motion might aspire to be equally precious and rare. Even without a patent, maybe such devices could be sold in mass as curios. Building a miniature model might secure my name, even if it didn't secure a large income. I identify with these things so consoledly, I don't see how they would not be a greater part of my life.

Corruscated Rind

2007-11-26T10:04:00.000-08:00

An ink drawing of the "second cycle" of motistical ink. The second cycle is indicated by distance from strict architectural forms in favor of a landscape that covers the entire page; the mythology becomes less one of fables and closer to futurism and objects of the psyche. Instead of a wire-frame or stone surface studded with holes, I approximate it to a garden or curving sheets of iron.

Hartford Courant

2007-11-01T09:04:00.000-07:00

Nov. 1st, 2007:

TECH/SCIENCE, "Nutmeggers on the Net: Essences and Sentiments"
by Phil Hall

...

Motism Made Easy

Also in New Haven is 24-year-old Nathan L. Coppedge, who is bringing motism to the Net masses via The Motist Agenda (motism.blogspot.com). Coppedge defines motism as "a movement based in philosophy, manifest in art and applicable to literature, described in the unpublished book "The Motist: A Free-Thought Manifesto" by Eucaleh Terrapin.

Eucaleh Terrapin is a nom de plume for Coppedge, a librarian during the day and digital philosopher/artist. Beyond his espousal of motism, he has used the Net to present his abstract art (nathancoppedge.com) and link the concepts of perpetual motion with artistic expression (impossiblemachine.com).

The Motist Agenda represents Coppedge's platform to blend art, philosophy and theories of motion into a new intellectual school.

"For the most part, I needed an 'official venue' for the ideas I've been sheltering for several years", he says. "A reason to keep going, and breathe life into the dream. Partly it's an acceptance of a more strictly academic role, even in absence of conventional qualifications."

It's been something of a tough sell though.

"Overall, I've found it difficult to advocate a philosophy," Coppedge says. "The majority of forums I find are caught up in old arguments. There is resistance, perhaps even by law, to the notion of perpetual motion. People would rather criticize the physics of the situation than consider the metaphysical side of what perpetual motion would mean."

Though his web traffic is on the low side--Coppedge diplomatically notes his May-launched blog is "still picking up"--he believes he can make motism matter.

"Because of the explorative nature of the art, and the diagrammatic nature of the philosophy, they interrelate to such an extent that I've begun to see artwork as almost an axial structure, a bigger but less careful metaphor than philosophy," he says.

"Art is a view, but not always a view of the real or even desired. Yet the goal is to make it real. Philosophy, insofar as it attains knowledge, is a system which describes something that can be trusted, something I would rather call a machine than a zero."

This article marks a major point, even if the view understandably accounts for the plight of the ideas.

[Later Commentary: Motism became Modism in later editions, but I still seek publishing]

Two drawings

2007-10-27T13:21:00.000-07:00

Borraging, ink on acid-free paper, 5 X 7" unframed

Openings, ink on acid-free paper, 5 X 7" unframed

A Recent Drawing

2007-10-24T10:44:00.000-07:00

Play House, Motistical Ink drawing interposed with notes approx. 5 X 7" unframed.

My primary art gallery may be found at The Impossible Machine: Machina Artistika

Requests for sales may be forwarded to terrapin@impossiblemachine.com

Virtually all the drawings are currently for sale.

Five (incl. Leaning Towers, Snickety, Shambles, Life Beside a Tree, and Tumult) currently have attractive metal frames and professional matting.

By request, I would be glad to mat and frame any other drawing shown at the gallery, with a one to two week delay.

Paintings are also for sale, in a more limited quantity.

As of yesterday

2007-10-24T10:42:00.001-07:00

the article has been postponed to November 1st. Hopefully its a fixed date.

Whether this indicates that the material has been expanded or was under question I do not know.

Article to Appear in Hartford Courant

2007-10-17T11:55:00.000-07:00

Phil Hall, an independent reporter has indicated that the article he authored, drawing in part on an interview he requested, will appear in the October 25th edition of the Hartford Courant, as a blog review.

Clearly this is a major coup when it comes to attracting interest in Motism, as a philosophy interrelated with the arts.

I will provide excerpts or a large body of the article here when it arrives.

This is exciting, the more so because there are a wide array of projects I may now take up, under the assumption that they will be of greater value to a community.

That my web-published materials and perhaps other writings are being considered suggests that I have a responsibility in shaping my work under a legitimate system of values. For this I am grateful.

Uncertainty

2007-10-10T22:05:00.000-07:00

Have found difficulty continuing with the new book idea, a few roadblocks. Partly nervous about the news article and prospects in publishing. Certainly things could get worse before they get better, or new prospects may fade. Its difficult to tell.

Hyper-Cubic Drawings

2007-10-08T15:48:00.001-07:00

A recent drawing, "Puzzle Bridge". Apologies for the poor image quality.

I have taken time away from art towards writing projects. My mother doesn't approve of the work titled "Untitled (Waxen Image)", claiming the colors are too bright. I think parts of it are spookily good, while other parts lack in coherence. I hope to work towards larger pieces, but this depends in part on establishing my identity apart from family.

My current project

2007-10-08T11:36:00.000-07:00

Over 4800 words. Pushed through a section I have written on twice before.

The fine art of examples.

Update

2007-10-07T10:01:00.000-07:00

My new project is going fairly swimmingly. I have over 3500 words in a little over two days, counting a two page contents-outline I had made previously.

Although the material is familiar, this new extended and rational approach reinforces my belief that Motism is something very real.

I continue to look forward to the article in the Hartford Courant, the date of which is not yet certain (sometime this month). I have mailed a manuscript, but have not heard back. I have no major relationship with a publisher at this point. Its possible that I will write another book before I reach an editing stage with any of it.

A New Project

2007-10-06T10:06:00.000-07:00

In an effort to shift the focus of The Motist towards strict philosophy, I have begun work on a new book based partly on the first.

I won't go into details, since it is a work in progress, but I have made an outline which has given me courage that this may stand as a work of philosophy, even apart from literary qualities. The structuring seems eloquent. I simply want to write it!

There's so much that can only be said if it is said clearly.

Developments

2007-10-04T08:43:00.000-07:00

I've sent The Motist manuscript to be reviewed. This is the nearest I've been to the writing life. I have the feeling that a great deal may hinge on this, but continue to remind myself that readers need a book that is considered through and through, so I should look over all materials with great care and revise wherever it might improve.

When it comes down to it, the effect on readers is far more important than the intentions of the writer, particularly if the writer's intentions remain vague. To some extent The Motist fulfills its promise in the present form, however I find it slightly disquieting that it doesn't remind me directly of any book I have seen on the shelf.

At least I can tell myself I am more prepared than ever to write.

Otherwise, I have posted a demonstration of the Coquette energy concept at Coquette.

I hope to create additional demos soon for other concepts, however these are not working models but slightly realistic demonstrations of principles.

Investigations 4 will be posted soon, if time allows.

Investigations 4

2007-09-30T15:53:00.000-07:00

There are several very key points in the last summary, which may be reformulated as follows:

1. The categorical value of symbolism is actually independent of the mode of rendering (e.g. geometry, natural or poetic symbols, glyph-like or graphical symbolism), at least in the context of a specific metaphorical context, such as the way point and space define both circle and cross as opposites, in an opposite fashion to the way black and white define grey. What is compared then is not a graphical resemblance, but rather a difference in subtle properties which define the specified field.

2. The "center" of an ameliorative method in fact implies degrees of separation from a center of correspondence; in this sense the field is dimensional horizontally by coherence, and vertically by correspondence.

3. Categorical fields describe one reality, which coheres insofar as it describes one condition or field of conditions.

4. The combinatorial relationship of symbols in fact leads to a hierarchical ladder of correspondence reaching for elemental archetypes conceived as ideal cases or game states in which a paradoxical mechanic is continually resolved.

What is implied by 1 and 2 is then a vertical field of correspondence by categorical symbolism, and a horizontal correspondence by symbolic transformation. Thus the vertical element implies a hierarchy in which simple or original--eventually archetypal--forms join in an axis of conjunction. Horizontally identities relate in a field of similarity and interrelation that may be abbreviated as categorical elements of distinction from the vertical, describing distance of relation from a specified field of "original" interrelations.

Considering parts 3 and 4, the conjoining of categorical fields in terms of the vertical and horizontal is expressive of a sort of spacial architecture of situational dynamics within a symbolic counterpart to considered states of identity and relation. Moving beyond this, the logic of relation may in fact be determined in terms of archetypal modes of relation. In other words, like architecture, the architecture of distinct symbolic states, even in terms of multiple categories of relation, may be determined in terms of the approach to a room or the method of interpreting a state.

For example, there may be a categorality of travel as opposed to a categorality of structure or basis. The truth that originates from sheer reality is not necessarily the truth that originates solely from power, etc. By considering roots there is a travel from root to a changeable future condition or objective (deontology), and there is an ontological amelioration of considering dynamic or representative states of holism. Although the first case may yield more results, the second in fact informs the range of conceivable symbols. Out of the dynamics of the unity of symbols, identities of key states become evident.

Paradoxical dualism provides a door to reconceiving the primary state as one reflective of an entire breadth of perceivable realities. I will expand on these points in the following Notes & Summary.

Status of the media inquiry

2007-09-30T12:00:00.000-07:00

I'm editing this entry from an earlier statement that my contact with the reporter has gone stale. In fact there is little reason to be nervous. He thinks well of my website, so judging by his authority the article in the Courant will go through. Sometimes its easier to anticipate doom than prepare for every kind of success.

Feeling optimistic.

Addressing Life

2007-09-29T12:37:00.000-07:00

Its easy in a dissociated age to forget how to live. Mystics may ask us to forget the body and its limitations, but this can be a conflicting message to those for whom a body is the highest personal reality.

It then becomes important to address what is the self and the higher self, not as something apart from body, or bound up in figments of a promised alternate reality, but rather relating directly to what has import to the individual.

One may ask, even, what is the body? Am I caught in a notion of body that is self-limiting? For example, a skeleton strung together by wire, or a cloud that can barely feel itself? Is the body forgotten, or does it move when the mind moves? Should it move? In what way does the body accommodate the self? Is it configured in order to appease the self, or is it always speaking of an escape from itself?

In order to solve these questions, I would like to ask, is it a body insofar as it is a body (a self-evident closed loop) or is it a body insofar as it is, insofar as it has being? In the first case we take the body for granted, even when it is a question. This has the effect of marginalizing the importance and reality of its sensations--even in thought. In the second case we are asking, of what does it consist, in what way may I realize it?

By looking into the meanings of sensations, presence, personal space, and related modalities, we are also asking what it is to be, and expanding the notion of self-as-life.

These notions are worth touching on, simply because while they have great bearing on the nature of experience, they are rarely the subject of western philosophy as it is known to me.

Hyper-Cubic Drawings

2007-09-28T15:24:00.000-07:00

Something I have not posted here is the prevalence of ink drawing to my concept of Motist art. In fact this is where it began. As an example, here are three recent Motist ink drawings, titled "Puzzle Bloom", "Snickety" and "Tangle":

Puzzle Bloom, 5 X 7" unframed, ink on acid-free paper.

Snickety, 5 X 7" unframed, ink on acid-free paper.

Tangle, 5 X 7" unframed, ink on acid-free paper.

[Snickety--middle--is recently for sale at Jojo's Cafe in New Haven for $40 framed]

Notes and Summary on the Third Investigation

2007-09-27T17:29:00.000-07:00

1. There is a life to the mechanics of categories, in part through the categorical nature of taleology. One useful way to look at this is in terms of analogy. The opposite of a given symbol or object is not always intuitive. Although a circle is made of a line, the opposite of a circle (a cross) may not oppose lines so much as the returningness of circles. This is because circles are defined within a certain context through which they gain metaphorical import.

2. Paradox is a high form of combining opposites to reach a truth inbetween. The use of a paradox is a high standard in reaching truth statements. More on this in The Motist manifesto.

3. The nature or "second center" in the midst of categories implies a dynamism amongst related ideas, that focusses reasonably on what is being defined rather than in building connections amongst clearly distinct realities. In this respect I share somewhat in the correspondence theory of truth. A link is provided at my less recent essays page at Philosophical Essays, listed under Coherence theory (I have not adopted a pseudonym at this earlier page).

4. Although there is a temptation to belittle this method as standing on no firm ground, in fact the categorical field is no one place; to change terms is to choose another field. This does not imply that any given field is meaningless, but rather that insofar as one field is distinct from another, there is some degree less overlap in what they describe. By starting in a different place, a different solution, not a different reality, is provided. Any statements derived are necessarily non-conflicting insofar as they relate.

5. There are also overlaps between larger notions of justice, identity, intelligence, beauty, etc. which may be compared in a similar fashion to arrive at a sense of the relatedness between ideal types and the system within which they may be organized or considered. At the very least, considering the combinatorial relatedness between categorical types and functions results in a broader view of the field of potential thoughts or roles. Finally, individual identity may be considered as existing within the context of such relationships, such that that life of inter-relevance becomes the life of mind.

Investigations 3

2007-09-22T19:49:00.000-07:00

Based on the notes and summary of the Second Investigation, there are several points to bear out:

1. The bridge between the properties of things is a bridge of qualific similarity that may be called categorical.

2. Part of the reason of experience is the relevance of the outward to the inward, implying an imperative that experience cohere to a kind of aesthetic of the mind.

3. Individuals, defined as identities with roles, find value within this afforementioned field of qualities, even if indirectly, by apprehending objects which to the extent that they have value, cohere to such a system.

4. There is a relationship amongst properties through which there is a common sense of place, justice, beauty, usefulness, ethics, intelligence, and identity. Thus the aesthetic or composition amongst these properties may provide a map of other sorts of relationships.

Although I have written of the field of categories before (the Motist manifesto provides a means for discovering such relationships, which are many and varied), I'm taking this opportunity to chart new territory, thus I am focussing not on specific truths as the methods may formulate, but rather more general rules or speculations reflective of over-arching themes.

I haven't written much before on the qualities themselves, although this is implicit in the method. I myself have difficulty finding the place in my thought where I apprehend with deep feeling, other than by awe or fear. As I continue the trends of the investigations, I am seeking the life of the thought, not as fossilized categories, but fields or vessels within which tranformation may take place.

From the first statement is implied that there is a sense of layers; property : quality : category. One may shift while another remains unchanged. For example, if I substitute property for symbol, quality for qualifier, and category in terms of a field of dichotomic opposites, what may be compared is for example CIRCLE : UNIFIED : NOT DISPERSED. If NOT DISPERSED is defined more accurately within the same field as UNIFIED, creating two other intermediate categories, we may then elaborate on it within the axial definitions of the two terms.

Unified may be defined as ALL CONTAINING, therefore its opposite would be the opposite also of ALL and CONTAINING. Since DISPERSED would thus be defined as NOTHING OUTSIDE, we have two new categories, one defined in terms of ALL OUTSIDE, and another in terms of CONTAINING NOTHING. A deeper interpretation yields that CONTAINING NOTHING = SPACE, while ALL OUTSIDE = POINT. So both a circle and its opposite are defined in terms of space and point. Interestingly, I have already defined the opposite of a circle as a cross, in my pages on mystical geometry at Cross as Polygon Type 2

Obviously this sort of determinative logic has already proven that it has some legitimacy.

Focussing on the second point, the question in a categorical aesthetic is for special situations that have particular value, that can't be dismissed as coincidences or incidentals. What are some names of special convergences of categories?

Paradox: a paradox is always a convergence of two things which appear true, which can only be solved in a special case, or not at all. The paradox provides two truths, or categories, within which a solution must adhere to each: the solution must be categorical, but it must also be a special case. Since I have suggested that categories are important, this seems almost like an archetypal representation of "special convergences of categories", especially in an axial system of opposites.

Another is analogical, like
CIRCLE : UNITY : NOT DISPERSED :: CROSS : DISPERSED : NOTHING OUTSIDE
However, not every case is categorical. We might say that BLUE : GREEN :: SEA : TREES, but this might be reduced to COLOR : COLORED; overall the property defined is color, whereas in the case of "circle : cross" different symbols are being compared, hence axially different properties are produced. The first is a more discerning case, in part because an analogy was necessary simply to define circle as "unified". However this is not to deny that it is a property of circles, thus by extension there is a categorical logic operating. When we cannot deny a property, we cannot also deny that a true opposite has a truly opposite property. This is the strictest sense I have found that an analogy may be categorical.

If it can be proven that the opposite does not have an opposite property, the opposition comes into question. If the opposition cannot come into question, then the property of the first object comes into question. When the opposite of the property of the first object is a property of the opposite, this is evidence that it is a true opposite of the first object.

Returning to the notion of paradox, there are ways in which the relationship amongst categorical parts of an analogy may be paradoxical. In what case is a cross a circle? In what case is a point space? It seems that this could be solved through considering categorical relationships.

The properties of space in the context of circle and cross are CONTAINING and NOTHING, while the properties of point are ALL and OUTSIDE. Thus both the situation in which a cross is a circle and the case in which a point is space are situations where CONTAINING is OUTSIDE and ALL is NOTHING. However, in this example, nothing is what space contains and containment is what a circle does. Therefore we may interpret it to mean that a cross is a circle when there is a circle outside, and what the circle contains is space. In the point-space example, the circle must be zero or one; it is a matter of whether it contains a point. However this suggests a valuation of points that is not spacial; for when a circle is complete with a single point in it, it is as though the circle is a point, suggesting that space and points do not exist without infinity.

If the axis of point-space is infinity, and the axis of circle-cross is ascriptive in the sense that it implies manifestation (signifier or nature, represented by the cross) is possible within certain limits or boundaries (the outer circle) whereby there is a relationship, a higher paradox is formed between infinity and the ascriptive, which may be seen in terms of qualities of each.

If infinity is the opposite of ascription, a compromise or amelioration may only be found through the ascription of infinity. Either what is ascripted perpetuates within infinity, or infinity may be ascripted within a finite context. One way to interpret is that these are the same.

Bearing on the third point of objects conceived within this system that may ameliorate by paradox, it is a case in which independent of the personal valuation of the perceived object (an object I will assume exists in any perspective regardless of the nature of the object, since such an object is required as a context to understand that change is possible and in this sense prefigures time) there is a correspondence between the unity of the perceptive framework and the nature of the object perceived.

For example, within time any object may be perceived as a trend (relating to Aristotle's concept of ~Talos). When a given condition has a beginning, middle, and end there is a way where it may be defined in terms of the presence or absence of its former and future qualities. In most cases the future condition is not the same as the past condition, thus the present may be defined in terms of the opposite past and future cases. When the present, or more specifically the object's state in the present, is defined in those terms, its nature may be seen as an interpretation of meeting potentials and seeking potentials, a sort of volitional dynamics.

If the present case is an individual person, these might be seen as accomplishments or resources, and a capacity to meet future conditions such as through wilful action or preparedness. However, in a more abstract sense the focus may as well be on opposites, but not of dynamic situations. What Aristotle calls the soul of a thing may as easily result from unchanging conditions; oppositions which exist already, or simply opposite potentials. Life becomes a potential to make the most of a figure ground, or at least travel within the realm where this ground moves. So long as language consists of opposites they may be compared.

Even if there are disagreements as to what opposes what, their compromise is different insofar as their terms are different. Therefore these are really two different fields; one where one thing opposes another, and a second case in which a third thing opposes the first. Because the parsing is different, they cannot be considered as though they are the same. The question is not "what is the opposite", but how to solve the problem as one means to approach it.

The fourth point I'll touch on briefly here by saying that notions of general concepts such as justice, beauty, usefulness, ethics, intelligence, and identity may be assembled in terms of parsing oppositions from different standpoints. A categorical context for one of these might be compared to another, in such a way as to lead to a broader, richer view of the meaning of each. For example, there may be a relationship amongst the beauty of machines, the usefulness of machines, and the ethics of machines, such that it is understood that the mechanics is in fact something apart from, but operative within, each of those zones.

Or there may be zones of experience in which the archetypes of those machines belong, a sense in which zones are related categorically through the categorical relation of the machines themselves: their role and meeting of a more universal notion, for example, the beauty of usefulness (technological perfection), the ethics of beauty (a positive psychological role), and an ethics of usefulness (an efficiency in meeting the overall needs of a given system or population; also archetypal value in meeting its place within the categorical framework, partly following from the previous two, or other combinations).

Of course, here I am considering machines in a broad sense, as a metaphor applicable to visible or invisible systems (in part, notions of conceiving), as well as the aforementioned objects considered as expressions of identities with roles, or simply a circumstance considered dynamically as a place where opportunity and sustenance are reliable.

I will clarify and expand on this in my following Notes & Summary.

An Observation on the Context for Volitionism

2007-09-22T07:57:00.000-07:00

Energy from?
Fuel from?
Energy.

Reinforces a kind of error that might date back to the 'Copernican revolution'

e.g. that life as we know it is in the middle of the energy universe: we do not create or destroy it, because it is immutable and timeless just as some say history was once perceived.

However, if it were discovered that energy could be created, this would indicate a role that is not only active in energy use, but more directly in the laws through which energy is channeled up to the point where it is perceived. For example, a river came from rain, and the elements and fuel of a power station must be consolidated before a single house has power.

However it is my view that there is something between burning and derivation that has more to do with the kind of grace that allows energy to be possible at all. This is more properly what legitimate volitional mechanics--if possible--would be about. For more on this, see my pages on Volition at Volitional Mechanics

Motism in the News -- Modism in the News

2007-09-21T06:04:00.000-07:00

Some press on Motism is slated to appear in October through the Hartford Courant, written by freelance reporter Phil Hall.

The interview came out of the blue, the impetus being Mr. Hall's biannual commitment to write an article of approximately 950 words on websites and blogs. It will include three different website owners.

Obviously Motism hasn't had exposure like this before. It gives me reason to believe that Motism has some potential to become as big as it seemed at the time of writing the bulk of my as-yet-unpublished book on the subject, The Motist.

More on the article when more information is available.

A Defense of Perpetual Motion

2007-09-15T18:14:00.000-07:00

Re-posted from my perpetual motion page:
Based on a critical source at: A Critic:

They take a machine ( A ) and a certain amount of energy ( B ) and expect that somehow the combination will give rise not merely to the machine itself ( a ) and a total of energy ( b ) equivalent in amount to what they put in ( B ). They expect not merely a and b; they will look for additional energy c. If they get it, they will get something out of nothing; they will get an effect without a cause behind it

This assumes that the machine is only a machine. In fact machine is already an accretion on the concept of matter. By the same logic a more primitive person might argue that matter with energy cannot be a machine, for it is already a combination of two things: matter (A) and energy (B), which cannot equal a machine (C).~1 Interestingly, this is a similar reasoning to the physicists of today. Also, he assumes that every perpetual motion machine has energy input. In fact the concept of over-unity assumes minimal input.

My tilt motor design (I think cleverly) requires no energy input aside from construction. It is a simple product of slope transferred by leverage, without loss of vertical height. Any energy output comes out of transferring mass on a slope into a difference in directed tilt. In this case I am tempted to claim that the assumption or even foundational proof that all energy must be inputed is a fallacy.

For example, consider a pair of airplanes. Each carries a considerable cargo,
but one is far more aerodynamic. The one that is aerodynamic takes less energy to carry the load a particular distance, and to a particular altitude. If we consider this apart from the energy required to lift the cargo, it turns out that there is a potential to drop a considerable weight that only exists when we have an aerodynamic plane.

Now consider theoretically that a machine’s functioning is like the difference between an aerodynamic plane and a plane that can hardly take off. One device can lift its bulk until it would have force if it landed, while the other doesn’t get high enough to have much of a result. In the first case there is some kind of output, if we ignore input. In the second case, there is no output, since not having gained altitude, the plane is still mostly inert matter.

Now let me draw an analogy that, since sealevel is in fact an altitude in terms of gravity, there is energy potential of the matter even when it is on the ground. It is as if, compared to a canyon, for example, the plane has already taken flight, in terms of the potential of its own mass. Thus, a theoretical machine may be treated as though it has similar properties.

For example, if the machine loses weight, this would be like dropping ballast. Note that losing ballast has nothing to do with how far the ballast falls. For example, a helium balloon with a rock weighing on the string will take off if the rock/ballast is moved, even if the rock remains at the same altitude. The energy the balloon might have has little to do with how much energy it took to detach it from the ground. Similarly, if leverage is applied to two weights, one attached to the other such that the leverage is sufficient only to lift one, if one weight is detached, the other may be lifted, independent of whether the detached weight loses altitude.

Note, however, that in the case of perpetual motion the goal is not to gain more height than is lost, or to lose or gain weight, but rather to gain energy with a consistent average of height and weight values. Let’s say that a theoretical device is a like a flying plane. If it drops ballast at its altitude, it may then gain energy (instead of altitude), whereupon it acquires its ballast once more (at no disproportionate cost since there is no loss of altitude), whereupon it drops its ballast once more at the same altitude, thereby gaining energy. The question becomes not whether this is possible, since my reasonable examples give evidence of this, but what specific means would allow it.

Unlike an airplane, the perpetual machine is not attempting to leave the ground; it doesn’t need a huge energy input in order to take off. Sealevel always has altitude in terms of gravity, the exception being if there is no ground to stand on (we wouldn’t expect a pencil to hover somewhere in the middle of a one-mile vertical shaft). Therefore it is reasonable to expect that even at sealevel, mass has potential energy, energy that may be lost by loss of altitude, but which remains constant given a constant—or constant average—altitude.

If the energy used in a perpetual motion design is partly created simply from mass, this might be compared to a plane that flies by dropping weight. In the case of the plane, losing weight certainly would assist flight. However, the perpetual motion machine is not attempting to fly, it is attempting to generate energy. Consequently—given an equivalent to aerodynamics, a kind of volitionism—we might equate the mass it has as energy, energy it does not need in order to take off, (since sealevel has altitude in terms of gravity). Hence mass might be utilized for a consistent effect, the sort sought after in perpetual motion design.

Extended Footnotes

1. An anticipated argument, that matter and energy are the same (and therefore it is redundant to say that it is both matter and energy, yet not redundant to say that it is energy and machine) is mostly valid on an atomic level. In fact, the machine is physically made out of something that is not energy input as we understand it technologically (e.g. electricity or a mechanical input).

The machine is already more than the sum of its parts, since the parts are not in and of themselves a machine. If any energy is inputed it can be proven that it is more than the sum of its parts: material parts (A) + mechanical relationships (B) + energy (C) is necessarily more than the sum of material parts and mechanical relationships.

According to this reasoning it is illogical to think that there is any machine that is NOT perpetual motion. Afterall, the machine could not have energy, for the same things must always result: matter and machine do not equal matter, machine, and energy! To say that even inputed energy could make matter and machine equal to matter, machine, and energy is also to say that the machine has energy. Yet to say that it has energy is also to say that matter and machine have energy.

According to the logic, however there is only energy insofar as machine and energy are the same thing. Otherwise there is no use in inputing energy, and no correspondence between them. To get full energy output, according to physics, is to have no resistance, no mechanics, i.e. no machine. In other words, in a physical model energy is not mechanical. Yet if energy is not mechanical, how is it possible to have mechanical effects? It begins to look unreasonable.

On the other hand, if energy is in fact mechanical, if a machine possesses energy by taking on a property of being energized, even if we allow that output may not ever equal input in a given (non perpetual) device, the energy 'used' (from input) in a mechanical sense is the only energy used to continue movements. Therefore, by this reasoning no mechanical device has output, since insofar as there is output, it has not moved.

energy input --> energy output = consistent/ balanced

used energy--> sustainable energy -->continued energy = unbalanced insofar as
there is mechanical energy

material parts--> energized parts --> material parts = balanced

passive mechanical relations --> active --> passive = balanced

Erratum 1: concerning ordinal symbolism

2007-09-12T10:51:00.000-07:00

Numerous times I have approached the conjunction between one symbol and another, or between a categorical field and a different related field. However rarely have I considered symbolism in a numerical or even computational sense.

There are beautiful notions of an equivalent to "boolean operators" within such a field. One symbol may be operated by division, producing a sense that it is contains a multitude of forms which do not address that concept of unity with the same sufficiency; like saying "the world is a stage", or its a "ship of fools" or "a world in a grain of sand", or "a single written page that was the end of all things".

By contrast, in a completative method, one individual type by special virtue allows a pre-existing field to take a specialized role, akin to leadership or a piece-d-resistance. In a third type, "complementation" different symbols or identities interrelate co-dependantly, like a balance of power, the traits of animals, or components of a machine.

An extreme notion of division which I would like to believe is rooted in some literary norms (in part because of its deep irony), is the notion that the field of human action or even spiritual inclination is a division of a fool or separation of his qualities.

This is a theory based on the idea (related to Tarot perhaps) that half a fool is not in fact less than a fool, because of some sort of sublime failure where in some universal sense he is unconcerned with measure, unable to find the right field of behavior.

I observe in myself for example, that I haven't had an idea of what the right field is, even apart from whether I have found it under one standard or another. In fact, even upon such a field I might be a sheep.

This adds teeth to the notorious question of "what is real?", primarily by granting a kind of albeit abstract materialism to the condition of unreality.

Exploring Categorical Shifts

2007-09-10T17:59:00.000-07:00

Following the trend of new isms--"volitionism", "devolitionism", "devescentialism" and so on as I have conceived them--I have an increasing sense that the human environment is categorically inhibited, that it doesn't provide a complete view, even of what a given set of people or participants ask.

Being bound to a single category, even a category of category-lessness, entails enslavement to a life without qualities, or at least breadth of qualities; caught in one name, such as "cafe" it is too easy to lose what a name means, so cafe is a place for life that, because its potentials are seen as fulfilled, does not fulfill the life of changing identity or potentials.

Even if life does not concern thought in a high-minded sense as a parsing of the environment in an active and interpretive manner, to escape the life informed by such an approach is to lose touch with the spirited life, or an environment that participates with the inner self.

Moving within such a field of categories (of which I have found scanty evidence, apart from philosophy and notions of networked environments), the self would necessarily become flexible and adaptive, yet to the extent that life takes the form it holds dear.

The conclusion then is that in a life without social networking there is a need for networks that in spite of this create a sense of locality, and hence individual reality. This is a step beyond internet-surfer as a kind of mind-body dualism, and closer to the notion of an engaging, transformative landscape. Ultimately in such a place, objects interpreted in a valuative sense, such as Motist artwork, poetry, and metaphorical machines, become like monuments or points of interest in a kind of metropolis allowing inter-modal transference or conduction.

In a simple sense, this is like saying that entire zones of the internet could be themed almost like today's popular PC games. In another sense there is a deeper implication that the systems of ordering and processing such zones may reflect the values of those who use them. This implies a more complex articulation, which does not take the interface for granted.

Even in the physical world, there are ways in which zones of a city could be networked to improve the experience. Much is lost by reducing buildings into simplistic blocks, that are not integrally related by function or in a way by which they participate with one another. Ultimately to improve the relatedness of the human landscape is to improve the value of the landscape to individuals.

There are simple ways to do this that are only surfacial; the way a given viewpoint sights down an avenue, the clustering of buildings with commercial purposes; or are simply about ancillary function, such as selling popcorn at a movie theatre. In a systematic sense currency has been universalized on different levels of community (both money and electricity). Granted, there are ways in which, for example, people at a gym would not appreciate generating electricity for a bookstore, but there are other more interesting ways in which one community can work more sufficiently for itself, or for another.

Although much writing and artwork is available on the internet for free, very little of it is used to change the human landscape. Too often what is on the shelf or the wall is a product, and not necessarily with intrinsically superior value. In fact, with the advent of digital paper displaying images or eventually motion, entire wall surfaces might be transformed to display an appropriate texture, landscape, or textual statement.

We should not even assume that the surface must be flat; curved or angular surfaces may have a different potential to utilize changing pictures. The paper or other digital material may even be produced with a different surface texture (for example as hairs, rough as stone, or with a strong gloss). This would improve the familiarity and authenticity of these structured zones.

Although some of this might be subsumed in the field of haptics, which relates more directly with virtual environments, there are benefits in considering the experience we take for granted in terms of considerations that oftentimes are relegated to entertainment districts. It isn't that life precisely should be a playground, but simply that some textures and structural considerations have an enormous psychological impact which influences how people think about their lives. There is evidence enough in avant-garde architecture; these buildings are valuable not simply because of radical structures, but because they make an impression.

It is my belief that moving away from unitary aesthetic into a kind of inter-unitary aesthetic would result in a landscape in which aesthetic values are appreciated in more empirical terms; the schism between great buildings and great art, and any human dissapointments would be reduced; experience would be more accomodating of what the mind implicitly asks.

On a higher level, a level where I feel I must tread carefully, aesthetics becomes associatively systematic and begins to derive inspiration from philosophy. I then begin to consider how systems effect the human landscape. If there is no conjunction between buildings, or even subtly related function, it becomes difficult to conceive of things as even related. Every location becomes a chasm that doesn't speak a common language.

Its true that the internet has done much to connect data, but it has failed to connect experience; people only gain association by the assumption of a second non-place where they coexist. What I am implying here is a renewed locality, not to information, but to the information experience. The flexibility of electronic format in fact permits reading to be lived. Just as the Chinese game of Go must have begun as a strategy game for the military, so too today's computer games and virtual environments may follow a reverse path and gain academic and everyday value. Part of this is recognizing that games are not something apart from life; if the individual has a sense of what is relavent to him or herself, there is a game that can accomodate this, and ideally, an environment that will accommodate the game.

Arguments against this are founded on the belief that life is more relavent as it is. In fact, media and a landscape that accommodates the media aesthetically and personally (in a way where it has relavence, and not simply commercial relavence), permit experiences in which writing, visuals, and networking would be accommodated, even according to an active and socially oriented form of living.

Embracing the two extremes of workaday life and global web suggest a compromise in which information becomes integral to the human landscape.

For related materials (an albeit less extreme but nevertheless radical approach) see XANADU.COM about possible futures of the web.

Its my belief that philosophy in relation to systematics, and some form of dynamic artwork, could play strong roles ultimately in such a place.

Notes and Summary on the Second Investigation

2007-09-07T14:37:00.000-07:00

* The bridge of comparison between symbolic or otherwise apprehended objects is the datum of qualific similarity.

* Intentionality is rational by being distinct from the arbitrary. The presumption of a rational intention is founded in the notion of a context that is not arbitrary. If a context that is not arbitrary is one of qualific similarity, escaping an experience qualified by the arbitrary is a matter of subtlety, that is, finding intention that speaks of the unknown, or the known that is not arbitrary.

* When rationality ceases to seek the relevance of one thing with another, its only reason is that it is incapable of sufficient reason. The alternative is to hold that one or more of the objects makes no rational impression, but this is the same as saying that it is not real. In fact to say that an object makes no rational impression is to admit insanity on its account. By this logic there is an inherent reasoning in the coordinated relevance of things; correlation becomes almost synonymous with mind.

The question becomes is it most rational to have a rational object (an object that confers reason), or to find reason even without reason (to possess a quality without a tangible source)? Is it reasonable to have a rational object that does not defer for relevance, or a relevance that does not defer to objects? Although brain chemistry may be implied here, what may also be implicated is a rationality to aesthetic experience.

In a certain way it is important to create an arbitrary that is arbitrary, a figure ground within which relevence is a valid term. In another sense it is important to create a relevance about relevance, that is to pursue meaning as a conscious act.

Art as a metaphor for intentioned experience is actually an arbitrary context for relevance beyond reinforcing the notion that relevance has a role. Intention may be less directly concerned with the manifest of experience than with the qualific relation of relevant objects.

For example, a person's interaction with a typing interface is not with keys on which to type, or the display of the language typed, but with the relevance of the language typed, and the relevance of the typing process with a display also qualified by language and also language equivalent to intention. To type without intention or relevance is not actually to type, it could be no more than a demonstration; not of purpose so much as function.

* The only complete tool, or complete symbol for usefulness, is a field of archetypal properties for apprehended things, that by the extent of its relevance is real. Reason transforms amongst these properties--whether they be named or unnamed--by reason. They provide a sense of place, justice, beauty, usefulness, ethics, intelligence, and identity.

* Life that finds place, justice, beauty, usefulness, ethics, intelligence, or identity thus takes shape by finding relevance within that system of relavence. Within that system individuals, defined as identities with roles, are rewarded for seeking relevance on their own terms.

Proportional Thinking--Considering an Aesthetics of the Scale of Concepts

2007-09-07T08:13:00.000-07:00

In my recent history I've considered forms--ideas in the limited sense as "in formation"--in terms of beauty, singularity, modularity, parallelism, and so on, not to make too much of it, but this leads me to a notion that in many ways thoughts in a symbolic sense suggest a particular proportion--closer to the original sense of relativity as I see it--and by extension scale.

There are numerous ways to look at scale. There is the scale of constructs which consist of similar units repeated, like an apartment complex. There is the scale of differences in scale, like a child standing over an ant hill, or Gulliver and the Lilliputians. There is also the scale of status or monuments which are in the same field but may rise twice as high or more--even as a statement.

Then there is what I would like to call the "meso scale" of proportions. I realize its often used in a basic context related to the root "middle". In my mind, however, it is more directly related to the scale of beauty, to the universalizable nature of the relationship between individual scale and functional scale.

It is the balance of proportions of various kinds that may make a given thing beautiful. For large populations nothing major sticks out, while for smaller populations special characteristics may take precedent. Ultimately what is beautiful for one is its balance amongst less balanced ratios in a larger context.

Similarly, there is a beauty to situations which depends on balance. There is one way who will always be hauling a 20-foot ladder, and his situations depend on that scale. For another there is always a microscope, so that things begin to look microscopic. For someone else it is inbetween--knife tricks, juggling, painting posters--and the act is somehow more amazing for being immediately apparent. It is as though the middlemost scale is really the primary performance.

Yet there is a point where scale is not meso, nor is it entirely distinct from other scales; instead it is what I call an "ordinal scale"; it is concerned with proportions yes, but within a greater measure. According to a proportional measure of what is finite or even infinitesimal, wires cross-sect a computer chip in a way that may not be relevant to non-experts, venetian blinds consist of a finite number of slats, complexity can suggest scalelessness in art, modules on a spaceship can be secondary to the mega-logic of its overall shape, bulk, and engineering.

Within this scale, proportions can be quantified modularly and not merely in terms of ratios; the proportion is not merely between the micro and the macro, but between the macro of the scope of the micro and the proportional theory or holism of the overall situation. The metaphor is not merely between the ratio of the small and the ratio of the large, but between the small's likeness of the large, and the large's accommodation for the nature of repeating the small.

Returning to the notion of the ladder, the microscope, and the juggler or knife-thrower, these are things that are still relevant on an ordinal scale. Architecture--and by extension, concepts of architecture--as a mentor proclaimed to me--is scaleless. That is, the metaphor of form is applicable on any level, so long as its proportion is not a metaphor. But insofar as its proportion is a metaphor, it has achieved relevance. The macro produces a ladder, creating the potential to gain and lose distance; the micro examines minutia providing an alternative to travel, while the meso is a knife thrower continually holding us in awe with its astounding relevance.

By extension, the value of ordinary thoughts is their relevance, the value of great thoughts is to shift the sense of scale, while the value of small thoughts is as an alternative to one's accustomed scale. Similarly, "middle-thinkers" are practical, great thinkers are philosophers or make leaps, and minimalist thinkers always understand that they are prefigured within the ordinary.

Investigations 2

2007-09-03T11:38:00.000-07:00

There are several points made in the first investigation that bear particularly on the impetus of this writing; first, the importance of the physical as a basis combined with the special need for multiple categories (that is no consistent standard of categorization such as quantity, intensity, association, relatedness etc.), leads to the idea that the physical in fact consists of signifiers, not in a strictly literal or even symbolic sense, but in the sense of distinct properties which may be apprehended by the mind, through which multiple objects may be compared. (It goes without saying that these may be sensory properties such as heat and cold, or abstracted properties of mental objects).

Thus the landscape being considered is the landscape of meaning, which bears on the second point, that the intentionalism being considered is the intention of meaning within such a field, which cannot be considered as arbitrary for that itself is founded on the notion that life as a whole is arbitrary (since the intention necessarily is founded within reality), if we keep in mind that matter cannot be rationalized apart from meaning, and there is no import in a strict sense without some subtle sense of intentionality, intentionality generally being distinguished from the arbitrary.

Thirdly, although the field of categories is not limited by one consistent standard, the properties of these "apprehended objects" as separate from the outward aspect may be combined such that through intention the inherent reason of their physicality is categorically manifest as equally real. That is, if we combine the apprehended properties of two things that are recognized as having the capacity to make impressions, it is unreasonable to think that no impression would be made. In fact, it is more reasonable to think that the combination makes no impression insofar as they have not been combined. Intention becomes important in distinguishing between combined "masses" or fixed objects, and logically or categorically combined properties of (meaningful) objects.(~1)

What is implicated here is that essentially within a pragmatic system of categories partially defined by the available tools, life itself as it is understood rationally transforms amongst a field of properties, which insofar as they are rational have a consistent relatedness with one another. This isn't to say that anyone qualified by rationality would know everything, but simply that insofar as tools may be defined holistically (that is, their breadth known), within any system of interpretation the combinations may be considered categorically finite. This isn't to say there are not infinite variations within a category, or that all systems are holistic, or even that the sum of all systems is a holism. It simply implies that categorical reason is a shortcut to great leaps, and that the system of categories, insofar as it is complete, almost constitutes a metaphysics. Yet only insofar as it permits transformation, indicating that such a system consists not of fixed categories of populations or realities-as-they-are, but rather categories of properties themselves related categorically.

Footnotes

1. Intention becomes a means of apprehending in a direct way a mental situation in terms of available objects. Objects without intention tend towards the arbitrary. Yet the intention of the individual often conflicts with the contradiction of the intentions of objects, such that reason becomes concerned with an arbitration of the arbitrary; that is, qualifying the arbitrary as, in fact, arbitrary (and things without arbitrary qualities as not arbitrary).

Notes and Summary of the First Investigation

2007-09-03T10:56:00.000-07:00

* An 'authentic' method may concern escaping excuses, or the substantiation of excuses, leading to a sense of locality, a landscape.

* Repeated themes are useful in that they accrete meaning.

* Since there are many places to start in terms of system, the best starting place is a very careful consideration for the value of the starting situation.

*Things to avoid: classifying the landscape under one consistent standard, since this limits the classes of the things within it, or absolutizes a state that by the nature of the investigation must begin mutable.

* The primary method is to consider the intentions of thought.

* Accepting truth is accepting reality. The physical world is part of this.

* The apprehending of objects is possible through a recognition of properties that may be considered apart from the outward notion of object.

* If one cannot escape the simple outer notion of object, it is fair to treat the mind as a simple sensory organ that responds to sharp objects with pain, smooth objects with relief, and so on. When the brain recognizes these things it also gains an increasing sensitivity to its own potential.

* The goal of thought is not to swallow tools and abandon life (pursuing study as an end in itself), but rather to engage with life in an increasingly sophisticated or dynamic manner.

Investigations 1

2007-09-01T20:43:00.000-07:00

Not to clear the mind
the mind can have pleasant clouds

By what regression or return do literal thoughts entail themselves, without speaking of life?

Thoughts are sometimes a series of excuses. The first thought may even be an excuse for excuses to be relavent. Although this sounds embarrassing or condemning, it explains the character of futility that pervades many lines of reasoning.

It seems useful to bear in mind at this point that although it is important to return to a particular thought as a means of reference, a process of thinking that repeatedly returns is not necessarily a circular argument; very often arguments are accretiative, benefiting from an idea that lingers to the extent that it participates givingly in the process as a repeated motif.

It is easy to jump into broad categories in determining or abandoning determination towards the context for a line of reasoning. The starting point for metaphorical tools may as easily be existential identifications with the attributes of animals as it is a systematic method or code abstracted from experience.

Because of this difficulty it seems reasonable to be hesitant in beginning, to the extent that I may determine to investigate while withholding the intention to provide a foundation for excuses. The clear advantage of this is that even lacking what might pass for cogency, the process itself is more thorough and meandering, such that the landscape as I see it is in a real sense recognized; not mistaken as one class of thing, or a thing that is innately known or unknown. Indeed, the frequent insistence of human inadequacy in approaching free-will, practicality, and death express that this is the only path to follow; life already is trumped by so many hazards, it cannot claim to know the path.

Thus what I intend to address is the place in which I find myself, as I consider the intentions of thought. By observing the intentions it becomes clearer that there is a landscape of what might be considered or believed. Although it is difficult to see this place as anything other than material, it is not realized except through a thoughtful process within which one might say “material is material”. If one is unwilling to accept that there is a material reality, it is difficult to see the reality of things equally real, or equally significant, or more living that do not share the properties of hardness, heat, or dullness (ostensibly, properties of matter).

Then it is important, first, to recognize the mind as a participant. The brain may need sensations detached from the world; it is easy to overthink an object seen with the eye, yet part of this is the failure to see the object as an expression of numerous combined potentials. If awareness lacks feeling it may be a simple attachment to dull simple qualities of experience. There is an advantage to dull simple qualities; the brain is insensitive, you could imagine poking it with a knife and you wouldn’t feel a thing. To overcome that kind of fear is to recognize there is a huge gamut of sensations that are too often unavailable. Yet the choice at this point would be to ignore thought, or to work with the materials given. Refining tools is not only about testing oneself, but also entails an engagement to experiences participating with one’s own inner limits and strengths.

Hyper-Cubic expression unveiled

2007-07-29T10:14:00.000-07:00

The first true example of a large canvas work in the Motist style:

UNTITLED (FOLDED FLAME) 18 X 24", created in oil paintmarker on canvas.

The title of the work has been changed from Untitled (Waxen Image), since the first was not representative.

This blog is soon to be listed in a philosophy blog directory:

Modist Poem 1

2007-07-19T15:50:00.000-07:00

Modist poetry in its strictest form adopts a categorical method for transforming from one idea to another, leading towards a deeper and yet interrelated understanding. This poem, the first and only poem I have written and recognized as typically Motist, eschews strict categorality in favor of an interpretive method more native to the poetic temperament. Each line was considered as the most sincere translation of the previous line, in terms of individual elements. The pretext-prelude, a concept borrowed from e.e. cummings, allows time to become comfortable with the context within which the poem is prefigured.

Each of the individual lines after the pretext is composed of three elements, each comparable to the corresponding portion of the shorter stanzas in the pretext. For example, "waves crashing" is translated into "flirtatious wave" in terms of comedy, and "destruction" in terms of tragedy. "Flirtatious wave" and "destruction" are then translated into "Flirting with death" for tragicomedy. In this way there is a logic, perhaps a categorical logic, to defining terms such as "tragedy" "comedy" and "tragicomedy".

That set of categories becomes a context for each of the lines in the remainder of the poem. "Flirting with death" becomes "brinkmanship", "expecting the worst" becomes "default", and "tragicomedy" becomes "familiar territory". The lines that follow then try to refine towards a notion of meaning more as an experience than as an abstract contextualization.

Always within the poem, "movement" forward becomes more important than the absolute rationality of any given statement. Yet interpreted specifically in the context of preceding or proceeding lines, it becomes more apparent how much is intended.

MODIST POEM 1 modified from former post 6/14

PRETEXT/PRELUDE

waves crashing
or not crashing
the heart leaps

flirtatious wave
apprehension
this is comedy

destruction
desolation
this is tragedy

flirting with death
expecting the worst
this is tragicomedy

PART 1
brinkmanship default familiar territory
war peace deity
extremism reason answer themselves
madness the method of madness different things

singularity systems a ground for comparison
nature law compatible
self universe one
knowing becoming a knot

wisdom suffering intelligence
principle bleeding promise
soul revealing mystery
divinity past sight holy
gods infinitely good

archetypes immeasureably valued
meanings qualified by articulation
truth being intricate
motism living byzantine
mind sprawling labyrinth

reactor passages codex
heart verses secret
psyche written dark
wild annotated sublime

PART 2
liberated deep beauty
unfettered layers bloom
escaping onion flower

fugitive unity heady
lawless everything returns
laws are territorial again

justice categorical duplicates
order axes ennumerated
levels mapped hierarchy
existence concept ladder
book of qualities ideation transcendent

dreams history to walk above
heart story mind story heaven
parable theory answers
hidden truth, answers hidden, truth answers
secrecy scries socracy

hermeticism labeled rhetoric /evil symbolic (vis.
‘impressions’, ‘birth of distinctions and the
distinction of distinctions’)
metaphysics dubbed logical
philosophy declared reason
bookmanship swearing light

--Eucaleh Terrapin

Technorati link--possibly temporary

2007-06-11T19:50:00.000-07:00

Technorati Profile

Semiotics 2

2007-06-09T09:42:00.000-07:00

I'm writing the following with the understanding that when and if I attain academic standing sometime in my life, this may go into a book in one form or another. I'm only offering this free on the internet under the condition that anyone who uses it will cite the source (Terrapin, Eucaleh. The Motist Agenda, 2007) in the way they would with a book or other formalized manuscript. That said, here's a little more on my understanding of semiotics, and the implications of semiotic thinking:

Assuming perfection, simplicity is waste(~1). The exception is qualities.

To seek perfection in simplicity or singularity (in the sense of low dimensionalism) is to minimize waste, but only insofar as perfection in an absolute sense has not been achieved.

It is worth noting that in a categorical sense singularity is imperfect outside the context of a breadth of opportunities and manifestations. (I.e. it is useless to think of individual identity or symbolism apart from the lives it might live, or the field of associations for the symbol.)

Singularity without a context becomes impotent, or ceases to be singular. The being or reality that does not extend beyond itself must be simple, perfect, or a form of waste. Through consciousness, a being extends through the simple or wasteful towards qualities that do not change. The qualities themselves are simple, since they are the least wasteful and simplest presence of perfection in reality. However, this is not to say that qualities are most perfect, for the qualities themselves have an object without which no consciousness could perceive them.

In some sense, the object is a thought. Yet simply by being a thought this does not make it a conscious thought. The activity of thinking gives life to a thought as though the thought had been a fixed sign brought to life.

Often the fixed shape of a thought takes form prior to its consciousness in a thinking process. However, the process of "signing" may be adopted ona conscious level as a means of informing the direction of the cognitive process, specifically in corroborating diverse notions towards a new realization built upon the intentions and principles of previous insights. In other words, a similar system approaches one symbol and the next.

Thus in the context of this network of signs, each being itself a thought, thinking takes place through one of two actions:

1. A transformation is made between two previously existing signs or

2. Through a comparison of two or more previous signs, a new sign is formed.(~2)

In the sense that I understand them, the first type of thinking is constructive and is a less conscious form of sign building. The second kind is the mark of special intelligence and even genius.

Footnotes

1. This has implications, for example in the choice to build houses independent of one another. Designing a perfect conglomerate is far more valuable than divided simplicity because of the nature of hierarchies. It may also ultimately be more efficient, e.g. if there is only one plan there is less conflict. Nevertheless it may run against the grain of standardization, fair market economy, and minimal input from specialists.

2. For simplicity's sake we may do well to consider that a new sign is not a new graphical symbol, but rather a new understanding that comes through the association of two different symbols (either of which may in itself exist as an abstract understanding rather than a visually or tactically percieved object).

Motism (MOH-tism)

2007-05-30T22:55:00.000-07:00

A movement based in philosophy, manifest in art, and applicable to literature, described in the unpublished book The Motist: A Free Thought Manifesto, by Eucaleh Terrapin.

Semiotics 1

2007-05-30T21:39:00.000-07:00

To say that a signifier is arbitrary implies that its context is arbitrary. Yet if the context is arbitrary it is difficult to see how it could have a consistent meaning to an individual, particularly if the individual has an awareness of the context, as presumably is intended by “Saussure’s dismantling of signs” (Wikipedia, “Semiotics”). If there is no consistent meaning of the sign, it is difficult to see how it might be considered a sign at all, since to define any given sign presupposes such a context.

The idea that signs are arbitrary amounts to the assumption that meaning is arbitrary. The way I see it, this is a naïve reflection of the unfounded conviction that the relationships between signs is not hierarchical within a given system of interpretation. To assume that the relationships are not hierarchical really only means that the system adopted in interpreting signs is flimsy and lacks rigor.

Considering the role signs play in the human landscape, it is reproachable to assume that the relationships between signs are arbitrary, if they figure so strongly in determining meaning for individuals. It is like saying that signs are arbitrary because people don’t care about them, or don’t think. Yet if signs are visually consistent for large populations, it is because they have value whether or not people think much of them. To me this indicates that they have been well considered by those to whom they have meaning.

Charles S. Pierce—system encumbered by technical language. It seems inadequate to approach meaning from an academic viewpoint, if it is ultimately the “reader” and “viewer” who experiences signs. Thus to define a signifier as a sign is in my view to move through notions of the signifier as reader. To categorize signs may not be adequate in categorizing the experience of signs.

For information on Pierce, see: http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/dictionary.html

Approaching the notion of formal significance is necessarily to approach the notion of formal experience. In this sense it is less important to “cogitate” the datum of signs, than to culture an awareness of the aesthetic of signs, especially as a system evokative of qualities running a spectrum from the merely provokative to the metaphysical and genuine (the evokative and metaphysical being two extremes which complement one another insofar as either is realized).

It is more meaningful to build a “black book” of meanings than to decipher meanings that have already been made. Sometimes analysis of signs is a step away from using them; by becoming conscious of associations it may be possible to develop a stronger system of associations, but more often than not a system is a simplification. Understanding signs is necessarily to use them. To know is to be, for every why there is a better how, the artist is one who paints.

It is my view that as with music, the greatest theory follows the greatest realization of form. Ideally, the theorist created the form. Thus exploring the theory is inhabiting every corner; to know language is to be a poet, to know graphics is to be an artist, to know systems is to be a philosopher. To not fear the exploration is to uncover nothing new.

The writer looks at the page, and blanches, and becomes the page. The artist’s inspiration takes the trundling, headlong form of life impinging on the unknown. The philosopher finds a system like an abandoned house he retrofits to his own taste. Every exploration is uncertain, yet the result is a new landscape, pushing towards new imprecations and hesitations. What is a special installation to one may become someone else’s new retrofitted house.

Yet I am not a subjectivist. The meaning for any given things comes about through reference to the universal. If there is a failure in specific situations or formulations, it is for lack of embodiment of a greater truth; i.e. the absolute and correlatory, that without which there is no being or relationship.

Concerning x-partate sign relations:

Considering the idea of the sign, the object the sign represents, and the interpreter of the sign it seems to me that a metaphorical and iterative approach would more adequately phrase the interpretive method. To recognize a sign involves a kind of “identifying”, a relation between self and other through the association of identity with identity. While the symbol, and by extension the object it may represent has a fixed identity conceived as an unchanging category, the interpreter has a mutable identity defined in the context of fixed symbols. Thus to identify with one symbol at a given time is metaphorically to take on that identity, to change form. Through the significance of that identity, one defines what one can become, a path of signification. This necessarily leads towards a transformation into another sign, which lends its own properties as alternate crossroads towards still further meanings. Thus while the symbol represents certain potentials and relationships, the interpreter of the symbol has a dynamic role in determining, or disambiguating, the path that is of greatest significance (or most pragmatic or utilitarian etc., if the pragmatic or utilitarian is seen as the highest significance).

What I see in this sense of a tri-partite relation is the many levels which spiral away from the initial concept of the signified and interpreter. For every new transformation from one symbol to the next, the identity of the interpreter has a “meta value” that is incremented to a new concept of self. Likewise, the most significant signifier is incremented to a new “meta value” which may reflect prior tranformations. Finally, whether the interpreter’s sense of meaning is changeable or fixed depends on whether the meta value has reached a stage where it has changed, and if so if it has reached a stage where it returns. Thus there is a kind of “Unity” value which increments based upon the breadth of the interpreter’s associative world. To have an infinite Unity value would be like being omniscient.

A new term:

“relative equilibrium”: the way a definition within one system is analogous to another definition within another equivalent system. The pragmatic value of a system may be conceived as proportional to the extent of its relative equilibrium. Essentially, the value of the system is to provide signs which are universally applicable within the known limits of the broader notion of system. A metaphysical system is one in which signs are extended beyond the known concept of system (signs conceived broadly may include categorical maxims, which possess an identity equivalent to symbolism within their context).

The preceding is copyright (c) 2007 Eucaleh Terrapin

Things in the works

2007-05-24T11:07:00.000-07:00

1. The Free Thought Manifesto. Latest draft has been sent to a publisher for review. *Fingers crossed*.

2. Crude model for the Coquette Volitional Energy Machine, materials bought but construction stalled for lack of assurance about workability (and the difficulty in cutting sheet metal with pliers and a wire cutter). Have yet to buy 2 or 3-in. diameter ball bearings. Device has special importance in the context of my Volitional Energy theory.

3. Art exhibit at Claire's Cornercopia slated for October with my photographer friend Wendy Felleter. Some level of publicity assured through a friend of Wendy's.

4. Starting to write poetry again for the first time since March of last year. Portion of impossible machine now devoted to the subject.

5. New blog here, and a link to it from Ask.com

A more public face...

2007-05-23T23:14:00.000-07:00

Terrapin is a name known to few. He is a man sometimes of few words. He has been a man on the margins for some time.

He is also a man of various talents, talents which given time must earn a hearing.

First, he is an artist in ink and paints. The world he travels is not always the world he explores.

Secondly, he is a metaphysical thinker. His Free-Thought Manifesto is not yet in print, but it details a philosophy that is not merely rational, but confers with experience, mythos, archetypes, literature.

Thirdly, his eccentricities take form in concepts for perpetuum mobiles, devices he theorizes could run on their own reason, if his hands were only able enough to build them. Yet he knows that some concepts are better than others.

Fourthly, he is also an aesthete of words: from time to time he writes verses meant to accommodate the life of the mysterious.

His new website explores each of these areas, giving freely in order to permit the most hopeful and least decided of visitors--the most impressionable ones--to see with their new eyes the extent of his city of wonders, his Impossible Machine.

impossiblemachine.com