Randomness As Non-Probability: Four Categories

I finally pinned down the four categories which I associate with true-random: that is, randomness which does not exist as a mere formality, but can encompass any type of random phenomena; Here it is, on the diagram at left; [1] Dithered, [2] Selective, [3] Significance, [4] Self-Adapted; Then, if there is a key to non-random randomness, this might be it, on the categorical-micro or in other words systemic-metaphorical level.

Ongoing Studies of Follology, the study of folly

Here is a diagram illustrating the development from classical to modern, and post-modern or futuristic ideas of stupidity. At left of the column is the argument "for" stupidity, on the right hand of the column is the argument "against" stupidity.

Among the historical examples of follologists was the late great Erasmus, who wrote In Praise of Folly, a very long-winded argument in which fools are defended tongue-in-cheek.

I hope this is a more efficient treatment of a similar subject (although I don't mention Plato).

Irrationalism: Things That Seem Rational To Me

---Sometimes using an aesthetic stipulation---
P1: birds are mechanical
P2: what birds eat is mechanical,
P3: because it makes them mechanical
Q: So chicken feed is mechanical
Deductive Corollary: It's a brilliant thought that electricity is mechanical

Other Ideas / Opinions:

*Politics is pandaemonium, so it's artificial or functional

*Without psychology, all is surface or ersatz; yet psychology is not functional

*Liars are more or less functional than other people; Liars are gamblers or think that lying is meaningless; Liars understand or do not understand; Liars are simpletons; Liars could be given some theory that looks complex to them and is not in fact complex; Liars are exaggerators; Liars always have a strategy; Liars failed childhood

*Thought is impersonally selfish; By understanding, one gains advantage; Help is only helpful when there is selfishness; The greatest attempts at understanding are acts of selfishness, and they are not great acts of wisdom; Wisdom has a system; It is a selfish selflessness; It is the assumption of theatre, and the assumption of activity; People don't understand activity; People imitate ideas; People are only functional by having license; There is some authority that thinks that lust is more important than the resolution of any human impasse; What we get is sometimes what we desire of what we desire; Some of what we get is what we do not desire, either what we understand or what we desire to understand; The activity of desire is selfless, whereas the fixitude of understanding is foolish

Mapping the Folly of Prediction: One Indicator

The above diagram shows the degrees of similarity which indicate that basic agreement with existential factors, whether they are statistics, impressions, or working tools, is a slippery slope into empirically determined actions, which are still labeled "intentions";

I detect a trend in philosophy that what is meant by intentional reality is decisions or conditions informed by outside influences, as expressed in the diagram; The very sophistication of these intentions is gauged in reference not to some interior "logic" or "mindset" but in relation to intentional reality, in other words, the rationability of the exterior influence upon the person; This is one thing that may be meant by behaviorism and functionalism, but it is also a statement about prospective predictions, the intellectual sense of what it means to have predictable reality; The influence at that stage is upon concepts such as "worlds", "disciplines", and "influences", depreciating what it means to have general unclosed statements in a body of discursive intellectual material::

Mental Phenomena

---An appraisal of context---

Spiritual stimulus: A dubious subject

Ghost organ: Decides souls

Vortistic ice cream scoop: Used for psychic brain surgery

Book of vile concordances: Bargains for which I was an un-influencing locus

Good thing I wasn't born on Halloween!

Lesson About Living Writing

The preference for choices of words; Confusion, persuasion, and brilliance don't have regrets;

Imagery such as:

Existential Eyeball
The State of Lick
Deeper Architect

Annotated, visualized, aesthetik, temperamental,
thought-work.

IF YOUR GIRLFRIENDS ARE PAINT CAN1 (PPAIN) (11)

SOMETHING LIKE YELLOW PAINT MONSTROSEA (SSEA11)

HEJJ

KELKELKELKELPE (KELLA) (CIRCUS) (HEJAHEHH) (HEJAHEH)

https://hypercubics.blogspot.com/2025/12/park-bus.html

DIOY

WORTH AN APARTMENT SWITCH WORTH DYING OF FRIGT

skee TAAT (JESUI) --> SKE

https://hypercubics.blogspot.com/2026/03/curatorial-museum-2026-03-23.html

HOLY GOD IS SHE WORTH MORE MONEY

AN I(N)

THEY'RE CHOPPING LETTERS RIGHT UP THERE WITH (iI)ON

Inspirations for Writing Non-Fiction

Marbles
Inkblots
Microfeche
Fire that bursts glass
Aged wood
Scientific observatory
A caterpillar

Interface Euphoria 2.0

---Words are everything sometimes---

Here are labels designed to give a natural mild euphoria, out of an aesthetic choice. The meaning is open-ended but associative, and often there are colors or other sense-data which can be expanded by some form of virtual reality stimulation or hyperrealism:

*Playdolphin (Mood)

*SecretCloud (Mystery)

*FoldedLadder (Logic of Ambition)

*Architexture (Logic of Surfaces)

*Minarets (Holy Day Music)

These provide an opportunity to integrate forms of experience with forms of interface and computing.

The Buddha Who Was Not the Buddha

Inspired quotations:

Everyone is trying to accomplish something big, not realizing that life is made up of little things. - Frank A. Clark

"Secret food, secret wish, moderate strength, long life" contemporary immortal


"Junk food sometimes includes moderate meat diets" advice from a Vegan


"Life is fair, people are not" from Twitter

"To cause harm to other living beings is to accept and revel in the imperfections of the world" immortal wisdom

Analogy in Philosophy

The ostensible system of axiometry and coherency is also analogy. Not to say that the system is open-ended or non-determinate.

The condition of analogy in an exclusive system is that it occurs at the center of a diagram. Not only does this imply process and staticity, it also implies an assumption of equivalence between the opposing properties. The stipulation I use to implicate that weak and desirable properties are not in conflict or eliminated in such a system is that pragmatics is a balanced or functional---a dynamic---property of the system itself. Many desirable properties which signify one of the major typological categories, or is useful in the parsing of categories for appropriate judgment, becomes also a functional systemic component which is therefore rendered like a contextual universal---it has functional significance which may override the 'reality' of conflict.

What else may be said about analogical properties in a system? Sometimes they overlap, and become quantifiable, exponential. This is one of the great discoveries of the axiometric system called objective coherentism.

My book, The Dimensional Philosopher's Toolkit, is due to be released sometime next year. My first book, the 1-Page-Classics, is already available on Amazon and other websites.

Coherency in Philosophy

Coherent knowledge is possible through exclusivity. But is any context exclusive? I argue that the term "absolute" is avoidable because afterall real objects can exist which are not absolute. This is similar to saying that "not everything is the sun" etc.

When it is realized that a context is composed of "qua-objects" it can also be realized that properties relatively exist or relatively do not exist. When there is ambiguity, we can say ambiguity exists or does not exist, or we can say that subtlety exists or does not exist.

In this context, I find it compelling that in a relative sense all terms used in a genuine system have some degree of absoluteness. There can be measurements of the degree of absoluteness, but this implies a "clausality" that power or some other distinct property is being measured.

In reality, a categorical system treats this property of measurement, say "power", "money", "pleasure", "pragmatism", just like any other word. Because of this, and because in axiometry opposites are used to contextualize exclusivity, it may be concluded that this form of exclusivity is relatively exhaustive.

Returning to the coherent concept from exclusivity does not imply much difference; only that 'system' or 'symbol' can be questioned. Yet, questioning the system is changing the system, and questioning the symbol is changing the symbol's function. So any other concept involves a new idea.

Axiometry in Philosophy

Since the era of deconstruction, there has been a tendency to prefer the term axonometrics over the term axiometry. And there is a strong reason for this: axiometry didn't really exist. At least not in a defined way.

Axiometrics is a term I'm using in my book The Dimensional Philosopher's Toolkit, to signify categorical knowledge organized usually in a quadratically exclusive method.

To describe axiometry further is to describe its role in the typological hierarchy. In relation to history, the peak of the hierarchy, axiometrics is an "aperture" which directs linear development into valuative senses. In the second category, complexity, axiometry is a zonal fielding process which captures the "dither" of potential experiences and contexts into an exclusive or categorically organized context. In the context of perfection, the third category, axiometry attempts to make statements that are logical and exclusive, resulting in information about relative perfection and imperfection, or in other words objective reality.

Perfection and Philosophy

Most philosophers who refer to perfection seem to haze into a world of symbolic justifications, perhaps mores, and pre-texts of archetypal ideas. Rarely are these ideas generated by the philosopher himself, or there is a caveat that these patterns or forms may be contingent on highly specific problems which embody the obsessions of individual people.

Partly understanding this, philosophers have made the mistake of not quantifying perfection, and sadly even this problem has not been widely revealed because there is often no counterpoint to perfection in the post-Holocaust era in which eugenics has gained a reputation of being "a little too clever" or under-cutting. Interestingly, quantification by itself poses a partial solution to the problem of perfectibility, e.g. that its key property is variation. Building on this, the compatibility of complexity specifically and generally (that is, coherently), promises to render perfection as merely a relativistic populist variable which, through this form of casualism, becomes hypothetically formalized.

And I don't mean to suggest that perfection is a mere hypothesis. Certainly forms such as mathematical manifolds, geometric regressions, and expressionist sculptures have optimal manifestations which bear out in specific codifications of properties. By saying these things are inadequate for perfection, we are not saying they are not perfected. Instead, we are saying that we do not prefer them aesthetically. People, by contrast, have an aesthetic capacity which renders them immune to critique. What is not judged to be value can be judged to be efficiency.

In the context of history, what does it mean to have perfection that is contingent upon complexity? It is a way of suggesting the meaningfulness of perfection, as a form that is wholly or mostly linguistic. This is a subtle means to a further subtlety, that pragmatics is of higher importance than perfection because of the pragmatic contingency of language. Another way of saying this, however, is that pragmatism is one form of perfection. Returning to quantification, it can be judged that pragmatism is not the only perfection---indeed a very small ratio of the total. In this way there is a set of checks and balances, which continues to relate with very real and functional categories.

The Role of Complexity in Philosophy

Complexity has been illustrated as a primarily numeric formulation, with implications solely in mathematics, and sometimes logic, and as a reserve fictional accounts. This is reflected in the limited number of philosophical problems which have been discovered, which, as general as they are, point towards a coherent system more than a mathematical one. The 'spheres' of properties or 'modal rooms' of experimental philosophy still point towards quantification, but in a way that implicates entities and consequently questions the assumptions of mathematics.

'Any damned rule' might refute some functional effect of mathematics, or at least raise the question that it is not a universal science.

The natural composite with coherency is complexity, but I feel this is un-grounded and un-honed perspective; it is more accurate to say that coherency as we know it embodies history, as described earlier (The Value of History in Philosophy), and complexity is a second rule which combines with a third, that is, perfection.

Instead of describing perfection at this point I would like to explain several things about coherent quantity. Although it is obviously a formal principle, there is no reason to believe that it is wholly explained by geometry or mathematics. It is, in my view instead, a quality science.

The second level, of complexity and perfection, gives in to the third level, which explains the modality of typology itself, in the form of comparing opposites. Knowledge of neutrals comes about through a determination that a neutral is dynamic, permanent, or constitutes a paroxysm (third category) or metadoxy (fourth category or more), that is, a logical extension of opposite properties into a further opposite.

Learning more about complexity depends on interpreting the pithy logic of coherence: (1) Neutrals are highly correspondent, (2) Quantification is mostly substance or definition, (3) Conclusions depend on the exclusivity of the set, (4) This system allows for the generation of variable-dependence by a factor of ^2, constant. Other systems may be better, but ostensibly depend on the context of information provided in this system.

The Value of the Concept of History to Philosophy

I have speculated for about a year now that history is a useful concept to typology. If typology embodies the most organized viewpoint on symbols and functions, including ultimately memes, then any concept with a strong degree of coherence in typology is also valuable for these other ends and aspects.

Do I have to argue for the value of history?

In the last several decades there have been an increasing number of people arguing for post-modernism, a trend that began with Kant's prelegomena and also Hume's arguments against causal knowledge. Concepts such as post-modernism also have a strong influence on architecture, and consequently the feelings of the everyday urban traveler, whether or not he or she considers these thoughts or perceptions to be post-modern.

History is a useful concept in spite of post-modern developments, as a means of encompassing assumed contexts of linear relationships. I distinguish even the post-modern concept of history from what I will call post-modern ability, or the capacity to effect history in a non-linear fashion.

However, history is still useful as a coherent concept when it becomes the basis for the extended definition of these further post-modern abilities. From a typological framework, it becomes 'the first quantifier'.

(In the context of virtual reality, it becomes increasingly important to map concepts which are imaginary or quasi-real, because even unreal things are subject to simulation; the concept of history offers the exciting prospect of formalizing aspects which are otherwise considered fiction and impasse).

Brain Circuits 1.0

THEY NEED(ED)

TV(TVVE) TvV -- AND THEN IT PROGRESS (ED) (EE) (EE) (EE) TVE

I ask myself now and then, partly unconsciously in the back of my mind, what if any program I "integrate with", hypothesizing that there is some compatibility between computers and so-called "brain cicuitry", is itself the character of my mind; The question I ask myself, a question I would ask or suggest other bloggers to consider themselves, is the question: "What are my brain programs" / "What is my knowledgeable advice"?

In my case, as a minimal modalist who values emotional realities, the following answers come to mind:

"DISQUES":

*Nihilism: integrates with meaning and processing

*Modularity: integrates with architecture and politics, by implication society and technology

*Classics Through History: cheap transcriptive knowledge-at-leisure, by the standards of the universe

*Memetic Hints: provides some insight into social situations

*Stealthy Parametrics: A "cheap" but sophisticated program for gauging conflictive engagements

*Pique d' Eloquiant: A creative language program, ostensibly with volition or preferences


CORRUPT PROGRAMS:

*Empathic Regulator: empathy was not compatible with regulation, or perhaps technology; may still exist in an irrational form

*Field Combatant: intellectual fields were confused for combat willingness

*Heraldry: was creatively modified to be a newspaper generator e.g. American Herald; was judged to not be highly economical, used as an argument for autonomous control of the program

*D'lle Arte: failure to identify critical qualifiers, modification failed to turn the program into system for diabolical knowledge and superpowers; still used as a language reference index; Others may be using it to gauge progress in the art world, a process that seems mundane by comparison / a sleeper program

UPPG https://hypercubics.blogspot.com/2016/10/all-tools-involve-trade-offs-exactly.html

Working Method 9: Macrosophy and Microsophy

Based on architecture:

Microcosm
1. The Antechamber of Atoms
2. The Microscope of Metaphor
3. The Interface of Integrations
4. The Motive of Mass
5. The Roominess of Objects
6. The Facets of Space
7. The Languages of Consciousness

Macrocosm
1. The Enlightenment of Entities
2. The Ways of the Worlds
3. The Harmony of the Spheres
4. The Magic of Mediums
5. The Scratches of Systems
6. The Places of Permanence
7. The Poetry of the Universe

Working Method 8: Variables of Perpetual Motion

1. Moving independently: autonomy

2. Returning to the same position: volition

3. Having a principle of energy from nothing: nihilectics

4. Having adequately connected parts: integrity

5. Counterposing every motion with a principle of continuation: imbalance

6. Doing something useful with another module: capitalization

7. Acting as a specialized component within a system: identity

8. Representing a complete system by itself: enterprise

9. Serving as a significant fact or indicator: entics

10. Serving as a significant reference for an information system: metaphor

11. Marketable functions: appropriation/ universalizability

12. Offshoot effects for economics and zeitgeist: definitivism

Working Method 7: Quadrants of Perpetual Motion

Quality State:

1. Slope - continuity
2. Axiallary - opposition
3. Principle - materialism
4. Volition - variation

Opposed State:

1. Degeneration
2. Fineness
3. Puzzle
4. Clumsiness

Neutral State:

1. Balanced slope for equivalent altitude: principle does not oppose equivalence
2. Middle ground, material-formal compromise: a compromise in "ideal" terms
3. Rare states may exist if they are materially possible, properties may vary
4. A context can be controlled by the properties involved in construction

Working Method 6: Hellish Qua-Assumptions

1. Hellish destruction

2. Hell as a reduction of the world to some law

3. Flames as 'visions', 'images'

4. Hell as a work of imagination

5. Hell as the 'furnace of the brain' [Blake]

6. Hell as passion

7. Hell as an arbitrary 'material'

8. Hell as a product of Greek physiologos (material thinkers)

Working Method 5: A Series of Altercations

1. Confucius: The Mandate of Heaven

2. Lao Tzu: The Dogged Philosopher

3. Socrates: Seeing the Truth

4. Sophists: Seeing the Falsehoods

5: Formalized Religion: Belated Good Will

6: Informal Science: Working Without Assumptions

Amusement on Apollinaire

I have read the French poet Apollinaire (who also wrote in Latin) only in samples, but the samples I have seen gave a stark impression; It is not that I wanted to rush to judgment, so I continued to read, and more often than not the words seemed to refer to love of some description, which seemed like a dangerous subject.

At first my mistake was to compare Apollinaire with Voltaire---I had seen another book of poems or critiques on the same shelf by him---ultimately, however, the subject was distinguished not be its acerbity, but by its reference to love. As such I was forced to make some conclusion about love, in order to make some conclusion about the works of this person.

Apollinaire showed a peculiar bitterness or pique which didn't explain that he had chosen love as his subject; In one poem he seems to persuade the reader that he is writing to a prostitute, with hidden arguments that he is in some way not quixotic or stupid; In this sense the reflection is a simple pallor of lust or bragadashio which could be interpreted in turns as wise or naive;

My final conclusion of this triste with words was to conclude that Apollanaire was in a battle with the winter, or even that the winter was having trouble with him; There was no reason to believe that love itself had imposed itself on the battle; Love was only a temperature control for some sort of redundancy of the gods::

Escher's Triangle

How does it work?
The 3rd dimension of the 2nd dimension---
The 2nd dimension of the 1st dimension---
The 1st dimension of the 0th dimension---
In other words, the 2nd zero!