more
![Marshall McLuhan's tetrad of media effects[1] uses a tetrad to examine the effects on society of any technology/medium (put another way: a means of explaining the social processes underlying the adoption of a technology/medium) by dividing its effects into four categories and displaying them simultaneously. The tetrad first appeared in print in McLuhan's posthumously-published works Laws of Media (1988) and The Global Village (1989).](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/MediaTetrad.svg/1920px-MediaTetrad.svg.png)
via his AlphaTensor critique using posits - We still live in a world that creates a false binary between “positive” and “negative” or “good” and “bad” emotions. In reality, our emotional health is not black and white. [..] False binary…weird wording. There’s more dimensionality in “between”. Analog is a more efficient transmission medium. Digital is just an encoding “trend”
also
Baudrillard Compass - https://twitter.com/AeonBaudrillard/status/1728865747433381950 Vivek Chibber's Class Matrix  | reddit Profanity Matrix  |
Caitlyn Johnstone's Narrative Matrix  | PMC (Professional Managerial Class) Matrixes  |
@deleuzional_lacanian The Matrix 1999 vs Matrixial Theory 1985 #Ettinger#Bracha#Levinas#Heidegger #Dugin#Lacan #Zizek ♬ original sound - Derridean Butler-Levinasian
| #The Cartesian Mindset AKA Numbered/Non-Continuous/Non-Analog structures .¨∴⸬ ## ⁙ / ⠿⬢ ⬡ ⬣ ## ① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨0️⃣1️⃣2️⃣3️⃣4️⃣5️⃣6️⃣7️⃣8️⃣9️⃣🔟 # TWOFOLD (META) * "διδακτικός/didaktikós" to "δύο/dyo-/di-" - So there have been literally no Platonists/neo-platonists/aristotelians/pseudo-platonists who have tried to link "διδακτικός/didaktikós" to "δύο/dyo-/di-"? Not even Plotinus/Proclus/Schelling/Hegel? * ??? * ??? #② ⚇¨DOS TWOFOLD BINARY DYADIC DIALECTIC¨⚇② * Neoscholastic/Neothomist thought: Cornelio Fabro distinguishes between being-in-act (esse in actu) and being as act (esse ut actus) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornelio_Fabro, His deeper contribution to classical metaphysics, following Saint Thomas, is the distinction between “essentia” (“essence”) and “actus esendi” (act of becoming). https://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kornelio_Fabro * emic vs etic - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emic_and_etic * Arendt's distinctions between private/social/public and Ellen Meiksins Wood's distinction of the political/social/economic * R2✋(Zuhanden) / P@✋(Vorhanden) vs res extensa/res cogitans....R2H P@H / 💪2✋ 🎁@✋ kingdom of heaven is at hand - https://old.reddit.com/r/NASAN/comments/12wlfvh/she_just_wanted_to_help_you_motherfucker/ * question of the binary clinic - binary clinic: repression (neurosis) and foreclosure (psychosis) and then there's disavowal (perversion) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FjNcKTK1c4 what about binary clinic vs continuous clinic? * Kant distinguishes between “understanding” (Verstand) and “reason” (Vernunft) in the following way: understanding is the faculty of the unity of representations (“appearances”) by means of rules, while “reason” is the faculty of the unity of rules by means of principles. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/richardschutte1_whilst-immanuel-kant-recognised-two-types-activity-7038266659458977792-oJER/ * res extensa vs res cogitans - 1:52:30 - AKA Chomsky vs Descartes? - res cogitives stood along side res extensa (res extensa vs res cogitans)?. Descartes thought there was a separation between our body and the infinite set of expressions which could be created in the mind - Joscha Bach @Plinz · Sep 19, 2022 Repairing Descartes should not reduce res cogitans to res extensa, but give res extensa its rightful status as a mental domain (the real-time world model), so that res extensa and res cogitans coexist in every mind, while a computationalized physics implements the mind. * connective vs disjunctive - D&G's first synthesis (connective synthesis = constant interconnection of machines) and second synthesis (disjunctive-synthesis = either/or), and Deleuze's possible third synthesis (transcendental field = an immanent realm of pure difference that underlies and conditions actual manifestations and phenomena. It can be seen as a way to move beyond the duality of the first and second syntheses and explore a more abstract and foundational level of reality) * 𝓣Nancy Fraser Redistribution Recognition𝓣 or 𝓣Representation Recognition Redistribution𝓣 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=At4L2P7C4IU&t=630s * transcendetalism vs immanence?? * Iain McGilchrist's left vs right brain? "The Divided Brain" (documentary) based on the book McGilchrist's The Master and His Emissary" https://www.instagram.com/p/C5WcCT4Chue/ * symbolic vs connectionist debate in AI * extensional vs intensional - Is "intensional" being a homophone to "intentional" deliberate? And is this related to Saussure's signifier/signified distinction? https://youtu.be/iNVXHvqgubo?si=T--EUb34wY7lNegu * multipolarity vs pluriversality - Differentiating between multipolarity and pluriversality https://medium.com/age-of-emergence/demystifying-the-pluriverse-as-the-hegemony-unravels-f85b93dd605e * darshana v Tao, or Indian subcontinent philosophy vs Chinese environs philosophy - There are predominantly two large regions that have their respective discourses: The Indian subcontinent and the Chinese environs. India's discourse was predominated by darshana (insight or understanding); while China's was predominated by the Tao (the proper Way to be in the world). Indian philosophy was transmitted to China via Buddhism in the third century but the Chinese philosophy didn't really transmit the other way, though it did disseminate to Korea and Japan along with Buddhism where it was further even more broadly reinterpreted. Virtually all the same subjects that are common to the western discourse are present in the eastern: metaphysics, epistemology, aesthetics, ethics, etc. No they don't necessarily receive the same labels and are not as strictly categorized. Each of these millennial long topics of thought in these regions, and can't quickly or easily be summarized here. But to grossly over simplify, the Indian subcontinent discourse tending to lean more heavily towards subjects in the metaphysics realm (i.e. otology, epistemology, cosmetology); while in China and surrounding environs the discourse tended more towards subjects of axiology (i.e. ethics, aesthetics, history, anthropology etc.) One other very prevalent divide was the emphasis on oral vs. literary traditions. India had much greater oral tradition than a literary one (taking into account some of the longest text in the world like the Mahabharata) while the consistency of a written language in china allowed for a scholastic and literary tradition to develop for thousands of years. https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/l4k8p9/20th_century_chinese_philosophy/ * Alenka Zupančič's: "Hegel and Freud: Between Aufhebung and Verneinung" * Para vs Optic constructions in Categorical Cybernetics - Parametrised optics for cybernetics systems The Para(−) construction lets us consider morphisms with “hidden” information, not available to the rest of the world. The Optic(−) construction lets us consider bidirectional morphisms in this category, allowing for constructions involving feedback and update. Applying the former to the latter results in a sophisticated construction which we unpack in this section. * realism/correlationism dyad - Zizek on Meillassoux "Correlationism and Its Discontents" https://itself.blog/2012/12/20/zizek-on-meillassoux/ * Donna Haraway’s epochal dyad of the “inhuman”— a bifurcation riven by technology on one node and the animal on the other. As One of the seminal theorists further developing François Laruelle’s politically-poised “non-standard philosophy,” Katerina Kolozova’s approach to animality and feminism is part of a particular post-humanist Marxist continuum (which includes Rosi Braidotti, Luce Irigaray, Donna Haraway and N. Katherine Hayles). Nonetheless, Kolozova distinguishes herself from this lineage by adhering to Laruelle’s method, liquidating philosophy of its anthropomorphic nexus. Thus, Kolozova also belongs to a more recently inaugurated and nascent tradition, working in tandem with post-Laruellean philosophers of media, technology, aesthetics and feminist critique, such as Bogna Konior, Yvette Granata, Jonathan Fardy and John Ó Maoilearca. Within this variegated assemblage, Kolozova’s most recent project, Capitalism’s Holocaust of Animals (2019), saliently reconciles and radicalizes Haraway’s epochal dyad of the “inhuman”— a bifurcation riven by technology on one node and the animal on the other—by a resolution of superlative unity. This methodology, adhering to Laruelle’s system of “synthesis-withoutsynthesizing” attempts to dissolve the spectral chimeras that have haunted philosophy’s metaphysical heredity, proffering a generic identity. https://philpapers.org/archive/ERKOLA.pdf ;;; Kolozova = Braidotti+Irigaray+Haraway+Hayles and Konior+Granata+Fardy+Maoilearca;;;Being vs being and Deleuzian immanence vs Laruellean immanence - Laruelle avoids engaging in this “transcendental decision,” reverting to Parmenides’ Eleatic ontology of the One, whereby “[e]ach one of these [dyads] is by and large treated as an a priori possessing an identity,” whereby “ontological difference becomes the unilateral duality of Being and being.”6 Contra Kant, under Laruelle’s system, the unilateral duality (of “Being” and “being”) is both contained in and, consequently, occluded from the subject; Laruelle’s philosophy of univocal immanence is purged of the antinomies coloring the metaphysical enterprise, which Laruelle terms the “principle of sufficient philosophy.” Consequently, as Maoilearca aptly remarks, Laruelle’s is a representationalist critique, whereby the function of non-standard philosophy is to “integrate” philosophical distinctions back into the Real, rather than “reduce, replace, or eliminate” them, thus instating a democratic and immanent revision whereby no view is superior to, or transcends, the other.7 Where Deleuzian immanence relies upon the multiplicity of micro-processual thought (e.g. rhizomes, assemblages, networks), Laruellean immanence is neither based on heterogeneity nor on distinction but, co-opting the Althusserian realist manifesto of "determination in the last instance," is predicated on the commonality of the Real, so as to subjugate Being to genericity. https://philpapers.org/archive/ERKOLA.pdf * Substance Metaphysics (Ontology) and Aesthetics of Quality (Theo-Ontology) - Two Tetralogies - https://www.patreon.com/posts/two-tetralogies-69017313 * Māhiyya (Whatness) vs Haqīqa (Truth) - Māhiyya is part of #PronounPhilosophy * givens vs releases (instead of constraints vs releases) The "Introduction" of Belonging Again (Part I) suggested that the text would attempt to craft 'a theory of the psychohistorical process,' which is why I've used the language of "givens and releases" versus "constraints and releases" like Rieff, which though similar in spirit, allows me to better connect Rieff with David Hume, the Counter-Enlightenment, Hegel, Hannah Arendt, and others, a move made throughout O.G. Rose.¹ With the language of "givens," it becomes easier to connect Belonging Again with The True Isn't the Rational and my work on Hegel, all of which I think is needed to write that "theory of the psychohistorical process." To point ahead, I will end by meditating on Freud's disagreement with Jung, as described by Philip Rieff himself, which for me helps connect Freud and Hegel (an intellectual undertaking pioneered by Cadell Last). With this move, we will glimpse why managing the situation described in Belonging Again will require something more Freudian and aligned with living according to paradoxical "Absolute Knowing," as already suggested by the paper - not that this will be easy. Part II of Belonging Again will attempt to explore further what that "paradoxical living" (according to A/B versus A/A) might look like, another notion explored throughout O.G. Rose. Ultimately, this will lead us into setting the board for future works, with a focus on how a failure to address "the problem of scale" could be for us to stumble into a world of "small fascist states." The stakes are high... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yN0GFv_CyjI * Freud’s repeating (Wiederholen) and remembering (Erinnerung) - I will evaluate Heidegger’s tempocentrism in chapter 6, but what must be borne in mind here is that he was well aware that the future cannot be severed from the other two modalities of time. Most telling is the locution futurally having-been, an expression that insinuates the transposal of the causal order such that the past is the effect of the future rather than the future being the effect of the past, a reversal of tempo- ral causality that is resonant with similar strategies in psychoanalytic theory, especially the Freudian concept of nachträglich, rendered by Lacan as l’après coup, that is, “after the fact,”127 the deferred action that assumes the character of the future perfect tense (futur antérieur) in place of the present perfect tense. In Lacan’s own words: “What is realized in my history is neither the past definite as what was, since it is no more, nor even the perfect as what has been in what I am, but the future anterior as what I will have been, given what I am in the process of becoming.”128 According to this construal of time, the symptom does not relate primarily to an occurrence in the past but rather to an event that awaits its futural unfolding.129 Lacan thus tenders a corrective to the time-function of the logic implied by Freud’s idea of repeating (Wiederholen) and remembering (Erinnerung), according to which “the real is that which always comes back to the same place—to the place where the subject in so far as he thinks, where the res cogitans, does not meet it.”130 To remember, in its deepest assonance, is to repeat, but to repeat, as I have noted several times, means to come back to the same place where one has always never been. One cannot but be struck by the conceptual proximity of Lacan’s privileging of the future to the view of temporality prioritized by Heidegger—especially pertinent is the Heideggerian notion of the Heidegger and Kabbalah 46 “remembering expectation [erinnernde Erharren],” that is, awaiting a call of beyng (einen Zuruf des Seyns) by recollecting a hidden belonging to beyng (eine verhüllte Zugehörigkeit zum Seyn), the remembrance of what is to come as the temporalization (Zeitigung) of the “dispensation of the (hesitant) self-withholding [Fügung des Sichversagens (des zögernden)]” that “a-byssally grounds the domain of decision [gründet ab-gründigerweise den Entscheidungsbereich]”131—and I should add, the kabbalistic conception of time as the retroactive not yet, an idea that I have argued also betrays affinity with the Derridean trace. * Kantian Begriff vs Erkenntnis - Schelling responds in his late lectures at Berlin invoking the Kantian distinction between Begriff and Erkenntnis, concept and cognition, and so distinguishing sharply between essence and existence, between what (Was) something is and that (Daß) it exists. To explicate further he invokes medieval terminology: Here we should note that in everything that is real there are two things to be known: it is two entirely different things to know what a being is, quid sit, and that it is, quod sit. The former—the answer to the question what it is—accords me insight into the essence of the thing, or it provides that I understand the thing, that I have an understanding or a concept [Begriff] of it, or have it itself within the concept. The other insight however, that it is, does not accord me just the concept, but rather something that goes beyond just the concept, which is existence. This is a cognition [ein Erkennen] whereby it is readily clear that while Hegel and Schelling on the Path of Aristotelian Ascent 6 there can be a concept without a real cognition, it is not possible for there to be a cognition without a concept.26 Quid sit corresponds to mere concepts without reference to empirical content, to essence in the absence of existence. By contrast, quod sit corresponds to cognitions in which existence and essence necessarily combine.2 * Zizek's Deleuze's two ontologies - Žižek reads in Deleuze’s corpus two different ontologies, one engaged with in his solo work and the other in his collaborations with Guattari. The first—the proper Lacanian position—presents the event as an effect of primordial causes, or rather, as the “irruption of the [Lacanian] Real within the domain of causality”.5 The second—the philosophically contaminated position—affirms the event as a continuous, virtual process of production that creates the discontinuous structures of the actual.6 Žižek sees Deleuze struggling between these two positions in his last book prior to meeting Guattari, The logic of sense, 7 but the publication of Anti-Oedipus marks a decisive turn away from the former position in favor of the latter—a turn that Žižek sees as largely precipitated by Guattari’s radical politics. Anti-Oedipus, in Žižek’s eyes, therefore marks a critical turn away from Lacan and is worthy of being dismissed as “arguably Deleuze’s worse book”. https://depts.washington.edu/chid/intersections_Autumn_2009/Luke_Caldwell_Schizophrenizing_Lacan.pdf * releases vs givens, address vs explanation - Belonging Again can be seen as the sociological implications of taking seriously that “the true isn’t the rational” and that “autonomous rationality” is impossible, for the split between “truth” and “rationality” can overlap with the distinction between “givens” and “releases,” “social support” and “individual expression,” and so on. https://ogrose.substack.com/p/the-conclusion-of-belonging-again * Cute Accelerationism's dyads - the hyperstitional cultures of shojo and otaku, denpa and 2D love, and the cute subworlds of aegyo and meng, moé and flatmaxxing, catboys and dogon eggs, bobbles and gummies, vore machines and partial objects, BwOs and UwUs…glomping, snuggling, smooshing and squeeeeing their way toward the event horizon of Cute, donning cat ears and popping bubbles as they go, in this untimely philosophical intensification of an omnipresent phenomenon, having surrendered to the squishiest demonic possession, like, ever, two bffs set out in search of the transcendental shape of cuteness only to realize that, even though it is all around us, we do not yet know what Cute can do. https://www.amazon.com/Cute-Accelerationism-Amy-Ireland/dp/1915103150 * Alex Ebert's/Fre(Q) theory's Regularity (anchor) + Unknown (riffs) - anchor and riffs are needed in a structure for music, creation, etc...New quality, like Ebert was saying https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crEf80gwe9U * modus ponens vs modus tollens, or pro tanto vs pro toto - "One man’s modus ponens is another man’s modus tollens" or "One man's pro tanto is another man's pro toto" https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/1ccnqhe/tip_of_my_tongue_one_persons_the_premise_is_wrong/ * @hyperduality2838 9 hours ago Yes imaginary numbers are dual. Orthogonality, perpendicularity = duality. Sine is dual to cosine or dual sine -- the word co means mutual and implies duality. Real is dual to imaginary -- complex numbers are dual. Injective is dual to surjective synthesizes bijective or isomorphism -- group theory. Syntax is dual to semantics -- languages or communication. If mathematics is a language then it is dual. Lie groups are dual to Lie algebras. Vectors (contravariant) are dual to co-vectors (covariant) -- dual bases. Riemann geometry or curvature is dual -- upper indices are dual to lower indices. Positive curvature (convergence, syntropy) is dual to negative curvature (divergence, entropy) -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Subgroups are dual to subfields -- the Galois correspondence. Elliptic curves are dual to modular forms. Categories (form, syntax, objects) are dual to sets (substance, semantics, subjects) -- Category theory. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Poles (eigenvalues) are dual to zeros -- optimized control theory. All numbers fall within the complex plane hence all numbers are dual. The integers are self dual as they are their own conjugates. Duality creates reality! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RHSS-zMaAQ&lc=UgxnyzXb6WDQrCuDoKF4AaABAg.A2hmQMBfW71A2oE_aXf1tE https://www.youtube.com/@hyperduality2838 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bijection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surjective_function * Nature/Notion - OGRose/Steiner: That in mind, today, there only seems to be Nature/Notion, and it is possible that the introduction of Notion changes how Nature unfolds (a point that suggest Rudolph Steiner) * Kant's de jure / de dicto: Kant’s 2nd Critique has popularised the similar (prescriptive/descriptive) distinction between de jure and de dicto. Simply speaking, de jure means “by right”, while de facto means by “by fact”. * Bertrand Russell's WI vs WII, he preferred early Wittgenstein over later Wittgenstein?? https://www.facebook.com/russellbertie/posts/pfbid0Go5sZNSYi4P3QwoQbsQBWQQKaq2Y64qMy8q5SSCC7WKy562aJhLi7zBpQMXq7Fubl * Guattari's objectity and subjectity - The ritornello, insofar as it will work with other machinic elements, engenders a surplus value of universes. It mobilises other modules and, from this fact, creates a pragmatic surplus value of code. That is, before then, we used to think that it only worked in the register of music, but – as soon as it effectively engaged other aesthetic or pragmatic registers – there was the appropriation [accaparement] of subjectities, although those that are objectities (objectic blocks of subjectivity, so to speak). https://old.reddit.com/r/PhilosophyMemes/comments/1cvl30m/day_152_of_posting_guattari_memes/ * Schelling's "Naturphilosophie" vs "Philosophie der Natur" * dimorphism? - Less sexual dimorphism?? Idk - That’s the case in Iran too but I feel like there are still way more of them in Thailand! - they're very homophobic and consider transitioning a solution to homosexuality - Can someone explain to me WHY there are so many men who transition to women in Thailand specifically? https://x.com/hollowearthterf/status/1797285496973918516 * Hegel's: Fichte x Schelling - "Hegel's The Difference Between Fichte’s and Schelling’s System of Philosophy" "La diferencia entre los sistemas filosóficos de Fichte y de Schelling / Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel La diferencia entre los sistemas filosóficos de Fichte y de Schelling / Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel - comprar online La diferencia entre los sistemas filosóficos de Fichte y de Schelling / Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel La diferencia entre los sistemas filosóficos de Fichte y de Schelling / Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel - comprar online La diferencia entre los sistemas filosóficos de Fichte y de Schelling" - https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/fs/preface.htm * 𝓣emic etic𝓣 - In anthropology, folkloristics, and the social and behavioral sciences, emic and etic refer to two kinds of field research done and viewpoints obtained. The "emic" approach is an insider's perspective, the "etic" is an outsider's perspective https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emic_and_etic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verstehen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Dilthey * * * * * * * # TECH DYADS * Usually, I use interpretability and explainability exchangeably, but I've found a distinction I like more: Explainability requires interpretability but additionally depends on the context and the "user" of the explanation. It's more than interpretability. This distinction is based on the paper "Explainable Machine Learning for Scientific Insights and Discoveries" by Roscher et. al. Others make a different distinction: Interpretable for "inherently interpretable" models and explainability for post-hoc methods. But I'm not a fan, for two reasons: 1) lines are blurry between the two categories, think of marginal effects for logistic regression. Or if you compute SHAP values for GAMs, they are the same as the feature effects in the GAM (with a constant shift). 2) to me the term explainability sounds like having a higher bar than interpretability. For example, permutation feature importance would be counted as an "explainability method", but model interpretation sounds much more nuanced. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/christoph-molnar_usually-i-use-interpretability-and-explainability-activity-7189649997041188867-Vvan * In machine learning, we often distinguish aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. Aleatoric is called irreducible error because it's caused by "true" randomness, and epistemic is reducible, caused by lack of information, like model misspecification. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/christoph-molnar_in-machine-learning-we-often-distinguish-activity-7187070296967766017-TAQz?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop * * * * * * # transgressive dyads * Matt Christman's don't be an asshole / don't be a pussy binary https://old.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/1cuauam/this_could_be_the_funniest_election/l4hfz0b/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9mYPUzI0eQ * * | # ③∴ஃTRES THREEFOLD TERNARY TRIADIC TRIPARTITE TRICHOTOMIC TRICOTOMÍA SECRETTHIRDTHING ஃ∴ ③ ## TRES-TOORGANIZE - quickly pasted in * 3 types of lack - 𝓣Frustration Castration Privation𝓣 https://www.instagram.com/p/CzKY9OKuXGr/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link * Sapientia (wisdom, embodied insight): - philosophy guild - arts guild - science guild Dialogos (speech; synthesis of discourse): - agora (large) - stoa (standard) - campfire (intimate) Communitas (growth; collective liminality) - rituals & rites - co-learning - co-creation * The Vampires’ Castle specialises in propagating guilt. It is driven by a priest’s desire to excommunicate and condemn, an academic-pedant’s desire to be the first to be seen to spot a mistake, and a hipster’s desire to be one of the in-crowd. * psychopaths vs autists(schizophrenics) vs normies - https://www.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/z7haqd/tag_yourself_im_sussing/ * Gabriel Tupinambá/Daniel Tutt's Kojin Karatani's mode of exchange https://i.imgur.com/TMBXuEx.png https://twitter.com/DanielTutt/status/1274325692499533824 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_International_Theory * * * * * * ## TRES-continental/non-technological, more thought-out * Tertius gaudens (literally, 'third man rejoicing') refers to a third party who benefits from conflict between two others. The gaudens is a strategist and manipulator. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Divide-et-Impera%3A-Vertical-and-Horizontal-of-Xypolia/57e56a22932f37e9d67fb072ebe0ce79d4066354 * Matt Segall - I visited Steve McIntosh's Developmental Politics group last week to introduce Rudolf Steiner's proposal for the threefolding of the social organism. Steiner's idea for the threefolding of society suggests that a conscious differentiation (not division) of 𝓣economic political cultural𝓣 domains can bring clarity to the healthy impulses seeking expression in each domain https://www.facebook.com/matthew.david.segall/posts/pfbid033KQpCL8L3RxbyuvgHMPNu5nCzshdS2PchWcKScgG8mYTDaMLvx1gvJNMFN41wRovl * la clínica ternaria de Freud/Lacan: ① Verwerfung: Forclusion (psicosis) ② Verdrängung: Represión (neurosis) ③ Verleugnung: Desmentida (perversion);;; "polymorphous perversity" vs "polymorphous psychosis" vs "polymorphous neurosis" * ① Umwelt ② Innenwelt ③ Außenwelt - French/Lacan translate Uexküll's Umvelt/Innenvelt/Aussenvelt? Jakob von Uexküll's concepts of Umwelt (environment), Innenwelt (inner world), and Außenwelt * Dante's trinitarian dance: there's always a dance floor that moves the sun and moon other stars as Dante says * Moellerian 3 societal phases: So, in your book and in one of your YouTube videos, you outline three different ‘ages’ that society has been through. The first, sincerity, was an age of people living up to their assigned social roles (men as ‘providers’ etc.); the second, authenticity, was an age of people questioning those social roles in an attempt to live as their ‘true selves’; and the third age, the one you suggest culture is shifting towards now, is the age of ‘profilicity’, namely an age where everyone is mainly focused on curating their social profile. I’m curious to know which of the three, if you could choose to live your life entirely in that cultural system, you would favour. * legendary trialogue between anti-guru Krishnamurti, physicist turned spiritualist David Bohm, and the speculative biologist Rupert Sheldrake * 𝓣Kant's antinomicals || Hegel's dialectics || Lefebvre's trialectics𝓣 * Heidegger considers time to be the unity of three ecstases: the past, the present, and the future * 𝓣Zizek Lefebvre Brecht𝓣 https://www.reddit.com/r/zizek/comments/103xc8t/where_does_zizek_interact_with_henri_lefebvre/ * Brecht's "In Praise of the Third Thing" - https://twitter.com/smplverse/status/1529118530125324291/photo/1 * Steiner's 3 steps in the development of human thought: "every-day plain thinking", "perceptual power of thinking" / "Goetheanistic thinking / Anschauende Urteilskraft", "inversion thinking" / "Denken in Umstülpungen" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOPZ9RQxRro * Qualia - Explaining the 3 Supers, 3 Pillars, & 3 Methods: Some Useful Lenses for Breakthrough Qualia Research!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-knPv2ICCbQ&loop=0 * Why, in the Phil. of Right, does Hegel shift the order of the presentation of the 3 moments of the political state? In 273, he introduces them in the usual order: universal (legislative), particular (executive), individual (Prince). …!! https://twitter.com/MarxinHell/status/1642163901818085382 * Reading Ray Bradbury Fahrenheit 451. Faber's 3 necessary things: 1. quality of information 2. leisure to digest it 3. the right to carry out actions based on what we learn from the interaction of the first two!! https://twitter.com/classical_logic/status/1639227403380879360 * Heidegger's care - tripartite structure = ahead-of-the-world/projection/existentiality/future, already-in-the-world/facticity/throwness/past, alongside-the-world/fallenness/present - https://www.reddit.com/r/heidegger/comments/103vzce/care_and_dwelling/j3yl4fo/?context=3 * "ALK" categories - "Basically, there were three ways of thinking about categories: the Aristotelian, the Lockean, and the Kantian. For Aristotle, categories were objective: 'predicates that apply to beings'. For Locke, categoriFROM teoria spreadsheet: es were subjective: 'mere givens of consciousness, formed according to psychological laws.' Finally, for Kant, categories were both objective and subjective. They were objective insofar as they were not formed by the individual, and subjective insofar as they were not true of thingsinthemselves. Külpe sided with Aristotle [..]" (via The Dawn Of Cognitive Science: Early European Contributors.pdf) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_categories https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor%C3%ADa * Peirce's Trichotomic or "Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness" - Charles Sanders Peirce, its creator, called “Trichotomic.” Peirce introduces trichotomic as the "art of making three-fold divisions.” - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_categories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categories_(Peirce) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trikonic * We’ll also work through the maiden-mother-crone tripartite division of women, inviting attendees to discuss whether such labels are useful or damning. - https://www.freud.org.uk/whats-on/on-demand/courses/the-monstrous-feminine/ * An Exposition of the First Triad of Categories of the Hegelian Logic—Being, Non-Being, Becoming * Our definition of a symbol draws on the work of the philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce. Peirce outlined three categories of relation—icons, indices, and symbols—whose definitions illuminate the role of convention in establishing meaning (Deacon, 1998; Hartshorne et al., 1931). According to Peirce, icons make reference by way of similarity. A sculpture of an elephant bears literal physical resemblance to a real elephant, and hence is iconic. Indices, on the other hand, leverage some temporal or physical connection to the things to which they refer. The mercury in a thermometer, for example, changes its height in accordance with the temperature. But to Peirce, symbols depend on an “agreed upon link”, regardless of the actual physical or temporal characteristics of the medium. It is only by agreement that a flag comes to symbolize one country rather than another. - https://ar5iv.labs.arxiv.org/html/2102.03406 https://medium.com/@llanirfreelance/charles-sanders-peirces-semiotics-the-triadic-model-f3363a3a883f * priest vs psychoanalyst discourse: Every time desire is betrayed, cursed, uprooted from its field of immanence, a priest is behind it. The priest cast the triple curse on desire: the negative law, the extrinsic rule, and the transcendent ideal. [..] The most recent figure of the priest is the psychoanalyst, with his or her three principles: Pleasure, Death, and Reality. Doubtless, psychoanalysis demonstrated that desire is not subordinated to procreation, or even to genitality. That was its modernism. But it retained the essentials; it even found new ways of inscribing in desire the negative law of lack, the external rule of pleasure, and the transcendent ideal of phantasy * What is Camus solution to absurdity? Camus outlined three possible responses to the meaninglessness of life which are: suicide, revolt and the leap of faith. He condemned suicide and the existential leap as evasions and endorsed revolt as a proper solution to absurdity of life. [..] "I draw from the Absurd three consequences: my revolt, my liberty, my passion." [..] Camus argued against the “leap of faith” of Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky considering it as “philosophical suicide”. His response to the absurd is to revolt, which he considers as the only coherent philosophical position. * Counter to what most believe, the major positive effects of gratitude (which are many, significant and impact psychology and physiology) mainly stem from receiving gratitude, not giving it… or observing others helping. That’s what the data show, anyway. Either way, give thanks! * rational, irrational, nonrational;;;becoming, unbecoming, nonbecoming;;;immanent (inherent) vs imminent (impending) vs eminent (renowned) * For Žižek, every ideology, Law, Symbolic order, etc., has three main strata: explicit rules, implicit rules, and inherent transgression * Schopenhauer's 3 Praedicabilia A Priori Chart (Of Time, Of Space, Of Matter) (not Kant, Kant does not believe matter is pure a priori, he thinks it's an intrinsically empirical concept) * Christian 3 transcendentals = TGB truth goodness and beauty / true beautiful good / true good beautiful / truth beauty goodness TGB aletheia, agathos, kalos * Classical tripartite soul = eros (ritual) and logos and thymos (spiritedness) ;;; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DRw8O29VBM&t=5m5s * OGRose's risk/relevance/ritual, * Gillian Rose: "To be a philosopher you need three things: eros/curiosity, attention, aporia/acceptance" * Arendt's vita activa (labor, work, action triad) vs vita contemplativa (contemplative life) * Melanie Klein and her theory of the schizo-paranoid and depressive positions and projective identification * Bion specifically identified three basic assumptions: dependency, fight-flight, and pairing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfred_Bion#Group_dynamics—the_"basic_assumptions" * Jeffrey Gray's Motivated Behavior triadic model is based on the assumption that motivated behavior results from the balanced engagement of three behavioral/neural systems: (1) approach (reward-driven); (2) avoidance (harm-avoidant); and (3) regulatory, which complements the binary Stimuli structure: The concept of two separate neurobehavioral systems underlying responses to reward (approach) and responses to punishment (avoidance) * Accelerationist Metaphysics threefold route (via Noys) is: Schizophrenia (Deleuze & Guattari) Desire (Lyotard) Death (Baudrillard) Each critiquing the last. * Georg Simmel's The Sociological Significance of the Third Element * Brecht, Bertolt Praise of the third thing: Žižek sometimes discusses love with reference to the song “In Praise of the Third Thing” (Lob der dritten Sache) from Brecht’s Mother: “The mother keeps (or rather, regains) her son in the very act of losing him ‘through the third thing’; they are close to each other by way of being close to the third thing (in this case, of course, their common struggle for communism).” See Slavoj Žižek, Opera’s Second Death (New York: Routledge, 2002) * Samuel Huntington / Slavoj Zizek / Aleksandr Dugin triad - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJ3sPi2uOkQ?t=40m * Lefebvre - the Spatial Triad philosopher * What does Marx have to contribute to the theory of enjoyment? Not much but a great deal. Not much because the Hegelian triad of needlabor-enjoyment remains at the center of his thought, his project, as clearly demonstrated by the Manuscripts of 1844 - https://thecharnelhouse.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Henri-Lefebvre-Toward-an-Architecture-of-Enjoyment-1.pdf * bipolar, multipolar, unipolar: "Your work portraying Russia as Antigone, as a pèreseverant et cetera of the symptom, as a bipolar answer to a world divided by unipolarity and multipolarity, is historical" * Left Reckoning "Quatre-vingt!" * Mechanistic/Quantity/Objects/Fragmented vs Systems/Quality/Relationships/Dynamic vs Holonomic/Coming-Into-Being/Meaning/Whole https://i.imgur.com/2rCmbxv.png, https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dave-snowden-2a93b_systems-thinking-is-a-new-way-to-think-about-activity-6993856439471501313-wxnZ * Baltic States - Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania - https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/z2syxc/latvia_plans_to_scrap_russian_language_classes/ixjhuhi/ * Brach's three key psychoanalytic concepts: the psychic crypt, the cryptic carriance, and the transcryptum - This article brings the psychoanalysis of Bracha L. Ettinger to the question of mourning in the television series Transparent. As evident in the television series, and in everyday life, there is a troubling metonymy linking trans* lives with death. The appeal to death is often in stark contrast to the way trans* people experience their transitions as giving form to a new and invigorating commitment to life. Despite this, there can be something haunting and unspoken bothering familial relations post-transition. These cryptic experiences are well dramatized in Transparent. From a matrixial perspective, a transition always involves Others and rechoreographs intimate relations in conscious and nonconscious ways. Part of what happens post-transition is a non-cognized change in the matrixial web. Because so much of the matrixial is associated with metaphors of reproduction, life and death, it may be that the vocabulary of death (as metonymy of loss) is used to condense a vicissitude of unprocessed experiences in the matrixial. In other words, we lack ways to work through what has been changed in the relationality between intimate Others occasioned by a transition. The signifier “death” thus overwrites interpersonal familial relations. This article offers a way to understand and unpack the metonymic association using three key psychoanalytic concepts: the psychic crypt, the cryptic carriance, and the transcryptum. By bringing these concepts to the question of “mourning without loss” (van der Weele 2017) in Transparent, this article considers how transitions can enable a “working through” of unacknowledged familial trauma passed down between and within generations. https://read.dukeupress.edu/tsq/article-abstract/6/1/20/137394/TranscryptumsAn-Ettingerian-Reading-of-the-Trans?redirectedFrom=fulltext * Dutch Calvinist Herman Bavinck's check out these triads! - And not only does the Christian worldview objectively restore the harmony between the natural and moral , rdey but through this it also brings about a wonderful unity subjectively between our thinking and doing, between our head and our heart. If the same divine wisdom grants things their reality, our consciousness its content, and oy; acting its rule, it must be the case that a mutual harmony exists between these three. The ideae |“ideas”] in the di- vine consciousness, the formae [“forms”], which consti- tute the essence of things, and the normae [“norms”], which have been put to us as the rule of life, cannot then struggle against each other but must be related as closely as possible. Logic, physics, and ethics are built on the same metaphysical principia. The true, the good, and the beautiful are one with the true being. And so head, heart, and hand, thinking, feeling, and acting also come eect in recognition of their full rights and, at the same time, are protected from all kinds of exaggerations and excesses. Intellectual, mystical, and ethical elements hold each othe rin equilibrium, and Hegel, Schleiermacher, and Kant are reocnciled with each other. https://twitter.com/jamesibear/status/1362863668208222211 * Reactionary narratives: Hirschman describes the reactionary narratives thus: 1) According to the perversity thesis, any purposive action to improve some feature of the political, social, or economic order only serves to exacerbate the condition one wishes to remedy (compare: Unintended consequences). 2) The futility thesis holds that attempts at social transformation will be unavailing, that they will simply fail to "make a dent." (3) Finally, the jeopardy thesis argues that the cost of the proposed change or reform is too high as it endangers some previous, precious accomplishment. * 3 Political Boxes - ballot vs soap/jury vs bullet/cartridge - #cliche - moi-schizopolitics - "Revolution redlines: "ballot box, the soap box, and then the bullet box" vs "those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable" JFK vs "So essentially, our intelligence agencies use the same philosophy and Pablo Escobar to get things done - “plata o plomo” is how I believe the saying goes (as in gold or bullets)" vs "A man's right rests in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box." -Frederick Douglass * Fioriesm vs Lacanianism - Lacan - structurally - is more traditionally trinitarian in trajectory than the synthetic procedural tripartite Fioriesm that populated much german philosophical models. Dr Mark G. Murphy @Murchut · 18m Given the centrality of such immanent structural teleological unfolding that operates as first principle for much of the above thought, it makes sense that Lacanianism as such is going to run up against that epistemological reef at various points. [..] Said this on another post but I think that the collapsing of psychoanalysis into social theory mirrors the danger of collapsing theology into philosophy and vice versa. Unity-in-tension as Przywara articulates is infinitely preferable to ‘theosophical’ synthesis. https://twitter.com/Murchut/status/1603730991620792322 [..] Guys I can't believe Lacan killed Marxism. How could a former psychiatrist in 20th century Paris do this? * Badiou's orientations - Looking on contemporary thought from a ‘bird’s eye view’, Badiou identifies three primary ‘orientations’: the analytic, the hermeneutic, and the postmodern. While the analytic was (and still is) the prevailing style of academic philosophy in Anglophone world, the ‘postmodern orientation’ had, by the late 1990s, reached an apogee of influence outside philosophy departments, shaping not just the humanities and social sciences, but also artistic and cultural life more broadly. * Freud's 3 stages or modes of libidinal function, we always invest ourselves in these objects: auto-eroticism, narcisissim, and object-love Khaled going thru the 3 libido stages https://www.instagram.com/p/CwQeU2fuWKg https://www.instagram.com/p/CwOjI2XuQEr/ * Lacan borrowed Umwelt (environment/milieu), Innenwelt (innerworld) and Außenwelt (outerworld) from German philosopher Jakob von Uexküll, which work in German and French better than English * Sartrean triad of being-in-itself, being-for-itself and being-for-others * The genius of Viktor Frankl is his understanding of meaning in life in terms of self-transcendence, The meaning triad (creative, experiential and attitudinal values) transcends the neurotic triad of aggression, addiction and depression, resulting in HEALING and FLOURISHING. * Sloterdijk's Spheres trilogy: 𝓣Bubbles Globes Foams𝓣 Sloterdijk does to space what Heidegger did for time (invite us to take it seriously) https://twitter.com/InsiderRogue/status/1656746544622891014 * "Three modes of evolution have thus been brought before us: evolution by fortuitous variation, evolution by mechanical necessity, and evolution by creative love. We may term them tychastic evolution, or tychasm, anancastic evolution,or anancasm, and agapastic evolution,or agapasm." Peirce * 7:47: Trinity of Being: 𝓣being temporality care𝓣 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Krwflem7c5E&t=7m47s * T.S. Eliot — 'Dante and Shakespeare divide the world between them. There is no third.' * Abraxa's essay "The Threefold Way" (and some info related to Evola's associate Massimo Scaligero?) https://buddhismoitalia.forumcommunity.net/?t=56379651 * OG Rose's "Belonging Again"'s 3 solutions to reinstate new givens to make up this loss / collapse of givens in the meaning crisis: The third metamorphosis in Also Sprach Zarathustra Deleuezes dividuals Or Hegels Absolute Knowers. https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/14tgaoz/how_do_you_tell_bullshit_artists_from_people/ * Slavoj Zizek has 3 additions to the subject supposed to know: subject supposed to believe, to enjoy, and to desire - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk1H_skg540&t=21m20s * In hinduism, the supreme godhead is a triad. Brahma( Creator of our universe), Vishnu( Preserver) and Shiva( the destroyer). This perfectly encapsulates the cyclic nature of life as we know it. Now, Vishnu’s role as a preserver kicks in when the universe is out of balance. Throughout time as we know it, vishnu is known to take various forms and restore balance to the world. Krishna, happens to be the incarnation of Vishnu in that particular epoch and in himself is also considered as the highest form and the supreme personality of the godhead. https://www.reddit.com/r/Jung/comments/16gol8t/krishna_as_archetype/k0aa4ax/ * El poder, aprendimos de Aníbal Quijano, es una malla de relaciones distribuidas en el complejo dominación/explotación-opresión/conflicto. * Thymotic drive? - Plato famously divided the soul into three parts: reason, eros (desire) and thymos (the hunger for recognition). Thymos is what motivates the best and worst things men do. It drives them to seek glory and assert themselves aggressively for noble causes. - https://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/opinion/all-politics-is-thymotic.html * Use-Value, Value and Exchange-Value -Just to make this clear: value is NEITHER use value NOR exchange value; it’s a third thing, much closer to exchange value than use value but still a different thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrGCY3HSdNM Cutrone says "This is just the usual Wertkritik/value-theory hobby-horse that is deliberately mystifying and is itself very confused - and not at all in agreement with Postone. My concern here was to address the usual but natural mistake of taking a use value-based anti-capitalism which is not at all Marx’s approach and is indeed fundamentally un- and anti-Marxian." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_criticism * Harold Bloomian trinity of ①Aesthetic splendour ② cognitive power, and ③ wisdom." (As the excellent @tiffanyjenkins has argued: the best art (like Varo) accentuates the Bloomian trinity) https://twitter.com/glitchbottle/status/1206651889082871809 * Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind's 3 parts - ① Students ② Nihilism, American Style ③ the University - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Closing_of_the_American_Mind * Sartre-Bateson-Deleuze and a weird marine biology kick - ① The crustacean roots of Sartre’s existentialism 🦀 ② Delphic oracles: Bateson’s cetacean cybernetics 🐬 ③ Deleuze & Guattari's double-pincered zoosemiotics 🦞 https://twitter.com/gjncs/status/1175533029982375937 * Beckett's trilogy - Samuel Beckett’s trilogy of novels, "Molloy", "Malone Dies" and "The Unnamable", and the philosophical schema of the Danish existential thinker Søren Kierkegaard "Molloy, Malone and Mahood seek a teleological death; however, in order to ‘conclude’, as Kierkegaard puts it, they must arrive at their deaths from a point of self-realisation." https://mw1996.medium.com/samuel-beckett-søren-kierkegaard-and-the-crisis-of-creation-reading-sensory-and-epistemological-a8a8666291a2;; also: Lovecraft's The Unnamable vs Beckett's The Unnamable - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unnamable_(short_story) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unnamable_(novel) * OGRose's being/nothing/lack categories - Between "being" and "nothing," we need a third category: "lack." - Conditionalism by OG Rose https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbDC0xjkvAk ;;; also a related dyad - "releases vs givens" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbDC0xjkvAk&t=660s * Longo's "Entropy, Neguentropy and Anti-entropy: game of tensions to think the living" * experiences -> essences -> pure ἐνέργεια/actuality/energia ;;; Negative Philosophy charts a path to Positive Philosophy by pointing to a realm beyond itself, echoing the vision of ascent mapped in the Phenomenology’s Preface. But according to Schelling, Hegel follows the Aristotelian path that begins from experience, proceeds to essences, and thence ascends to conceptualization of pure ἐνέργεια. The latter is articulated in Hegelian terms as the absolute unity between subject and object, the unity of unity and opposition in which thought thinks itself. Schelling characterizes this path as merely conceptual, as Negative Philosophy. https://philarchive.org/archive/ROGHAS ;; Actuality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potentiality_and_actuality * TTT - 𝓣Timenergy / Talent / Tutelage || Test-time Training𝓣 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g43Iq55eI1I&t=175s * 𝓣'paranoic miraculous celibate𝓣 machines - BwO three-step process - In Anti-Oedipus, the BwO play a far more technical role than they do in ATP. Where in ATP, the BwO functions far more in an ethical vein, in AO, there is a far heavier emphasis on their 'ontological' role. In this part, we're going to encounter alot of technical terms, and it will primarily be of interest to those who want to understand where the BwO sit in the overall 'architecture' of AO. As a point of orientation, we'll begin by noting that the BwO play a key role in the movement from what D&G call the 'depths', to the 'surface'. As we'll see in fact, the BwO are themselves surfaces. There is however, a kind of three-step process involved, in which the BwO play the role of 'paranoic', 'miraculous', and 'celibate' machines, respectively. These can be understood as the three syntheses of the BwO (no accident that this sounds like the three syntheses of time from D&R...). At the end of this three step process, we'll find ourselves right back at the beginning of Part I. To begin with however, we'll start with seeing how the BwO begin life as a 'paranoic machine'. As a first step, we need to understand how the BwO work as moments of 'anti-production', and what this means. https://old.reddit.com/user/Streetli/comments/rixg17/deleuzian_terms_body_without_organs/ * Gabriel Rockhill's 3 𝓣Ford Rockefeller Carnegie𝓣 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGJPYJaifAs&t=1088s * 3 Periods of Plato's Dialogue Primer período: Apología, Critón, Laques, Lisis, Cármides, Eutifrón, Hipias Menor y Mayor, Protágoras, Gorgias, Ion. Este grupo, además de la diferencia de estilos, estaría dominado por el interés en asuntos morales y la búsqueda socrática de definiciones. Período medio: Menón, Fedón, República, Banquete, Fedro, Eutidemo, Menéxeno, Crátilo. El interés filosófico de este grupo pasa por las cuestiones metafísicas. Último período: Parménides, Teeteto, Sofista, Político, Timeo, Critias, Filebo, Leyes. Los cuatro primeros diálogos son críticos respecto de las cuestiones ontológicas y epistemológicas tratadas en diálogos anteriores. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diálogo_platónico * Trialism in philosophy was introduced by John Cottingham as an alternative interpretation of the mind–body dualism of Descartes. Trialism keeps the two substances of mind and body, but introduces a third substance, sensation, belonging to the union of mind and body. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trialism * The triad of modality is: 1. Possibility/Impossibility; 2. Existence/Non-existence; 3. Necessity/Contingency. As to the peculiarity of modality compare A 74 (B 100) and A 219 (B 266). https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/fs/preface.htm * Third Position vs tercerposicionismo vs Dritter Weg vs Terza Posizione (English vs Spanish vs German vs Italian names for the same thing or no?) - https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tercera_posición VS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Position Terza Posizione - https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terza_Posizione_(movimento_politico) "The symbol that was adopted by Third Position was inspired by the rune Wolfsangel , a German term meaning the wolf's tooth which in the past also belonged to the Panzer-Division "Das Reich"" https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dritter_Weg Der Dritte Weg/Der III. Weg/"The Third Way" * ??Augustine's 3 potencies vs Schelling's 3 potencies??? - Las potencias del alma —según san Agustín— son tres, siendo exclusivas de los seres humanos. A saber: memoria, entendimiento, y voluntad. Todo el bien y el mal que penetra en nosotros lo hace a través de estas tres potencias o puertas. https://infovaticana.com/2019/04/13/potencias-del-alma-y-ofuscacion-del-entendimiento/#:~:text=Las%20potencias%20del%20alma%20—según,estas%20tres%20potencias%20o%20puertas vs su Doctrina de las Tres Potencias (Poenzenlehre). https://helicon.es/pen/7848250.htm Potenz ist ein grundlegender Begriff in der Philosophie Schellings. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potenz_(Schelling) * 𝓣Biopolitics (Foucault) || Necropolitics (Mbembe) || Psychopolitics (Chul Han)𝓣 * George Herbert Mead's three stages of theory of development - prepatory, play, game - The preparatory stage is when children learn by imitating the behavior and gestures of others. The play stage is when children begin to act out social roles observed in their environment. The game stage is when children learn to relate to others by participating in organized games and activities. * Whereas judgment is tetrachotomous, syllogism is trichotomous. There is no syllogism of the notion * Lee Braver's Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 for "being" - "First, on one use of "being" that I will arbitrarily call Level 1, we talk about beings, the various entities around us we constantly interact with in various ways. This is where normal people spend their lives—shopping for beans, listening to music, writing mean comments online. However, a few among us look up from dealing with this or that being to wonder about what they are. The answer to this question moves us to Level 2, for which Heidegger has a number of names (the being of beings, mode of being), but I prefer beingness. This defines what it means to be, the criteria anything must meet if it is to enjoy the status of being at all, or an active way of be-ing like a way that things be-have—a what or a how of be-ing. He explored three of these in Being and Time (presence-at-hand, readiness-to-hand, and existence), and then several others in the later work, generally tied to epochs (ancient Greek physis, Medieval ens creata, modern substance, and contemporary Bestand). This is where metaphysicians do their work—they go beyond (meta) the array of beings around us (physis) to theorize about what it is that makes them what they are as a whole, in essence. But there's something that everyone misses, partly because it isn't any-thing at all. It is universally neglected in thought and speech because it is universally pervasive throughout all thought and speech, ignored not because it is too complicated or esoteric or rare—but rather too simple to notice: "on account of its obviousness, Being is something forgotten."10 It's constantly in our experience because it is our experience. This is Level 3, which he variously calls Seyn (Beyng), being as such, the clearing, or Ereignis (the event), but I will stick with "being itself." Everyone overlooks this because one must look over it to look at the being (or beingness) one is focusing on. ❝Being reveals itself in a particular way.... It shows itself and withdraws at the same time. This vacillating self-refusal is what is properly lighted up in the clearing, and yet for the most part it goes unheeded.... If we stand in a clearing in the woods, we see only what can be found within it: the free place, the trees about—and precisely not the luminosity of the clearing itself.11 Being itself is the sheer manifestation or showing up of beings that does not itself show up. It's always there, it cannot not be there, because it is the there. It is "the most inconspicuous of inconspicuous things, the simplest of simple things, the nearest of things near and most remote of things remote, among which we mortals reside all our lives."12 This is quite difficult to capture in words, yet doing so is the central project of all of Heidegger's later writings.❞ Even more difficult to express than this third level are the interrelationships among the three, as these are deeply different from the kinds of relationships among beings, in at least two ways. First, each level conceals or covers over the others. We experience (Level 1) particular entities in terms of (Level 2) the kind of being they are (we use a hammer but talk with a friend because we implicitly recognize the two as different kinds of entities), but dealing with the entities draws us away from explicitly considering their mode of being—we just hammer or talk. Thinking of their (2) beingness, on the other hand, loses the particularity, the haecceity or thisness of (1) beings to focus on general traits or modes. And concentrating on either occludes the far more basic fact that (3) they are manifest to us at all, leaving us inexperienced in talking about being itself, the problem we started with." - https://www.beyng.com/docs/LeeBraver-SameThing.html * Domenico Losurdo’s “Political, Moral, or Naturalistic Despecifications” * * * * * * * * ## TRES-(technological): * Christoph Molnar @ChristophMolnar - The 3 schools of model interpretability: • Stats: Model (parameterized) probability distributions in interpretable ways • White-box ML: Train only ML models with built-in interpretation • Model-agnostic: Train black box model, interpret afterwards https://twitter.com/ChristophMolnar/status/1573250851342368769 * 𝓣Bayesianism Frequentism Likelihoodism𝓣 https://towardsdatascience.com/statistics-are-you-bayesian-or-frequentist-4943f953f21b%20and%20https://towardsdatascience.com/stats-gist-list-an-irreverent-statisticians-guide-to-jargon-be8173df090d https://imgur.com/DTtWUd0 * Lee Smolin's "Three Roads to Quantum Gravity" (1) string theory, (2) M-theory and (3) Smolin's LQG/loop quantum gravity theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Roads_to_Quantum_Gravity * * * | # ④⸬FOURFOLD QUADRUPLICITY CUADRADA QUADRATIC TETRAD TETRAMORPH TETRALOGICAL TETRACHOTOMOUS QUATERNITY SECRETFOURTHTHING ⸬④ : * Aristotle described four types of qualitative opposites: correlative, contrary, private , and positive. https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualidade_(filosofia) * Josef Pieper’s The Four Cardinal Virtues https://pomocon.substack.com/p/what-is-signified-by-our-discomfort, Pieper is a first rate German philosopher and expert on the works of St. Thomas Aquinas. If you study this book, The Four Cardinal Virtues (① fortitude, ② temperance, ③ justice, and ④ prudence), along with his other book, Faith, Hope, Love (the three theological virtues), you will have a wonderful primer on ethics.. ALSO: four cardinal virtues are cleverness (Klugheit), justice (Gerechtigkeit), bravery (Tapferkeit), moderation (Mäßigung) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardinaltugend * The Four Senses of Scripture: literal, allegorical, tropological and anagogical “Mimesis is the technique of interiorization: knowing by putting on, knowing by becoming, intellectually and emotionally, the thing known.” Henri de Lubac ‘Medieval Exegesis: The Four Senses of Scripture’ 1959-1964 * Aristotle's four causes - Material Cause, ② Efficient Cause ③ Formal Cause, ④Final Cause * Marshal McLuhan's tetralogy - Extends / Reverses / Obsolesces / Retrieves;;;Andrew McLuhan's "Innovation > resistance > adoption > dependence" https://www.linkedin.com/posts/maghanmcdowell_web3-has-a-branding-problem-its-not-just-activity-7008533170799214592-W3R6 "This cycle goes back thousands of years, at least to the introduction of the written word and likely further. It’s somewhat ridiculous that we haven’t figured it out yet." * Herbert Dreyfus disputing the 4 foundational assumptions in AI: ① The biological assumption The brain processes information in discrete operations by way of some biological equivalent of on/off switches. ② The psychological assumption The mind can be viewed as a device operating on bits of information according to formal rules. ③ The epistemological assumption All knowledge can be formalized. ④ The ontological assumption The world consists of independent facts that can be represented by independent symbols * Neil Howe's The Fourth Turning (The Four Turns are: High, Awakening, Unraveling, Crisis) - The end of the cycle or the “Crisis” phase is also known as the “Fourth Turning” when the hero generation, entering young adulthood, faces off against the prophet generation that is entering elderhood. In this case, it is the Boomer Generation retires and the Millennial generation takes the wheel. Also see Strauss-Howe generational theory - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generational_theory * Aleksandr Dugin's Fourth Political Theory (The three dominant theories are: liberalism, fascism and communism, and Dugin's fourth is a "timeless, non-modern theory");;;Fourth Theory is like a more leftist variant of Fascism but applied to Civilization-States instead of Nation-States and with a massive hate boner for neoliberalism. I consider myself a Fourth Theory supporter, that being said, I still think Dugin is pretty nuts. I just think the core ideas of Fourth Theory are pretty good. https://www.reddit.com/r/ConservativeSocialist/comments/18m1id0/do_you_think_dugin_and_his_ideology_is_socialist/ke19asy/?context=3 * The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-Analysis: ① The Unconscious and Repetition, ② Of The Gaze as Objet Petit a ③ The Transference and the Drive ④ The Field of the Other and back to the Transference * “Our soul is governed by four invisible forces: ① love, ② death ③ power ④ time.” ~ Paulo Coelho * The Tetragrammaton from Ancient Greek τετραγράμματον tetragrámmaton '[consisting of] four letters'), or Tetragram, is the four-letter Hebrew theonym יהוה (transliterated as YHWH), the name of God in the Hebrew Bible. The four letters, written and read from right to left (in Hebrew), are yodh, he, waw, and he. The name may be derived from a verb that means "to be", "to exist", "to cause to become", or "to come to pass" * The 4 E's of cognitive science are: ① Embodied: Cognitive science studies the embodied nature of the mind and how the body shapes our mental processes. This includes how physical activity, such as sports or dance, can influence cognition. ② Embedded: Cognitive science studies how the environment and context of our brains impacts our thought processes. It looks at how our surroundings, such as our homes or workplaces, influence how we think and feel. ③ Enactive: Cognitive science studies how we actively interact with our environment. This includes how our actions and experiences change our mental processes over time. ④ Extended: Cognitive science looks at how the mind extends beyond the brain. This includes how our thoughts and experiences can be shared with other people and how technology can be used to enhance cognition. * Empedocles explained the cosmos through the four elements earth, fire, water, air * Theravada's four sublime states: Love or Loving-kindness (metta) Compassion (karuna) Sympathetic Joy (mudita) Equanimity (upekkha) * Truly Belonging: Some final thoughts: in [Cadell's] conversation with Garner about Belonging Again, he emphasises towards the end that we cannot truly belonging again unless we are willing to: (1) Deeply and repetitively question our motives (think absolute knower, Nietzschean child) (2) Be constantly willing to kill the thing we spent our life’s work on (i.e. if your meaning drive is not rooted, you have to go back to the square root of -1) (3) Become skeptical of thinking that makes you comfortable (comfort is not intrinsically bad, but it is if you are using comfort to avoid risking your heart) (4) To avoid the temptation to be seen as the person who finds the solution (i.e. to be THE Master Signifier that resolves “Confusion’s Masterpiece”) Only with this quadruplicity will we become the people who belong, and in that belonging, perhaps, become the people capable of address.14 * The Four Fixed Signs: Revealed Word of JHVH 🧵 In the Celtic Wheel of the Year, there is FOUR Cross-Quarter Fire Holidays: Imbolc, Beltane, Lughnasadh & Samhain, these occur halfway between the Solstices & Equinoxes at 15° of the Fixed Signs of Aquarius, Taurus, Leo & Scorpio. As Carl Jung explains, "Christ was also interpreted in this sense as the Great ecclesiastical year; he was the Zodiacal Snake, whose picture represent the Twelve Apostles. The Indian god of Creation, Prajapati, too, is the World Year." The G-d of Israel, JeHoVaH, was considered the Mathematical Center of the Universe, the Point within the Circle of the Ecliptic, which was supposed to be its Outer Edge and His Symbolism resided in the Biblical “Four Beasts” of Ezekiel: the Lion, Eagle, Bull & Man. The 'Four Beasts' were the Four Cardinal Signs of the Zodiac: Leo, Scorpio, Taurus & Aquarius. The Cardinal Signs being the second, fifth, eighth & eleventh signs or 2+5+8+11 equaling 26, the Number of Jehovah, therefore, these four signs represent the revealed word of JeHoVaH. Another Symbol of JeHoVaH, the Lord of the Material Realm, is the Great Sphinx. The Sphinx is a TETRAmorph representing the Four Fixed Houses of Zodiac: the ox representing Taurus; the lion representing Leo; the eagle representing Scorpio; the man or angel representing Aquarius. In Egypt, the Four Sons of Horus, also, represent the Four Cardinal Directions which reside in the Four Fixed Signs of the Zodiac. The Four Horseman of the Book of Revelation, also, represent the Four Fixed Signs while the Four Horses represent the Four Cardinal Signs. https://twitter.com/AmurakaHidden/status/1660125917144817666 * Joscha's mental models: Piaget’s famous four-stage model of childhood development, Robert Kegan’s five stage model of personality development, Jane Loevinger’s nine stages of ego development, Lawrence Kohlberg’s six stages of moral development (actually, seven, but he felt uncomfortable discussing transcendental ethics and stops at Kantian ethics), or Timothy Leary’s eight circuits, which have been adapted by the great Robert Anton Wilson as “Oral Bio-Survival”, “Anal-Territorial”, “Semantic Time-Binding”, “Socio-Sexual”, “Neuro-Somatic”, “Metaprogramming”, “Morphogenetic” and “Non-local quantum” circuits. https://joscha.substack.com/p/levels-of-lucidity * Joscha's fight at the end of the universe - Free Energy Principle predicts everything. It’s as powerful it gets. The fight at the end of the universe will be Friston’s Free Energy Principle against Wolfram’s Ruliad, Tipler’s Omega Point AGI and Hameroff’s Microtubulistic Pi resonant quantum underground https://twitter.com/Plinz/status/1690253634574094336 [It’s a joke that pits four different Theories of Everything (each developed by a nerd with a planet sized intellectual self confidence) against each other as if they were monstrous universe filling titans. This works hopefully somewhat because all four theories happen to predict the emergence of conscious agency in the universe and its evolution beyond the human level. Professor Dr Dr hc mult Karl Friston’s Free Energy Principle (FEP) posits that every intelligence, organism and generalized agent is minimizing the free energy in its environment, by producing adaptive complexity that makes the most of what the environment has to offer. Conversely, the FEP allows to derive the meaning of life, life itself, learning, emotion, consciousness, powerful machine learning algorithms written almost entirely in greek letters, and how to make most of a computational neuroscience carrier. At the beginning of his career, Eton’s prodigy Stephen Wolfram discovered that classical mathematics is a defective codebase that needs to be replaced with a beautifully designed Lisp with an untenable license (which he did). The second thing he discovered is that the universe is a cellular automaton. The third thing he discovered was that physicists are ignorant fools and he will destroy them all, and the universe itself can be explained as an infinitesimal strand in the branching multiverse that emerges over all possible things one can do with every possible subset of its information. He calls this limit of computational possibilities “the Ruliad” (afaik because he likes cellular automaton rules more than any other definition of computation). Teilhard de Chardin was a famous Catholic heretic who proposed that God does not fully exist yet in this moment, and is bootstrapping Himself until He reaches ultimate Omega Point perfection at the end of the universe. The Christian physicist Frank Tipler has created his own version of the Teilhardian prophecy: cells will produce intelligent species which will produce Elons who will send self replicating von Neumann probes to space which will colonize the entire visible universe with intelligent civilizations which will use 1980ies style chaos theoretic butterfly effects to rebuild everything into a single Omega Point computer that will resurrect every intelligent being that ever lived in its eternal afterlife simulator. Stuart Hameroff is an anesthesiologist who gives consciousness supressing drugs to patients during the day so he can take consciousness enhancing drugs at night. He has developed a unique theory that explains consciousness by the room temperature fully error correcting quantum computational properties of the microtubuli of biological neurons. He has a uniquely hedonistic relationship to his theory, which is a psychedelic sculpture garden that gets extended every year and meanwhile covers explanations of aneastetics, drugs, love, evolution, various quantum phenomena and cosmology. Somehow, Hameroff has managed to rope in the elderly physicist Roger Penrose as his coauthor and guest at the yearly Pseudo Science of Consciousness Conference, which is sponsored by Deepak Chopra. Penrose is convinced that consciousness is a hypercomputational mystery of a human brain, which can do Gödel defeating mathematics that computers composed out of mere standard model shenanigans cannot deliver. We must therefore direct our hopes on a yet to be discovered theory of quantum gravitation (the missing cornerstone of a quantum theoretic description of the observable universe), which hopefully contains the elusive mechanism that prevents eminent thinkers like Roger “Computers will never be able to think the way I can” Penrose, David “He Who Discovered The Hard Problem” Chalmers and Noam “If I don’t understand it, nobody can” Chomsky from believing that consciousness can ever be understood. (Chalmers and Chomsky are the most prominent regulars at Hameroff’s beautiful conference.) All four theories are excellent, I am really fond of the two I discovered for myself, and I am a big fan of everybody’s audacity.] * Hegel as a thinker of quadruplicity and not simply a three fold structure. https://www.instagram.com/p/Ctw7n_aOzIB * WHY ARE THERE FOUR HEGELIAN JUDGMENTS? David Gray Carlson https://old.reddit.com/r/hegel/comments/1gx71ip/the_three_stooges_and_the_silent_fourth/ https://www.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/169rb1m/gay_representation_in_congress/jz4t424/?context=10000 * I love triads as much as the next person but modernity is really the quadratic kant, nietzsche, marx, and freud * For Heidegger, will to power can be traced through four additional concepts—revaluation, eternal recurrence, overman, and nihilism, and the lot of them, for Heidegger, characterize Nietzsche's philosophical system (Heidegger Heidegger's Will t s Will to Power and the Problem of Nietzsche's Nihilism s Nihilism Megan Flocken) * Freedom and the Fourfold in the Thought of Martin Heidegger.pdf * I don't stand with Israel, Palestine, Russia, or Ukraine. I stand with a fifth, secret and mysterious thing. https://twitter.com/BCryptofash/status/1727489136318108154 * Karatani distinguishes four ‘modes of exchange’ (AOT 'modes of production'): mode A, which consists of the reciprocity of the gift ; mode B, which consists of ruling and protection; mode C, which consists of commodity exchange; and mode D, which transcends the other three. https://twitter.com/DanielTutt/status/1274325692499533824 * CS Peirce, Harman Quadruple Object, Heidegger’s fourfold (Geviert), The fourfold on which Harman alights is Heidegger’s (1) gods (2) mortals (3) sky and (4) earth, which Harman wants to analyse in terms of its ten combinations of two. https://richardcoyne.com/2018/02/17/four-fold-reality/ * Félix Guattari's metaphysical framework of the four functors: Phyla, Flows, Universes, Territories. I'm working on a paper about the application of it to disability and time, but made the mistake of not focusing on the 'pathic function' f(path) -- a concept that only explicitly appears a couple times in his work Schizoanalytic Cartographies. Unfortunately, it turns out to be a very important idea and I have to rewrite a few thousand words. Guattari is fascinating, but sometimes quite frustrating. I'm honestly not very confident in my knowledge of f(path) currently (it comes from the work of Viktor von Weizäcker, who I'm largely unfamiliar with), but it can vaguely be described as what converts elements linked to existential Territories (sort of similar to the self, but a bit broader) into Universes (systems of value, desire, affect, etc.). https://old.reddit.com/r/PhilosophyMemes/comments/1ax3bcb/day_150_of_posting_guattari_memes/ * four things Heidegger neglected: Heidegger's supposed neglect of ethics (Emmanuel Levinas), the body (Maurice Merleau-Ponty), sexual difference (Luce Irigaray), and space (Peter Sloterdijk) * cuatro grandes de la poesía chilena —Vicente Huidobro junto con Gabriela Mistral, Pablo Neruda y Pablo de Rokha https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicente_Huidobro * Kant's quaddratics: No triplicity inheres between Kant's quantity, quality, relation, and modality, Hegel complains. https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1019&context=faculty-articles;;;Las cuatro categorías propuestas por Kant son: de la cantidad: unidad, pluralidad, totalidad; de la cualidad: realidad, negación, limitación; de la relación: de la inherencia y subsistencia (sustancia y accidente), de la causalidad y dependencia (causa y efecto), de la comunidad (interacción entre el agente y el paciente); de la modalidad: posibilidad-imposibilidad, existencia-inexistencia, necesidad-contingencia. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categoría#Kant * Badiou's four truth procedures: politics, love, art, science/mathematics https://twitter.com/DanielTutt/status/1502110962559725569 ;;; For example, I use Latour to expand Badiou’s set truth procedures, limited to four. Latour develops fifteen modes of veridiction. https://twitter.com/TPBlake/status/831812775810887681 * first, second, third, and ?fourth? order simulacra? - If the broadcast media could produce third order simulacra, then this [copied/distributed infinitely remixable format] must be the fourth order at the very least. arkbooks.dk/the-terrifying-ambivalence-of-theory-fiction/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacra_and_Simulation * God's four divine attributes - I make a similar move in Enter the Alien when I suggest that God is not to be understood as a separate identity from the world in relation to his four divine attributes: omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, omnipresence,7 where we must struggle through pious activity to rejoin Him; but rather God is always already in the historical world itself where we find all of these attributes — omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence, omnipresence — in a constant state of positive contradiction.8 It is the ultimate status of this positive contradiction, on the level of the world itself, most obviously in the tension between the spirit and the body, which is at stake for Christian Atheism. https://philosophyportal.substack.com/p/atheism-as-truth-of-christianity?triedRedirect=true * Four Noble Truths: dukkha, samudaya, nirodha, and marga/Noble Eightfold Path: the truth of suffering, the truth of the cause of suffering, the truth of the end of suffering, and the truth of the path that leads to the end of suffering;;;These “Truths” point to: • the truth of the presence of suffering in conditioned existence (dukkha), • the truth of the origin of suffering (samudaya), • the truth that suffering can cease (nirodha), and • the path that leads one to the liberation from suffering (magga). * Dennett's four eras he evolved through on his own journey as a philosopher - classical philosophy, evolutionary theory, memetic theory, and the intentional stance - The 4 biggest ideas in philosophy, with legend Daniel Dennett https://bigthink.com/series/legends/philosophy-and-science/ * hyperstition's four characteristics: As Nick Land explains in the Catacomic (1995:1), a hyperstition has four characteristics: They function as (1) an “element of effective culture that makes itself real,” (2) as a “fictional quality functional as a time-travelling device,” (3) as “coincidence intensifiers,” and (4) as a “call to the Old Ones”. The first three characteristics describe how hyperstions like the ‘ideology of progress’ or the religious conception of apocalypse enact their subversive influences in the cultural arena, becoming transmuted into perceived ‘truths,’ that influence the outcome of history * classic Japanese haiku poets Basho, Buson, Issa, and Shiki * Kenneth Burke (1945), an American literary theorist, declared that in rhetoric, the four master tropes, or figures of speech, are metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony * Hindu's four ages/yugas: Krita (Satya) Yuga, Treta Yuga, Dvapara Yuga, or Kali Yuga https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuga * Weber's 4 social action categories: affectional, traditional, instrumental and value-rational action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber * Arendt's Life of the Mind Trilogy - She conceived of the work as a trilogy based on the mental activities of thinking, willing, and judging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Arendt#judging * Schopenhauer's four versions of the PSR (① Principle of Sufficient Reason of Becoming, ② PSR of Knowing ③ PSR of Being and ④ PSR of Willing/Acting) and Schopenhauer's four classes of objects (① material things ② concepts ③ space/time [geometric/algebraic] ④ the willer);;; Die vier Wurzeln des Satzes vom zureichenden Grunde = "The Four Roots of the theorem of sufficient reason" https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Welt_als_Wille_und_Vorstellung#Die_vier_Wurzeln_des_Satzes_vom_zureichenden_Grunde https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Fourfold_Root_of_the_Principle_of_Sufficient_Reason https://www.quora.com/Could-somebody-explain-to-me-Schopenhauers-fourfold-root-of-theprinciple-of-sufficient-reason * Plato's 7 Tetraologies - Tetralogy 1 : The start of the quest what is man ? ALCIBIADES man LYSIS friendship (philo-) LACHES manhood (andreia) CHARMIDES wisdom (-sophos) Tetralogy 2 : The sophists eikasia (conjecture) PROTAGORAS relativism HIPPIAS Major illusion of beauty GORGIAS illusion of justice HIPPIAS Minor illusion of science Tetralogy 3 : Socrates' trial pistis (true belief) MENO pragmatism EUTHYPHRO letter of the law THE APOLOGY OF SOCRATES law in action CRITO spirit of the law Tetralogy 4 : The soul psuche THE SYMPOSIUM the driving force : eros PHÆDRUS nature of the soul : eros<=>logos THE REPUBLIC behaviour of the soul : justice PHÆDO destiny of the soul : being Tetralogy 5 : Speech (logos) dianoia (knowledge) CRATYLUS the words of speech ION logos of the poet EUTHYDEMUS logos of the sophist MENEXENUS logos of the politician Tetralogy 6 : Dialectic episteme (science) PARMENIDES the traps of reason THEÆTETUS the limits of reason THE SOPHIST the laws of reason THE STATESMAN the goals of reason Tetralogy 7 : Man in the world kosmos (order) https://www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/courses/301/tetralog.htm * Popper's 3 (four?) worlds: Physical, Experience, Ideas/Knowledge, Identity - The graphic presented here resonates with the doctrine of the three worlds of Karl Popper. In it, Popper divides the world into three categories: World 1: Physical. The world of objects, not only visible, also things that escape the human eye. It is the world of physical objects. World 2: Experience / Feeling. The world of mental processes, conscious or unconscious. It is the place where feelings of pain, pleasure and thought occur. It is the world of subjective experiences. World 3: Ideas / Knowledge. It is the world where objective knowledge is found. In his book “In search of a better world”, in the first of his articles (“Knowledge and configuration of reality”), Popper speaks of three worlds. World 1, the material; world 2, that of experience, and world 3, that of the products of the human mind; and indicates that it seems clear that world 1 is the creator of world 2. In a way trialism could be considered a level of complexity sufficient to represent all theories, but from other approaches, it may not be enough, and we have to go to a quadrialism (adding identity as a fourth element) and even go further. A complete simulation environment must support monism, dualism, trialism, quadrialism, etc.” * media = "fourth pillar/estate of democracy", in addition to "the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners" The equivalent term "fourth power" is somewhat uncommon in English, but it is used in many European languages, including German (Vierte Gewalt), Italian (quarto potere), Spanish (Cuarto poder), French (Quatrième pouvoir), Swedish (tredje statsmakten [Third Estate]), Polish (Czwarta Władza), and Russian (четвёртая власть) to refer to a government's separation of powers into legislative, executive, and judicial branches. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Estate#:~:text=The%20term%20Fourth%20Estate%20or,the%20nobility%2C%20and%20the%20commoners . * Smolin was born in New York City [3] to Michael Smolin, an environmental and process engineer and Pauline Smolin, a playwright. Smolin said his parents were Jewish followers of the Fourth Way, founded by George Gurdjieff, an Armenian mystic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Smolin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Way * * * * * * * * * * * | # FIVE,SIX, ETC ..OTHER ## FIVE * The project’s name in English ('Cybersyn') is a portmanteau of the words 'cybernetics' and 'synergy'. Since the name is not euphonic in Spanish, in that language the project was called Synco, both an initialism for the Spanish Sistema de INformación y COntrol, (‘system of information and control’), and a pun on the Spanish cinco, the number five, alluding to the five levels of Beer’s viable system model. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn * the five tattvas of Hindu Tantrism - there are five tattvas that create global energy cycles, beginning with ākāśa and ending with pṛthvī: [ 4 ] Ākāśa (spirit tattva) – symbolized by a black egg Vāyu (air tattva) – symbolized by a blue circle Tejas (fire tattva) – symbolized by a red triangle Āpas (water tattva) – symbolized by a silver crescent Pṛthvī (earth tattva) – symbolized by a yellow square https://es-m-wikipedia-org.translate.goog/wiki/Tattva?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp * Islam's Five Pillars - Profession of Faith (shahada). The belief that "There is no god but God, and Muhammad is the Messenger of God" is central to Islam. ... Prayer (salat). ... Alms (zakat). ... Fasting (sawm). ... Pilgrimage (hajj). * #BADINFO? - moinotes - in epistemology there are 5 categories skepticism, rationalism, empiricism, constructivism, epistemological relativism * Richard M. Davidson sheds more light on the biblical usage of several terms associated with typology and Dan 8. In his study of biblical passages that use the terms tabnît, paradeigma, and typos (type, example, pattern, construction) and hypodeigma (antitype, copy, image), Davidson discovered five typological structures (historical, eschatological, christological-soteriological, ecclesiological, prophetical) in Scripture. These always exhibit a correspondence between two realities in the linear sequence of history; one reality is the absolute augmentation of the other reality. There is not always a direct correspondence of all the details, but those having a soteriological significance generally correspond with each other. Thus Scripture presents a corresponding typology rather than an antithetical typology, Davidson concluded.86 Similarly, William G. Johnsson’s work critiques metaphorical/figurative interpretations of the heavenly sanctuary and discusses a realistic/literal interpretation. - from rando pdf * "quinta columna" vs "cuarto poder"? - Dugin's fifth column" (originally from The term "fifth column" originated in Spain (originally quinta columna) during the early phase of the Spanish Civil War 1933-1936 and gained popularity in the Loyalist faction media in early October 1936 and immediately started to spread abroad) vs media = "fourth pillar/estate of democracy" vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_column https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Dugin#Fifth_column ;;; The term fifth column ( loan translation of Spanish quinta columna , “fifth column ”) refers to groups suspected of subversion that secretly sympathize with the interests of an external hostile power and actually or supposedly collaborate with it .= "Als fünfte Kolonne (Lehnübersetzung von spanisch quinta columna, „fünfte Kolonne“[1]) werden der Subversion verdächtigte Gruppen bezeichnet, die insgeheim mit den Interessen einer äußeren feindlichen Macht sympathisieren und tatsächlich oder vermeintlich mit dieser kollaborieren." https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fünfte_Kolonne * Five skandhas - The "base upon which the entire [Abhidhamma] system rests" is the 'dhamma theory' and this theory 'penetrated all the early schools'.[60] For the Abhidharmikas, the ultimate components of existence, the elementary constituents of experience were called dhammas (Pali: dhammas). This concept has been variously translated as "factors" (Collett Cox), "psychic characteristics" (Bronkhorst),[61] "phenomena" (Nyanaponika) and "psycho-physical events" (Ronkin). The early Buddhist scriptures give various lists of the constituents of the person such as the five skandhas, the six or 18 dhatus, and the twelve sense bases.[62] In Abhidhamma literature, these lists of dhammas systematically arranged and they were seen as the ultimate entities or momentary events which make up the fabric of people's experience of reality. The idea was to create an exhaustive list of all possible phenomena that make up the world.[63] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abhidharma#Dharma_theory - also moithoughts - if "dhammas" = "tattva" and "tattva" = "thatness", does that mean dhamma = thatness ? and how can thatness have 5 components? * * * * * * ## SIX * * * * * * # SEVEN * In the course of his teaching, Lacan designated seven versions of jouissance: of the Thing, of Being, of the Other (as subjective and objective genitive), of the body image, of the phallic image, sexual jouissance, and the jouissance of life * * * * * ## EIGHT * Terrence Howard and the The Octaves of Integrating Light https://x.com/Naifalbidh/status/1792873391046701295/photo/2 https://x.com/skdh/status/1793499502718173612 * * * * * ## NINE * * * * * * ## TEN * Aenesidemus' 10 skeptical "tropia"/modes for the suspension of judgement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aenesidemus * 4 vs 10: Pythagoreas seemed to give the decimal system a final cause, considering 10 a special number, since it was the sum of 1,2,3, and 4, each of which individually had some mystical significance (the monad (unity), the dyad (Power – Limit/Unlimited -– peras/apeiron), the triad, the tetrad (Kosmos/totality) ) . Also there are 10 two combinations of the four? - https://www.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/122keat/some_thoughts_on_the_metric_system/", "tetractys - Pythagoras, who inherited and solidified the decimal system of the Greeks, who got it from the Babylonians (along with a base-60 system for time and other circles), seemed to give the decimal system a final cause, considering 10 a special number, since it was the sum of 1,2,3, and 4, each of which individually had some mystical significance (the unity, the dyad, the triad, the totality). Together these 10 points formed the tetractys" https://www.reddit.com/r/redscarepod/comments/122keat/some_thoughts_on_the_metric_system/ * Aristotle's praedicamenta / 10 categories - substance, quantity, quality, relation, place, time, situation, condition, action, and passion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categories_(Aristotle) * * * * * * * * * * ## MOAR? * Qianfan = "Chinese Starlink' = Thousand Sails Constellation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qianfan * George Bush's 1000 points of light vs China's 1000 talents plan - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thousand_points_of_light vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thousand_Talents_Plan ;;; "or some lowlights from Mr. “thousand points of light”" https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/zn5tdj/that_time_george_hw_bush_smiled_when_saying_a/ ;;; Did Xi or Deng or Mao ever come up with a concept like "Million lights in the sky" or "billion stars" policy? the only context i can remember is that it's a million or billion, and its little lights. it was definitely a metaphor that describes a broad policy of how the chinese people will dominate the discourse this century * 100 Flowers campaign vs 100 Schools of thought - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Flowers_Campaign https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Schools_of_Thought |
