[ssf] I. Conceptualisation of the Other
.
adam at diamat.org.uk
Tue Sep 19 21:21:36 BST 2006
"Oez, seignurs, ke dit Marie,
Ki en sun tens pas ne s'oblie" -- Guigemar
a) Introduction
---------------
How to word this ?
An example:
Consider me, atom i
my place, shape and matter
are tempered to respond
to social-cultural and other cues, as is
as is
any other atom i
we exist in a field
of senses,
signals and noise
touch and tastes / smells
i ask that the platonic reader
will not be mislead in to thinking
that
in beginning to draw
the material form of the atom
and its position in space-time
that
i intend to draw
my conceptualisation of the Other
upon the material base of
the atoms alone
Rather,
i begin here
from an understanding
that
any projection
from any others perspective
is dependent on she, he or its
material position
and wonder if
this is problematic ?
In *Constructing Quarks*,
[ Andrew ] Pickering argues:
"It is unproblematic
that scientist
produce accounts of the world
that
they find comprehensible:
given their cultural resources,
only singular incompetence
could have prevented members
of the community
producing an understandable
version of reality
at any point
in their history.
And,
given their training
in sophisticated mathematical techniques,
the preponderance of mathematics
in particle physicists' accounts
of reality
is no more hard to explain
than
the fondness of ethnic groups
for their own language"
[ John ] Gribbin,
in *Schrodinger's Kittens*
draws this point from Pickering's assertion:
"In other words,
the 'mystery' that mathematics
is a good language
for describing the Universe
is about as significant
as the discovery
that
English is a good language
for writing plays in.
If world views really are cultural products,
as Pickering and [ Thomas ] Kuhn argue,
then
it should be no surprise
that
there are different interpretations
of quantum reality."
So, you read my problem --
how to word this ?
But it's not me, atom i,
that's been wording it,
in recent space-time,
is it ?
Erm,
not at least
to the extent
of the other guys,
the other atom i,
other scientists,
mentioned below:
"The universally acknowledged crucial significance
of the Cartesian cognito
in the formation of modern self-understanding
is a guiding motif of the study.
It seeks to show
how the view-point of the cognito
reinforced by the impact of modern science,
has inspired the philosophical itinerary
[ sequence ]
in the course of which
the traditional conviction
that
the alienated man
is the man
who does not believe in God
has given way to
the view
that
belief in God
is
a profound source
of human alienation.
This theme is illustrated
in its development
in the philosophies of Kant,
Hegel, Feuerbach and Marx,
and in its contemporary expression
in positive Naturalism
and Existentialism"
-- Patrick Masterson : Atheism and Alienation
If x is ten,
then
x squared is an 'undred,
as we used to say at school,
but joking apart
one can read
and other wise sense
how cultural paradigms
change in history
b) Atomic Projections
---------------------
Back to the example:
Consider me,
the material projection of atom i,
worded and pronounced "atoma stoicheia"
in Greek --
"indivisible elements"
in translation :
Well this element, i, exist,
and i live in a field:
and i am deemed to be a separate entity,
a unit entity,
with a material shell
that demarks my boundaries
within the greater Other,
and i am deemed to be a whole unit,
an whole i,
since any division of the i --
any bisection of the i
is as clearly a contradiction
to the existence of the i
as is the splitting suggested
in the justice of Solomon
But is that all there is ?
What about the inner i
we've heard so much about
in all its nine billion names :
as a single entity
sometimes labeled the sole,
one's consciousness,
or, a kernel commonly
This type of projection,
this type of determination of the atom,
the type which penetrates
the outer shell of the atom i,
is worded and pronounced "atomoi archia"
in Greek,
in translation :
"indivisible principles"
or
"beginnings"
The projections of the archia --
these projections in to the inner atom,
differ from
the projections of the stoicheia --
the drawings of the material shell,
the etchings of sensual space,
in that
the archia, the "principles",
need not be plotted
on Cartesian graph paper
And
-- this is where the numbers comes in --
some folk project,
draw two or more parts
in to the structure
of the archia
Let us adopt [ Richard ] Feynman's's label
and call these inner bits "partons"
And let us first consider
division one
and the two bit consequences
projected in to this jig-saw archia
b i) First Division : Two-Parton States
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Examples:
good / bad
right / wrong
true / false
sane / mad
innocent / guilty
healthy / unhealthy
left brain / right brain
sinister / dexterous
superior / inferior
There are many more examples
of two tone competing separations
and most,
like the above,
have labels alluding to
a direct binary connection
to many of the dominant cultural paradigms
emerged, and re-emergent
out of the other atom i
out of the other elements
and in to the flux
In other words,
these kind of two-parton projections appear to form,
and be formed
reflect, and be reflected
from and to
extant material reality
is that such a bad thing ?
* are we not human --
do we deny there is both good and bad in the world ?
do we not know our right from wrong ?
and in any case
* one would expect the microscopic parts
to reflect the structure of the macroscopic whole ? [1]
and visa versa
consider [ Niels ] Bohrs' model of the atom --
there are patterns in material reality that are common
at many scales
[ Martin ] Heidegger has something to say
about scientists,
prescribing schemes upon nature
that would make a trooper blush [2]
Suffice to say
that
there have been many patterns
projected upon to the atoms --
paradigms drawn
in analogy to systems
that are deemed
to be atomic
in the sensuous, material world --
for instance, i note
partons are sometimes
characterised as animals
Returning now to the segregation of the partons :
do we deny there is both good and bad in the world ?
do we not know our right from wrong ?
In these binary questions
we may draw the partons
as discrete entities
within the archia
Or alternatively
we may draw the archia whole
but tethered
between two forces of attraction
the good / bad posts --
the naughty but nice posts
the angels and devils
of pink's toddler
with labels weighted as meaningful
and therefore as meaningless
as the imagining intellect
is enabled to comprehend
but all the same,
tethered between two forces
commonly denoted as being
outside of the atom archia
and within,
more often than not,
the material flux
in contemporary space-time
For example :
Rather than 'criminal' = 'evil' and only 'evil'
multiple
mitigatory
transitory tags
emerge from the material flux,
such as the 'criminal' may = 'desperate',
or 'poor',
or 'badly informed',
or 'negligent'
or 'sick'
or indeed 'provoked'
These tags,
emerging from the material flux,
tend to shift
the attractive node
out of the atom archia
and in to the flux
But i note
there are many extant paradigms
that clearly draw the line
of separation inside the archia --
consider the doctrine of original sin for example
i'll return to that point later,
but for now, i draw the archia whole
and with one property :
a tendency to become attracted / repulsed
to dualistic models
extant in the material flux
b ii) Second Division : Three-Parton States
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There are many three,
and many-fold-parton myths [3]
extant in the material flux
These myths
tend to be
more sophisticated,
in that
we witness
specific character development
within each of the partons
In this section,
i shall treat
a common
a three-parton state
in order
to draw out
common characteristics
In sections b iii)
i shall treat
a many-fold-parton state
with the same intention
before drawing
a prototype parton state
in b iv)
A common three-parton state:
The transactional army --
child : adult : parent
The supposed progressions :
time stones of learning
tethered upon negotiated experience
the mediated partons of id junior,
id, and id senior,
4 legs, 2 legs, 3 legs
putting their own house in order --
ship-shape
anchors away,
and in to the sea
of reflected trioptic Other:
atom i
navigating by triangulation
[ adult ]
But surely,
using the methods of b i),
these three partons
may be deconstructed
as readily as
the two-tone paradigms
and drawn as 3 loci
outside the archia ?
[ parent ]
Yes,
we've seen this triple
many times
in the material flux
Attach transition tags,
cast them back,
and hear them dissolve
[ child ]
But in which domain
does this tether,
do the triplets reside ?
[ parent ]
In the material flux
i tell you
Myths older
than Oedipus and Eve,
mediated by
that chap
with the liver complaint --
Cast them out,
out of the archia
please
[ child ]
But to where do
these compounds belong ?
[ parent ]
Not compounds, loci
There's a good little mite
just attractive / repulsive
meacons
Deconstruct them,
cast them in to oblivion
and be done with it
-- the archia can resist
[ child ]
Resist what --
It might be nice, and
then
why would i want to resist
[ parent ]
Nice, nice
not nice,
Into the flux
with the books please
we've read this all before
[ adult ]
Erm ...
hold on a second
[ adult 2 parent ]
there's no need to adopt that tone, and
[ adult 2 child ]
it was your idea in the first place
to draw the archia whole
don't you want to anymore
[ child ]
Yes, i do,
but have had another brain wave
and i'm thinking about the Other
[ parent questions adult ]
Oh ...
You've been letting
the child play
with those religious nuts
again
haven't you
[ adult 2 parent ]
Don't be like that
Are you tired
or just moody
[ parent 2 adult ]
yes,
i've been working
[ adult 2 parent ]
yes, and i have too
buster
and completing my lists
is just as wearing
as your big job
[ parent ]
oh, i know
i know, i know ...
but we've witnessed this one
many times
eject this tripartite
in to the flux
from whence it came
it sucks,
it sucks
at our material form
it draws upon our ideal form
it manifests,
dominates,
and patronises the flux
and thereby shapes us
but never
in its own image --
all ways
it is the oppressor
and
all ways
we are the oppressed
Child,
what ever you're thinking
throw it away
Conceptualisations
of the Other
always boil down
to a good / bad duality
and we need less ideologies
not more
[ adult 2 parent ]
That's rich coming from you
up in your ivory tower
i think all you do sometimes
is sit there navel contemplating
inventing ideologies
best take the plank out
before casting aspersions
[ parent 2 adult ]
Me,
inventing ideologies
which planet are you on
[ adult 2 parent ]
Earth,
you ought to try it out sometime
[ parent 2 adult ]
oh,
i have, i did,
i do
what's up with you now
[ adult 2 parent ]
my lists --
carrying out your 'suggestions'
in the here and now
i have so many lists
so many divisions
it appears that i represent
an ideology :
your ideas
[ parent 2 adult ]
my ideology,
my ideas ?
i am conscious of the pasts
and therefore
conscious of the futures
that is all i am
This Child
is conscious of neither
and needs my,
needs our
'suggestions'
[ adult 2 parent ]
you will remember what happened
to Cronus then
[ child ]
Work, work, work
And, i'm just playing
[ adult laughs ]
may be our child
is conscious of something other
it does spend a lot of time
faffing and learning
in the common flux
[ parent 2 adult ]
let the child play then
but watch it carefully
what is the question
[ child ]
The many parton-state --
to where, to whence
does one cast
the oneness of the many parton-state
drawn upon the generational code
of a negotiated family
[ adult ]
But this oneness of which you speak
is itself no more
than
an atomic characterisation --
the projection of an ideal family,
and
that state can not be pin-pointed
in history
and therefore
this entity,
this oneness
does not exist
[ child ]
Do you deny
that this elementary compound
exists
by the bucket full
everywhere
in the material flux
throughout known space-time
[ parent ]
Let it
dissolve there
Only this will ensure
the wholeness of the archia
the wholeness of the "beginnings"
[ child ]
Do you deny
that this elementary compound
exists
multiple times
everywhere
in the ideal flux
throughout known space-time
[ parent ]
Now,
your tone reflects hierarchy
What kind of beginning
is this,
if not one
we've not witnessed
a million times --
where is
the atom archia now
where is
its freedom in being --
where is
its self-determination
[ adult ]
But the child is the parent of the adult --
Freedom in being
is not
freedom from being
The projections of the archia --
these projections in to the inner atom,
differ from
the projections of the stoicheia --
the drawings of the material shell,
the etchings of sensual space,
in that
the archia, the "principles",
need not be plotted
on Cartesian graph paper
[ child ]
or in space-time
for that matter
[ parent ]
But where,
whence else
can it be
plotted ?
[ child ]
in to the none finite --
the multitude
pronounced "to apeiron" in Greek, or
"infinitio" by Cicero --
the Infinite
[ parent ]
But the infinite is not real,
it is myth
it has no real domain --
you propagandise
an ideology
[ child ]
where, and whence
do the photons exist
in which domain
do we get light reign
-- atom i
[1] "Modern physics is not experimental physics
because it uses experimental devices
in its questioning of nature.
Rather,
the reverse is true.
Because physics,
already as pure theory,
requests nature to manifest itself in terms of predicable forces,
it sets up the experiments precisely for the sole purpose
of asking whether and how nature follows the scheme
prescribed by science."
The Question Concerning Technology -- Heidegger
[2] "... but noting
that what can be demonstrated in the microscopic
can be evidenced in relationships of larger scale,
whilst conversely
general considerations of the macroscopic
leave doubt as to whether
this understanding
will hold when applied to the detail:
the microscopic,
the archia"
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1841/dr-theses/ch06.htm
[3] "Since the stage in evolution [ growth ]
when man ceased to be an animal
and became homo sapiens,
it has been inherent
in his nature [ sic ],
on looking at the world about him
with wondering eyes,
to ask the questions
'Why ?' and
'How ?'
It is the results of his groping attempts
throughout the ages
to find the answer
to these questions
which we call religion --
or mythology:
for we are inclined [ determined ]
to consider our own beliefs
-- if we have any --
as religion,
and other people's beliefs
as mythology.
A myth
then
is firstly,
man's attempt to explain the world
and the things he sees in it,
and to make intelligible to himself
the natural phenomena
which condition his way of life
in that world.
His beliefs will vary
according to this way of life
and its needs.
For example,
to nomadic herdsmen,
wandering about
and disputing
grazing territory
with rival tribes,
a strong,
belligerent sky-god
will be the best protector;
while to a peaceable
and settled agricultural
community
it is the fruitfulness
of the earth-mother
which is all important.
Secondly,
and at a later
and somewhat higher stage
of human culture,
a myth seeks to :
to justify
an established social pattern
together with its
traditions and its rituals;
and it records,
as it were dramatically :
the historical invasions
and migrations,
changes of leadership
and foreign influences,
which combined
to establish
that social pattern.
This second kind of myth
will tend to produce
a hierarchy of gods
which parallels
the society of believers:
for instance,
the gods of ancient China
were members
of a divine bureaucracy
resembling in almost all respects
the political administration
of their worshipers.
At some stage
in the long,
slow development
of these two types of myth,
there will come a priest-poet,
often semi-legendary,
who will rationalize
his people's beliefs
and give formal shape
to their myth,
as did Homer and Hesiod for the Greeks,
and in this manner
is a national religion established.
And later,
much later,
though still based
on the same primitive beginnings,
will come
-- as they did for the Romans --
the elegant sophistication
of an Ovid
with his *Metamorphoses*,
or of an Apuleius
with his charming allegory
of Cupid and Psyche.
The precise difference
between :
a myth
and
a folk-tale
has long vexed scholars,
because in many examples
the theme and content
of both
are similar enough
for their stories
to be in essence
the same.
Just where exactly
do the traditions
of people
cease to be myths
and become merely
folk-tales ?
It is now
generally agreed
that
if a story
tells of a happening
which affects the whole world,
or all the members
of a certain community,
and is set in a time
before a pattern
of everyday life
has been established,
[ then ] it is
a
myth.
If,
on the other hand,
a similar happening
affects an individual
living in
a roughly identifiable
modern age,
and in a setting
recognizable
to the hearers
of the story,
then it is
a
folk-tale.
It therefore follows
that
myths tell stories
of the beginnings
of things,
and concern
mainly the gods
and those semi-divine
cultural heroes
who often stand
for abstract qualities --
courage,
kingship,
warrior's strength,
and so on --
while folk-tales
tell of
individual human beings
and their
personal adventures,
and often
of anthropomorphic animals
and their doings.
A myth explains
and rationalizes,
and is,
for those who believe it
perpetually and
repeatedly true;
a folk-tale seeks
only to instruct
and to entertain.
Thus,
in Jewish tradition,
Adam
the First Man
for whom a mate
was created
from one of his ribs,
and the Welsh
solar hero
Lleu
whose wife Blodeuwedd
was formed for him
from flowers
by the magician Gwydion,
are part,
respectively,
of the Jewish
and Celtic
mythologies.
But Cinderella's prince,
wandering the land
with the glass slipper
in search
of a particular
once-glimpsed bride
is the protagonist
of a folk-tale.
The myths of ancient Greeks
can be divided
into three groups;
firstly,
myths of the Olympian gods --
that is Zeus the father-god
and of the more important
of his fellow-deities;
secondly,
myths which explain
the natural phenomena;
and
thirdly,
the hero-myths
which relate the deeds
and adventures
of mortal heroes
who were often of
semi-divine parentage
or ancestry."
Introduction to Greek Mythology : Barbara Leonie Picard
More information about the ssf
mailing list