This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.


Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:17 pm

Words = symbols of noetic constructs - abstractions.
Words refer to interpretations of phenomena.

Phenomena, via a medium, which is also a phenomenon, stimulate the sense organ which translates this stimulation into a neurological pulse, transmitting it to the central processing hub, which is the brain, where it is collected, analysed and integrated into mental models, by adding to it stimuli collected internally, using the nervous system = abstractions, noumena.

Noumena are then compared to already abstracted data, experience, which are stored in memory.
Also, add to this genetic memory, or DNA, and you have a soup of data being processed and combined into mental models.

To put it another way, internal organ hierarchies, creating a personality (a psychological framework), are combined with externally derived stimuli, into abstractions, or noumena.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:18 pm

The Objective, the world in other words, now becomes a democratic referendum = an agreement between subjective minds as to what permits the most inclusion.
The most "objective" being the shared subjective view which incorporates as many subjective views within its premises, and does not hurt, insult, any of them.
This is what the Semite calls Cosmopolitanism.
Democracy of Subjectivities.

In other words the term "world" now refers to a community of subjectivities, which, if disconnected from reality can be a community of the delusional - a nihilistic community, such as the one depicted in the movie The Matrix.
The word "world" refers to humanity.
Philosophy reduced to a political search for that shared common subjective ground - that lowest-common-denominator.
This is "good".

The world, itself, is bad.
Anyone who contradicts this self-referential cocooning, is evil, and/or ill.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:18 pm

Language is culture....just as DNA is the organism.
Language expresses the culture's essence.
The organism, its presence, is an expression of its genetic history - past/nature.

Genes manifest as memes and words, and how they are applied, are the representation of this process.

Just as genes are the inherited memories of the past (nature) applied in the current, in the present, as presence, so is language the application of an inherited memory cache applied in the present.
The inherited may be repressed, hidden, cultivated, atrophied, or warped (mutated), due to environmental conditions (conditioning).
The application of words, the wealth of linguistic creativity, and how it is applied, expresses the organism's vitality, its essence, and how it has been raised from birth.
Internal organ hierarchies expressed as art: symbolically, metaphorically, representationally.
Like all art-forms the word, like colours, forms, textures, tones etc. and how they are used expresses the intent of the artist, his talent, and how it has been affected by his upbringing (social, natural, nurturing).

The relationship of man with world, as this has been determined by past/nature within environment/current is contained within the application of words.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:20 pm

Daniel Bell wrote:In the primitive world-view—and in such sophisticated primitivism as Zen Buddhism—the world was presented in its immediacy and concreteness. Greek cosmogony gave us a vocabulary of first-level abstraction. The pre-Socratics introduced metaphor; Plato, with the idea of the Demiurge, the symbol; and Aristotle, the idea of analogy. (Our traditional modes of thought employ all three. Imagery can be visual, aural, or tactile, but it employs the techniques of metaphor, symbol, or analogy in "picturing" the world.)

Theological speech, as derived from Christian thought, is deeply soaked in symbols—the Cross, the Messiah, the Epiphanies, the Sacraments—and the language emphasizes mystery and personal- ity: grace, charisma, kairos, passion or suffering, ritual. The break- down of theological beliefs and the rise of a scientific world-view, leading to the enthronement of physics and the natural sciences, gave us in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries a mechanical cosmology—the image of the world as a machine, or as a celestial clock. This ordered world reached its apogee in two images: the beauty and precision of Laplace's Mecanique celeste, in which the universe functioned as a jewel; and the idea of the "great chain of being," in which all creatures were united in one perfect strand. In Alexander Pope's words:

Vast chain of Being! which from God began, Natures ethereal, human, angel, man,
Beast, bird, fish, insect, what no eye can see, No glass can reach; from Infinite to thee . . .

The language of analysis, once derived from theology, was now wrested from the early physical sciences. (Poetry, driven, as White- head put it, from the world of fact by science, resorted to ambiguity as its mode of expression, while modern existentialist theology finds its mode in paradox.) In the social sciences the key terms were Force, Motion, Energy, Power (and while these terms have specific referents in physics, they have few operational specificities in social analysis). But as the natural sciences progressed, the social sciences added new biological analogies to the metaphors derived from physics: evolution, growth, organic structure and function, and these terms, until very recently, were the language of sociology.

Even when, in the nineteenth century, social science sought to find a language of its own—"economic man," "psychological man," "capitalism," and so forth—this led to a conceptual realism or what Whitehead called "the fallacy of misplaced concreteness." The search for "a language of one's own" in order to avoid the trap of reification has led (as exemplified in Talcott Parsons' Structure of Social Action) to "analytical abstraction." Thus, theory construc- tion in sociology, for o n e , has become a highly deductive system derived from a few basic axioms or really analytical concepts, such as the patterned variables in the action schema of Parsons, in which the empirical referents no longer stand for concrete entities—the individual, society, and the like.

But in the more general sweep of knowledge, the dominant mode of intellectual language today is mathematical, and especially in our new "intellectual technology" (linear programming, decision theory, simulation) we have the "new" language of variables, parameters, models, stochastic processes, algorithms, heuristics, minimax, and other terms which are being adopted by the social sciences. Yet the type of mathematics that is influential here is not the deterministic calculus of classical mechanics, but a calculus of probabilities. Life is a "game"—a game against nature, a game of man against man—and one follows rational strategies that can pro- vide maximum payoffs at maximum risks, minimax payoffs at mini- max risks, and that most lovely of terms in utility preference theory, a payoff that is provided by a "criterion of regret."

But all of this leads to a paradox: the modern vocabulary is purely rational, with no referent other than its self-contained mathematical formulas. In a modern cosmology (as in physics, and now in the other sciences as well), pictures have gone, words have gone, and what remain—apart from elegance, but even here it is the elegance of formal ingenuity—are abstract formulas. And underneath these formulas there is no law of nature as we knew it before, eternal, universal, immutable, and readily discernible. Underneath are uncertainty and the breakup of temporal and spatial sequence.

Thus our vocabulary reinforces the emergence of an abstract, if not mystical, world conception. And this is the penultimate disjunction between the everyday world of fact and experience, and the world of concepts and matter." [Capitalism]
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:27 pm

From Latin sacrum facia: the making of things sacred.

From Italian fascismo, from fascio ‘bundle, political group,’ from Latin fascis
from Greek φακτρια

a-The processes collecting and arranging data, so as to perceive within it patterns to be applied and validated pragmatically using costs/benefits to measure the intent by the outcome.

b-Most often associated with the ability to abstract mental models from sensual input, then affirmed by their successful application as being most probable and/or superior.

c- The mental ability o construct abstractions, and to sue them to project in time/space consequences (imagination), adequately predicting future by the usage of precedent (past/nature)

a- The accurate appreciation of abstractions, and patterns, discerning applicable from inapplicable knowledge, or realistic from unrealistic concepts, goals, ideals.

b- The construction of a plan of action, based on the accurate appreciation of data and their connections (meaning), to successfully attain an objective.

c- The practice of weeding away nonsensical data, leaving only sensible, pragmatic, applicable information.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:28 pm

Themistius reminds us of how the Hellenes thought of life through the words they used to define its stages.

Birth = γενεθλίων.
Γεννά = birth
Άθλους = Labours.

Birth of labours.

Midle part...
Βιος = life
Βια = violence, struggle - i.e. bio-logy = study of life, of living organisms.
Logos of Life.
Organism = arrangement of patterns - congruence of processes inter-relating, interacting.

Θάνατος = extinguishing, disappearing.
Αναπαύσει = rest, pause.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:28 pm

Spirit: referring to self, as the sum of all nurturing (experiences, events) passed on as genetic/memetic code – memory.
Soul: referring to ego, as the aware self, manifested as presence. Starting at birth and ending at death, it is a piece of the chain known as spirit.

Although spirit/soul are often used as tautologies, making them interchangeable, to differentiate the concepts will increase precision – clarity – just as using artificial/natural, or meme/gene, or ego/self, differentiates processes, exposing subtle details, results in increased lucidity, because to be conscious/aware is to differentiate, to distinguish.
Convolution is to allow concepts to remain vague, elusive, and unclear – maintaining a state of unconsciousness.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:44 pm

Existence = state of constant interactivity. Dynamic.
We can conceptualize energy in SuperString Theory contexts, suing music as out metaphor.
Energy is a vibration/oscillation with a particular sequence, tone, speed...
What is vibrating is not a string but space.
Space = possibility, in Heideggerian contexts, therefore matter/energy - i.e., energies with a patterned sequence - are probabilities.
The sequence is of possible/probable interactivity, across dimensions. Dimensions are fragmenting, and we call this expansion of space/time.
Chaos = random energies, or vibrations/oscillations with no patterned sequence. chaos is by definition always repulsive, ergo expansion is accelerating, because chaos is increasing - tending towards absolute randomness, from near-absolute order (Big Band) - Yin/Yang - this is what we experience as the arrow of time, i.e., towards increasing chaos. Ergo we worship order, ro the absent absolute that never finalized.
We see here the love/hate relationship of man with existence, because without chaos life would be impossible - if order were absolute - singularity - then there would be no Big Bang expansion.

Interactivity = how two different energies relate/interact.
Interaction can be divided into two parts: attraction/repulsion.
Attraction/Repulsion is simultaneous and ongoing when two different patterns (inter)act, or when a pattern (inter)acts with a non-patterned energy.
If harmony exceeds disharmony we have a net sum of attraction – movement towards.
If disharmony exceeds harmony we have a net sum of friction, resulting in repulsion – movement away.
Away and towards describe increased possibility/decreased possibility.

No 'self' need be presented as the evaluating component, because it is not required to explain how energies can form complex unities. Self is a specific phenomena, applicable only to life - patterns that have established a balance and which become conscious, willful.
Self = continuum of data, memories, in the forms of organic algorithms - DNA - or experiences (knowledge = second hand experience; experiences=first hand). Self is held together by memory creating an unbroken continuum.
Ego is but a small part of self, The part awakening to itself - lucid self: self-conscious. This is where nihilism takes root as a psychological defensive reaction to emerging self-consciousness.

The disharmony between two energies can be stabilized by the presence of a mediating third or fourth, compensating for the excess of repulsion, so as to produce a stable unity, such as a particle.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:45 pm

Θεός - God

θεω - to run.

θεωρώ - observe, study.
θεωρός - member of official spiritual representation of a city to receive the oracles χρησμό - necessity, later having to do with god's reply to a query.
θεωρία - Theory - connected to the yearly ritual of seeking the God Apollo in Delos, encircled by the islands Cyclades {Κυκλάδες} - encirclers.
The island must have been formed by the gradual rise of ocean waters , after the Ice Age.
To observe as a god, to seek the illumination of Apollo.
Δήλος - birthplace of Artemis and Apollo.
δήλος - he who appears.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:47 pm

Creating self-referential, self-consistency is difficult, but easier than connecting words to world, in a consistent manner.
Star Wars creates a self-consistent universe, and so does Star Trek.
Lord of the Rings is a self consistent world.
DC and Marvel offer their own self-consistent realities.

Their self-consistency, their own particular self-referential logic, is what makes them a pleasant escape, a 'realistic' alternative to reality.

But philosophy does not only have to be must be consistent with what is independent from mind.

As I've mentioned repeatedly, memes emerge from genes.
Language represents the particular adaptation of a particular people within a particular environment.
Its forms, sounds, sequences, reflect the attitude that emerged through this relationship of man with world.
Nevertheless, all languages must refer to the same world, and so whatever symbols, words, sequences, sounds they use, they must correspond to a real phenomenon, because words, no matter what language they are an expression of, are representations of noumena, or abstractions, and abstractions are the product of an interaction of mind with world.

World dictates the abstraction, and language is an expression of this, and how the particular organism reacted to it.
Language does not shape world, but world shapes language, and the methods and successful of those who use them to orient and direct their activities.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:48 pm

Absolute: Whole, Immutable, Independent, One, God, Perfect, Nil, Indivisible, Complete.
Absolute can be used as a metaphor to accentuate one's sense of certainty.
Absolute can be used to refer to a relationship, a fact.
These applications are not my own.

What is the absent-absolute?
It is the foundation of Nihilism.
It is the projection of a noetic construct, into the phenomenal world of (inter)activity (Flux) and then its presumption as already existing outside the mind, and the naive expectation of its discovery, or as what "exist" in some beyond existence realm, in the above, below, , internal, eternal immanent future.
It is the externalization of an esoteric fabrication, rooted in emotion, in the mind's ability to mix abstractions, to rearrange them at Will.
It is a metaphor for perfect, whole, static, complete, total, one, Being, God, indivisible, immutable, unchanging, omnipotent, omniscient, certain...order, predictability buried in complexity, masked by confusion, hidden by ambiguity, vagueness, insinuation.
It is what is "missing" in the cosmos, for a Nihilist: his needs, desire projected outward, or the inversion of his esoteric private, subjective universe, into an presumed external one.
It is the sensation of need/suffering, of endless change, or interactivity - Flux, producing friction upon order, causing attrition...ergo it is a metaphor for the end of need/suffering, for a final end in Being.
It is an end, a telos...and entirely non-existent - the very definition of non-existence.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:49 pm

Meaning = how patterns relate.
The recognition and appreciation (judgment) of how phenomena relate to each other.
Meaning is not arbitrary.
A misinterpretation results in costs, no subjective hoping, or redefining of words, can protect you from, but only an external entity, such as an institution, or another individual who correctly judges and evaluates can intervene, if it so chooses, and with its own motives, to protect the mistake from being experiences as cost, or as negative consequences.

Meaning is how the noumenon, the abstraction harmonizes, agrees with, the interacting patterns.
Meaning is about relationships between external, to the mind, phenomena, patterns, and how the mind can translate them into internal mental models, or abstractions.
Therefore, the arbitrary use of symbols/words referring only to internal constructs with no external references, are meaningless to all but those sharing the same arbitrary constructs.
In such cases one must understand the meaning only if and when he or she buys into the esoteric arbitrary connections, corresponding to nothing external.
They are totally subjective, and based on fabrications, emotion, shares needs and desires, common weaknesses and insecurities.

Realists require no arbitrary meanings, because whatever names you give the same observable phenomena, how they relate is not based on the whims and preferences.

Meaning is found, out in the world, not constructed in the mind, without considering the world.
Meaning is world interpreted, not world created.
World is, and mind emerges as a connection of body, the physical, to its dynamism.
Mind is the point where the fluid is converted to static abstraction (image) or into sensation, emotion, and then given a symbol, given a word/number to represent it.
Mind is the point of contact of past, manifesting as presence/appearance, with an ongoing interactivity (flux).
The nervous system, with the brain as its hub, is the dynamic point of conversion, from body (physical) to mind (abstraction), with the symbols are the nervous system's representation of the dynamic fluid interactive.

Organism is in continuous dialogue, interactions interpreted continuously, between otherness and self - presence/appearance, and past/nature.
The idea(l) is the meaning projected forward as prediction, offering choices, options, of probability to the organism.

Idea refers to mental abstractions combined into more sophisticated mental models corresponding to external interactive phenomena.
Ideal refers to the judgment, evaluation of ideas, projected as desirable, or good, in relation to other ideas considered undesirable, bad, or evil in the Abrahamic Nihilistic paradigm.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:50 pm

Time - not a thing, a force, existing in the world, part of the world.
time is a human concept, referring to a relationship of man with world, using human biological processes as a standard for evaluating interactivity or change.
If no life is present, no consciousness, there is no time, but only interactivity.

Space - does require a consciousness.
It is the projection of possibilities in relation to interacting energies.
Without a conscious mind space would be a field of interacting patterned and non-patterned energies.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:54 pm

Christian scripture states it openly:
Bible wrote:In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Word being the English translation of the original word 'logos'.
ΛΟΓΟΣ - From the word ΛΕΓΩ - to speak, later generalized to mean to reason, to explain, to think...
ΛΕΓΩ - to gather, collect and to centralize, to give a centre to.

In Greek it has no insinuation other than to give a word to what the mind does - gathers, stimulation, collects them and then gives them speech, acoustic resonance representing these mental collections.
As with the word ΑΛΕΤΗΕΙΑ - un-forget, the Romans took it and translated it into Latin, losing its original connotation and imprisoning generations of Latin based tribes in a linguistic error.
Word became a representation of the noumenon that was now placed before the phenomenal world, as pre-existing the apparent.
Since then words/symbols have been used to try to escape reality.
Artistic minds immersing themselves in the power of symbols and words, feeling liberated, saved, free to remake reality by recombining words/symbols in a pleasing, invigorating, inspiring synthesis. One that can trigger an emotional psychosomatic effect.

In the west we live in a world of symbols and no substance....words with no accompanying deeds.
we live in this world of words we were given - an idealized world where language does not discipline itself to world, but plays, fabricating fantastic new alternative worlds.

God = word...and word is still God for Moderns.
They worship it.
They surrender to its power, as they do to all forms of art - judging it by how it affects them emotionally and through mind how it affects them physically.
They do not worship nature, world, through symbols/words but stop at the symbol hedonists stop at the effect, at pleasure.
Moderns stop short.
They remain fixed on the symbol, or pleasure, or the effect, not daring to go further into the cause.
They stop at noetic abstractions and interpretations given a name, a symbol, and do not proceed towards the phenomenon, the apparent.

Symbols/words are like toys for infants.
Magical....bedazzling, bewildering, mysterious.
In them they can become anything they dream of, and if they can gather their friends to play they can create a game that can become a universe on its own.

What is language?
A sophistication of grooming, among primates.
When we speak, we gather and groom, establishing alliances, positing ourselves within a group.
What is a word, written or spoken?
A projection outward of an internal construct; the externalization of an abstraction constructed by gathering, collecting, stimuli from interactive phenomena; an externalization of an interpretation.

Verbal language has great space effect.
One can gather at a distance.
It shrinks spatial distances.
Written language shrinks temporal ones.
Now you can gather and groom, across greater expanses, long after your death.
Your words remain effective, potent, as long as there are minds trained to decipher them, and be triggered by them.
Word = God.
He's not dead....he's Word - code.
And how magnificently Moderns are affected by words, and symbols...because God, the Abrahamic one, did not die.
He changed his names.

More than intent, words can now insinuate and through their ambiguous insinuations of intent, of ideals, they can trigger imaginative, emotional, reactions to them, as if they were divine.
Have we not all experienced their power in movie theatres where they, in combination with fantasy imagery and music, can transport us into alternate realities we then refuse to leave?
The ancients used narration to gather the children and paint fantastic world using words - myths, full of metaphors.
In our time we have music, movies....fArt.
We enter the 'cave' to watch shadows on the wall, and be transported - ΜΕΤΑΦΈΡΩ - out of our bodies, out of our minds.

Language has the multiplying power of musical soundtracks....the myth takes on a life of its own.
A simpleton does not need an imagination, because it is provided for him.
Mythology is not connected to experience, but experience to mythology.

Symbols/Words have such a profound effect on immature, undeveloped minds, on feeble, needy, inexperienced psychologies, on psychotics....and on the effect they want to stop and stay.
They want to live in the mythology - in an idealized reality.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:54 pm

Δαίμων = divides, separates. distribute - originally meant the deity that distributes fate.
Δαημον = He who is knowledgeable and experienced.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:56 pm


οργω - extreme desire.
οργασμος - orgasm.
οργη - rage.

Through the extreme desire I accumulate excess energies, storing them, and keeping them on stand-by.
The storage itself requires effort - control, stress.
Nervous energies, kept in-the-ready, by the nervous system for the fight/flight mechanism.
Rage and sexual ecstasy closely related.
The release is the returning of what is stored back to world as (inter)activity.
It is accompanied by spasms, hyperventilation, or to muscle movement, converting the energies to action.
The organism is triggered by a stimulation to begin the process of releasing the accumulated energies.

We see here the relationship between 'need' (lack), and, 'desire' (excess), as one indicating success, or virility in relation to world.
The organism accumulates and stores energies only if it is successful in appropriating to deal with attrition produced by (inter)action (Flux).
Eros/Thymos = the creative force of (inter)action (repulsion/attraction).

Eros relates to momentum – cosmic vibration.
The ancients conceived of eros as the striking of a cauldron, where cauldron is cosmos and eros the force that produces the process of (inter)activity – vibrations/oscillations. The ‘at work’ of energy εν-εργεια.
Similarity of orgy and ergo, is hard to miss.
The letters comprising the words are not accidental.
ΕΡΓΩ - ergo begins with the open ended epsilon and concludes with the omega indicating a towards an end, a conclusion, an objective. The omega is also open ended, from bottom/up. An expanding o.
ΟΡΓΗ - orgy begins with the omicron and ends with a upsilon. An accumulated whole enclosed, leading through a vibrating tongue and a clenched throat to a long release.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:56 pm

Dumbing-Down corrupts the utility of language, internalizing it.
Retardation of spirit.

Dumbing-Down shames the mind for perceiving patterns, and for thinking them relevant.
Dumbing-Down makes the individual doubt his own senses.
Regression of mind.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:57 pm

ΔΕΛΦΥΣ = woman's womb
ΑΔΕΛΦΟΣ/ΑΔΕΛΦΗ = brother/sister

From this we get Delphi, world's 'navel' or world's womb.

ΔΕΛΦΑΞ = young pig, piglet.
ΔΕΛΦΙΝ = newborn.
ΔΕΛΦΙΝΙ = dolphin, because it looks like a young piglet.

All from the root word ΔΕΛΤΑ, meaning door, and the letter of course.
There are hundreds of combinations that can be produced with the root word DEL-TA.....synthesizing them with other words, each alluding to the root.

We see here an example of how Greeks follows a logic. From a root word, referring to something tangible, real, all kinds of synthetics can be produced.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 12:58 pm

Languages evolve to reflect the development of human awareness. From cave drawings, where image represents an entire phenomenon, more complex forms arise such as linear-a, and linear-b, script where each image represented entire concepts, abstractions and/or syllables, and from there alphabets evolve where each symbol corresponds to a sound, and a sequence represents what a single image represented in the past, and then mathematics evolves where each symbol is entirely abstract, and represents an idea with no external reference so it can be used to represent any external reference.
A process that mirrors the evolution of human thinking from word of mouth narratives, to insinuating mythologies, and then to more precise philosophies.
The gradual ascent in complexity is accompanied by the gradual ascent from broad, ambiguity, leaving much to the imagination, to more precise symbols representing more precise concepts that leaves less to the imagination but expose the mind to a level of complexity where it becomes aware of how much is unknown.
Like ascending up a mountain. At the base all is intimate, but close-by, restricting your view. You hear sounds, see shadows, but you cannot discern accurately what lies a few meters away. The imagination goes wild, with anticipation, fear siding with caution, imagining the worse, the extreme negative, and then needing the opposite, the extreme positive to deal with it.
As you ascend up the mountain you begin to see more, and further. What sounded mysterious is now exposed, but what you gain in view you lose in details. You see more, and further away in space, but you see less precisely, but more generally.
From the intuitive to the intellectual, corresponds to alchemy giving way to chemistry, minerology etc., and astrology to astronomy, psychology, biology etc., and mythology to philosophy, spirituality etc. The simple produces multiple spin-offs dealing with specific categories within the general. But with each advancement upwards more parameters emerge, more possibilities, more categories.
This is exactly what language reflects. This gradual advancement requiring more precision. Hieroglyphics become symbols of syllables or entire words, and then symbols/letters representing sounds.
With each step up many superstitions are left behind. The imagination no longer has to speculate when the mind can discern.
The ancient Greeks believed in Olympians gods, representing environmental phenomena. When man understood what caused them then the same deities became representations of natural forces, such as electromagnetism. Knowledge and understanding increases the illuminated regions of reality, and superstition, and tis obscurantism, is forced to the edges, where light merges with darkness and produces shadows it can exploit to manipulate human fears.
The more man sees and understands, the less he is mystified and manipulated by fear and hope. Then a new frontier of mystification is produced with new superstitions, and fears to be exploited by charlatans and priests.
Language evolves to accommodate this advancement of human awareness and the emergence of new mysterious frontiers.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:01 pm

Theoretical Unification in Obscurantism
Magic of symbol/word.
With an icon/idol two contradictory concepts can be merged into a singularity.

Jesus, as the synthesis of two opposing and contrary world views, i.e. Judaism and Hellenism.
Universe, as the synthesis of two contrary states, i.e. chaos and order.
Chaos, as the synthesis of two contrary definitions, i.e. complexity and randomness.

The synthesis encloses the oppositions into a singular whole, something contrary to experience where nothing is ever finalized, enclosed made into a 'whole', a oneness.
Cosmos, unlike the concept of a universe, is an open-ended concept - the contradictions are defused as an ongoing expansion that is never finalized, i.e., completed.
The contradictions are not dealt with but are converted to vague obscure ideas - placed in noetic twilight where all merges in shadow, and all distinctions bleed into each other.
The idea - ideology - of a Messiah promising a release from the contradiction in some 'beyond' space/time, or projected as an always immanent future.
Paradise, or never finalized as a presence. it always remains vague and somewhere other than here and now.

Clarity, the shedding of light, is avoided, because this would reveal what is being concealed.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:01 pm

Obscurantism. occultism, uses language as a tool for mass manipulation. Like teaching the masses how to purchase fish from a fish monger, who becomes, to them, the messianic priest.
Paganism teaches minds how to fish, liberating them from their dependence on others, and to come closer to the natural world from where the fish come from. They eliminate the middle-man, the priestly miser, who is presenting himself as the source of all fish so as to feed himself through the efforts of others.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:04 pm

Spengler, Otto wrote: This mathematics of ours was bound in due course to reach the point at which not merely the limits of artificial geometrical form but the limits of the visual itself were felt by theory and by the soul alike as limits indeed, as obstacles to the unreserved expression of inward possibilities — in other words, the point at which the ideal of transcendent extension came into fundamental conflict with the limitations of immediate perception. The Classical soul, with the entire abdication of Platonic and Stoic ἀταραξία, submitted to the sensuous and (as the erotic under-meaning of the Pythagorean numbers shows) it rather felt than emitted its great symbols. Of transcending the corporeal here and now it was quite incapable. But whereas number, as conceived by a Pythagorean, exhibited the essence of individual and discrete data in “Nature” Descartes and his successors looked upon number as something to be conquered, to be wrung out, an abstract relation royally indifferent to all phenomenal support and capable of holding its own against “Nature” on all occasions. The will to-power (to use Nietzsche’s great formula) that from the earliest Gothic of the Eddas, the Cathedrals and Crusades, and even from the old conquering Goths and Vikings, has distinguished the attitude of the Northern soul to its world, appears also in the sense transcending energy, the dynamic of Western number. In the Apollinian mathematic the intellect is the servant of the eye, in the Faustian its master.
Mathematical, “absolute” space, we see then, is utterly un-Classical, and from the first, although mathematicians with their reverence for the Hellenic tradition did not dare to observe the fact, it was something different from the indefinite spaciousness of daily experience and customary painting, the a priori space of Kant which seemed so unambiguous and sure a concept. It is a pure abstract, an ideal and unfulfillable postulate of a soul which is ever less and less satisfied with sensuous means of expression and in the end passionately brushes them aside. The inner eye has awakened.

Decline of the West

According to Spengler the Faustian spirit is about boundless space/time.
An open-ended cosmos not an enclosed universe - ergo for the Greeks Alethiea described an uncovering, contrary to the Roman veritas

Heidegger, Martin wrote: With regard to the Latin name for the true, verum, we shall keep two incidents in mind:
1. Verum, ver-, meant originally enclosing, covering.
The Latin verum belongs to the same realm of meaning as the Greek αληθες, the uncovered – precisely by signifying the exact opposite of αληθες: the closed off.
2. But now because verum is counter to falsum, and because the essential domain of the imperium is decisive for verum and falsum and their opposites, the sense of ver-, namely enclosed and cover, becomes basically that of covering for security against. Ver is now the maintaining-oneself, the being-above; ver becomes the opposite of falling.
Verum is the remaining constant, the upright that which is directed to what is superior because it is directing from above. Verum is rectum (regere, ‘the regime’), the right, iustum.
For the Romans the realm of concealment and disconcealment does not at all come to be, although it strives in that direction in ver, the essential realm determining the essence of truth. Under the influence of the imperial, verum becomes forthwith ‘being-above,’ directive for what is right; veritas is then rectitude, ‘correctness,’ we would say.
The originally Roman stamp given to the essence of truth, which solidly establishes the all-pervading basic character of the essence of truth in the Occident, rejoins an unfolding of the essence of truth that begin already with the Greeks and that at the same time marks the inception of Western metaphysics.

The Romans corrupted the Hellenic through the process of interpretation - i.e., in the process of reproduction mutations arise and are passed on to the new synthesis, the new organism.
Our Anglo-Saxon centred world has inherited this corruption, in the form of 'truth' and in the term 'universe'.
We no longer conceptualize a kosmos but a universe - an enclosed space/time which necessitates a noetic leap 'into the non-existent' outside space/time.
This noetic leap is taken literally, and not as a method producing paradoxes - dissonance between mind/body, [physical and mental - that are passed on and symbolized via semiotics, i.e., linguistically.
This is where the Magians find fertile ground to exploit the illiterate, the untalented and the cowardly.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:05 pm

Vidal, Gore wrote: As societies grow decadent, the language grows decadent, too. Words are used to disguise, not to illuminate, action: you liberate a city by destroying it. Words are to confuse, so that at election time people will solemnly vote against their own interests.

Words lose their meaning.
The masses become degenerate, using words to conceal their own degeneration.
The simplest, most self-evident, concepts gradually become incomprehensibly complex, and too abstract to use to come to any conclusion.

Vidal, Gore wrote: A current pejorative adjective is narcissistic. Generally, a narcissist is anyone better looking than you are, but lately the adjective is often applied to those “liberals” who prefer to improve the lives of others rather than exploit them. Apparently, a concern for others is self-love at its least attractive, while greed is now a sign of the highest altruism. But then to reverse, periodically, the meanings of words is a very small price to pay for our vast freedom not only to conform but to consume.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:09 pm

Reinhard, May wrote: Finally, Petzet draws our attention to two other informative remarks of Heidegger’s. First, in conversation with a Buddhist monk from Bangkok in September 1964, Heidegger said that ‘he himself would often hold to Laozi—but that he knew him only through the German intermediaries, such as Richard
Wilhelm’.9 Second, Petzet reports that on hearing the Buddhist monk say that ‘nothingness is not “nothing”, but rather the completely other: fullness. No one can name it. But it—nothing and everything—is fulfillment’, Heidegger responded with the words, ‘That is what I have been saying, my whole life long’ (P 180/190). Heidegger apparently said something similar in connection with one of D.T.Suzuki’s books.

Heidegger's Hidden Sources

What can be more alien, more of an otherness to an organism, than chaos, defined as randomness.
Order = patter of repeating consistency.
Random = non-pattern inconsistency.

Both represent forms of Energy - Greek for εν = in, in the midst of, in the process of..... εργο = work, creation, Proto-Indo-European *wérǵom, state of agitation, turmoil, i.e. flux, experiences as need/suffering - agon.

Corresponding noun of Ancient Greek ἀγείρω (ageírō, “to gather”), with later senses from ἄγω (ágō, “to lead”). Confer Sanskrit गण (gaṇa, “troop, gang, flock, tribe, assembly, company”); Ancient Greek ᾰ̓γορᾱ́ (agorā́, “assembly”), Sanskrit ग्राम (grāma, “multitude, troop, assembly, collective”); Sanskrit आजि (ājí, “race, competition, battle”).

γυρο -
Etymology 1
From Koine Greek γῦρος (gûros, “rounding, circle”), substantivized from Ancient Greek γῡρός (gūrós, “round”)[1], from Proto-Hellenic *gūrós[2], possibly from Proto-Indo-European *guH-ró-s, from *geHu- (“to bend, curve”) +‎ *-rós.[3][4] Possible cognate with Sanskrit गोल (gola, “circle”).

To be in the midst, in the process of an encircling agitation, turmoil, a constructing, creating.

Χαος =

Etymology. Greek χάος means "emptiness, vast void, chasm, abyss", from the verb χαίνω, "gape, be wide open, etc.", from Proto-Indo-European *ǵheh2n-, cognate to Old English geanian, "to gape", whence English yawn. ... 6th century BC) interprets chaos as water, like something formless which can be differentiated.

The nothing that is not nothingness - but the strange other. Other than order.
Not complexity, because in this linguistic (mathematical model) chaos is but a higher or lower order. Not "other than" but "same as" but hidden...not yet discovered, not yet revealed - revelatory, immanent revelation.

To an organism dependent on consistent, predictable processes, i.e., ordering, chaos is the terrifying, strange incomprehensible otherness.
Often incorporated into metaphysics as a monstrous strangeness, and in spirituality as the evil, or the mystifying, occult - ion monotheism it is implied that it is of order - complex, mystifying - but still order, part of the one-god representing absolute order - often called "good", because of the aforementioned.
Occultists often present themselves as 'knowers' of the mystifying, to the many, complex - the root of superstition is this farce, using language to imply a complexity via nonsense.
The initiate is mystified by words of order expressing nonsense, using triggering imagery to seduce reason and to help it suppress scepticism - often easy because the psyche needs to believe in a hidden order, an absolute reason for its need/suffering. The charlatans uses a desire/need already present in the initiate, to help him or her overcome the last remnants of doubt.
His presence as an other which is offering a gift - salvation, deeper truth etc. - adds to the seduction. By surrendering its will to this presence, as other, the initiate feels it is coming to terms with the mysterious and terrifying.
The charlatan becomes the proxy through which the individual surrenders or comes to an understanding - strikes a deal - with the chaotic.
This is why morality is always an underlying factor.
Through the proxy the initiate establishes a relationship of reciprocity - he/she believes.
Cults are born in this way, and then develop into what we call religions.
Hinduism Buddhism, are not religions.
There are three actual religions, presently, in the world - or three that dominate.
Zoroastrianism is the source, but it is not practices by enough followers to be called a religion - it is a ex-religion that has returned to the status of cult.

Reinhard, May wrote: In the following passages Heidegger puts ‘presencing’ [Anwesen] in place of ‘Being’ [Sein] and ‘unconcealedness’ [Unverborgenheit] in place of ‘Nothing’ [Nichts] (and vice versa), thereby elucidating the new ‘sense’ of the old ‘housing’:
The enigma is…‘Being’. For that reason ‘Being’ remains simply the provisional word. Let us see to it that our thinking does not simply follow it blindly. Let us first ponder the fact that ‘Being’ is originally called ‘presencing’, and ‘presencing’ means: to come to and endure in unconcealedness’.63y

In each case Heidegger substitutes one for the other, ‘Nothing’ for ‘Being’ (and, for ‘Being’, ‘presence’) and vice versa, and thereby effects permanent translations: for ‘Nothing’ now also ‘unconcealedness’, the ‘Open’, and the ‘clearing’. Another term that belongs to this sequence of correspondences is ‘truth’ in the sense of ‘Being’, ‘Nothing’, and ‘unconcealedness’. In Being and Time Heidegger writes, ‘Being and truth “are” equiprimordial’ (SZ 230); while he later also takes ‘Nothing’ and ‘Being’ to be equiprimordial in the formulation:
‘to think that Nothing that is equiprimordially the Same as Being’.65
These kinds of obvious correspondences, which are easily to be found throughout Heidegger’s work and represent essential factors in its design, always concern his major thought, namely ‘Nothing’, which constitutes unmistakably (as we have seen already in the case of Being and Time) the ‘meaning of Being’.
Thus Heidegger makes a clear distinction between this idea and what he calls ‘empty nothing’66 or also nugatory nothing [das nichtige Nichts]. By contrast:
‘This [true] Nothing…is nothing nugatory [nichts Nichtiges]. It belongs to presencing [Being]. Being and Nothing are not given beside one another. Each uses itself on behalf of the other in a relationship whose essential richness we have hardly begun to ponder’ (QB 97/Wm 247).
These interpretations of ‘Nothing’ have, for Heidegger, nothing to do with nihilism as it has been understood so far (since Nietzsche); their aim is rather the overcoming of nihilism.

Reinhard, May wrote: Being and Nothing are not given beside one another. Each uses itself on behalf of the other…(QB 97/Wm 247).d
Being is none other than nothing,/Nothing is none other than being.80
Nothing as ‘Being’ (Heidegger, ‘WM?’ [GA 9] 106, note b).
Nothing and Being the Same (‘WM?’ [GA 9] 115, note c).
Being: Nothing: Same (‘SLT’ 101).

No-ting is literally what Being is.
No thing.
Heidegger differentiates nothing from nothingness, which is what Nihilism worships.

Reinhard, May wrote:Heidegger nevertheless attempts with his elucidation a new beginning from an unaccustomed perspective, one that can find an appropriate starting-point only outside Western philosophical thinking. ‘The question of the thing comes from its origin into motion [Bewegung] again’ (WT? 48/36). His (non-Western)
answer corresponds almost verbatim to the following expression:
What gives things their thingness is not itself a thing (Zhuangzi, 22).87
And according to Heidegger:
[The] thingness of the thing…cannot itself be a thing again (WT? 9/7, cf.
Compare with the well-known formulation in Being and Time:
The Being of beings ‘is’ not itself a being (SZ 6).g
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm

Re: Semiotics

Postby Aegean » Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:12 pm

There are two references that limit the utility of symbols/words.
The first is conventional use - a shared meaning - facilitating the communication of ideas (dictionary); the second is a worldly reference - a shared reality - facilitating the connection of mind with reality (noumenon with phenomenon).
The most common misuse is in the second.
Words being collectively defined and also collectively validated. Words connecting mind to other minds, via their spoken and written expressions - inter-subjectivity, i.e., collective solipsism.
Humanity as world; world as humanity. In this context all is conscious and ordered - with an intent - will, and an end - purpose.

Rejecting objectivity is the refusal of anything outside this inter-subjective, self-referential, enclosure; a refusal to place the standard of validation outside human minds.
With no one-God - in the Abrahamic sense - the alternative is terrifying to the desperate degenerates of the world; their desperation leads to their degeneration - sheltering atrophies.
Nature is frugal. She creates in abundance so as to then weed most of it out of existence (culling) - trial and error, where there is no conciousness it is the most effective method of adaptation to changing environments.
Nature's superfluity is a method of adjusting life to fluctuating environmental conditions.
Life is superfluous; world is frugal - ergo the conflict.

In this case Nature can be used to mean both life (wilful matter/energy) and non-life (will-less matter/energies).
This is where cowards and hypocrites - self-deceivers - become conveniently confused - the multiple utility of single words.
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 8:36 pm


Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], MSN [Bot]