James S Saint

Neosophi is back up and running. Links should be accessible now.

:smiley:

Hope you’re doing OK, James.

Six months have passed . . .

“Good men must die, but death cannot kill their names.”
-Proverb

You are remembered James - may you rest in peace

I would suggest ( :stuck_out_tongue: ) that this may be a bit premature unless you know for a fact that James has died. Do you?

It is possible of course but it is also possible that he is living La Vida Loca somewhere else and I do not mean the hereafter.

This is where Rilke’s quote comes to mind.

Do not rest in peace, James ~~ give them HELL!

During the last four years I was translating James’ work into German. I went through thousands of his posts on ILP, Humanarchy and other forums, trying to summarize it all, including RM:AO Physics and the analogies to Psychology and Sociology, in order to arrange a book out of it. James patiently answered all my questions, we had a permanent PM-contact. Last autumn the first draft of the book was finished and James agreed to reread the English version. Being very critical with his wording, he said it would take some time for him to correct it all, and it would be the best if he withdraws for a while. I still hope that this is the reason why he is not around, but half a year is a long time and our contact abruptly stopped in January.
I decided to wait until July, and then bring this project forward by myself. I suppose this is what I have to do now. Hopefully it will be finished by the end of the year. My plan is to get it published first in German, then in English as well. I’ll let you know.

K: well, good luck…….I hope you get it done…

Kropotkin

You were on Humanarchy? Cool.
I still have the forum file for that, with all the posts.
Went through some trouble putting it on a new site but couldn’t get it to work.

At least 80,000 people died of flu last winter in U.S., CDC says
The government says it’s the highest death toll since the winter of 1976-1977.

nbcnews.com/health/health-n … -s-n913486

Now available in German!

James S. Saint: Rational Metaphysics:Affectance Ontology … and its analogies in Psychology and Sociology

The English version will follow, hopefully soon.

Nice! It’s democritus again… the 2.0 version.

So the old boy is doing okay, then? There was a little stir a while back and everybody was wondering if and how he was.

There was no contact between me and James since January 2018. Using the material that was available to me, partially rewritten by James, I compiled and published the book myself.

So St. James is still MIA? Shirley there’s a way to find him. Can we contact any collaborators, friends, pinochle partners, or tai chi instructors he might have had? What about philosophy fora. Where was he last seen affecting his ontology?

The German version of James S. Saints RM:AO is now also available as E-book, e.g. here.
I hope that I can publish the English version in a few months.

And now the English edition of James S. Saints “Rational Metaphysics: Affectance Ontology … and its Analogies in Psychology and Sociology” is available as bound book and e-book.

Great work Mithus - I knew you would do it. I am looking forward to reading it.

I have questions for James but it seems that I got back to reading him a little too late.

I stopped watching the internet years ago while James was debating relativity with the admin on this board but then last year I ran across the following article using a word that I encountered only once before - “affectance”. The article from Cornell University’s computer science department discusses the use of affectance as a model for increasing accuracy of measurements involving networked radio telemetry.

Years ago when I first heard that word, I tried to look it up with no luck. Fortunately someone asked James about it and he provided what seemed an appropriate definition. More recently seeing this article, I had to wonder if it was the same “affectance”. After a good bit of study, although I can’t say that I totally understand it all, I realized that it was the same as James’ defined affectance - “subtle influences”, especially relating to radio transmissions. Shortly after that I had to wonder if perhaps the infamous "James S Saint’ was in fact one of those listed engineers in the article; Kowalski, Kudaravall, or Mosterio. But then I found another article from the University of Massachusetts. And today when I do a search I find definitions and all kinds of articles about “affectance”. Someone was onto something, something subtle. Something with quite subtle influence. He seemed to be quite a remarkable character.

I had been observing James decades ago after he captured my attention with a topic - “Watching the watchers watching the watchers watch”. I immediately knew what he was talking about but it took a couple of days before I realized what he was really saying. It was clear that he was aware that the people employed to observe the public live with a different frame of mind and value standard. Judgements occur that ethically shouldn’t. And I first thought that he was commenting on the observer’s supervisors watching them watch. But he wasn’t. What he was bring to light was that just as the public live in a bubble of skewed belief, unaware of the thoughts and perspectives of those observing them from above, those very observers are also living in a skewed bubble of belief, also never thinking that they too are being not merely observed, but often misjudged and misguided by a third layer of unseen eyes, attitudes, and agendas. I found that thought disturbing. And that was only the beginning of many unsettling revelations James seemed compelled to bring to light.

The next topic he raised that rocked my boat was about techniques for establishing complete social invisibility - leaving undeniable evidence that one person was actually a different person who was trying to hide his identity - a surprisingly effective trick. He explained the details and how those two topics were directly related (James, if you are still out there - How am I doing? :wink: ). In those days it was common for discussion boards to suddenly develop a problem and disappear. In this case, I could easily see why. James had a way of blurting out things that serious people didn’t want heard. And that led to just about every organization blasting him with any kind of allegation that might stick, calling him every name in the book. In that regard he reminds me of President Trump and the liberal media. Both he and Mr T just boldly blurt it out and let the chips fall where they may as long as it gets all worked out in the end. And James too seemed to have known too much about the deep state swamp, US socialist agenda, globalism, and how they all play together. He often showed a deep disdain for people manipulating the masses no matter who they were. He was the natural whistlerblower type. I wonder how he would have been as a Fox News host.

James seemed to have a way of causing people to think and with an endless list of wizened sayings. I wish I had had the forethought to record them. On occasion I’ll be reminded of yet another one. I had to wonder where he ever came from. What kind of man when discussing religion thinks about things like what the words “god”, “Adam”, “Man”, “spirit”, and such really mean before getting into it? How did he ever find out? He was a consummate deconstructionist ensuring that everyone was on the same page. It would have been great to see him and Ben Shapiro debate something but I can’t think of anything they would argue about.

After reading up on him more and starting to think like him, I have to wonder. Is affectance a thing and substance? Or is it a philosophy of subtle influence? Seemingly both.

It’s great to see there is a book to reference.

When I was translating this text from James’ blog, I asked him about the word “Affectance”, and about “Logical Affectance” in particular, because I couldn’t find it in any dictionary or lexicon.

He answered:

James defined Affectance as:
) Subtle influence(s) {as used in Infant Psychology},ultra-minuscule, mostly randomized electromagnetic pulses,
) Actualization of potential(s) to affect
) A region of varied and subtle changes
) An amount of subtle affects

From the book:

In terms of an earlier definitions within child psychology, there is a correspondence with my view of deconstructing the psyche into earlier elements, or ‘normally’ deconstructing, or de-differenting the psychically variably established stasis(existential epoche),.

Which under unusually dramatic circumstances may subtly and negatively affect. a dramatic reversal into a pre-unified Lacanian mirror.[regression (with loss of intervening variables)].

Imputed by positive, (more actual re-cognition of richer symbolic content) or lesser, leading to negative affectance.

Absolute acceptance, implies in existential terms, a relational discordance, as in NietzcheSartre, a variable positive~negative relationship between Being < Existence > Nothingness; in re-cognition.
Re-cognition has both phenomenological and eidectic variable overlapping applications.

This is how I perceive the affectence-effectance relationship.

That is the one that I am more interested in, but so far, i’m not seeing much on this board about that.