From My Notebook on Understanding of Understanding as System

This notebook describes in short form the direction my thought is currently going on the nature of revelation.
of 3
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
   Note: the correlations at the bottom refer to each other but not in an ordered fashion as I was jottingdown notes quickly. i.e. what’s in the notes on each person correlates to what’s in the notes on all theothers, more or less. Notebook Thursday, 03/18/2010 Divine revelation = absolute knowledge = systemic (not systematic) understanding = knowingawareness.After development of systemic complexity in the understanding, a sudden emergent, hence systemic,self-reinforcing understanding of understanding arises, where applicability of emergent understandingin multiple areas at once self-reinforces (makes absolute) knowledge in a particular area.“Nothing is more stupid than absolute knowledge”, although divine revelation is equivalently stupid.But both are stupidly real and actual, mathematizable, comprehensible, explicable, and the same thingexpressed differently. The emergence of absolute knowledge was by this means the end of the religiousepoch. The religious epoch’s possibilities were exhausted by the non religious understanding of thefoundational religious experience.Systemic understanding is necessarily theological, but not onto-theo-logical (conceptual) in the manner of metaphysics. It arises from the event of shining (theo), applicable to all 3 branches of theology (god,nature, psyche). Of couse any specifics are potentially as completely untrue and misled as they are potentially true, necessitating testing of its results, or at least ensuring they do not contradict theknown, in order to prevent fallacy (same as Jesuit tenet on divine revelation). Need to examine the phenomenologically experiential results of an event of emergence of systemicunderstanding that coincides with (triggers) an abrupt phase transition within understanding itself, i.e.the triggering of epochal understanding of history, and recursive reciprocal understanding of understanding. Correlations : Religious : • epiphany, revelation, divination, prophecy • end of world (srcin of freedom as death of god – “and god became man” – end of moral law“died for our sins” – no law, no sin. • srcin (god) as the word, the unfamiliar, the no one, the transcendental (no-thing). • Man as the one with speech (logos), world ruling by ability to name. • ‘Lord’ as absolute master (feudalism) hanging on in religious speech. Dialectical (Hegel and Marx) : • Being/nothing as actuality of dialectically theoretical identity/difference. • Absolute knowledge (Hegel himself as end of ‘history’) as telos of dialectical sublation (sensecertainty, perception, consciousness, self consciouness, absolute knowledge) throughunderstanding of history. • System of ‘The Science’ of logic as absolute knowing, replacing the conceptual sciences. • Lord/bondsman dialectic of forcible enslavement. becoming non-consensual material wage-slavery. • Understanding of knowledge (revelation) as product of self owned labor. • Transformation of the proletariat by ideological revolution.  • Materialism as non philosophical completion of idealism (by itself materialism doesn’t qualifyas philosophy). • Marx turned Hegel upside down, but Hegel upside down remains Hegel, as Marx wellunderstood, unlike many marxists. • Together they form the ideal and material grounding of absolute (self-reinforcing)understanding of understanding (absolute knowing) and understanding of history as havingended. Nietzschean :   • ‘death of god’  as having already happened but ‘news has not reached man yet’ – ‘death of god’ends atheist humanism as well as religious humanism. • end of conceptual world has already taken place in Hegel and completed by Marx • madman as mirror of society (morals, values) that ends justification of society (foucault, madness and civilization ) • eternal recurrence and will to will as recursive understanding of being, end of resentment(ressentiment), srcin of possibility of truth of psychology • the ‘last man’ as the conceptualist. • morality as non-consensual slave consciousness. Heideggerean : • intentionality as self consciousness not consciousness • world as as-structure of understanding opened by event of being-human (dasein as having-to- be-openness – thrownness – abyss of finitude) • call of conscience as self-calling, • dasein becomes evental da-sein •  being (under erasure) becomes beyng • topology becomes topography • language as ‘house’ of beyng • enowning (event of self owning of identity ) • history as epochal • srcin of the epoch in the event • end of conceptual epoch (metaphysics, religion, science as ’separating’ – science/scythe, hencereduction to isolated objects in scientific imagination) • Evental ‘theo’ (srcinal greek verb, meaning ‘to shine’ with no nominal formation) as abground – abyssal grounding – of later nominal theos • difference between identity and difference (grounding of abground) as the Same. • consensual enownment-enslavement (understood practically) as mastery (enowning), • event of appropriation as abground of appropriateness – being in one’s place • “relationships” as non relational topography (post topology). Aritistic (Joyce/Beckett) : • non religious epiphany identity (self, soul, spirit, mind) as the stories we tell ourselves • finnegan’s wake as the system grounding the possibility of understanding of story • himself as srcinator of understanding of story as master artist • Joyce is omniscient as an artist (Samuel Beckett) • Beckett completes the movement by artistically examining ignorance and loss of self-identity(the Unnameable)  Philosophy of Nature : • Mind as emergent non linear determinative system (controls ‘earlier’ systems) • Mathematically demonstrated strong emergence with arbitrary layering. • Recursive nature of self-consciousness as possibility of intentional emergence. • Origin as void • understanding of understanding as emergent systemic understanding • void as ‘constantly seething transformation of unformed matter (space) into formed matter and back’ – ‘Plato was right’ – Heisenberg • quanta of space (unformed matter) as finite container of infinite energy with spillover asCasimir Effect.
Similar documents
View more...
Related Search
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!