Poise and poeisis
I guess thisll be a informal pop philosophy storytelling thing
Some poets use the notion of sonder/umwelt regards the worlds of other persons, people, animals, non organic "life" and maybe abstractions and ideas. Consolation of eidos and the imperfect cognate in time and space to eider down bed pillows...
Maybe a sort of relationality occurs (or not!) based on the primacy of the observer who can decentre themselves enough to comprehend a hypothethical transference of the other persons animals etc "what would it like to be a bee?"
In my history there were those who signaled "it's not ok to speak what's on your mind"
And that could be any bully in intimidating tone or complaining that their swine snouts wrinkled in repulsion and response. I'd like to include disciplines and any church ethic that might marr articulation as a circumstantiality or circumloquaciousness (sick word of the day!). Those smirches are weapons in the wrong hands
Being on point for me at the moment is saving my life in some departments
Obviously articulation is power and it leads places abstract, geo/spatial. It takes hearted bodies through stages and patient theatre wings.
Articulation helps in areas where radical difference exists. Groups of persons people animals etc (let's call that set P)
The things in set P can have the same or radical difference in articulation. The set is stable. There is no external or internal force to make the set collapse in trickles of blood or stolen money in this case. It's ok to be on point in these worlds. The reformatting of my sentience, so to say, in relating my sometimes way off the kilter affect and capacity is perhaps the workings of the "Lemurian timewar", the return to rationality post Deleuze and the ambiguity of schizophrenising as a verb when in many lives it's a being. A clinical schizophrenic (Landian prisoner of war from the future maybe) as Deleuzian is a collapse of the etic position of the ethic-aesthetic observation deterritorialising the territoire. A seepage between being and verb. Not Frank Sinatra grafitting a campus toilet but bo de. This bode well? Or Debo - perhaps the master narrative at La Borde is a Debordian spectacle of the power of a philosophical gaze.
When the on point is lost any dynamic may affect the kinematic. Driving a car in opaque conditions could mean a crash. Danger.
On points? In a poem I wrote I mentioned something about 7 billion logics in the world. That concept is a logical pluralism. But set P is more than that and every member of that set may have logics that change broadly in a day and starkly different on different issues. And then there's set P in parallel universes that may or may not follow our universes rules. Throw those universes in the set.
Here ethology and ethnology and a hint of medical anthropology for my madness which could be now said was catalysed by not being competent in theory of numbers. Naive theory of numbers is a now a possible idea for a story
Some poets use the notion of sonder/umwelt regards the worlds of other persons, people, animals, non organic "life" and maybe abstractions and ideas. Consolation of eidos and the imperfect cognate in time and space to eider down bed pillows...
Maybe a sort of relationality occurs (or not!) based on the primacy of the observer who can decentre themselves enough to comprehend a hypothethical transference of the other persons animals etc "what would it like to be a bee?"
In my history there were those who signaled "it's not ok to speak what's on your mind"
And that could be any bully in intimidating tone or complaining that their swine snouts wrinkled in repulsion and response. I'd like to include disciplines and any church ethic that might marr articulation as a circumstantiality or circumloquaciousness (sick word of the day!). Those smirches are weapons in the wrong hands
Being on point for me at the moment is saving my life in some departments
Obviously articulation is power and it leads places abstract, geo/spatial. It takes hearted bodies through stages and patient theatre wings.
Articulation helps in areas where radical difference exists. Groups of persons people animals etc (let's call that set P)
The things in set P can have the same or radical difference in articulation. The set is stable. There is no external or internal force to make the set collapse in trickles of blood or stolen money in this case. It's ok to be on point in these worlds. The reformatting of my sentience, so to say, in relating my sometimes way off the kilter affect and capacity is perhaps the workings of the "Lemurian timewar", the return to rationality post Deleuze and the ambiguity of schizophrenising as a verb when in many lives it's a being. A clinical schizophrenic (Landian prisoner of war from the future maybe) as Deleuzian is a collapse of the etic position of the ethic-aesthetic observation deterritorialising the territoire. A seepage between being and verb. Not Frank Sinatra grafitting a campus toilet but bo de. This bode well? Or Debo - perhaps the master narrative at La Borde is a Debordian spectacle of the power of a philosophical gaze.
When the on point is lost any dynamic may affect the kinematic. Driving a car in opaque conditions could mean a crash. Danger.
On points? In a poem I wrote I mentioned something about 7 billion logics in the world. That concept is a logical pluralism. But set P is more than that and every member of that set may have logics that change broadly in a day and starkly different on different issues. And then there's set P in parallel universes that may or may not follow our universes rules. Throw those universes in the set.
Here ethology and ethnology and a hint of medical anthropology for my madness which could be now said was catalysed by not being competent in theory of numbers. Naive theory of numbers is a now a possible idea for a story
 |
| A graph that's deceptively irrelevant |
