Meillasoux Heuristic for and by Ariel Riveros
"The rehabilitation of the mathematical absolute contests three prevalent positions for which the de-absolutization of thought also implies its de-universalization: first, all forms of neo-Kantianism and the different varieties of the contemporary "return to Kant", for whom it is only possible to uncover the universal conditions for an entity's perceptibility; second, the philosophy of "radical finitude" that thinks the facticity of our relation to the world in terms of a situation that is itself finite; and finally, all forms of postmodernism that dismiss any claim to universality as a mystifying relic of old times."
Unreason. Not thinking the Absolute. Neighbor to Laruellian pre-vent and insufficance. The Absolute is deflated. Unilateral duality. The issue of epistemic Ancestry for Meillasoux is related as science creating fields where human thought in the light of givenness can't access*. Laruelle rejoindees that givenness is not given. Along with deleuzian univocality as fulfilling Meillasoux Unreason, along with its support from Badiou regards giving ontology over to maths/science, this here is a village.
-----
Or factualness
"Facticity is the point of departure for gaining access to this absolute: Meillassoux shows that it is not the correlation, but rather the facticity of the correlation, that constitutes the absolute. This entails changing the function facticity has had for correlationism, insofar as it has to be understood not as limiting our knowledge of the absolute, but instead as granting us knowledge of it. In the end, facticity amounts to unveiling the in-itself."
----
This facticity is not a basis for science according to Meillasoux. This primary state is eternal though lawless. What he terms hyperchaos. But has Meillasoux facticised hyperchaos? Anyway,for him
"This transformation allows Meillassoux to introduce a new notation, factiality [factualité] or the principle of factiality." So we can science and Kant redone with the Ancestry of science afoot.
"Furthermore, two propositions are derived from this principle -- the principle of non-contradiction, and the necessity of the "there is". These propositions, in turn, enable the author to defend Kant's thesis concerning the existence of the thing-in-itself."
Meillasoux also argues that Galileo instituted mathematisable world separate from humans. Like Copernicus separated science from geocentrism.
There's a point worth exploring for me between Hume and Kant and causation. Hyperchaos as absolutised facticity. ZFC or what I think Badiou calls the transfinite. Does that really stabilise chaos in such a sense? Or hyperchaos? Factualité is contingency over chance. Koestler and their ancestralising of similar science. Could someone with my personal ancestrality that might be episodically and facticitally hyperchaotic extract a factualité of hyperchaos? And might such a speculative process somehow make non contradictory transform? What do you think?
"The rehabilitation of the mathematical absolute contests three prevalent positions for which the de-absolutization of thought also implies its de-universalization: first, all forms of neo-Kantianism and the different varieties of the contemporary "return to Kant", for whom it is only possible to uncover the universal conditions for an entity's perceptibility; second, the philosophy of "radical finitude" that thinks the facticity of our relation to the world in terms of a situation that is itself finite; and finally, all forms of postmodernism that dismiss any claim to universality as a mystifying relic of old times."
Unreason. Not thinking the Absolute. Neighbor to Laruellian pre-vent and insufficance. The Absolute is deflated. Unilateral duality. The issue of epistemic Ancestry for Meillasoux is related as science creating fields where human thought in the light of givenness can't access*. Laruelle rejoindees that givenness is not given. Along with deleuzian univocality as fulfilling Meillasoux Unreason, along with its support from Badiou regards giving ontology over to maths/science, this here is a village.
-----
"Facticity is the point of departure for gaining access to this absolute: Meillassoux shows that it is not the correlation, but rather the facticity of the correlation, that constitutes the absolute. This entails changing the function facticity has had for correlationism, insofar as it has to be understood not as limiting our knowledge of the absolute, but instead as granting us knowledge of it. In the end, facticity amounts to unveiling the in-itself."
----
This facticity is not a basis for science according to Meillasoux. This primary state is eternal though lawless. What he terms hyperchaos. But has Meillasoux facticised hyperchaos? Anyway,for him
"This transformation allows Meillassoux to introduce a new notation, factiality [factualité] or the principle of factiality." So we can science and Kant redone with the Ancestry of science afoot.
"Furthermore, two propositions are derived from this principle -- the principle of non-contradiction, and the necessity of the "there is". These propositions, in turn, enable the author to defend Kant's thesis concerning the existence of the thing-in-itself."
Meillasoux also argues that Galileo instituted mathematisable world separate from humans. Like Copernicus separated science from geocentrism.
There's a point worth exploring for me between Hume and Kant and causation. Hyperchaos as absolutised facticity. ZFC or what I think Badiou calls the transfinite. Does that really stabilise chaos in such a sense? Or hyperchaos? Factualité is contingency over chance. Koestler and their ancestralising of similar science. Could someone with my personal ancestrality that might be episodically and facticitally hyperchaotic extract a factualité of hyperchaos? And might such a speculative process somehow make non contradictory transform? What do you think?
https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/after-finitude-an-essay-on-the-necessity-of-contingency/ - notre dame article on After Finitude by Gabriel Riera
