Posts tagged ‘dooyeveert’

Finally, Another Entry

I’ve been writing almost frantically for about a month.  I’m recapturing about 40 years worth of notes and thought, none of which could ever be shared because the words were lacking in the English language.  The concepts are either too simple (most likely) or too complicated (possible) for most people to begin to comprehend.  Then again according to the theory itself this would have to be true.  It actually is a theory in that I have made predictions about various things and then investigated to see whether I was correct or incorrect in the predictions.

I was incorrect, for instance, in predicting a social breakdown in the United States in 2012 due to growing enforced economic disparity which had become too glaringly evident to be hidden.  Rather than that, there is the panoply of glowing veils and Japanese Room Separators, along with the CGI-gifted Virtual Imagery of our increasingly ideal world (that of, that is, images of others rather than the bothersome reality; our dross transformed to gold; our goals personified in mythical creatures created by Photoshop and our own desperate need to be deceived…

Over 90% of the U.S. population lives in cities.  Big cities.  They are fascinated by the concept of being able to survive in the woods (that they call wilderness).  They are so fascinated by the wild that they actually think they can have beasts of prey as pets, take no special care with them and deal with them entirely bereft of any understanding (of anything, perhaps)–and expect to survive.  These are the ones who brandish weapons (instead of using them) and are surprised when doing so has made them vulnerable.  They are so fascinated by death and war they burst into colleges, schools for near-infants and shopping malls–so that they can kill without any probable fear of hurt to themselves.  [Most of them don’t think that they could survive boot camp, which is why they take the coward’s route.]  Note that they’re usually correct in thinking that, as well.

The media has transformed them.  It wasn’t the government, as Orwell and many others thought.  The government in the U.S. is pretty well a product of the people and our lack of will.  Those who truly govern us, hidden on boards if visible at all, owners (if you merely look at the balance of registered wealth, as many have now) of most of the game…do so only because we allow them to do so.  If all the governed are dead, there are no governors.  Nor are there firearms with infinite magazines.

What I am writing toward is a version of ‘the truth’, not that I think that is something to be expressed in terms of language as most of us know it.  [That is why I am a zen Buddhist.]  Wish me luck.  I simply haven’t energy to keep up with the rest.

October 25, 2015 at 8:46 pm Leave a comment

Modal Philosophy and Truth

Modal philosophy isn’t necessarily tied to a religious system (lack of religion should be taken as implicit in this statement).

A modally-oriented philosophy could actually be one of several sorts.  Dooyeveert’s version was that basic truths were acquired by means of the Bible (without going into origins and editings).

The more that a philosophy (particularly one restricted in viewpoint) or sociopolitical system provides stability the less it is able to adapt.

[mutterings and murmurings at midnight]

–Glenn

October 25, 2008 at 4:12 am Leave a comment

Dooyeveert, Modal Philosophy, and Further Considerations

October 23, 2008 at 1:56 am Leave a comment

a minor note

A minor note.

What I’ve been babbling about solving is this:  Dooyeveert’s Modal Philosophy employed modes which were essentially absolute.  That is, the validity (the “truth”) of a given mode is reportorial, and you don’t have to consider the origins of the definitions involved.  The tendency to use exclusivity-oriented definitions in this context means essentially that error is inescapable.  Another way of saying this is that the usage of absolute statements in a relative world is at least questionable.

The notion of modes is observably defensible.  It’s at least a way of describing ways in which people organize their perceptions, names, knowledge and assigned protocols in dealing with the environment (which naturally includes other people).  There are some fascinating possibilities introduced by this that I’m thinking about as well.  The notion of modes deals  well with the origin of human structures of knowledge and communication.  There’s also the matter of dealing with political structures and names.

All of this has direct effect on the nature of value.  “A change in values must result in a change in goals.”  The Nuclear Society has led to the Disentitled Generation; what the more current generation is remains to be seen.  My peers, I should say, fell back (predictably and actually without choice) on the dollar, peso, pound or whatever as the sole possible determination of value.  There was nothing else.  Trying to deal with others on any other basis hopefully just made us look like fools, rather than making us look dead.  Honor was the cool thing for comic books and popular films.

This is a minute fraction of what I’ve been scribbling away at.  It is kind of interesting.  I really did read a lot.   So I’m somewhat absent just now.  Assuredly the spirit will run out and I’ll spend more time on the Internet.
–Glenn

September 28, 2008 at 8:47 pm Leave a comment

Modal Philosophy

The primary problem I’m facing now is deceptively simple; what are modes?  Combine this with the statement that each occurrence is necessarily unique in some respects, and it becomes obvious that primarily modality is an artifact of a representational system or systems, although it is real in various respects.  It affects action (because it affects perception); modes can be shared (to some extent they have to be, because society per se is a product of shared perceptions which are the products of modes) and have stability.  A repetitive characteristic of modes is the assumption of the norm; what is experienced “now” (variously defined) is what has been and will be.  [Adaptation is the product most of all of pain.]  Modes are absolutely not exclusive.  Exclusive modes are the product of abstraction; Dooyeveert’s choice of “justice” as a mode was perhaps as perfect an example of this as could exist.  Modes as we know them descriptively are lingually-derived.  Experience itself is and must be pre-lingual.  The behaviorists and Freudians both might or might not argue.  If “conscious” experience then is lingual free will in most is arguable.

–Glenn

This is a tiny fragment of what I’ve been muttering about having thought about for forty years.  I’ve finally come to some actual conclusions.  Sort of; my philosophy doesn’t actually allow for absolutes, odd as that may seem.  The true origin lies in the meeting of Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Luther, and Calvin of all things.  Throw in a little Bible (I did read it three times) and a few other books, plus at least a million words I’ve written (I’ve probably managed to get a thousand published).

September 27, 2008 at 4:12 am Leave a comment

I Hear Reality Is Just a Step Away

 

08/23/08

This is the first entry on the “new” computer. That is, with the fan cannibalized off Rose’s old computer, and with the brand new 320-gig interior hard drive. I can’t hear the bloody computer any more. I hadn’t actually realized I could, I guess. So a lot of the over-heating was most likely simply due to a hard drive that shouldn’t have been working at all. Diablo II operated smoothly. I think both hard drives were used, although the larger one was narrowly. Whatever. I’ll be setting up some drive syncs. The oddest thing is being able to do something on the system now even while the CPU is using most or all of its capacity. I’m planning on saving all writing to a central “My Documents” folder and then mirroring it. I also will be cleaning off an exterior hard drive from the looks of things since I couldn’t get Norton Save & Restore to initiate. I really don’t think it’s a virus, either. I hope not. I’m getting tired of this crap. I keep running checks and I keep protection up. I still haven’t quite recovered from Rose telling me she doesn’t trust me because I’m too much of a good trip. I guess I’ll get over it or I won’t, as I told her.

21:29 More appropriate I suppose. Hadn’t thought about the fact that a program has the capability now to insert times. So I may as well do it on the diary-like entries I make. AbiWord because Open Office seems to be much like Microsoft Office in that it’s untrainable in some respects; an opening letter of a “sentence” must be capitalized. That meaning might lie in other directions is simply unsupportable, sort of like some New Age girdle I suppose: can’t be leather because it would be victimizing the beasts but can’t be plastic because it would be victimizing the beasts. …Maybe it should be human skin. But then of course there would be animal-rights activists wondering why we’re having all the fun.

21:37 I think that the first point of focus is going to have to be the representative system. After all, I have finally logically proven that no representative system can actually be true. It has to be infinity plus one, so to speak: so it’s not only the problem of the inter-relationships of the components of the representative system (and the establishment of sets within the system, which is actually what the modal system and Dooyeveert are on about), the problem of modeling permutations within the represented system–because you cannot be assured that each and every instance is identical, each must be represented, unless aspects of relevancy are identified and then defined. Definition essentially means assigning social identity stability. Relevancy is task-oriented, case-oriented, whatever. Either that or you’re daring to assume that your representative system, which was thrown together in a limited amount of time and for timely reasons…is absolutely true, for all time and under all situations. This is where Dooyeveert fell.

 

21:51 One thing you do know is that any judgement, and particularly any valuation or valorization, is relative and the product of a work of artifice. Language is by nature artificial. Our only hope toward a first step of reasoning clearly would be the production of an artificial language. One of the problems confronting even the mention thereof is quite similar to the realization in the late 1970’s that indeed one soldier could be given the power to wipe out an entire city. Trust is perhaps even more a product of artifice than is any monetary value. The real problem is going to come when need intersects with its description. Need alone has little power. Description, even masterful description, when it is not driven and kept if not secret then certainly not advertised–that has no power at all. Every time, though, that the two have met, whole worlds of perceived structure have fallen.

 

22:10 At about 14 I actually did become convinced that there was a sort of loop involved in the information available to me. truth/reality/perception/description and pick any part of it, proceed in any direction on it, and you came back to where you started. Eventually. No matter the grand words of it. I did try to have faith, which I perhaps foolishly defined as a belief in some sort of God directing things. I mean presumably in real time. Like, that would be what the deacon’s meetings were about. To this day, I haven’t the faintest idea. The ministers or for the Catholics the priests, the holy men, all interpreted reality so that… Easiest answer was, maintain the power structure. There would be a few exceptions.

 

If you have someone who is exceptionally intelligent, you have to hope she or he is also exceptionally moral. At this point, I would be interested in using this. As in, I did my part.

22:23 Yeah. Besides, it would be fun. And it would be the part indicated if the character survived this long, for that matter. Loki. Good at that.

 

Anyway, that reality/truth thing is tricky. That intent should be indicative of veracity is asinine. If that were true every man would be a (successful) politician. Reality is the presumptive, that is, in the justinian model, while truth is a matter of intent. That nearly got us into nuclear war, by the way.

 

The first step in approaching reality is the realization that no system of representation we have is necessarily particularly close to what is occurring. One good example of this is the recurring question about why we’re not getting radio signals, and how much energy we’re throwing out. They’re using something that’s a lot more efficient, probably FTL, and we’re at best the guys with the big speakers on the corner of the block, nice guys, but too loud and keep the beer inside.

 

 

What I actually mean here is that our assumptions of linear causation aren’t possible. Few occurrences have one cause. Fewer occur by themselves. We assume time is one way because of our representative system. We state things are proven when by our own definitions a hypothesis has graduated to a theory, that is all, and all that can happen. There are innumerable assumptions within every statement we make, and few of us even guess at what they might be. Reality is something that we guess toward; that those oriented toward corners tell us the solution is math I find somehow ironic. And they are, note this, quite carefully telling the truth. Most of the time, anyway. Bear in mind that any given discipline does tend to define relevance pretty, well, sort of, well…automatically. Using the principle of exclusion, as anyone who’s dealt with a government agency can testify. Bear in mind that if language is what you use to define reality then what you can’t say isn’t real.

 

…Yet faith is a primary component in any society, and actually quite often cited in government appeals, presumably not to be overthrown (or they’ll sick the police, army, and navy on us). Might bomb us too. Oops. “Sic.” Sic. …Sick.

–Glenn

August 24, 2008 at 12:59 am Leave a comment