Dear KP,
Although being back at my desktop, I am twice slower than usual - upgrading my email system (Netscape.4) and getting used with the new ways to format, link and manage.
I wrote you a piece when the only material i had
http://server
.snni.com:80/~palmer/labyrinth/beings.html
Since then, I received your post and the address
http://dialog.net:85/homepa
ge/apeiron.htm
Unfortunateley I could not yet get the data - I can connect
but must 'wait and wait for the answer'.. and nothing comes. I'll try again
during the WE.
I am glad that info about HOMA was well received - as usual and for years, the perplexity of my correspondants is stimulating. I'll join my 'comments on your beings.html bellow - you'll see, at the bottom, that I was trying to summarize again this hypothesis.
So, for the moment, I have only this beings.html page to work with - at least it will make a base for further development when I'll be able to access FRAGMENTATION OF BEING AND THE PATH BEYOND THE VOID, WILD SOFTWARE META-SYSTEMS, REFLEXIVE AUTOPOIETIC SYSTEMS THEORY.
I try to write and send the following in htm format.
-------------------
yesterday morning
I write from a laptop away from my usual base and i wish to comment on your labyrinth/beings.html - I'll have later the opportunity to retreive and answer your email.
Let me say first that I shall be looking for exchanging about cybernetics models with you. At the present time the comparison between our philosophical terms may be a usefull approach.
I have intended to locate your entities (being, essence, idea etc...) onto the quadriparted model [Optical Model - or 4discourses - written 4m] of PLAN. Since they all are from a same origin or "Western Worldview", there are god probability that they match. Here is how i see their superimposition - that may bring out the way philosophy and psychoanalysis differ and/or complete.
-------------------
A) First the
major bipartition that the 4m displays in its vertical division by a mirror
(which closes the mouth of the Cave), would be supported by the distinction
between "beings" &
"Being".
The beings are in the Cave (left) - where
they support the "plural" that PLAN regards. The ontological/ontic
differentiatiion being shown in the vase/bunch mounting (or 'editing'). The
Being is beyond the mirror (right)
A reversal inversion (apocalypse) must be mentioned yet. We must be fully aware that the 4m presents a rotation of the Cave model, as the Art of Memory shows (after Bruno's spinning wheels). In the 4m, the symposium takes place out of the cave (as it was already evoked by Plato when he describes the cave inhabitants who have dared to move out of the cave - alias beyond the mirror) - consequently, when Simonides left the Symposium, he enters le Cave. This is what PLAN realizes (extraction from the group, into the analysis room) : bringing back the 'illuminated' in the cave - Plato mentions the emotional difficulty there.
If we conceive that the Cave is the exterior - we have made the principal step where we can bring forth the Freudian model <../../../../akh/psy /modpsy.htm#a2>. Then we may find your description of a noematic nuclei as being 'the "external" coherence' of the apperances. In this case the "appearances" are things as they appear beyond the mirror - i.e., the modern reality which is theorized as virtual (Re: quantum and other modern physics), while their n.nuclei is to find in the exterior that is the cave.
If we agree on this point we would have
a major commun base for the representation of the sphincter and/or the freudian
"erotic spot," libido etc..
There is a net illustration of such nuclei,
as the empty green circles/rings
<http://www.dnafoundatio
n.com/priv/planact.htm> which are deposed and piled in the
cave, according to their state when you define :
>Things are the noematic nuclei themselves without
thought
>of their quiddity.
This is appropriate to depict those things that slaves are - in the cave, as well as the analysand+analyst, if Psychoanalysis enables PLAN as a science. Yet, i may not need to go so far in this present study - and better continue closer to your reference.
B) You present
the
existent as the "raw giveness" which
acheives a "series of things". "Series" it the term I also use from J.P.Sartre,
which points out to the ek-sistence where the Agent (superior-left quarter
<http://www.dnafoundat
ion.com/priv/4dmem.htm#aca>) concludes in its act - and
actuality.
The animated picture of PLAN illustrates
this process that you compare with a sweeping of a light (the green rings
wich pile in the analyst cabinet), when the session stacks the series of
"things" up to the end, when the group acheives its analysis.
At the extremity of this swept series,
the 4m presents this very "actual" place, as the superior-left quarter which
may figure Kant's noumena - and which is <never shown> since it founds
the repressed (repression of the
frustrating<http://www.dnafo
undation.com/temp02/18/1895b.htm#xti>) and its clearance
into the representation (beyond the mirror as follow:)
C) I see the
representativity in the way you write about
"essence"
- for the analysis of the things in PLAN draws this serial line (that you
may call kind, sort or type) which ends [clockwise] into a "gloss"
- which is indeed the mirror preamble that the subjectivity is the essence
of.
This ideal place is represented in the
4m as the superior-right quarter, which declines towards the return of Simonides
toward the symposium. This movement is also reflected in your comment:
>In other words, just as things have essences so
to essences
>have meta-essences in a regress.
This is describing the inverse rotation
[starting with S1 in Agent place, counterclockwise that you call regression]
of the Lacanian formula - when the metamorphosis (S2) represents the first
Significant (S1)
<http://www.dnafoundation
.com/temp02/joac.htm>.
D) I beleive it is not
difficult either to continue the comparison with
the
idea.
The domain of the Idea is the symposium,
outside the cave, beyond the mirror, the virtual 'reality' - following
J.P.Sartre, it is the space of totalization; it is also the place
where I have located his "totalization of totalizations" which meets your
description of "concept", especially when it supports this <illusory
continuity that forms the background (on which the idea appears as a
figure)> that Sartre calls "absolute".
Meanwhile, you say that the concept itself
may be abstracted, to become a "source" - and this may be exactly what is
shown when the vertical mirror in the 4m become the horizontal flat-wave
of a lake (so called Republic or Psychoanalysis position). This position
shows the idea merging into the cave - and how the 'Thing' participates <in
the underlying ground of Being>. Evidently it is to define the ideology
under analysis in PLAN (since the "extraction" of the member form the
group/symposium realizes his 'amorphosis' as a source).
<http://www.dnafou
ndation.com/temp02/psocio2.htm#rod>
Now, if we summarize the circular process
I have described, from the
slave-thing,
to the
existent - alias exis -
toward the
essential gloss which turns again
into the
idea, then back in the cave as a
source,
there is a gap in that the existence
is never stoped and the essence always
idealized.
I have introduced this perpetual escape
of the individual and the complexification of its class (glass/gloss) as
the "clearance into the representation" (Re: above), that matches the
"Clearing-in-Being" that you depict.
The noumena which displaces its "idealized
participation within the clearing-of-being" allows indeed a "Process", which
eventually reveals itself to be too complex ("discontinuities and sharp
transitions") - that looks like what children express when they are "hyper"
and "wild".
This is where I see PLAN acheiving the
clearing - indeed it purifies the very ultimate "shadow" which still clutters
the clearing. In the description of PLAN, the extraction of the member leaves
a "minus-one" which realizes the effective pure presence (absence, never
possibly supported by any sociology before/until the virtual and cyber
immortality, genetics etc...) while the "shadow" enters the cave.
-------------------
About the A=M=O comparison, yes, Akhnaton cleared his
consecration (his naming, "Amenophis.4) leaves his kingship and enters the
cave. He merged with his people for an experience which is renowned as for
bringing the incomer to be declared a fool and/or being murdered. Yet leaving
a minus-one in Thebes, he survived the attacks in the cave and concluded
his series of transformation until his individuality re-emerged as Moses;
but when he came again in this quiddity, the world had changed - he became
a prophet in a world of a "chaotic mixture of order and disorder".
The very question I face in regards to this (hypo)thesis
is the way the Oedipus complex is solved. This A=M=O cycle leaves Oedipus
in the new-ramside-world-order in the complex phase of Clearing-in-Being
(known as a myht). My theorization is that the effective 'clearing' is only
acheived with the pure 'minus-one' that PLAN allows (so Oedipus must be
'cleared', extracted again, analysed to clear his clearing).
Yet there is another element that I have not mentioned in
the above comment. I beleive that something remains in the Clearing. I beleive
that along this circuit, when the clearing is eventually cleared, it is the
cybernetical machine which occupies the field (i.e., virtual reality within
reality, digitization industry, artificial intelligence etc...). In other
words, it means that PLAN could not be applied as long as there were no such
utilities within reality.
Thus, I also means that the Oedipus Complex could not be
cleared before the Age of Cybernetics.
Then, I must ask : when did the Age of Cybernetics began ? Evidently, at first sight, during the 20th ; but if we look just a little more in depth, before the very open day, didn't it start with the dawn - I mean: with the emergence of Hermes Trismegistus? (who was 'Hermes Thot" in the Ptolemean Hermoplois Magna built on Akhnaton's city location). So... Trismegistus, aka Triplex, HT3, known as the patron of Alchemy who prophetized Statues Which Speak & Cure... i.e. artificial intelligence, according to Yates. So, more than a millenium after the clearance of Moses, the clearing of the oedipus complex may be hypothetised when Thot leaves again Egypt. At that moment, when the symbol leaves again the City of Horizon, it is not as Moses nor Oedipus, but as Trismegistus (that time is the beginning of Christianity).
I have tried to theorized this double loop (which is elswhere
originated from the lacanian topology, where it is named "Internal 8") in
places as:
http://www.akhnaton.c
om/cured/fac01.htm#esc