Re: Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic field(mind).
The barrier between religion and ordinary life, like the one that suppossedly exist between gods and ordinary life is conventiona. If it is true that men have an instinct for religion, this is not governed by a switch that is put on when in a temple or when it is reading esoteric teachings. It is on all the time and in everyone. What produces this need of the soul or this innate instinct of the human nature?. It may produce organized relgion, but also politics and ideology. The brain areas excited by the appearance of the Pope in a group of believers are the same that are excited in ecologists when Al Gore appears. In the past there were no separation between both phenomena. This is an mostly Occidental division. The cult of personality in socialist countries and the sectarian movements (either political or religious) are new editions of the fundamentally Unitarian nature of religion and politics. So, then, gods and adivines have been and will be here forever. When a name for them is discredited, they appear with new names and within new organization. The modern Global warming alarmism is an episode of adivination by makin illegitimate use of science. the Marxism was a scholastic school of Masters of Reality that claimed predicitive powers over the story of Humanity. The gigantic photographs of Marx Lenin in the URSS parliament is an example of religious temple of Atheism. But also the small photograph or a loving one in the dormitory carries out a religious sense, Specially if it passed away and it was a greath influence in our lives. Religion is everywhere and forever. 2012/8/18 Alberto G. Corona agocor...@gmail.com I can not resit to say something here. 1)Adivination may be very dangerous, because adivination can be a powerful way of manipulation. an autoproclaimed adivine can manipulate you or your society if the the adivine is a powerful person. It can gain the a status of living god. In the past they were adivines or magicians, later they were the philosophers. Nowadays they are mostly scientists. I´m talking about the bad people of these groups. 2) very related with this, it is very plausible that by natural selection applied to the need to coordinate societies for common goals, we have the capability and the unavoidable necesity, by instinct to deify something or someone and to hypostasize it, that is to give it a personal nature it it has not. this may derive from the cult to the authority of the founder of the ancient tribe of our ancestors. If we have this instinct and this is unavoidable, the best use of it, to avoid the manipulation of those who want to ascend in the mind of the people, to what was in the past reserved for the gods, is to adore a transcendent personal god that represent the unknown. There is no theology here. I´m, talking in practical terms. although it may be considered of what Saint Thomas would call natural revelation. I´m fascinated o how much specifically Christian apologetics can be derived from the apparently antireligious, simple and egoistic notion of natural selection, which is none of the three. But this is not the place to discuss that. 2012/8/17 Roger rclo...@verizon.net Hi Craig Weinberg You are right in a sense. Weather prediction is a form of fortune-telling. But the reason traditional fortune-telling is frowned on by the Bible is that it invokes powers outside of God or over God (Thou shalt have no other God before me). I don't consider weather prediction as a replacement for God, so no problem. A more common false God however is your career, and we're all guilty of that. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/17/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - *From:* Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com *Receiver:* everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com *Time:* 2012-08-17, 12:35:03 *Subject:* Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic field(mind). Thanks Roger, Your work on this looks very interesting. I think I get the gist of it but I will have to take a closer look. I wonder how would fortune telling not include weather reports, actuarial tables, financial forecasts, etc? Historically there doesn't seem to be any meaningful correlation between fortune telling and any particular danger to people as a whole. Certainly no more danger than drinking wine or eating ice cream. Craig On Friday, August 17, 2012 9:49:24 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: Hi Craig Weinberg I was into the esoteric a decade ago, including the Tarot, and especially the Yi Ching. whose ability to transform and embed and interlink metaphors is very powerful. Being combinatorically constructed, it is a complete, homogeneous and interlinked (hyperlinked) semantic field (to a certain resolution). You can do things with it not even dreamed of in western semantics and language processing
Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic field(mind).
On 19 Aug 2012, at 11:15, Alberto G. Corona wrote: The barrier between religion and ordinary life, like the one that suppossedly exist between gods and ordinary life is conventiona. If it is true that men have an instinct for religion, this is not governed by a switch that is put on when in a temple or when it is reading esoteric teachings. It is on all the time and in everyone. I agree. I make a case that all correct machine are theological. The reason is that such machine, when looking inward (as they can do by self-reference) can guess that there is something transcending them. What produces this need of the soul or this innate instinct of the human nature?. It may produce organized relgion, but also politics and ideology. The brain areas excited by the appearance of the Pope in a group of believers are the same that are excited in ecologists when Al Gore appears. In the past there were no separation between both phenomena. This is an mostly Occidental division. But it is also a natural division. When machine get theological, from their perspective it looks like those kind of things are different. And at some level they are. I think that the conflict is already reflected in the left brain / right brain difference. Perhaps between woman and man, east and west, yin and yang. Take any machine, she will develop those two poles. the schizophreny appears only when one pole believes to be more right than the other pole. The cult of personality in socialist countries and the sectarian movements (either political or religious) are new editions of the fundamentally Unitarian nature of religion and politics. So, then, gods and adivines have been and will be here forever. I concur. When a name for them is discredited, they appear with new names and within new organization. Absolutely. Some atheists sects can copy some clergy ritual at the level of the microcospic details, and also the authoritative arguments. I am thinking to some atheist masonic lodges (not all). The modern Global warming alarmism is an episode of adivination by makin illegitimate use of science. the Marxism was a scholastic school of Masters of Reality that claimed predicitive powers over the story of Humanity. The gigantic photographs of Marx Lenin in the URSS parliament is an example of religious temple of Atheism. But also the small photograph or a loving one in the dormitory carries out a religious sense, Specially if it passed away and it was a greath influence in our lives. Religion is everywhere and forever. OK. But it can progress. The authoritative argument in science and religion is a rest of our mammals reflex. Dogs and wolves needs leaders, for reason of a long biological past story. It makes sense for short term goal, like it makes sense to obey to orders in the military situation. But it is really an handicap for the long run. And that means that authoritative arguments will disappear, in the long run, or we will disappear, like the dinosaurs. Natural selection can select good things for the short terms, and throw them away later. What will not disappear is science and religion. Religion and spirituality will be more and more prevalent, and play a role of private goal, and science will be more and more understood as the best tool to approximate that spiritual goal. I think. To fight fundamentalism in religion, theology should go back to the academy (which like democracy is the worst institution except for all others!). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic field(mind).
I can not resit to say something here. 1)Adivination may be very dangerous, because adivination can be a powerful way of manipulation. an autoproclaimed adivine can manipulate you or your society if the the adivine is a powerful person. It can gain the a status of living god. It can even be a philosopher or a scientist. 2) very related with this, it is very plausible that by natural selection applied to the need to coordinate societies for common goals, we have the capability and the unavoidable neccesity, by instinct to deify something or someone and to hypostasize it, that is to give it a personal nature it it has not. this may derive from the cult to the authority of the founder of the ancient tribe of our ancestors. If we have this instinct and this is unavoidable, the best use of it, to avoid the manipulation of those who want to ascend in the mind of the people, to what was in the past reserved for the gods, is to adore a transcendent personal god that represent the unknown. T There is no theology here. I´m, talking in practical terms. although it may be considered of what Saint Thomas would call natural revelation. I´m fascinated o how much specifically Christian apologetics can be derived from the apparently antireligious, simple and egoistic notion of natural selection, which is none of the three. But this is not the place to discuss that. 2012/8/17 Roger rclo...@verizon.net Hi Craig Weinberg You are right in a sense. Weather prediction is a form of fortune-telling. But the reason traditional fortune-telling is frowned on by the Bible is that it invokes powers outside of God or over God (Thou shalt have no other God before me). I don't consider weather prediction as a replacement for God, so no problem. A more common false God however is your career, and we're all guilty of that. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/17/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - *From:* Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com *Receiver:* everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com *Time:* 2012-08-17, 12:35:03 *Subject:* Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic field(mind). Thanks Roger, Your work on this looks very interesting. I think I get the gist of it but I will have to take a closer look. I wonder how would fortune telling not include weather reports, actuarial tables, financial forecasts, etc? Historically there doesn't seem to be any meaningful correlation between fortune telling and any particular danger to people as a whole. Certainly no more danger than drinking wine or eating ice cream. Craig On Friday, August 17, 2012 9:49:24 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: Hi Craig Weinberg I was into the esoteric a decade ago, including the Tarot, and especially the Yi Ching. whose ability to transform and embed and interlink metaphors is very powerful. Being combinatorically constructed, it is a complete, homogeneous and interlinked (hyperlinked) semantic field (to a certain resolution). You can do things with it not even dreamed of in western semantics and language processing. Leibniz almost discovered these properties. I developed a theory of story ujsing it (in the form of the Feng Shui). See http://tap3x.net/EMBTI/**j8clough.htmlhttp://tap3x.net/EMBTI/j8clough.html Similarly I studied the time based version of the Yi Jing called the Tai Xuan Jing (T'ai Hsuan Ching) which is ternary in form and especially mysterious and beautiful. Then I went back tio the Lutheran Church and being conservative, and being advised and believing that such esoteric topics (unfortunately used in fortune telling, forbidden by the Bible) are not a healthy pursuit, I gave up all of that stuff. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/17/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - *From:* Craig Weinberg *Receiver:* everything-list *Time:* 2012-08-15, 05:05:44 *Subject:* Reconciling Bruno's Primitives with Multisense Hi Bruno, I was thinking about your primitive of arithmetic truth (numbers, 0, +, and *, right?) and then your concept of 'the dreams of numbers', interviewing Lobian Machines, etc and came up with this. One single irreducible digit which represents a self-dividing continuum of infinite perpendicular dialectics between eidetic dream states (in which dream~numbers escape their numerical identities as immersive qualitative experiences) and entopic non-dream states (in which number~dreams escape their dream nature as literal algebra-geometries). This continuum f( ), runs from infinitely solipsistic/private first person subjectivity (calling that Aleph **)* *to infinitely discrete/public third person mechanism (calling that Omega **), so that at **,any given dream is experienced as 99.99...9% dream and 0.00...1% number
Re: Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic field(mind).
I can not resit to say something here. 1)Adivination may be very dangerous, because adivination can be a powerful way of manipulation. an autoproclaimed adivine can manipulate you or your society if the the adivine is a powerful person. It can gain the a status of living god. In the past they were adivines or magicians, later they were the philosophers. Nowadays they are mostly scientists. I´m talking about the bad people of these groups. 2) very related with this, it is very plausible that by natural selection applied to the need to coordinate societies for common goals, we have the capability and the unavoidable necesity, by instinct to deify something or someone and to hypostasize it, that is to give it a personal nature it it has not. this may derive from the cult to the authority of the founder of the ancient tribe of our ancestors. If we have this instinct and this is unavoidable, the best use of it, to avoid the manipulation of those who want to ascend in the mind of the people, to what was in the past reserved for the gods, is to adore a transcendent personal god that represent the unknown. There is no theology here. I´m, talking in practical terms. although it may be considered of what Saint Thomas would call natural revelation. I´m fascinated o how much specifically Christian apologetics can be derived from the apparently antireligious, simple and egoistic notion of natural selection, which is none of the three. But this is not the place to discuss that. 2012/8/17 Roger rclo...@verizon.net Hi Craig Weinberg You are right in a sense. Weather prediction is a form of fortune-telling. But the reason traditional fortune-telling is frowned on by the Bible is that it invokes powers outside of God or over God (Thou shalt have no other God before me). I don't consider weather prediction as a replacement for God, so no problem. A more common false God however is your career, and we're all guilty of that. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/17/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - *From:* Craig Weinberg whatsons...@gmail.com *Receiver:* everything-list everything-list@googlegroups.com *Time:* 2012-08-17, 12:35:03 *Subject:* Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic field(mind). Thanks Roger, Your work on this looks very interesting. I think I get the gist of it but I will have to take a closer look. I wonder how would fortune telling not include weather reports, actuarial tables, financial forecasts, etc? Historically there doesn't seem to be any meaningful correlation between fortune telling and any particular danger to people as a whole. Certainly no more danger than drinking wine or eating ice cream. Craig On Friday, August 17, 2012 9:49:24 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: Hi Craig Weinberg I was into the esoteric a decade ago, including the Tarot, and especially the Yi Ching. whose ability to transform and embed and interlink metaphors is very powerful. Being combinatorically constructed, it is a complete, homogeneous and interlinked (hyperlinked) semantic field (to a certain resolution). You can do things with it not even dreamed of in western semantics and language processing. Leibniz almost discovered these properties. I developed a theory of story ujsing it (in the form of the Feng Shui). See http://tap3x.net/EMBTI/**j8clough.htmlhttp://tap3x.net/EMBTI/j8clough.html Similarly I studied the time based version of the Yi Jing called the Tai Xuan Jing (T'ai Hsuan Ching) which is ternary in form and especially mysterious and beautiful. Then I went back tio the Lutheran Church and being conservative, and being advised and believing that such esoteric topics (unfortunately used in fortune telling, forbidden by the Bible) are not a healthy pursuit, I gave up all of that stuff. Roger , rclo...@verizon.net 8/17/2012 Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything could function. - Receiving the following content - *From:* Craig Weinberg *Receiver:* everything-list *Time:* 2012-08-15, 05:05:44 *Subject:* Reconciling Bruno's Primitives with Multisense Hi Bruno, I was thinking about your primitive of arithmetic truth (numbers, 0, +, and *, right?) and then your concept of 'the dreams of numbers', interviewing Lobian Machines, etc and came up with this. One single irreducible digit which represents a self-dividing continuum of infinite perpendicular dialectics between eidetic dream states (in which dream~numbers escape their numerical identities as immersive qualitative experiences) and entopic non-dream states (in which number~dreams escape their dream nature as literal algebra-geometries). This continuum f( ), runs from infinitely solipsistic/private first person subjectivity (calling that Aleph **)* *to infinitely discrete/public third person
Re: Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic field(mind).
On Saturday, August 18, 2012 5:04:28 PM UTC-4, Alberto G.Corona wrote: I can not resit to say something here. 1)Adivination may be very dangerous, because adivination can be a powerful way of manipulation. an autoproclaimed adivine can manipulate you or your society if the the adivine is a powerful person. It can gain the a status of living god. In the past they were adivines or magicians, later they were the philosophers. Nowadays they are mostly scientists. I´m talking about the bad people of these groups. Sure, but doesn't the abuse of adivination pale in comparison to most other forms of political device? Has the Bible or Koran every been used as a powerful way to manipulate societies? Has financial power ever giving someone the status of a living god? To me, especially in a modern context, using divination is seen as a huge liability. The Wall Street wizards of quant magic are far more influential than any Bronze Age warlock ever dreamed of being. 2) very related with this, it is very plausible that by natural selection applied to the need to coordinate societies for common goals, we have the capability and the unavoidable necesity, by instinct to deify something or someone and to hypostasize it, that is to give it a personal nature it it has not. this may derive from the cult to the authority of the founder of the ancient tribe of our ancestors. If we have this instinct and this is unavoidable, the best use of it, to avoid the manipulation of those who want to ascend in the mind of the people, to what was in the past reserved for the gods, is to adore a transcendent personal god that represent the unknown. There is no theology here. I´m, talking in practical terms. although it may be considered of what Saint Thomas would call natural revelation. I´m fascinated o how much specifically Christian apologetics can be derived from the apparently antireligious, simple and egoistic notion of natural selection, which is none of the three. But this is not the place to discuss that. I think that our contemporary culture shows that society can bond to abstract conceptual brands just as well as an anthropomorphized personality. Our Gods are commercial abstractions of status. Any fears of charismatic religious power in the West are probably hysterical exaggerations at this point. Relatively few people care about someone claiming to speak for an omniscient God anymore - it's who speaks for financial success that matters. Craig -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Everything List group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/u6E4l_QDWWwJ. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic field (mind).
Thanks Roger,
Your work on this looks very interesting. I think I get the gist of it but
I will have to take a closer look.
I wonder how would fortune telling not include weather reports, actuarial
tables, financial forecasts, etc? Historically there doesn't seem to be any
meaningful correlation between fortune telling and any particular danger to
people as a whole. Certainly no more danger than drinking wine or eating
ice cream.
Craig
On Friday, August 17, 2012 9:49:24 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
I was into the esoteric a decade ago, including the Tarot, and especially
the Yi Ching.
whose ability to transform and embed and interlink metaphors is very
powerful. Being combinatorically
constructed, it is a complete, homogeneous and interlinked (hyperlinked)
semantic field (to a certain
resolution). You can do things with it not even dreamed of in western
semantics and language processing.
Leibniz almost discovered these properties. I developed a theory of story
ujsing it (in the form of the Feng Shui).
See
http://tap3x.net/EMBTI/j8clough.html
Similarly I studied the time based version of the Yi Jing called the Tai
Xuan Jing (T'ai Hsuan Ching)
which is ternary in form and especially mysterious and beautiful.
Then I went back tio the Lutheran Church and being conservative, and being
advised and believing that such esoteric topics
(unfortunately used in fortune telling, forbidden by the Bible) are not a
healthy pursuit, I gave up all of that stuff.
Roger , rclo...@verizon.net javascript:
8/17/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so
everything could function.
- Receiving the following content -
*From:* Craig Weinberg javascript:
*Receiver:* everything-list javascript:
*Time:* 2012-08-15, 05:05:44
*Subject:* Reconciling Bruno's Primitives with Multisense
Hi Bruno,
I was thinking about your primitive of arithmetic truth (numbers, 0, +,
and *, right?) and then your concept of 'the dreams of numbers',
interviewing Lobian Machines, etc and came up with this.
One single irreducible digit 锟斤拷 which represents a self-dividing
continuum of infinite perpendicular dialectics between eidetic dream states
(in which dream~numbers escape their numerical identities as immersive
qualitative experiences) and entopic non-dream states (in which
number~dreams escape their dream nature as literal algebra-geometries).
This continuum f(锟斤拷), runs from infinitely solipsistic/private first
person subjectivity (calling that Aleph *锟斤拷*)* *to infinitely
discrete/public third person mechanism (calling that Omega *锟斤拷*), so
that at *锟斤拷*,any given dream is experienced as 99.99...9% dream and
0.00...1% number and at *锟斤拷*, any given machine or number is presented
as 99.99...9% number and 0.00...1% dream.
The halfway point between the *锟斤拷 *and* **锟斤拷* axis is the perpendicular
axis f(-锟斤拷) which is the high and low correspondence between the literal
dream and figurative number (or figurative dream and literal number
depending on whether you are using the dream-facing epistemology or the
number-facing epistemology). This axis runs from tight equivalence (=) to
broadly elliptical potential set membership (...)
So it looks something like this:
f(锟斤拷) 锟斤拷 *{锟斤拷** ...** 锟斤拷** =** 锟斤拷**}*
To go further, it could be said that at *锟斤拷*(Omega), 锟斤拷 (Om) expresses
as *10|O* (one, zero, line segment, circle referring to the quantitative
algebraic and geometric perpendicular primitives) while at *锟斤拷* (Aleph),
锟斤拷(Om) expresses as
锟斤拷锟斤拷锟斤拷锟斤拷 (tetragrammaton or yod, hay, vov, hay, or in perhaps more
familiar metaphor, 锟斤拷**锟斤拷锟斤拷**锟斤拷(clubs, spades, hearts, diamonds)
where:
锟斤拷 clubs (wands) =Fire, spiritual, tactile
锟斤拷 spades (swords) = Air, mental, auditory
锟斤拷 hearts (cups) =Water, emotional, visual
锟斤拷 diamonds (pentacles/coins) = Earth, physical, olfactory-gustatory
Note that tactile and auditory modalities tune us into ourselves and each
others sensemaking (selves and minds), while the visual and
olfactory/gustatory sense modalities are about objectifying realism of the
world (egos or objectified selves/self-images and bodies). It should be
obvious that 锟斤拷 clubs (wands) and 锟斤拷 spades (swords) are stereotypically
masculine and abstracting forces, while 锟斤拷 hearts (cups) and 锟斤拷 diamonds
(pentacles/coins) are stereotypically feminine objectified fields.
Sorry for the mumbo jumbo, but it is the only way to be non-reductive when
approaching the qualitative side. We can't pretend to talk about the
eidetic, dream like perpendicular of number logic while using the purely
empirical terms of arithmetic reduction. We need symbols that can only
refer to named qualities rather than enumerated quantities.
Let the ignoring and insulting begin!
Craig
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Re: Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic field(mind).
Hi Craig Weinberg
You are right in a sense. Weather prediction is a form of fortune-telling.
But the reason traditional fortune-telling is frowned on by the Bible is that
it invokes powers outside of God or over God (Thou shalt have no other
God before me).
I don't consider weather prediction as a replacement for God, so no problem.
A more common false God however is your career, and we're all guilty of that.
Roger , rclo...@verizon.net
8/17/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything
could function.
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-08-17, 12:35:03
Subject: Re: The I Ching, a cominatorically complete hyperlinked semantic
field(mind).
Thanks Roger,
Your work on this looks very interesting. I think I get the gist of it but I
will have to take a closer look.
I wonder how would fortune telling not include weather reports, actuarial
tables, financial forecasts, etc? Historically there doesn't seem to be any
meaningful correlation between fortune telling and any particular danger to
people as a whole. Certainly no more danger than drinking wine or eating ice
cream.
Craig
On Friday, August 17, 2012 9:49:24 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote:
Hi Craig Weinberg
I was into the esoteric a decade ago, including the Tarot, and especially the
Yi Ching.
whose ability to transform and embed and interlink metaphors is very powerful.
Being combinatorically
constructed, it is a complete, homogeneous and interlinked (hyperlinked)
semantic field (to a certain
resolution). You can do things with it not even dreamed of in western
semantics and language processing.
Leibniz almost discovered these properties. I developed a theory of story
ujsing it (in the form of the Feng Shui).
See
http://tap3x.net/EMBTI/j8clough.html
Similarly I studied the time based version of the Yi Jing called the Tai Xuan
Jing (T'ai Hsuan Ching)
which is ternary in form and especially mysterious and beautiful.
Then I went back tio the Lutheran Church and being conservative, and being
advised and believing that such esoteric topics
(unfortunately used in fortune telling, forbidden by the Bible) are not a
healthy pursuit, I gave up all of that stuff.
Roger , rclo...@verizon.net
8/17/2012
Leibniz would say, If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so everything
could function.
- Receiving the following content -
From: Craig Weinberg
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-08-15, 05:05:44
Subject: Reconciling Bruno's Primitives with Multisense
Hi Bruno,
I was thinking about your primitive of arithmetic truth (numbers, 0, +, and *,
right?) and then your concept of 'the dreams of numbers', interviewing Lobian
Machines, etc and came up with this.
One single irreducible digit which represents a self-dividing continuum of
infinite perpendicular dialectics between eidetic dream states (in which
dream~numbers escape their numerical identities as immersive qualitative
experiences) and entopic non-dream states (in which number~dreams escape their
dream nature as literal algebra-geometries).
This continuum f( ), runs from infinitely solipsistic/private first person
subjectivity (calling that Aleph ) to infinitely discrete/public third person
mechanism (calling that Omega ), so that at ,any given dream is experienced as
99.99...9% dream and 0.00...1% number and at , any given machine or number is
presented as 99.99...9% number and 0.00...1% dream.
The halfway point between the and axis is the perpendicular axis f(- ) which is
the high and low correspondence between the literal dream and figurative number
(or figurative dream and literal number depending on whether you are using the
dream-facing epistemology or the number-facing epistemology). This axis runs
from tight equivalence (=) to broadly elliptical potential set membership
(...)
So it looks something like this:
f( ) { ... = }
To go further, it could be said that at (Omega), (Om) expresses as 10|O (one,
zero, line segment, circle referring to the quantitative algebraic and
geometric perpendicular primitives) while at (Aleph), (Om) expresses as
(tetragrammaton or yod, hay, vov, hay, or in perhaps more familiar metaphor,
(clubs, spades, hearts, diamonds)
where:
clubs (wands) =Fire, spiritual, tactile
spades (swords) = Air, mental, auditory
hearts (cups) =Water, emotional, visual
diamonds (pentacles/coins) = Earth, physical, olfactory-gustatory
Note that tactile and auditory modalities tune us into ourselves and each
others sensemaking (selves and minds), while the visual and olfactory/gustatory
sense modalities are about objectifying realism of the world (egos or
objectified selves/self-images and bodies). It should be obvious that clubs
(wands) and spades (swords) are stereotypically masculine and abstracting
forces, while hearts (cups) and diamonds (pentacles/coins) are stereotypically
feminine objectified fields.
Sorry
