Heidegger

jenks

thread death
I feel that communality isn’t that lost to us - maybe it’s an age thing but one finds one own community- curates it even. I feel very optimistic about this - a fact of lockdown has been a re-establishment of networks which utilise technologies but also re-establish face to face communality. All kinds of buttons are being reset.
 

jenks

thread death
As far as I know, a capitalist techgnosis that manages to tap into the veins within these currents (imaging an attractor/point within a distribution, and stack a loooong series of those slides next to each other temporally, and you will have a thread within a sort of wind-current, the distribution repositioning itself in reaction to an attractor that repositions itself in reaction to the distribution, and so on), could quite possibly impregnate the veins with something identifiably marxist.
I’m not being rude but I really don’t understand your second sentence here - would you mind explaining it for me?
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
No worries, that one was a mess, even relative to most of my posts. You mean that whole parenthetical sentence, or the sentence around it?

The parenthetical point was an aside in the interest of painting a sort of image to connect a statistical sensibility with a more poetic one, and the sentence around it was in the interest of pointing out one of the metaphysical tasks at hand.

The metaphysical point, "As far as I know, a capitalist techgnosis that manages to tap into the veins within these currents, could quite possibly impregnate the veins with something identifiably marxist.", is that a certain kind of gnosis might lead us to identifying the more essential factors at play within capitalism, and from this identification we can resume a more earthly, maybe even empirical, means of understanding it.

I've brought up a few times that Buckminster Fuller quote about improving the dominant model rather than fighting it, as a means of attaining a more favorable reality. That kind of sentiment is important here, and it would consist of a marxism going convincingly undercover as a capitalism, albeit a strange capitalism, in the interest of eventually attaining a more favorable reality that could not be attained by merely opposing capitalism.
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
The belief is that the optimal capitalism, or at least one of the equivalently optimal capitalisms, would eventually lead to a reality that is actually Communistic, rather than Communism necessarily arising from capitalisms failure.

That is: capitalism and communism are compossible, the unfalsifiable crux being that capitalism can be expressed in a far wider variety of systems than we think it can.
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
A fully automated capitalist world would be in capital's interest just as much as ours, no?

edit: or something like that. The point is to indicate that such an compossibility is a possibility.
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
What kind of attempts have there been at a heideggarian-phenomenological approach to physics, or fields nested within physics? I say heideggarian because he seems to be the most robust elaborator of the kind of phenomenology I have in mind - the philosophic kind, rather than the scientific kind which studies apparent/observable qualities. But hey, maybe Hussurl, Brentano, Merleau-Ponty, have stuff to offer. Not familiar with any of them.

If the traditional subject is framed as a certain vantage point of complexity, could we scale down certain principles/theories of being, and apply them to physical machinations of a lower order than the psyche?

Perhaps our conception of being, or perhaps of existing, takes as essential certain qualities that are not essential, but rather contingent upon our order of physical complexity. Perhaps such metaphysical things as will, pathos, cogito, are not essential to the kind of being in question.

Instead of orienting a phenomenology within the relation between a psychic/conscious system and its environment, what if we can orient some kind of analog phenomenology within a relation between, say, a molecule-system and its environment? What is it that both systems are doing, the former more robustly, the latter less?

Maybe eigenvector is the word for this, but its a word I still haven't really grasped. It seems to denote a sort of meta-vector, or a vector that is characteristic of a transformational series of vector spaces?

Regardless of what that word ought to denote, what I have in mind is a sort of entelechy of complexity, the coming-into-being or actualization of higher orders of physical complexity. A vast variety of equilibria may be met here, with multiple species/speciations each kinda coalescing around some locally optimal permutation.

That might be key here: that the detection-of-the-optimal is limited to the local environment. So the winning permutation of species A might not stack up well against the optimal permutation of species B. And so there is a sort of meta-optimal permutation, or apex permutation, which, as far as I can tell, is the position incarnated by the human.
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
That might be key here: that the detection-of-the-optimal is limited to the local environment. So the winning permutation of species A might not stack up well against the optimal permutation of species B. And so there is a sort of meta-optimal permutation, or apex permutation, which, as far as I can tell, is the position incarnated by the human.
This ties into how we can only approximate the new, using established pathways. When, actually, the new consists of pathways that we have not yet learned to establish. But because we are confined sensorily, confined phenomenally - because we can only experience a certain locality, our ability to predict the new is limited to what can be ascertained within that locality.
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
Anyone here know if Heideggar got into physics at all? Or any of the other phenomenology folks?

Also, the phenomenological scaling could go either way: to lower complexities and higher complexities. Perhaps understanding the lower, and how the lower relates to us, might grant us insight into the higher, and how we relate to it.
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
I'm not very familiar with Heideggar, but I can see where what I'm talking about wouldn't really be heideggarian. Maybe it would just take heideggar as a point of departure.

I guess it would be a sort of scalable ontology, or an ontology of scaling complexity. And at our scale, which I mentioned in terms of psychic systems and their environment, would just be a more robust ontology than that of molecules.

Like what if we take the project of phenomenology as being dependent upon factors that are exclusive to the psychic scale/perspective. But then, what would be the connecting thread/spine that traverses all scales of complexity, and how could we study the being of this thread/spine?
 

vimothy

yurp
I think the problem is that phenomenology doesnt make any sense from the POV of molecules. molecules are not conscious, it's not a question of scale
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
Yeah perhaps phenomenology doesn't make sense if we are talking about systems that exist but don't experience existence essentially as we do.

But then what would the ontological category be that subsumes both our existence and the existence of molecules? Some category that spans the spectrum of consciousness?

Can we have a phenomenology of pre-conscious systems, wherein we anachronistically impose a sense of experience onto these pre-conscious systems? Or would that just undefine "phenomenology"?
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
Can we have a phenomenology of pre-conscious systems, wherein we anachronistically impose a sense of experience onto these pre-conscious systems? Or would that just undefine "phenomenology"?
This imposition/projection of experience onto systems of a lower-order complexity would be the libertine leap I mentioned. A leap that doesn't take a very firm ground as its point of departure, but could nonetheless yield interesting, perhaps even progressive logos.
 

luka

Well-known member
Staff member
this doesnt seem very heidegerrian to me. molecules are not "conscious", they are not analogous to humans
depends how you think consciousness works. i dont, personally, think its peculiar to yumans
 
Top