Dear Readers,

A text-module defining the

**F**.

__.__

**E**__.__

**D***'*

**Principle**

**of**

**Metafinity***'*has been cleared for posting to the www.dialectics.org Glossary Page.

I have posted a JPEG image of that definition below, for your convenience.

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

A text-module defining the

I have posted a JPEG image of that definition below, for your convenience.

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

FYI: The "treasure trove" of definitions of key

See --

http://point-of-departure.org/Point-Of-Departure/Point-Of-Departure-entry.htm

http://point-of-departure.org/Point-Of-Departure/ClarificationsArchive/ClarificationsArchive.htm

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

An

I have posted all

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

An

I have also posted this

A detailed narration of this

http://feddialectics-miguel.blogspot.com/2014/05/dialectically-reconstructing-5.html

-- and via --

http://capitalismsfundamentalflaw-wayforward.blogspot.com/2014/05/dialectically-reconstructing-5.html

-- which have also been updated to include the image posted herein, below.

Enjoy!

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

An

I have also posted this

A detailed, multi-step narration of this

http://feddialectics-miguel.blogspot.com/2014/05/dialectically-reconstructing-5.html

-- which has also been updated to include the image posted herein, below.

Enjoy!

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

An

I have also posted this

A detailed presentation of this

http://feddialectics-miguel.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-dialectic-of-human-sexual.html

-- which has also been updated to include the image posted herein, below.

Enjoy the daring scientific forthrightness -- the

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

An

I have also posted this

Enjoy!

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

An

I have also posted this

Enjoy!

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

FYI: A revised, expanded edition of Karl Seldon's

To access this new edition, look for

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

An

I have also posted this

Enjoy!

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

I have also reproduced this

This example, of

A detailed presentation of this

http://feddialectics-miguel.blogspot.com/2013/08/part-iii-interlude-dialectic-of-tv.html

-- which I also updated to include the image posted herein, below,

http://www.dialectics.org/dialectics/Vignettes.html

http://www.dialectics.org/dialectics/Vignettes_files/Miguel_Detonacciones,v.2.0,F.E.D._Vignette_15,The_Dialectic_of_TV_Series,Ultra-Simple_Example,28AUG2013.pdf

Regards,

Miguel

Dear Readers,

I have excerpted, below, for your enlightenment, a passage from a recent "lecture to the troops" by Karl Seldon, which addresses the significance of the Seldonian

I have also appended, to the excerpt below, the simple proof of that

Enjoy!

Regards,

Miguel

-- is deductively
implied by the axioms that we have presented, as per the proof also presented
-- all seemingly so simple -- provides nothing less than a rectification of the
chief defect of Ancient Mediterranean *‘***Arithmism**’ and *‘***Monadism**’, i.e., of the principle that
animated Ancient Mediterranean philosophy and science from the Pythagoreans,
circa **360**
B.C.E., through Plato and beyond, all the way forward at least to Diophantus’s
‘proto-ideographical’ algebra, *circa* **250** C.E.

That chief defect
was the *radical dualism*
of «*arithmos*»
*vis-a-vis* «*monad*»,
i.e., of *‘‘‘***assemblages of units**’’’ versus *‘‘‘***individual units**’’’, viz.:
**“ **EUCLID defines in the *Elements*,
VII, 2, a number as “the *multitude*
[K.S.: «*arithmos*»] made up
of *units* [K.S.: «*monad*»]” having
previously (*Elements*, VII, 1) said that a *unit* is “that by virtue of which each of
existing things is called *one*.” As *a unit is not composed of units* [K.S.: but, on the contrary, a *unit* is, typically,
“made up of” __sub__*-***units**,
e.g., a *‘*__meta__-«*monad*»*’* is “made up of” «*monads*», as we have seen], neither
EUCLID nor ARISTOTLE regard a *unit*
as a *number*,
but rather as “the *basis*
[K.S.: «*archÃ©*»] of
counting, or as the *origin*
[K.S.: «*archÃ©*»] of *number*.” **”**

[H.-D. Ebbinghaus,*et al*., __Numbers__, Springer Verlag [NY: **1991**], p. **12**,
**bold**/*italic*/*color* *emphases added*].

[H.-D. Ebbinghaus,

Under the spell of that radical diremption [‘

True, an element
of [“purely”-__quant__itative] dynamism could
enter this world picture as *“***genealogy**”
-- as the begetting of new «*monads*»
by old[er] «*monads*»
of the «*arithmoi aisthetoi*», the
sensuously-empirical *“***units**”
-- but all and __only__
within a given kind, i.e., within a single, “eternal”, “eternally fixed” «*genos*»*-*«*arithmos*», or «*species*»*-*«*arithmos*»: never as *‘*__meta__-**genealogy**’.

That is, no «*genos*»*-*«*arithmos*» -- not even any «*species*»*-*«*arithmos*» -- could cross
its boundaries of kind, its ontological boundaries, to give birth to «*monads*» of even a
different, but *already existing*
__other__ «*genos*»*-*«*arithmos*», or «*species*»*-*«*arithmos*», *LET ALONE* give birth to a previously __un__precedented, brand new «*genos*»*-*«*arithmos*», or «*species*»*-*«*arithmos*». That is, *“***genealogy**”, but *no* *‘*__meta__-**genealogy**’,
was admissible for such a world picture.

Thus, no *cosmological* *‘*__meta__-**dynamical
**__meta__-**evolution**’
was even conceivable for such a drastically ‘«*arithmos*» **<--****|****-->** «*monad*»’ «*mentalitÃ©*».

But the
deductively-derived ‘contra-Boolean’ rule --

-- interpreted in such
a way that __each__ of
the «*monads*» of
the *successor*
«*arithmos*»,
denoted by __Delta__[ __x__ **]**, is constituted
out of a [sub-]«*arithmos*»
of [some of] the [former] «*monads*»
of the *predecessor*
«*arithmos*»,
denoted by __x__,
i.e., such that __each__
[*meta**-*]«*monad*» of the __Delta__[ __x__ **]** [*meta**-*]«*arithmos*» is “made up of”
a heterogeneous multiplicity of the «*monads*» of the __x__ «*arithmos*», each __Delta__[ __x__ **]** *unit* thus a *‘*__meta__-«*monad*» of those __x__-type *units* / «*monads*», tells a dramatically
different story.

This rule can make
possible the compact, ideographical description of __D__omains, of __u__niverse__s__-of-discourse -- including of *the* *universal* [*whole cosmos*] *universe**-*of-discourse, the *universe**-*of-discourse *of the total universe* [*as a whole*], as a *single*, still-further-unfolding
*‘*__meta__-**genealogy**’.

Such a description
thus formulates a *‘*__dialectical__ theory of
everything’.

But even also for
subordinate __D__omains,
this rule makes possible the ultra-condensed, ideographical description of *‘*__sub__-**universes**’,
causally and *‘***meta**-**genetically**’ connecting
predecessor «*arithmoi*»*-*kinds with their ‘‘‘offspring’’’ new-«*arithmoi*»*-*kinds -- their successor kinds -- consisting of
both *meta**-* and *hybrid* «*arithmoi*»*-***of**-«*monads*», to which those
predecessor «*arithmoi*»*-***of**-«*monads*»*-*kinds give birth, describing a
universe-of-discourse-‘universe-al’ *‘*__meta__-**genealogy**’ **of ongoing**, **recurring **__ontological__ __innovations__,
i.e., of* ‘***onto**-**dynamases**’,
expressible / describable by / in / via a single *‘*__dialectical__ meta-**equation**’. **... ** **”**

Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)