Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Karl Seldon’s Sagacious Sayings Series -- #7. Mechanisms of ‘[Self-]Meta-«Monad»-ization’: Generic versus Specific.










[My] Full TitleKarl Seldons Sagacious Sayings Series, #7 --

Mechanisms of ‘[Self-]Meta-«Monad»-ization:   Generic versus Specific.







Dear Readers,



From time to time, I like to share with you some of the gems of insight that leap from out of the ‘‘‘multilogues’’’, among Karl Seldon and other members of the Foundation, and from the transcribed versions, published internally, including of those ‘‘‘multilogues’’’ in which I did not happen to participate, when and if those [edited] transcripts are cleared for public sharing by the Foundations General Council.


Below is an excerpt of Karl Seldon's remarks from the edited transcript of a recent such ‘‘‘multilogue’’’. 

 

 

Regards,

 

Miguel



 

 

 


[Karl Seldon]:

 




For a «Genos», like that of dialectics, which is universal in its scope, and in its span, the diversity implicit within it, the vastness of the «differentia specifica», that separate, and that distinguish, its «species», and all of the individual differences of their specimens/instances, or «monads», must be maximal; must be the widest imaginable, or even wide beyond any possible human[oid anticipatory imagination.  Only experience and exploration, only “induction”, can, at length, ever hope to encompass such an expanse.”

“Similarly:  Given the universality of the dialectical, «aufheben» processes that we have named meta-«monad»-ization’, and meta-unit-ization’, in the formation of new kinds of units, or of «monads», and, thus, in the formation of new «arithmoi», of new ‘‘‘numbers’’’ of these new kinds of units, and, thus, in the formation of new ontology, of new [ontological] categories, for human[oid] minds, in our cosmos, it is to be expected, upon generic dialectical grounds, that the specific mechanisms of this general «aufheben» process will exhibit enormous variation in detail, from each predecessor taxonomy level one self-hybrid «monads»-formation, to its successor self-hybrid «monads»-formation, across the entire expanse of the meta-genealogy of our cosmos, such as has been actualized in cosmological history to-date.”

“From the protons and neutrons as nuclear sub-atomic «monads», as meta-«monads»’ of their quark and gluon sub-«monads»’, each held together, internally, by gluonic color forces, to the electrically neutral atom «monads», as meta-«monads»’ of their sub-«monads»’ -- electron and proton/neutron nuclei -- bound together by electrodynamic forces, to the molecule «monads», as the more massive meta-«monads»’ of their sub-«monads»’ -- atom «monads» -- also bound together by electrodynamic forces, to the pre-eukaryotic living cells, as still more massive meta-«monads»’ of their sub-«monads»’ -- molecule  «monads» -- bound together by mechanical forces, and beyond, the mechanisms that generate, and that sustain, all of this neo-monado-genesis, exhibit a vast ‘[natural-]historically specific diversity, one of diverse mechanisms that all generate, from a ‘[natural-]historically generic point-of-view, the same, unified generic outcome:  the outcome that we call  dialectical, ‘[self-aufheben»’, ‘[self-]meta-«monad»-ization’, forming the metafinite qualo-fractal -- qualo-fractalboth synchronically and diachronically, both presently-spatially and historically-temporally -- process and product of the self-construction of our cosmos.”

“What would be momentous would be to be able to model a meta-genealogical meta-evolution of this progression of specific mechanisms/forces of monadic composition as a meta-monadic dialectic in its own right.











No comments:

Post a Comment