Friday, January 27, 2017

F.E.D. Publishes Enhanced Version of ‘Hegel’s ‘‘‘Algorithm’’’ for Dialectic’, Methodological Essay by Hermes de Nemores.





F.E.D. Publishes Enhanced Version of Hegels ‘‘‘Algorithm’’’ for Dialectic, Methodological Essay by Hermes de Nemores.






Dear Readers,


Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectic [F.E.D.] has just published an enhanced version of the new dialectical-methodological essay by F.E.D. Secretary-General Hermes de Nemores, Chief Administrative Officer of the Foundation, via the www.dialectics.org web site.

This essay is entitled Hegels ‘‘‘Algorithm’’’ for Dialectic.


Happy reading!


Regards,

Miguel











Sunday, January 22, 2017

F.E.D. Publishes Part 2 of ‘Hegel’s ‘‘‘Algorithm’’’ for Dialectic’, Methodological Essay by Hermes de Nemores.





F.E.D. Publishes Part 2 of Hegels ‘‘‘Algorithm’’’ for Dialectic, Methodological Essay by Hermes de Nemores.






Dear Readers,


Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectic [F.E.D.] has just published Part 2. of the new dialectical-methodological essay by F.E.D. Secretary-General Hermes de Nemores, Chief Administrative Officer of the Foundation, via the www.dialectics.org web site.

This essay is entitled Hegels ‘‘‘Algorithm’’’ for Dialectic.


Happy reading!


Regards,

Miguel



















Saturday, January 14, 2017

Participation in a Web Dialogue on “Dialectical Materialism”.










Dear Readers,


I have pasted-in, below, an opening exchange within a new web-dialogue in which I am participating, at --

It involves, from me, a somewhat succinct definition of ‘‘‘dialectic’’’.

Enjoy!


Regards,

Miguel







Q:  [Define] “Dialectical Materialism”.


R:  First of all, to understand what “dialectical materialism” means, one needs to understand what “dialectical” means, and, thus, what “dialectic” is. 

A dialectic is a categorial progression in which a simple[r] starting category breaks out into an opposition between itself and its more complex, supplementary first ‘contra-category’, born from within that starting category.  Then a third category, a ‘first uni-category’, emerges from the “hybridization” of the first two categories.  And so on. 

Such a categorial progression can describe a present scale of existences, such as Marx’s ‘Commodities + Monies + Monies-Mediated-CIRCULATIONs-of-Commodities’... in Capital, or an historical progression of existences such as, in the ‘‘‘Dialectic of Nature’’’, ‘ “non-composite” “quanta” [e.g., quarks] + “composite” “quanta” [e.g., protons] + atoms [hybrids of protons, neutrons, and electrons] ... ’ . 

For more regarding Marxian dialectics, see www.dialectics.org






Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Seldon’s Opus: Key Excerpts. Excerpt No. 6 -- ‘An «Aufheben» ‘Qualo-Fractal Tower’ is NOT a “Hierarchy”.’


 

 

 

 

Seldons Opus:  Key Excerpts.  Excerpt No. 6 --


An «Aufheben» Qualo-Fractal Tower is NOT a Hierarchy.’








Dear Readers,

It is my pleasure, and my honor, as an Officer of the Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.] Office of Public Liaison, to share with you, from time to time, as they are approved for public release by the F.E.D. General Council, key excerpts from the internal writings of our co-founder, Karl Seldon.
The sixth such release in this new series is pasted in below.  [Some E.D. standard edits have been applied to the direct transcript of our co-founder’s discourse].

Regards,
Miguel







a dialecticalaufheben»], finitary ‘qualo-fractal tower’ -- e.g., like that of our «kosmos» as a whole, consisting of an «arché-monads» scale/level, that of pre-/sub-nuclear particles [non-composite bosons and fermions], ‘‘‘topped’’’ by a scale/level of composite boson and fermion «monads»[mesons, protons, neutrons, hyperons, etc.], ‘‘‘topped’’’, ‘‘‘in turn’’’, by a scale/level of atomic nuclei/atom «monads», ‘‘‘topped’’’ by a scale/level of molecular «monads», ‘‘‘topped’’’ by a scale/level of prokaryotic, or, better, of pre-eukaryotic, living cell «monads», and so on -- is NOT a hierarchy, as the ruling class, and their “scientific” servants, would have it.”

“This is because, in terms of ‘interactivity’, and ‘interactability’, all ontological categories, or all of the «monads» that those ontological categories represent, exist in the same space, on the same “plane”, in terms of their access to one another.” 

“Each fundamental ‘«monad»-ic’ kind is accessible to interaction with all of the others.”

“Dark Energy”, and “Dark Matter”, as presently unknown to us as the nature of their «monads» may be, can -- and do -- impact human society, and also all of the other scales of ontology that are earlier in their cosmological ‘extantcy’ than is human society.”

“At their most basic, ‘«arché »-ic root, our bodies are made of quarks and gluons.  Our bodies “still” contain these , and quarks and gluons can, in principle, and do, shape our bodies, and all of the post-prenuclear scales of ‘cosmo-ontology’ between us and those quarks and gluons, including the tiny portions of that total 'cosmo-ontology' that are also contained in our bodies.”

“Likewise, the electrons within the atoms that also compose our bodies, e.g., if impacted by incident electromagnetic radiation -- by its photonic «monads» -- will affect the rest of the scales of «monads» that also compose our bodies.”

“Likewise the protons and neutrons that also compose those atoms.”

“Likewise the molecules that those atoms also compose.”

“Likewise the organelles, e.g., the mitochondria, of our bodies eukaryotic livings cells -- those organelles that are the ‘‘‘living fossils’’’ of ancient prokaryotic living cells that once merged to compose the forerunners of those eukaryotic living cells out of which our bodies are [also] made.”

“Some attenuations there may be, in the accessibility of the units/«monads» of the higher, and of the presently highest, ‘qualo-fractal scales’, to the action upon them of the units of the lower, and of the lowest, ‘qualo-fractal scales’, and in the accessibility of the lower, and of the lowest, ‘qualo-fractal scales’ to the action upon them of the units of the higher, and of the presently highest, ‘qualo-fractal scales’.”

“But there is nothing of the kind of absolute barriers between the units of different ‘qualo-fractal scales’ that would justify applying, to such ‘qualo-fractal towers’ -- to such ‘qualo-fractal scaled-similarity regresses’ -- the ruling-class-promoted term hierarchy."


 











Sunday, January 08, 2017

Seldon’s Opus: Key Excerpts. Excerpt No. 5 -- 'Phenomic Awareness'.

 

 

 

 

Seldons Opus:  Key Excerpts.  Excerpt No. 5 -- 'Phenomic Awareness'.







Dear Readers,

It is my pleasure, and my honor, as an Officer of the Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.] Office of Public Liaison, to share with you, from time to time, as they are approved for public release by the F.E.D. General Council, key excerpts from the internal writings of our co-founder, Karl Seldon.

The fifth such release in this new series is pasted in below.  [Some E.D. standard edits have been applied].

Regards,

Miguel







"We like to increase 'phenomic awareness', by means of "phonemic awareness", as well as by means of 'morphemic awareness'.






Wednesday, January 04, 2017

Excerpt from Another Recent Web Dialogue on 'Psychohistorical Dialectics'.





Excerpt from Another Recent Web Dialogue on 'Psychohistorical Dialectics'.







Dear Readers,


Appended below, FYI, is an excerpt from a different web dialogue on 'Psychohistorical Dialectics'.

Enjoy!


Regards,

Miguel







Blog Entry:  See -- https://skullsinthestars.com/2016/12/26/isaac-asimovs-foundation-trilogy/#comment-92358



My Response:  There is an ancient name for the pattern that constitutes the trilogy within Asimov’s eventual ‘heptalogy’, and that you note as follows — “To summarize the Foundation series in another manner: each sequel challenges the premise of the previous book, forcing the reader to challenge the assumptions that he or she has developed.”

Going back at least to Socrates and Plato, and, perhaps, to Zeno, that name is “dialectic”.

The ‘self-reflexivity’ essence of dialectic also applies to the nested nature of Asimov’s relationship to — and USE of — “psychohistory”, that you also note, as follows: “In Asimov’s work, psychohistory provides the ability to predict the behaviors of large groups of people as a whole and even manipulate those behaviors. I swear that Asimov applies this idea to his own readers in Foundation and Empire!”.
 
A group calling itself ‘Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica’ has endeavored to bring Asimov’s insights, expressed via his fictional Foundation history, into actuality.

They have developed a new mathematics — whose core is a CONTRA-Boolean Arithmetic and Algebra — and applied it to model the history of humanity on Earth, via seven ‘psychohistorical-dialectical meta-equations’, including separate ‘meta-models’ describing (1) the [psycho]history of the progression of the dominance of the forms of human ideology\knowledge, from Mythopoeia, then to Religion, and then to Philosophy, then on to Science, and on to Psychohistory itself, (2) the [psycho]history of human social formation(s), (3) the [psycho]history of human social RELATIONS of human-societal self-reproduction, and (4) the [psycho]history of human social FORCES of human-societal self-reproduction.

Using this new mathematics of ‘psychohistorical dialectics’, they have ‘pre-constructed’, symbolically, the institutional and functional structure of a successor social system to that of the present, including deriving draft constitutional amendment and statutory undergirding for that successor system, plus a plan to foreshorten the ‘New Dark Age’ that that present system impends, versus the ‘Global Renaissance’ that it also potentiates.


For more about this developing story, see:  http://www.dialectics.org.







Monday, January 02, 2017

Excerpt from Web Dialogue on Psychohistory.





Excerpt from Web Dialogue on 'Psychohistorical Dialectic'.







Dear Readers,


I have excerpted, below, my response to a recent blog-entry, by another blogger, regarding Asimovian Psychohistory.

Enjoy!


Regards,

Miguel







Blog-Entry:  See -- https://skullsinthestars.com/2016/12/26/isaac-asimovs-foundation-trilogy/#comment-92358


My Response:  There is an ancient name for the pattern that constitutes the trilogy within Asimov’s eventual ‘heptalogy’, and that you note as follows — “To summarize the Foundation series in another manner: each sequel challenges the premise of the previous book, forcing the reader to challenge the assumptions that he or she has developed.”

Going back at least to Socrates and Plato, and, perhaps, to Zeno, that name is “dialectic”.

The ‘self-reflexivity’ essence of dialectic also applies to the nested nature of Asimov’s relationship to — and USE of — “psychohistory”, that you also note, as follows: “In Asimov’s work, psychohistory provides the ability to predict the behaviors of large groups of people as a whole and even manipulate those behaviors. I swear that Asimov applies this idea to his own readers in Foundation and Empire!”.

A group calling itself ‘Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica’ has endeavored to bring Asimov’s insights, expressed via his fictional Foundation history, into actuality.

They have developed a new mathematics — whose core is a CONTRA-Boolean Arithmetic and Algebra — and applied it to model the history of humanity on Earth, via seven ‘psychohistorical-dialectical meta-equations’, including separate ‘meta-models’ describing (1) the [psycho]history of the progression of the dominance of the forms of human ideology\knowledge, from Mythopoeia, then to Religion, and then to Philosophy, then on to Science, and on to Psychohistory itself, (2) the [psycho]history of human social formation(s), (3) the [psycho]history of human social RELATIONS of human-societal self-reproduction, and (4) the [psycho]history of human social FORCES of human-societal self-reproduction.

Using this new mathematics of ‘psychohistorical dialectics’, they have ‘pre-constructed’, symbolically, the institutional and functional structure of a successor social system to that of the present, including deriving draft constitutional amendment and statutory undergirding for that successor system, plus a plan to foreshorten the ‘New Dark Age’ that that present system impends, versus the ‘Global Renaissance’ that it also potentiates.

For more about this developing story, see http://www.dialectics.org.






Sunday, January 01, 2017

Excerpt from Web Dialogue on "Marx's" "Dialectic Materialism".








Dear Readers,

The following is an excerpt from my recent web dialogue regarding the definition of -- "Marx's" -- "Dialectic Materialism".

Enjoy, and HAPPY NEW YEAR!


Regards,

Miguel







Q[ https://www.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/5k34j8/eli5_of_marxs_dialectic_materialism/?utm_content=title&utm_medium=front&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=Socialism_101 ]:  

"... of Marx's Dialectic Materialism?"


R“Dialectic Materialism” is not a term that Marx ever used, and, hence, is not really “Marx’s”.

Marx did clearly hold that dialectic -- the irruption of an “other”, by “aufheben” processes of self-negation, form out of a prior class or category, and, later, the re-combination of those prior two in a way that resolves their initial opposition -- characterizes the totality of physical Nature, including pre-human Nature, and contemporary exo-human Nature, as well as human Nature. 

See, for example Marx, Capital., Volume I, Part I, Commodities and Money, Chapter III., Money, or the Circulation of Commodities, Section 2., The Medium of Circulation, [sub-section] a., The Metamorphosis of Commodities, 1st paragraph.

Regarding “Materialism”, Marx was openly critical of both French “Mechanical Materialism”, and other forms of abstract “Matter”-ism, as well as of Hegelian and other abstract “Idealisms”. 

Marx’s world view was a kind of dialectical synthesis, negating the fetishisms, mystifications, and subject/object inversions of BOTH preceding “Matter-isms” and preceding “Idea-isms”.


Marx’s dialectical synthesis might best be termed ‘psychohistorical materialism’.

That is because Marx’s writings evince a keen awareness, and focus, on the historically causative role of the human, intersubjective, collective-psychological, including ideological forces involved in humans making history together.

For example, Marx’s critical concept of [capital-]VALUE is not a PHYSICAL substance, but a SOCIAL substance, grounded in the collective human view holding objects of value, the physical objects onto which humans collectively project and enforce VALUE.

For more about this view of Marx’s theory, see www.dialectics.org.