Sunday, September 29, 2019

Alienation & the Profit-Fall. A Rare Glimpse into Seldon’s «Juvenilia».




Social Self-Alienation and the Profit-Rates Fall -- 

A [Rare] Glimpse of Seldon’s pre-F.E.D. Work.







Dear Readers,



The F.E.D. General Council has just approved, for public presentation and review by the Office of Public Liaison, some components of Karl Seldon’s pre-F.E.D. body of work.

I am happy to be able to share with you the following excerpt from that body of work.



For more information regarding these Seldonian and Marxian insights, please see --

and

For ‘poster-ized’ visualizations of many of these Seldonian insights -- specimens of dialectical art -- see:




¡ENJOY!



Regards,


Miguel Detonacciones,

Member, Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.],
Participant, F.E.D. Special Council for Public Liaison,
Officer, F.E.D. Office of Public Liaison.


Seldon --

The Cause Of The Fall of Capital Analyzed From The Point Of View Of The Developing Historical Subject/Human-Social Individual.

The real and most radical root of “fictitious capital” is the fiction that capital itself is.”

“That root is both the false consciousness about wealth of capitalist social individuals, and the social practices of capitalist society, which mutually [re-]produce one another.”

“The central ideology of capitalism is that capital in itself and by itself is profitable, is productive, is self-expanding.”

“Capitalist practice is first and foremost behavior as if this were so.”

“This attitude, inherent in capitalist practice, whether fully conscious or not, is most nakedly manifest in capital’s interest bearing form, M--M’ in Marx’s notation -- which Marx rightly calls the most fetishistic, most insane capital value-form, wherein capital is presented as if it compounds [its] value by time alone.”

“Interest-bearing capital or debt-capital, as bank capital and state finance capital, is, as we have seen (and are seeing), the finally dominant form of capital (in the form of usurers’ capital, interest-bearing capital was also prominent in the “antediluvian” prelude to capitalism proper -- to industrial capitalism).”

“Capitalist consciousness involves a totemization or fictitious, fetishistic valuation of only the objectified forms of human ‘subject-ivity’* (means of production, weapons, accumulated monetary wealth and hoards, goods in general), together with a denigration of human ‘subject-ivity’ in its direct form; a fetishization and over-valuation of external wealth over against that wealth’s actual source in human, ‘subject-ive’ creativity and human ‘subject-ive’ ‘agent-cy’.”

“Capital is this ‘fictitious’ valuation placed upon the objective result of human laboring activity, of the ‘subject-ive’, productive, creative process, enforced as both a social law and a social consensus.”

“Capitalist society measures profit as return on fixed capital (“investment”), not as return on labor-power.”

“Capitalist society neglects and even cannibalizes its true resource:  self-expanding labor-power; self-expanding productive, creative force.”

“This is the root cause of “fictitious capital” (which is thus doubly fictitious).”

“This is the ultimate cause of capitalism’s demise.”

“The continual and final devaluation of accumulated (fixed) capital has this fundamental self-devaluation of humanity -- prevalent ever since capitalism’s inception -- to avenge.”

Capital (capitalist ideology; capitalist praxis) locates wealth in an illusory manner.  Hence capitalism falls when its real wealth outgrows any possibility of maintaining both this wealth and this illusion.”

“Real wealth is self-expanding use-value.  Capital takes into its accounts only self-expanding exchange-value.  Hence its economy can work only so long as self-expanding exchange-value -- self-expanding, accumulating capital-value -- is able to serve as an adequate proxy for and mirror of self-expanding use-value -- i.e., for the ‘self-expansion’ of labor-power, the ‘self-expansion’ of the subject, of human-social subjectivity in nature.”

“Fictitious value is merely the symptom and outcome of this essential fiction, the radical mis-location of value --

·         the undervaluation of humanity by itself;

·         the elevation of the object/product of human labor over and above the laboring human subject”

·         self-alienation.”


“Thus self-alienation itself is the essential cause of capital’s downfall.”

“The wage-relationship itself; the alienation and exile of labor-power (labor-power being the actual basis of productive force or productivity), combined with the husbanding and hoarding of its accumulated result, fixed capital, is already the seed of this fall, a seed which must germinate in the proportion that capitalism itself self-unfolds.”

Allegorically:  at night, after the shift is up, labor is turned out into the cold, to fend for itself in the street.  And that labor is “laid-off” when the hard times come, to waste away.  But the machinery is locked tight away, kept high and dry, out of the cold and rain, and secured behind the heavy factory doors.”

“The essential wealth of humanity, as such, is itself as the subject within nature; is its own combined (or inter-)subjectivity.”

“This truth had to be ‘real-ized’, that is, made material, objectified -- brought into empirical manifestation -- historically, through the vast human labor of human history.”

“Humanity had to come to discover itself, as it were hidden, among the vast cluttered terrain of objective value, as itself at the very center of all value.”

“The cheapening of the elements of constant capital, that is, the growth of the productive force, is the immanent cause of capital’s crisis.”

“But the productive force is a measure of subjectivity.”

“It is the development of the producers, of the working class, of human potency within nature (albeit disguised under a growth of subjection) -- the growth of socialized creativity -- which “growth of the productive forces” connotes, and which becomes the out-growing of the capitalist phase of human growth.”

“In exchange-value terms, this process eventually expresses itself as the self-de-valu-ation of value, as the self-contraction of capital-value; as negative profitability.”

“The development of social subjectivity means that the value of any fixed objectification of humanity drops ceaselessly relative to the burgeoning wealth-creating power of the living movement of human-social energy; the objectifying fecundity of human-social praxis.”

“This cornucopia of human sensuous-cognitive activity can fix itself momentarily in, and throw off from itself, an indefinite series of transitory self-objectifications, without ever becoming eternally identified with and limited to any one of these ‘supersede-able’ self-objectifications.”

“All human-social self-objectification, all objective wealth, is devalued continually in the face of the potentially unlimited and self-evolving creative power of the living fire of human-social energy.”

“Wealth must thus be re-conceptualized as subjective wealth; as the subject itself; as ‘subject-ivity’ itself.




*[by ‘‘‘subjectivity’’’, we mean ‘subject-hood’; ‘subject-ness’; the ‘subject-quality’ of humanity within nature.]







Saturday, September 28, 2019

'The Dialectic of Music-in-General'


















'The Dialectic of Music-in-General' --

Our Constitution of our «Arche»-Category for our Systematic-Dialectical Presentation of a taxonomic inventory of 512 Categories of Musical Elements Available for the Composition of Modern ‘‘‘musics of symphonic form’’’.







Dear Readers,



The Seldonian dialectogram pasted-in below, with Commentary, illustrates our constitution of an «arche»-category for a systematically ordered dialectical method of presentation of a taxonomic, combinatoric inventory of 512 categories of musical units available for the composition of modern ‘‘‘musics of symphonic form’’’.


For more information regarding these Seldonian insights, please see --

and

For partially pictographical, ‘poster-ized’ visualizations of many of these Seldonian insights -- specimens of dialectical art -- see:




¡ENJOY!



Regards,


Miguel Detonacciones,

Member, Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.],
Participant, F.E.D. Special Council for Public Liaison,
Officer, F.E.D. Office of Public Liaison.























Friday, September 27, 2019

‘The Dialectic of Symphonic Music’.

















The Dialectic of Symphonic Music -- A Systematic-Dialectical Presentation of a taxonomic catalogue of 512 Categories of Musical Elements Available for the Composition of Modern ‘‘‘musics of symphonic form’’’.







Dear Readers,



The Seldonian dialectograms series pasted-in below illustrates The Systematic Dialectic of Symphonic Music -- the presentation-method dialectic of the indefinite  numbersarithmoi»] of modern musical unitsmonads»] represented by the ideo-physio-ontological categories which are about -- which areunit-ed by -- the musical units known today as musical notes, chords, cells, figures or motifs, phrases, periods, melodies, sections, and movements, and that can be combined in myriad ways to compose ‘‘‘musics of symphonic form’’’.

For more information regarding these Seldonian insights, please see --

and

For partially pictographical, ‘poster-ized’ visualizations of many of these Seldonian insights -- specimens of dialectical art -- see:




¡ENJOY!



Regards,


Miguel Detonacciones,

Member, Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.],
Participant, F.E.D. Special Council for Public Liaison,
Officer, F.E.D. Office of Public Liaison.































Friday, September 20, 2019

The Dialectic of the 3 «Species» of Opposition.








The Systematic Dialectic of the Three «Species» of Oppositions.







Dear Readers,




The late Dr. Charles Muses was one of Karl Seldon’s early mentors.

In Muses’ 1985 book, Chronotopology, Muses distinguishes two species categories under the general single category of opposition -- the species category that we have come to call that of ‘annihilatory oppositions’, as radically opposed, per Muses, to the species category that we have come to call that of  ‘‘‘complementary oppositions’’’.

Muses posed these two categories, to Seldon, as forming, in essence, a ‘‘‘radical dualism’’’. 

Seldon disagreed, seeing the two ‘ideo-species’ categories as constituting a dialectical opposition, or categorial ‘“antithesis”’,  of an «arché» category vis-a-vis its ‘first contra-category’, and recognized a third category, a ‘first uni-category’, or ‘dialectical synthesis, hybrid category’, as a «tertium quid» ‘ideo-species’ category, that Seldon named ‘supplementary oppositions’.

The partially pictorial ‘dialectogram’ image below, together with its text-image commentary, provide an introduction to the Seldonian concept of ‘supplementary oppositions’.







For more information regarding these Seldonian insights, please see --

and

For partially pictographical, ‘poster-ized’ visualizations of many of these Seldonian insights -- specimens of dialectical art -- see:




¡ENJOY!



Regards,


Miguel Detonacciones,

Member, Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.],
Participant, F.E.D. Special Council for Public Liaison,
Officer, F.E.D. Office of Public Liaison.























Thursday, September 19, 2019

A 'Supplementary Opposition', NOT a “Radical DUALism”.










A Supplementary Opposition, NOT a Radical Dualism--
The Subordinated Quantitativity of the N_Q_ Purely-Qualitative Seldonian Arithmetic/Algebra for Dialectic.







Dear Readers,




In the Seldonian ‘Dialectical, Immanent Critique of the “First Order”, “Natural Arithmetic System’, notated, in the language of the N_Q_ dialectical arithmetic itself, as --
N_  ---)  N_N_   |-=   N_ ~+~ N_Q_
--  the ‘quantitativity’ of the, “first order”, “Natural Numbers arithmetic system is not “abstractly negated”, and, therefore, is notabsolutely absent” in the purequalitativity’ of the N_Q_ arithmetic axioms-system as positive fruition of that immanent critique.

On the contrary, that ‘quantitativity’ is merely “demoted” [Hegel] -- is ‘subordinated yet still present in’ that N_Q_ successor system of arithmetic; still present in that “purely” qualitative arithmetical fruition, by way of the subscript[ed] ordinal numbers, and even of the subscript[ed] cardinal arithmetic, that goes on in the N_Q_ axioms-system, e.g., per its ‘‘‘multiplication’’’ axiom.

That is, even the subscript-level -- ‘‘‘subordinated’’’ -- ‘quantitativity’ of the N_ ordinal/cardinal numbers, is crucially leveraged, in all variants of the N_Q_ product-rule axiom, so as to incorporate their cardinal aspect, e.g., in the form of subscript[ed] cardinal addition, to regain, to restore, and to maintain, after each N_Q_ ‘‘‘multiplication’’’ operation, the ordinal ‘consecutivity’ of the generic N_Q_ ‘meta-numerals’, in each ‘self-iteration’ of the generic Dyadic and Triadic Seldon Functions.

Therefore. the opposition between N_ and N_Q_ in --
N_2  |-=  N_ ~+~ N_Q_
-- is not a radical dualism, but a dialectical supplementary opposition, with N_Q_ «aufheben»-conserving as well as «aufheben»-elevating and «aufheben»-determinately-negating N_, and thereby ‘‘‘supplementing’’’ N_ so as to overcome an internal deficiency discovered within N_ itself, e.g., by means of the “first order” conjunction of the Goedel Completeness and Incompleteness Theorems, implying the existence of “Non-Standard Models” of the “Natural Numbers if the Standard Model is posited as existing.







For more information regarding these Seldonian insights, please see --

and

For partially pictographical, ‘poster-ized’ visualizations of many of these Seldonian insights -- specimens of dialectical art -- see:




¡ENJOY!



Regards,


Miguel Detonacciones,

Member, Foundation Encyclopedia Dialectica [F.E.D.],
Participant, F.E.D. Special Council for Public Liaison,
Officer, F.E.D. Office of Public Liaison.