Sunday, November 11, 2012

The Inherent, Ineluctable 'Self-Problematicity' of 'Ideo-Formations'

Full Title:  The Inherent, Ineluctable ‘Self-Problematicity’ of ‘Ideo-Formations’ [as of ‘Physio-Formations’].

Dear Readers,

A section from Part I., the Background part, from the latest version of the essay "The Goedelian Dialectic of the Standard Arithmetics" is presented below.

The latest version of the full essay is available via the following URLs --

Part 0.:  Prefatories --,Prefatories,Miguel_Detonacciones,F.E.D._Vignette_4,The_Goedelian_Dialectic_of_the_Standard_Arithmetics,last_updated_22OCT2012_1.pdf

Part I.:  Background --

Part II.:  Core --,Part_II.,Miguel_Detonacciones,F.E.D._Vignette_4,The_Goedelian_Dialectic_of_the_Standard_Arithmetics,last_updated_07NOV2012.pdf

"The Inherent, Ineluctable Self-Problematicity of Ideo-Formations’ [as of Physio-Formations’].

We assume herein, throughout, that, as with the ‘physio-formations’ of extra-human/pre-human Nature, so with the ‘ideo-formations’ of human[oid] Nature:  they all inescapably carry inside themselves the seeds of their own ‘self-«aufheben»’ self-supersession.

We assume further that the primary impetus for their [[self-]be]coming [as] self-supersession arises in response to conditions that are inescapably present -- if each such formation is to manifestly be what it is -- “inside” them; conditions that they ‘essence-ially’ and necessarily “contain”.

These conditions induce or constitute a process of progress, of ‘perfect-tion’ within them, which can never eventuate in any final state of “perfection”, but which does eventuate, beyond a critical threshold in this ‘‘‘self-development’’’ process, in taking them definitively, ontologically outside of and beyond themselves.

We assume that such ‘ideo-systems’ are, in particular, ‘«aporia»-prone’.

They are, in this sense, “unstable” -- surpassable, and, indeed, tend to be, over sufficient time, surpassed in fact, owing to the agency of their own internal causes.

That is, they fail, in the course of their development, even internally, by their own native criteria, based upon their own [“internally self-ravaged”] ground, as a result of their own "inside agitators", and hence, must ‘ideo-ontologically’ ‘‘‘extend’’’ that ground in order to overcome their own, immanent, or self-failing(s).

But that very ‘extent-tion’, as redress of self-failing(s), in turn engenders a new, unprecedented kind of internal inadequacy, or of self-failing, requiring a further, new kind of self-extent-tion’ of ground for its rectification.

And so on.

Human-phenomic ideo-systems are inherently self-problematical’.

This fact expresses the very essence of their 'dialecticality'.

The Gödel incompleteness theorems represent a formal and predictable way in which formal-logical systems encompassing at least ‘“Natural Numbers”’ arithmetic will be ‘self-problematic’, and demanding of immanent critique, i.e., of self-critique, in the sense of being ‘‘‘formal-logically, immanently incomplete’’’ [or, far worse, in the sense of being formal-logically "self-inconsistent"!].

But there are other ways as well in which the self-problematicity of human ‘ideo-formations’, as components of the Terran ‘Human Phenome’, will manifest.

Our assumption and principle of the dialectical self-problematicity of human ‘ideo-formations’ is applied by us -- most decidedly and without the slightest exception or hesitation -- to all [psycho]historical human[oid]-phenomic ideo-formations’, including to those ‘ideo-formations’ developed by we of F.E.D. ourselves.

Every “intension” harbors in-tension’ -- internal tension -- intra-duality’; ineluctable self-duality’."



No comments:

Post a Comment