Karl Seldon’s Sagacious Sayings Series -- #12. ‘The Boolean «Mentalité»’ & ‘Categorial Self-Hybridization’.

[My] Full Title:  Karl Seldon’s Sagacious Sayings Series, #12 --


'The Boolean <<Mentalite'>>' 


&
   
'Categorial [Class] Self-Hybridization'.

Dear Reader,

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, edited 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 Foundation’s General Council.


I have pasted-in, below, an excerpt of Karl Seldon's remarks from the edited transcript of a recent such ‘‘‘multilogue’’’. 

 

 Regards,

 

Miguel 

[Karl Seldon] --

 

“For what we term ‘The Boolean «Mentalité»’* -- otherwise known as ‘The Modern «Mentalité»’, and, indeed, as ‘The Modern Ideology’ -- for which ‘x “of” x’ always yields only x itself all over again:  x(x) = x; x² = x¹; for which any category/class/«arithmos»/population of individuals,  x, operating ‘xly’ upon itself, yields ever only x itself again, unchanged:  only “simple reproduction”, only linear equilibrium “dynamics”, only “fixed point” behavior -- for that «mentalité», the very concept of categorial [or “class”] ‘self-hybridization’, of a kind of ‘self-[inter]action’, or of ‘‘‘self-activity’’’, that yields ‘‘‘self-change’’’ in a qualitative, ontological sense; that yields singularity as ontological revolution -- as qualitative, ontological change/newness/innovation -- must remain an impossibility, or a paradox.  It must remain so, because it requires an admission of the actuality of non-linear, non-equilibrium processes of qualitatively, ontologically self-expanding self-reproduction.”

“But for the minds that have discovered dialectics-in-«gene»-ral, the recognition of such processes has become ‘‘‘second Nature’’’.”
 

“They can ‘‘‘see’’’ the core processes of our «kosmos», in both ‘‘‘human Nature’’’, and in the rest of Nature.”

“They can ‘‘‘see’’’ the processes whereby ‘x “of” x’ yields, yes, still x itself again, as an external-conservation, ‘‘‘evolute’’’ aspect [‘‘‘moment’’’] of the «aufheben» or dialectical process, but in which:  x(x) ≠ x; x² ≠ x¹; in which non-linearity [quadratic, degree 2, or otherwise] does not reduce, immediately, to linearity [i.e., to degree 1]; in which the typical ontological category/class/«arithmos»/population of individuals,  x, operating ‘xly’ upon itself, yields, yes, x itself, but together [‘+’] with something new, by means of an internal[ized] «aufheben»-conservation, «aufheben»-negation, and «aufheben»-elevation aspect of the dialectical process, of, typically, ‘[self-]meta-«monad»-ization’, ‘[self-]meta-unit-ization’, or ‘[self-]meta-holon-ization’  --  x² = x¹ + Dx¹ -- wherein ‘Dx¹’ represents the incremental new ontological category/class/«arithmos»/population of individuals, each individual of which is a ‘meta-individual’ of the individuals of the x¹ ontological category/class/«arithmos»/population of individuals, in that each is made up out of a heterogeneous multiplicity of the individuals that made up x¹ = x, e.g., as any typical word unit is made up out of a heterogeneous multiplicity of letter units.”

“Such [‘double-conservation’] self-«aufheben» processes, e.g., of ‘[self-]meta-«monad»-ization’, can be ‘‘‘seen’’’, by the ‘dialectical eye’, to constitute the ‘self-hybrid’, ‘auto-hybrid’ units, which form the very source of the very possibility of the conventionally “hybrid”, ‘merely hybrid’, ‘allo-hybrid’ units and of their ontological categories.”

“‘Categorial auto-hybridization’ is, in fact, the foundation, the pre-requisite, and the source of ‘categorial ‘allo-hybridization’.”

“‘Self-hybridization’, of the extant, forms the other which, by its [inter]action [with] [upon], and by its resulting combination with, that earlier extant, forms the ‘mere hybrid’, the ‘allo-hybrid’, uniting the earlier extant and its other.”

“‘Self-hybridization’ [formation of, e.g., q_VV = q_X, and q_YY = q_Z] must occur before ‘Mere hybridization’ [q_ZX] can occur.”

“‘Self-hybridization’ provides the wherewithal for ‘Mere hybridization’.”

“Before ‘Mere hybridization’ [q_ZX] can even become a potential, a possibility, ‘Self-hybridization’ must have already produced the ontological raw materials that ‘Mere hybridization’ requires [q_YY = q_Z, & q_VV = q_X].”

“Monies, as a ‘self-hybridization’ of the ‘barter-«praxis»’; of barterable Commodities [q_CC = q_M], & «Kapitals», as a ‘self-hybridization’ of the Monies-mediated-Circulations-of-Commodities-«praxis»; of Monies [q_MM = q_K], must have both come into sustained existence before ‘‘‘Money-«Kapitals»’’’ [q_KM] can come into existence as a recurring “moment” in the “spiral” of the expanded reproduction/accumulation of «Kapitals» -- of [Marx/Engels:] “The Reproduction and Circulation of the Aggregate Social Capital” [q_KMC].”

“‘Self-hybridization’ is no IMpossibility, no paradox, and no illusion.”

“‘Self-hybridization’ is the very wellspring of ontological advance, of the ontological progress of our «kosmos».”

“*[Here, it must be noted that the Modern Boolean, binary, dualistic, so-called “digital” «mentalité» does not encompass even the full scope of Boole’s original, formal “algebra of mental operations”, let alone of the mind of George Boole, of the man himself, a man who manifested moments of emergent transcendence of those limits, at a time, and under psychohistorical conditions, which might lead many to classify those presciences as “premature”].”