‘Dialecticity’ as ‘Karmicity’ Demystified -- Part 06: ‘The Seldon Files’ Series.
Dear Reader,
It
is my pleasure,
and my honor, as an officer of the Foundation Encyclopedia
Dialectica [F.E.D.]
Office of Public Liaison, and
as a voting member of F.E.D.,
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, and from the internal sayings, of our co-founder,
Karl Seldon.
The sixth release in
this new such
series is posted below [Some E.D. standard edits have been applied, in the version presented below, by the editors of
the F.E.D. Special Council for the Encyclopedia, to the
direct transcript of our co-founder’s discourse].
In this 6th installment, Seldon describes that aspect of his theory of dialectic which is a demystification of the ancient religious
dogma of karma, in terms of the ‘dyadic Seldon function’ mathematical model of dialectic.
Seldon --
“Just as Marx’s theory resembles Hegel’s theory, but
minus the mysticism, so F.E.D. theory resembles the ancient religious doctrines of
“the law of karma”, as a “law of [“Spirit-permeated”] Nature, but minus the
mysticism.”
“Thus, for example, per the
‘dyadic dialectic function’ -- the ‘dyadic self-«aufheben» function’ -- if x represents the selected «arché» ontological
‘‘‘eventity’’’ for a given Domain within our cosmos, or for the cosmos
as a whole, or, for either case, even if x represents the qualitative
superposition of a ‘meta-genealogical’ multiplicity of ontological
‘‘‘eventities’’’, the ‘dyadic function’ holds that --
x = x1 ---> x2
-- that is, that, in or as
time, x inexorably goes
to or becomes x “squared”.”
“I.e., the ontological
kind of activity or of action that x represents, becomes, in or as time, the application of that activity
to itself; the self-application of operation x; the self-interaction of action x; the ‘‘‘self-reflexion’’’ of x, x’s bending back upon itself; the ‘self-refluxion’ of x, the flowing back to self of the ontological kind of
activity that x stands for; and
also the ‘self-involution’ of the x ‘‘‘eventity’’’.”
“Mathematically,
algebraically [in accord with the axioms of the NQ
arithmetic that undergirds this algebra], the ‘contra-Boolean’
expression
x = x1 ---> x2
means that linearity goes to nonlinearity, that linear x, or x1, inexorably goes to/becomes ‘quadratically’ nonlinear x, i.e., x2.”
“The “karma”, or ‘karmic
mechanics’ [‘karmic dynamics’] -- in a word, the quality of ‘karmicity’
-- of any such ‘‘‘eventity’’’, x, is that, to exist/enact-itself entails, later, to receive itself
back, to meet itself, to confront itself, to transform itself by its own kind
of action acting upon itself, although the/any mediation of this ‘self-refluxion’
by the non-x is elided in this
‘‘‘karmic’’’ algebra.”
“For x to operate upon the rest of the universe is
also, inescapably, for x to
operate upon the whole universe, itself included, and thus, a
little later, to operate upon itself as well as upon the rest of the
universe.”
“This is not some kind of mystical equilibrium
doctrine of eternal stasis, or of some temporally and temporarily delayed
restoration of immutability. The
activity x2
does not restore the pre-x1 state of the Domain, or of the cosmos as a
whole, as the totality.”
“The ‘karmicity’ of each x1 means that the ontology of the Domain in which
x1
inheres, or of the cosmos as a whole, continually
expands itself, in or as time.”
“That is, x1
---> x2, and --
x2
=
x1 + Delta_x1 |-=
x1
+ y1
-- is such that y1 is not
less than x1,
and y1 is not equal to x1, and y1 is not
greater than x1, i.e., is such that y1 is qualitatively, ontologically unequal to x1.”
“The other key to this theory
is to recognize that
x1
---> x2 is a
self-«aufheben» operation, or self-«aufheben» process -- that is, a dialectical
process -- enacted upon x by x itself; a process of x ‘meta-genealogically’ giving birth to y as x’s ‘supplementary opposite’, or ‘antithesis-eventity’; of the ‘endo-duality’
of x within itself expressing itself,
at length, as the external ‘exo-duality’ of y versus x.”
“That is, the units of the
ontological ‘‘‘eventity’’’/-category/«arithmos» that y represents are ‘aufhebenations’ --
‘meta-unit-izations’ -- of some of the former units of x.”
“As a ‘‘‘law of Nature’’’,
i.e., as a human, linguistic description of Nature, diachronically,
at every [‘qualo-fractal’] scale and in every past
epoch of Nature’s history that we have so far observed/reconstructed, and also,
when interpreted relationally, more-synchronically
x1
---> x2 |-= x1 + y1
as a description of Nature’s present
constitution or ‘content-structure’, this expression works, and it also works
for our expectations/predictions of the future of
Nature, and of the future of Terran humanity/human Nature within
and as part of Nature as a whole, of Nature as the totality.”
For more
information regarding these
Seldonian insights, please see --
For partially pictographical, ‘poster-ized’ visualizations of many of these Seldonian insights -- specimens of ‘dialectical art’ -- see:
¡ENJOY!
Regards,
Miguel
Detonacciones,
Voting Member, Foundation Encyclopedia
Dialectica [F.E.D.],
Participant, F.E.D.
Special Council for Public Liaison,
Officer, F.E.D.
Office of Public Liaison.
Please post your comments on this blog-entry below!
No comments:
Post a Comment