Labyrinthal Laboratory Conditionals

Knecht leapt years ago into the black water of the river.

A leap of faith made in the face of a numinous bemusement.

A mæstro professing the art of conduction.


Cantos ; stanzas ; quatrains ; sections ; headings ; chapters ;


The function of any value such as x wilt result in a set of potential solutions.

f(x) : {set}, {set of the set}

yields Sentence G.

Godel’s lyric.

Taken from a song called Settes.


Cantos: sections dividing long poems.

– ORIGIN C16: from Ital., lit. ‘song’, from L. cantus


Dante sang poems in one hundred cantos.

The infernal first album of nine is the only one that hit the record charts.

Bemusing that he still writes lyrics and songs after his exile from Florence.

The courters and patrons of knightly chivalry frenzied in feigned, immodest outrage at the song of attack (quite poorly executed too, it is said) that

he played his Lady.

But he keeps on playing.

A fine equestrian he would have made.

Socrates and his diatribe will be with Dante shortly

Cursing Odsyyeus again, malifacent Man in Black: agent of injustice to Ajax.

The fellow-temple servants redeemed Parceval just yesterday.


Maestro Virgil’s rock n’ rolling opera

Nine lines feed nine recorders.

Eight channels receive live feed.

Three mixers temper.

A music master architects.

The 1 audits the confluence of the Take Stream.

The 1 who will stop the band,

called And the Band Played On,
only long enough to

allow them to listen.

Players eager to hear themselves.

Impetuous.

Feedback looping.

The impetus of the 1.

The effect of showing the parts their whole.


Any system aware that is under observation is changed by the very act of being observed.

An axiom accepted and admitted to be a theoretical, not practical, concern.

In theory the results may be nullified.

The axiom is ad hoc. Improperly derived.

Invalid even if accurate.

As Wittgenstein’s Mistress, it behooves me to ask this

Question for the Vienna Circle:

Now that you have observed that the act of observation changes the observed,

Do you ever worry for the assured changes in your method, institutions, experiments, results, or selves?

As you observe the knowledge of this observation affecting your observations and that which you observe?

Or is that just another theoretical problem too?

~

Just an observation from this lovesome dummy.

Prettification per Parcigal

Parcigal learned the powers of personal appearance, nearly two decades past. She learned its ability to exploit and/or to be exploited, nearly a decade ago. Hell, all gals did where she was from, Alabam, the Dirty South. Personal appearance stood as the primary source of feminine efficacy (next to blood kin).

The place where they raised her never addressed that which she regularly pondered: the long game for pretty lady face.

This type of prettification during youth resulted in an aged-self prettifying to remain relevant, as a new generation of beautiful gals arose.

The true Tao seemed to be finding Beauty unmasked.

Bare face.

No jewelry.

Unadorned.


She started to let her face be as it is. Washed it, moisturized it, but that was all.

She became the appearance of the female she was.

She did this, going about daily public interactions, until she knew her face,

Became the female she is.

Then she wields the power of makeup’s masking properly. Not defensively.


Parcigal lived her dream of Art. She reinterpreted Myshkin anew, unbound to previous ties made.

Allegory.

Of course now, books are more often quoted than read.

The once enumerable is now innumerable.

Hypertextuality.


Parcigal recoils from monastic traditions. It is being one a crowd, faceless.

Initiation required heavy control over the individual’s entire life. Gives very little free will. They seperate sexes, assuming gals are even allowed at all. It imparts a tacit intent to shame the sexual nature of the h. sapien mammal. She does not doubt the resiliency of these traditions. But, her energy does not run properly in their circuits.

She recoils from secret societies and erudite traditions, because she distrusts agendas she agrees to but cannot fully see. It feels, in her mind, like blindly giving away power.

But she is wary. She is also extremely lovesome.

A lovesome nature required diligence.

What was the use of sensualism with a resonant partner?

Why was this primal magic so hidden?

Magnetism and electricity.

Conductors.

Conductive bodies are conducive to utilizing each resonant body.

By nature.



So, in her Fool way, she left her Ewer the note below.

The morning after she spent her first night in the handmade.

Before she snuck out (after two minutes of hard doting on his sky-eyes) without rousing him.

Narratory Recall (Thought)

Æ am a/the word. And a/the word is not only, but also, glad/ly.


The recounting or slight reprise of several (re)countings falls to me.

Í endeavor to do my best on this, your sojourn.

But(t < giggle >), í am a Fool, a bit of a cad. And proud of my wide-eyed wonder.

Please, bear in mind that what is “down for me is up.”


What the sisters did in this sphere marks history. Of course, time perpetually does this to history, so long as there is one conscious, sapient, vantage point to see it.

Cassandra and Echo. Aphrodite ruled Cassandra.

Cassandra knew it not until she reawoke from her latest dream.

Unselfishness went far. Embracing laughter and not war did too. Now, such names reach above and below.

There is a beautiful naked woman symbolizing this sphere, allegedly it is she.

Symbols.


Failure, futility, debauch and valour. Her titles and attributes.

One who loves roses as well as the name of the rose.


She sometimes takes the form of the íynx.

The wryneck.

Has the power of beauty triumphant. The meaning of this is not to be taken for obvious and it will become clearer in your imagination as we progress.

She took but two weapons. One was no more than a long bit of cord. Her girdle. Atypical. Her lamp. She carries her own. While she loves to sing the Song of the Goddess, she has yet to accept Shakti theology officially.

Amusing given her role. But then again, she is a fool.

Of course, Rādāh took most of the heat.

~ But, now í get ahead of what passes for my mind these days.


Your merry narrator has an acadæmic background. Outside.

An able learner keened up into a gifted child. The tradition of empiricism, many empiricists think, has become a large collective comprised in majority by a bunch of pretentious prognosticators. You may add my name to the list. I would not deny it.

We do have a methodology to which we may aspire; although í’m not sure we understand it anymore.


Any work undertaken is going to address a research question. This general question will lead us to our object of inquiry. From there, we may begin our study by commencing with research.

Let us consider our object of inquiry here to be of Landgrave tradition.


This endeavor, like all forms of writing, will be an imagined experience. One that we shall undertake together.

Í will address conceptual and practical problems.

Practical problems predominately belong in the professional spheres. They address states of affairs in the world that are found troublesome. Much like a lazy eye, this perspective will ultimately depend on whom you ask: what is the “real” problem?

Sex, love, gender, women’s rights, men’s desires. These are not problems as much as potentially and periodically problematic. The difference akin to someone who likes the soup hot but not spicy. Modernity shuffles the deck of sex, gender roles, discrimination time and again; and these term fly like spaghetti towards the wall.

And yeah, it sticks. The pasta is done. While a new bot boils already. Periodicity. Embrace dont fear.


Conceptual problems tend to the acadæmic spheres, as they often have the luxury of not solving any real problem, but rather simply pointing out that what people currently think is wrong. Undexterous. Or else, they may point out some other version of not knowing [sic. differentiated from not-knowing].

While there may be no tangible cost to this type of problem there is a consequence: a particular kind of ignorance: a particular lack of understanding that keeps us from realizing something else that is even more significant.

My conceptual problem will address the problematic notion we refer to as Cartesian Dualism. To put it nicely. But we will consider the present social bifurcation existing between sexuality (pleasure, sensualism, hedonism) and spirituality aka soul power.

We will also review the practical problems of the politicization of love. Our concept of love and souls and spirit tethered itself to new stakes of symbology with the birth of nations. Questions of individual efficacy and empowerment. Evidence nature is not foisted by self organization, but birthed by it.

Perhaps nature dealt us the recurrent self organization that becomes Parcigal et al.

No 0ne knows.

The Major Key Scale: Paths, Diagrams, Table on Contents. (notes on esoterica/mysticism)

*I draw the figures myself as part of my method. The understanding gained by looking differs from the understanding gained by doing/recreating. But to be clear: I know I don’t understand. I am unbothered by this. I give my method not as a suggestion, but as a token of my intent in transparency*

The Sephirotic Tree (found in Sufi meditation manual The Ecstasy Beyond Knowing)


Diagram (table of contents?) found between the two title pages of Umberto Eco’s Foucault’s Pendulum.

The pages numbers and spelling variations, outside of the drawn SPHERES, are my notes and not present in Eco’s figure.


This is my attempt to syncretise the two and then discern through contemplation


This is the iteration I currently contemplate. It contains the previous three iterations and now attempts to include those symbols used by hermetic traditions in their depictions of the Sephirotic Tree. Best to view this as a best guess. I am not affiliated and thus cannot speak to the meaning ascribed under these traditions. This was taken from the Wild, Wild, West that is internet research. It is not a truthful representation of knowledge. It is a method for further methodological contemplation and meditation.


This is the Key Scale in order.


There are 22 possible paths in this Tree of Life.

Here is as far as I have gotten currently.

“How different really are atheists and believers?” (Costica Bradatan)

https://wp.me/p1gja9-3Sf

Thank you Costica Bradatan and John Gray.

Interesting piece very relevant to the cultural elephant in the room (at least in America). This elephant also relates to the popular perception that a scientific and a religous belief perspective are mutually exclusive.

Lots to unpack but highlights include:

“[Grey] uses paradox not just for rhetorical effect but to a philosophical end.”

<thank you. rhetoric abounds already.>

Voltaire and Nietzeche, as perceived atheists, are rexamined.

“no such thing as secularism”

The idea that religion is born from a fundamental need to make meaning.


The author suggests religion is irreplacable in our meaning making process.

I propose extending this more broadly: culture is irreplacable and religion is a social structure of culture. This is consistent with the authors’ arguements.

While categorization is reductionist at times, the breakdown of ‘types’ of atheists is appropriate and beneficial to the big picture “layman” discussion.

Atheist” and “scientist” have become confused as synonomous. “Atheist” is largely a stigma in many local American communities. If you believe this is irrelevant to the endeavor of science, please consider public school textbooks and science. Evolution is less frequently taught (in the South, at least), then cited as theory and then discredited.

Why? Because text book order demand stems from state boards of education.

Please check The Revisionaries, a documentary demonstratig this process.

https://www.politicalresearch.org/2013/02/13/the-revisionaries-documentary-goes-inside-texas-textbook-controversy/

HARTZ. American Exceptionalism (pt3).

Because American industrial development generally resembled Europe’s, Hartz cast his exceptionalism thesis in strongly political and cultural terms.

What has differentiated politics in the U.S. are limits that have been imposed on economically induced political change by the agreement on liberal beliefs and practices.


Standard Critiques of Liberal Consensus Theory

The most common critique argues that the thesis seriously understated the extent and variability of class conflict and governmental interventions in the economy,

Hartz and Tocqueville did, after all, take for granted that widespread economic wealth was involved in sustaining the liberal character of American political thought.

Social pluralism and seperation of residence and workplace can be attributed at least in part to the openess and fluidity of a liberal society.


Implicit Metatheory of the Consensus Thesis

The consensus thesis is mainly concerned with the years near after the original settlement of America and there are three reasons why the thesis cannot be a causal explanation over the more extensive period.

1. The decisive causal factors took place in Europe and the thesis has little to say about these events or the causes that brought them about.

2. The thesis emphasizes continuity; it does not seek to explain political development nor is it concerned with the way one set of changes produced another set of changes.

3. Causal explanations must clearly distinguish between dependent and independent variables. The thesis attributes America’s persisting liberal culture to the liberal beliefs and practices of the original settlers. Beliefs and practices make up a culture, and the original liberalism of a culture cannot be a cause of its liberalism later on.

The Problem of Nothingness-Selected Tracks from Jean Paul Sartre

An abstraction is made when something not capable of existing in isolation is thought of as in an isolated state. Consciousness is an abstraction. The concrete can be only the synthetic totality of which consciousness, like the phenomenon, constitutes only moments. Effecting a phenomenological reduction will not succeed in restoring the concrete (of consciousness) by the summation or organization of the elements which we abstracted from it. The relation of the regions of being is an original emergence and is a part of the very structure of these beings. “Is there any conduct which can reveal to me the relation of man with the world?”

We have established a parallelism between the types of conduct man adopts in the face of Being & Non-Being. We’re tempted to consider Being & Non-Being as two complimentary components of the real -like dark and light. Two contemporary notions which would somehow be united in the production of existents and which it would be useless to consider in isolation. Pure Being & pure Non-Being would be two abstractions which could be reunited only on the basis of concrete realities~There is nothing in heaven or on Earth which does not contain in itself Being & Non-Being,

Things in general “are”, but their being consists in manifesting their essence. Being passes into essence. One can express this by saying, ‘Being presupposes essence.’

Being is prior to nothingness and establishes the ground for it. Being has a logical precedence over nothingness and it is from Being that Nothingness derives its efficacy. Nothingness haunts Being. Nothingness can have only a borrowed existence. Non-Being exists only on the surface of Being.

*this is just Sartre’s opinion, yo. Dissent? Thoughts?