Tag: Methodology

cassette à fleur

I shift shoulders,

Crackly, a’tængled.

Naught not knotted.

Capacity and current

Contained by my spine.

Contracting.

Runs amok until

Corrected to both

convex & concave

Context.

Back braced

And arching.

Bending

Bow

To arrow.

Column of my chord.

Given immobility put to good use

In postures

Not posturing.

Posing but no poser.

Calf cramps

Paces inside

In sides.

Sidling as slides.

Sliding the sphere of my cəntər

Recanter.

And əntərs.

My abdomen to

My solar plexus

through

To my head.

Red , Terracotta , orange

Yellow , Green, Indigo.

Amid

White

Black.

All then red.

When cultivating a rose, they account for size, form, color,

Substance

Stem & Foliage

Balance

&

Proportion

(but wə can turn anything into a competition, I’d wager)

An ugly rose?

Hum

Birds and bees do not notice.

Lao Tzu or The American Rose Association Rule Book.

Misnamed. Mislabeled.

!

Dont let the roses pick up on that vibe.

Or the glass embracing it might break.

The rose and the vase.

This translates to a title.

Awhite awit. De-lis

Whirling padded fan blades

Belt around in circles.

Encircling.

Edifying eddies of easy breezes

Above me.

Pink & blue light

Nearly a wishing sky meandering on my wall.

Reflected

Then

Transposed.

Everyday reaching one more yard.

Poised.

Discomposed.

A’teeter

Totter.

Topple.

Someone fell down?

Afront.

In front ampersand behind.

(All a front for)

A’cold

Front

A’coming

Font.

Red rocks the remain

chilled & a’cold

/Des-/In spite constant sunshine.

To spite.

Spritely

Bell Rock

Pealing.

Bells.

Belle appealing.

Upturned. Un toward.

A forward.

A’front.

Word afore

A nameless, unspoken

Fleur

Watch “Small Faces – Itchycoo Park (Lyrics)” on YouTube

https://youtu.be/QBZgu9riZyc

If these Rings Spoke & Salmon Sang Electric

The sun begins to make cameo appearances.

The trail crew came through.

Cutting back.

Below is tribute to felled ones.

Ready to be reabsorbed into the ecosystem.

No waste.

The water rose.

See the fish (salmon) ladder flow from both sides

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.

Inverting Bodies in Motion

What happens if inertia, itself, becomes inert?

Does this mean then that the tendency of matter would be to embrace acceleration?

Displacing a disposition to remain inactive with a

novel propensity for motion?

Latin inert-, iners

unskilled ; idle ; motionless

Abject and supine.

Sounds harsh.

But synomously we find base,

A supporting or carrying ingredient

The bottom of something considered as its support

It is from here we may erect initially.

It is at base where we find the tendency of inertia rendered inert.

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?

Watch “John Irving on why The World According to Garp is more relevant now than he ever imagined” on YouTube

The Problem of Sciences (one more old a** quote to discover from a great book)

Classical mechanics uses space and time but never questions itself about time, space, or motion. And, Social Sciences do not question themselves about man. We cannot take it for granted that experience will give us the facts of a group or that anthropology will bind these facts by means of objectivity, strictly defined relations, if we want to access “human reality.”

The problem is our research is aimed at constituting laws and at bringing to light functional relations/processes.

By indirect knowledge, I mean the result of reflection on existence. It is indirect in this sense-that it is presupposed by all the concepts of anthropology without being itself made the object of concepts.

The Problem of Nothingness (bonus pts if you guess the source-it should go without saying.)

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 the beings.

“Is there any conduct which can reveal to me the relation not man with the world?”

We have established a Parallelism between the types of conduct man adopts in the face of Being and Non-Being. We’re tempted to consider being and non-being as two complementary 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 and 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 and Nothingness.

What the Technical Meaning of ‘Emergence’ means to me (3 Things)

EMERGENCE

system: combination of components can form a more complex organization, that can be termed a system. E.g. of biological systems: cells > organism > ecosystem. To understand how biological systems work, it is not enough to have a complete “parts” list.

emergent properties of systems: with each upward step in the hierarchy of biological order, novel proerties emerge that are not present in the level just below. They are due to the arrangement and interaction of parts as complexity increases. E.g. thoughts, memories are emergent properties of a complex network of nerve cells.

reductionism

reducing complex systems to simpler components that are manageable to study (horseapples: I say) The dillema of understanding biological breaks down thusly:

1. We cannot fully explain a higher level of order by breaking it down into its parts

2. Something as complex as organisms and /or cells cannot be analyzed without observing them take their own selves apart.

Zagreus (oft confused with a dude up a tree)

Camus’ Zagreus once “laughed and added, ‘You see Mersault, all the misery and cruelty of our civilization can be measured by this one stupid axiom: happy nations have no history,’ ” incorporating time and nations into the excruciatingly existential search for ‘metaphysical truth.’

What is a book but manual?

Is it just, using an alchemical apparatus within a story?

Just

an alchemical apparatus used to drive the plot, scaffold the story structure, and/or function, also, as a skeleton key?

Transmutate to into art.

The reader and/or audience undergoes the Cathartic process,

like enzymes provoke.

The Apparatus drives the substance of letters/words toward catharsis.

Our story’s technical equipment enables a bunch of words

to BeRead by an audience or reader of the collection.

In this way, words transmutate to a collection, set, Sum, somme

that somehow be-came greater than the sum of its parts

This alchemical thing is but primarily a piece of technical (albeit ‘unscientific’) apparati that is taken-up, in itself, and then applied to a bunch of words such that when those words are taken-up [sic. in the abstracted sense], an epiphenomenon emerges on a different level of scale.

A Pretty Beautiful Poem

Conviviality: C17 from Latin convivialis “a feast”

“fit for a feast”

(of an atmosphere or event) friendly, lively, enjoyable

potential. hy/Poten/use

potentiate

potent. pot. Portia (circa Antigone)

portent (n) ; portend (vb)

– portentious

port

porter

Deceit…. disgust

Conceit…. disguise. (dis/g -)

Receipt… despise

(- cei/P/t)

DISAMBIGUATION

Pretext: ostensible reason (false) used to justify an action.

Pretense: act of pretending, false ambitions / claim

Pretend: imaginative same / fantasy

Pretension: claim of aspiration to something pretentious

Pretentious: attempting to impress with falsehood

Prevaricate: act or speak in an evasive way

Prima facie: (law) at first sight [ / site / cite]; accepted as so until proven otherwise

The Old English spelling of pretty = prættig, meaning

‘cunning or crafty’ coming as it did from a West Germanic base meaning

‘trick’.

By the Middle Ages, pretty had come to mean ‘clever, skilful, or ingenuious’.

The sense development [ deceitful, cunning, clever, skilful, admirable, pleasing, attractive ] has parallels in adjectives such as nice.

PRETTY

1. attractive in a delicate way, without being truly* (common) * beautiful. *author’s change*

2. used ironically to express displeasure: fairly ; trinket ; (used condescendingly) attractive person.

Pretty is to prevericate in order to increase Prestige?

A pretty face is a prentious face?

Pretty is pretension?

Beauty is.

Is being pretty pretentious? or prestigous?

The pretension of the face being ‘pretty’ was pretentious?

Pretty is prevarication to gain? [Prevaricate and procrastinate have similar but not identical meanings.

Prevaricate means ‘act or speak in an evasive way’.

Procrastinate, on the other hand, means ‘put off doing something’.

Prestigious.

A face being pretty is a pretension.

That’s beautiful, that is, Pretty!

PRESTIGE entered English in the mid 17th century (tricksy, cuz it means the 1600’s) from French, and ultimately derives from the Latin plural noun praestigiae ‘conjuring tricks’.

It took on its modern meaning in the 19th century (the 1800’s) by way of the sense ‘dazzling influence, glamo/u/r’, which at first [only] had a derogatory implication.

Aren’t we beautiful, Pretties?!

Extra Credit: speak the 17 words below aloud. Wild right? They kinda stopped making sense after a while. Lovesome.

Pretty ; Prettify ; Prettifies ; Prettifying

Prettified ; Prettification ; Prettifier ;

Prettier ; Prettiest ; Prettyish. . . . . Prettyboy.

Prettily ; Prettiness ; Prettyish ;

Pretties.

Prettied.

Prettying.

* Knock Knock…Orange… Orange you glad the other (stars) astericks didn’t make you scroll all the effing way down here? Hyuck.

I. All words cited from OED Concise (pic below-citations take forever)

II. All 17 “Pretty” derivations were taken from 3 dictionaries.

THE IS

He said, “Slick-you don’t hafta put effing limitations on the goddamn variables in a dynamic system! Like, the more chaotic the individual parts of a dynamic system are, then the more effing potentialities or organizational principles may be exploited and checked out for utility and efficiency. Why lock in and hoover when the shit will regulate itself eventually? Hmm? Why is it that everyone effing assumes that organic self-organization is so uncommon? … Well, you can still call it uncommon, I suppose, like…shit, like uh, as uncommon as a not great hand of poker.”

She said, “You mean if liberty is completely maximized, despite the appearance of chaos, society will spontaneously organize itself in a sustainable or meaningful way?”

“Yeah.”

“And the odds of this are as likely as getting dealt a losing poker hand- likely to occur more often than not?” she asked.

“Yeah,” he said, “the only precondition is that the individual parts all impact each other’s functioning.”

How math talks? In statements.

Euclid was the dude who gave us (Euclidean) geometry.

He included the postulate below.
Given any straight line and a point not on it, there “exists one and only one straight line which passes” through that point and never never intersects the first line, no matter how far they are extended.

Well, this was later replaced with the assumption that more than one parallel can be drawn to a given line through a given point. One could also make the assumption no parallels can be drawn thusly. This led to a new type of geometry.

It was after this shift in thought that mathematics was recognized to be much more abstract than traditionally supposed:

  1. Because math statements can be construed in principle to be about anything, rather than some inherently circumscribed set of objects or traits of objects.
  2. Because the validity of math statements is grounded in the structure of statements rather than in the nature of a particular subject matter.
  3. Because any special meaning that may be associated with the terms in the postulates plays no essential role in deriving the theorems.

*Clumsily articulated from readings by Douglas Hofstadter as well as Roger Penrose

Uncertainty & Doubt

https://writtencasey.wordpress.com/2017/02/20/416/

There’s this face

It’s a face in my minds eye, that of a man.

A particular man, whose face I knew not until gravaty presented it.

The cheeks of older, the eyes of “I’m sure I know you from before”.

Effing idiot, you do not end sentences with prepositions.

Silly boy in need of correcting.

Sir, should you prefer.

I am Miss and I will shatter your soul to pieces of glad bliss.

Speak, won’t you?`

Lipsome venom

Benevolent disrespect with intent of disrming.

Shamefully disarming with easy kindness that makes man howl.

Gracious pain unexpected spurns blissful.

So breath deep in anticipation.

Silent sensory

Tell me I’m wrong and to stop my shameful wantoness.

No one will. They see it not or remain silent in want or delusion.

Squeak out or leap and jump til I’m dizzy.

I’m simple but elegant in my simplicity.

My intelligence is eerie and of touch.

To exploit is to ruin that sought.

So just show lovesome, desperate want.