The first task or group concerns the semiotics of speech-alone talk. One of these would be about unveiling the hidden history of a word. This topic is addressed in chapters 2 and 12.
0069 Kirk Kanzelberger joins Thomas Aquinas with a basic acknowledgment: Evil is a privation of a good.
He then considers natural and moral evil.
In moral evil, he locates a semiotic disorder, in addition to a privation.
He considers the nature of the sign, as formulated by Charles Peirce.
0070 He publishes his argument in a journal worthy of the reader’s support.
Reality: A Journal for Philosophical Discourse
0071 My comments are not so different. They thread through both Peirce and Poinsot. They pass through the two loops brought to light by John Deely.
Yet, the are different, in that they offer diagrams based on Peirce’s categories.
0072 Typically, Razie Mah’s comments are published in the smashwords website and carried by a variety of e-book vendors.
Start with A Primer on the Category-Based Nested Form.
Add A Primer on Sensible and Social Construction.
That is all that is needed to introduce oneself to the interscope of social construction.
Figure 09
0073 The three-level interscope appears in the chapter on meaning in the masterwork, How To Define the Word “Religion”.
The three-level interscope plays a role in A Primer on the Individual In Community.
The three-level interscope serves as a model of langue, in Comments on Robert Berwick and Noam Chomsky’s Book (2016) Why Only Us: Language and Evolution.
0074 All these works are available at the smashwords website.
So concludes this look at Kanzelberger’s foray into both Aquinas and Peirce, concerning reality and the nature of privation.
0063 What about the disciplines of modern psychology and sociology?
Do they labor as word-smiths, hammering out the spoken words that will address the tsunami of concupiscence-related disorders that currently plague modern society, or do they construct spoken words that thwart an evangelical’s desire to hear a sermon on Original Sin?
After all, lectures on concupiscence are not justified in a Zeitgeist where concupiscence is labeled “natural”.
0064 Surely, secular experts justify various features of our current Zeitgeist… er… regime, just like they previously (and maybe still do) labored to account for various flavors of mercantilism, various strains of fascism, and various manifestations of communism.
These ideologies all build on foundations of spoken words, specialized disciplinary languages fashioned by academically certified agents.
0065 Spoken words can (somehow) create the artifacts that validate spoken words.
The best way to make that happen is with sovereign power.
Spoken words can generate the righteousness underlying an organizational objective that will allow me (and my fellow travelers) to demand sovereign action. Then, the state implements my organizational objective, thereby validating the righteousness that my spoken words advocated.
Try to get around that.
0066 An example?
May I call the current regime: “big government (il)liberalism”?
Some would call it, “the administrative state”.
Big government (il)liberalism is the latest sovereign solution to the nasty consequences of an enlightened disposition, declaring, “Concupiscence is okay, because it is natural.”
“Tolerance” is key.
Big government experts must be tolerant in order to better manage the citizen’s natural proclivities.
0067 So, the word, “liberal” has been perverted from a focus on freedom and responsibility to a fixation on nonjudgment.
The prefix, (il), celebrates this inversion, because managing citizens is the negation of serving them.
0068 Isn’t that what the word, “government”, ought to mean?
If the citizens are going to do what’s natural, then someone must clean up the mess. What does that mean? Someone must control the citizens, in order to ameliorate the mess that they would produce, if left to their own natures.
Er… not someone, something. Something big.
0069 In a world where government is omnipresent, the message comes across loud and clear.
Look at your television and listen to the talking heads.
0001 The Greimas square is introduced in Comments on Gregory Sandstrom’s Essay (2013) “Peace for Evolution”, available at smashwords. This purely relational structure is introduced as a way to visualize langue as a system of differences. This is not the only way to visualize the word-in-mind. But, it is useful in labeling a word as a node in a symbolic order.
0002 Here is a picture of the Greimas square.
Figure 1
0003 Philip Marey is a senior US strategist at Rabobank. He contributes to the website, Zerohedge. On Friday, January 8, 2021, at 18:25, Tyler Durden posts Marey’s short work, commenting on recent events. The title consists of one word: insurrection.
0004 “Insurrection2a” should go into slot A1, as the focus of attention. However, the situating actuality2b is causality2b. Marey’s post considers the projection of causality into the term. What explains the presence of insurrection2a?
0005 The first cause that Marey raises comes from academics, in particular, economists. The primary cause of insurrection is economic.
“Economic causes” go into slot A1.
0006 In contrast, Marey offers an alternate cause: identity. His researchers show that the US political system becomes increasingly polarized after the 1964 Civil Rights Act. This demonstration is a red herring, because polarization is already present in the 1964 presidential contest between Barry Goldwater (populist, “insurrectionist”) and Lyndon Johnson (party insider, “statist”). The 1964 Civil Rights Act is a symptom, not a cause.
The cause is the expansion of the federal government, with its attendant religion, Big Government (il)Liberalism (BG(il)L).
0007 Perhaps, the relevant factor for the growth of identity politics in the US is to be found in the rapid expansion of state university systems in the 1950s and early 1960s. New positions and fields of inquiry germinate a novel brand of Marxism. Cultural Marxism exploits cultural distinctions, rather than economic.
0009 The next slot, A2, speaks against identity issues. Since identities are not equal, then the term, “inequality”, fits. Yet, inequality is not the same as different identities, so the contradiction is real, yet confusing. What happens when all identities are equal?
0010 What contrasts with inequality?
Equality, of course.
0011 Here is the completed Marey square for the causes underlying insurrection.
Figure 3
0012 What characterizes the word, “insurrection2a“, as situated by causality2b by modern academics?
Economic causation (A1) is the economist’s focal point.
Identity issues (B1) contrast with economic causation (A1) and lingers slightly below consciousness.
Inequality (A2) stands in contradiction to identity (B1) and complements economic causation (A2). Indeed, many BG(il)L academics conclude that government policies should be designed to reduce economic inequality, in order to remove fuel for insurrection.
Equality (B2) contrasts with inequality (A2), speaks against economic causality (A1) and complements identity-as-cause (B1).
0013 Here is the complete Marey square, once again.
Figure 4
0014 Do I see a problem?
Modern economists advocate for federal policies to reduce income inequality (A2) as a way to keep the peace (A1). In other words, inequality (A2) feeds into economic causation (A1).
Does the same pattern apply to the contrasting elements (B1 and B2)?
Should modern economists also address the contribution of identity?
Or does that responsibility rest with a different suite of experts?
You know, the one’s who argue that “identity” is fully malleable, yet behave as if it is fixed.
0015 Does the proposed solution of reducing economic inequality (A2) create an unintended consequence of forcing equality (B2) onto identity (B1)?
Is there a word that describes forcing equality (B2) onto identity (B1)?
How about the term, “conformity”.
If, identity cannot be fashioned out of the creative expression of experts, then identity is not something that readily changes. Identity is not so easily altered.
0016 What happens to the proposed solution?
Reducing economic inequality entails conformity, which explains government and private-public sector behaviors subsequent to the incident in Washington DC on January 6, 2021, the so-called “insurrection”.
The US Congress passes legislation to crack down on “domestic terrorists”, that is, people who do not conform. They also impeach, for a second time, a figurehead that serves as the “other”, the one who does not conform. Onto this other, they project their own crimes.
Private-public sector companies purge their platforms of people who do not conform with their corporatist stance, where the federal government handles the problem of economic inequality. In doing so, they promote equality of identity for those remaining on their platforms. Those who remain are complicit in purging those who do not have identities worthy of equality. Of course, those who are unworthy of equality do not believe the experts.
0017 Marey’s square identifies two experts. One drives the broadcast conversation, attributing social unrest (insurrection) to economic causes, particularly inequality. The other drives a hidden conversation, where favored identities conform to the narrative. In the latter case, experts are cultivated in order to chastise those who do not conform and to justify exclusion from public-private platforms.
0018 In short, Marey’s brief article hones in on a serious entanglement, which cannot be discussed, binding a BG(il)L public narrative (A1) with a hidden agenda concerning identity (B1). Forced conformity (B1, B2) is as disturbing as economic inequality (A1, A2).
0001 Does astrology begin with the first singularity?
The first singularity potentiates civilization, by opening the door to unconstrained labor and social specialization.
Astrologists exemplify a certain type of specialization.
0002 How does astrology work?
Astrology offers a primary causality, associated to the celestial realm, as a way to appreciate the secondary causality of our mundane realm.
0003 In sum, astrology provides context and potential to events that we experience in the here and now.
Figure 01
0004 Yes, this structure parallels the primary and secondary causalities appearing in scholastic philosophy.Primary and secondary causes are discussed in Comments on Fr. Thomas White’s Essay (2019) “Thomism for the New Evangelization”.
0005 The normal context3 and the potential1 for astrology2 depend on another actuality2, consisting of what we see in the celestial spheres, the motions of the sun, moon, planets, constellations and other stars.
This gives rise to the astrologer’s vision, where a reading of celestial events1b expresses the potential1b of celestial arrangements, transits and so on2a.
Figure 02
0007 Now, there are two actualities. On the content level, there are celestial arrangements. On the situation level, there are various civilizational events, including personal dramas.
There is no apparent material or instrumental causality connecting the two, even though the sun, the moon, and the planets have gravitational influence. The sun also determines space weather. Plus, the sun orbits the galactic center.
The tradition of astrology offers final and formal causes, cobbled together over time through correlations between planetary motions and mundane events.
0008 The discovery of planets beyond human sight contributes to modern astrology. An entirely new branch of astrology looks at historic events and trends in relation to the motions of the outer planets, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and now, Erin. This branch of astrology considers civilizations as beings.
0009 Conjunctions of Jupiter and Saturn, the outermost visible planets, occur in a every 20 years. One lifetime may see 4 conjunctions.
However, the pattern extends beyond one lifetime. The conjunctions of Jupiter and Saturn occur in one type of sign for around 200 years. The typology of signs is earth, air, fire and water. So, every 800 years, the cycle completes.
The last conjunction between Jupiter and Saturn occurred in an earth sign. The 2020 conjunction takes place in an air sign, Aquarius.
0010 The Jupiter-Saturn cycle of 800 years, belongs to both ancient and modern astrology.The recent Saturn-Pluto conjunction, in January of 2020, belongs to modern astrology.
0011 In April 2020, I posted a series of blogs about the Saturn-Pluto conjunction in Capricorn, with Jupiter co-present (but not in conjunction). This celestial event in January, 2020, marks the start of one of the most bizarre plagues of modern medical history. Even though the novel coronavirus from 2019, has a fatality rate of less than 5% for people over 75 years old (and for people with co-morbidities, including asthma), the responses of governments throughout the world has been amazing.
Rather than protecting old folks, health-care bureaucrats locked down entire populations.
0012 How did the crisis start?
The novel coronavirus initially spread after the City of Wuhan held a huge banquet commemorating the upcoming lunar New Year, the Year of the Rat. Already, the easily transmitted RNA-based virus had infected many. This was its opportunity. When Wuhan’s residents returned to their native homes for the Lunar New Year, the disease spread throughout China. Also, the disease passed through international air terminals to the rest of the world.
0013 This mundane event coincides with the Saturn-Pluto conjunction. Capricorn is the sign of government and organization. Saturn is the planet of time (as in, ‘your time is up’ or ‘your time has come’). Pluto is the sign of the underworld.
Is it any coincidence that health-care experts come out and declare this novel coronavirus to be a grave disease?
Here is a picture.
Figure 03
0014 As discussed in my blogs in April, 2020, the imagery of the sign of Capricorn touches base with the first singularity.Thus, the conjunction of Saturn and Pluto in Capricorn resonates with the dawn of astrology, as a specialization within our current living world.
0015 Does Aquarius touch base with the first singularity?
Capricorn is half-goat and half-fish, which corresponds to the dual earth-water origin of the Ubaid culture, 7821 years ago.
The Greeks do not capture this image with their story of Pan being caught in an alternate chimerism.
0016 Neither do the Greeks capture the nature of how Aquarius resonates with the origin of astrology within our current Lebenswelt.
Ganymede is a youth so handsome that he is taken up to be the cupbearer for the Greek gods. So Aquarius is symbolized by a youth pouring water from a jug onto earth.
0017 Ah, it turns out that in Babylon, the god Ea carries an overflowing vase of water. This is the same Ea that is associated with both land and sea in Capricorn. And, this is the same Ea that is associated with the primordial waters.
0018 So, bearing jugs of water for the gods?
In one Mesopotamian origin myth, humans are created in order to do the work that the gods were tired of doing.
Is that what is in store for the next 200 years?
0019 Against this speculation, the sign of Aquarius is an air sign, rather than an earth or a water sign. So, where does Ea fit in with the creation of the air.
What does pouring water have to do with giving birth?
In one ancient Mesopotamian myth, Enlil, the god of the air, is born from the union of Aku, the sky, and Ea, the water.
0020 Ah, that is more like it.
Aquarius touches base with the birth of unconstrained social complexity. Unconstrained social complexity has the character of the weather, the air, the storm and the wind. There is no telling how the spirit moves. But, drop a coin into an astrologer’s hand and you may hear how the sun, the moon, the planets and the constellations put your turbulence into a celestial perspective and divinized opportunities.
0021 So, the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn, in the sign of Aquarius, in December 2020, also resonates with the start of our current Lebenswelt. Enlil is born again.
0001 Sociology is often a curious field of inquiry. In the mirror of the world3, there is only one Be Little Men movement (blm). Blm is a slogan2. No substitutions to these words are allowed. The potential1 underlying the slogan2 is fixed on the only possibility among a sea of possible meanings, presences and messages. That potential is the possibility of marxist righteousness1.
Here is a picture of a triadic relation, as introduced in A Primer on the Category-Based Nested Form.
Figure 1
0002 What is marxist righteousness1?
Marx is a “communist” who names his enemy, the “capitalist”.
The specter of “capitalism”?
Das Kapital?
The root word for “capital” is “head”.
Wrap your cap around that.
0003 Marxist righteousness1 relies on the emptiness of spoken words. A speech-alone word is merely a placeholder in a system of differences. Meaning, presence and message must be projected into each spoken word. The marxist reserves the right to project that meaning, presence and message.
Allow no substitutes.
Substitutions squander the purity of the projection.
0004 What does this mean to me3?
This is what the target of a marxistslogan never asks.
The slogan isolates the guilty.
Originally, the capitalist is the one upon which marxist righteousness descends. The target is guilty, with no option of managing the label, except through submission1. Indeed, the organizational objective2 is to manifest submission1.
Now, other labels serve as slogans2a.
This second nested form situates the first nested form, as described in A Primer on Sensible and Social Construction.
Figure 2
0005 There are two blms. On the content level, blm is a slogan2a emerging from (and situating) righteousness1a. On the situation level, blm manifests organizational objectives2b that actualize the potential of submission1b, thus increasing the wealth, power and overall prowess3b of those reflecting the mirror of the world3a.
According to rumors, advertisers in saavy suites say that executive suits of major corporations donate large sums1b to an organization2b whose namesake is the slogan2a. Other, less well-endowed targets are suited up as scapegoats, following the historic and literary patterns noted by Rene Girard. Marxist righteousness projects a lack, held within the accuser, upon a scapegoat, the target.
0006 Yes, by definition1a, certain types can never submit1b. These characters are magically gifted with the power to create the lack that they are accused of1a as well as the standing to fill that lack with their own… shall I say?.. capitals1b.
0007 Is marxism a modern version of an ancient religion?
Surely, early civilizations sacrifice humans to their gods.
Remember the old adage?
A capitalist will sell the communist the rope to hang himself.
The joke works as long as the target does not comprehend the intent of the customer.
Why would anyone hang the fellow who sold “him” some rope?
Marxist righteousness calls the fellow, a “capitalist”.
The seller’s hanging manifests the realness of the marxist’s organizational objectives1b.
In the same way, ritual sacrifice validates the realness of ancient deities.
0008 What else does this imply?
The target is not privy to what does this mean to me3b. The deadly earnestness of marxist submission1b cannot be appreciated from the outside. The above two-level interscope is sensible only from the inside. The insider holds the secret knowledge3a that secures the slogan’s single possible meaning, presence and message1a.
If a gnostic path blossoms into a social movement, such as the be little men movement, then today’s secular academic sociologists include the topic in their regional and global meetings, showcasing how they are in tune with the emerging secret knowledge. They can explain it. They can write books about it. They can explore its righteousness1a, explicate its slogans2a, develop pathways for submission1b and extol its authority2b. They can conduct surveys in order to show how a slogan has struck a cord in social consciousness3a. They can tell all how the insider feels3b.
0009 Modern sociology is such a curious field of inquiry. It poses as a mirror3a ofthe worldc. As such, it constructs its own sensible approach, in the same fashion as marxist religions.
0010 Five related works are available at www.smashwords.com.
A Primer on the Category Based Nested Form
A Primer on Sensible and Social Construction
How To Define the Word “Religion”
Comments on Eric Santner’s Book (2016) “The Weight of All Flesh”
Comments on Peter Burfeind’s Book (2014) Gnostic America
