Object, Process, Time, Space, Identity orientation in language

The philosophical notion of the interstitial, the relations between objects. the between-ness.

Now, lapsing into Heidegger we see the object bias in language. the between-ness, not an only incredibly baroque abstract noun, but showing language's lean to the "what" of stuff. Or the being as Heidegger notes in his famed Neo-Aristotelianism of being and Being.

Language is object biassed and oriented. Does this necessitate an object orientation in philosophy? Is philosophy still constrained by language's biases?

This is the point of departure for major speculation. For one, the question of language object orientation could beg the speculation of the possibility of language being process oriented, for example.

That language biasses toward the "how" of stuff. Not to mention when and where etc. Speculated base of language therefore could not only include the object orientation but process orientation, temporal orientation, spatial orientation, and identity orientation. All these orientations will discretely influence the others.

We have something like a hypergeometry of multiple orientations and their discrete influences. Or a physic of such. Perhaps following this trajectory to science is a continuity of the object orientation bias, is creating a trajectory of the other orientation/s possible, or their interstitiality. In a object way to imagine how a temporal and process combine and relativity would operate/sound/appear/ feel like, or are we already immersed?

Tip of iceberg.


"The growing disciplines of systems biology, sensory ecology, and chronobiology are founded on the principle of the ontologically equal exchange of information in a state of awareness between the organism and its surroundings. Finally, the tired old issues of illusionism, dualism, and skepticism regarding consciousness can be laid to rest."

I don't really think so. The Fallacy of Systematism we also see in cybernetics

WT2KSB7K7THB

Philosophy of the Grid

Virilio's notion of Pure War inscribed in architecture might be a little histrionic but I don't fault immanent critique for aesthetics, just the maths.

The little dandelion breaking through the street concrete - it's not a fanciful beach. It's the earth as another monster giving us gifts like that. The cracks, the gaps, the voids - it's no longer Heidegger's fork in the road of being. It's material, real, quals and quants, objects and process...the interstitium, the integementum, the pericycle - these are of human and plant world, the gaps where exchanges coo like doves. These gaps are something, Niels Bohr I say answered Heidegger correctly though, he may not have been informed of phenomenological contexts. Dynamic balance in exchanges.

The notion of dynamic balance is not only biological or ecological. It's used in many trades and disciplines - including photography.

These are relations and processes as exchange and flows. asystemic and systemic, complexist flows.

Neurocriticism

In this recuperated state of socialized health via neuroplasticity realizations blissfully blossom.

The uptake of reasoned language - the simplified tone, clarity, economy and the Hemingway toolset so admired as felicity of style. I'm happy with my facility with the prosaic. I celebrate it.

I have an entirety of engagements with this rapprochement with common sense language prescribed by 20th century English (Oxbridge) philosophy.

First is the fields one orients to. I talk now of government policy but not governmentality or governance. I talk of stability but not metastability. I appreciate architecture but I won't giggle at what nomadic architecture could really be in material construct and tensile terms - sure I could blather about fluidity as parametric motif but nomadic architecture with neither domination, basal orientalism or postmodern inversion where the margin is everything. Postmodernity's inclusivity of the margin could be a replication of the Frankfurt model of capitalism - it subsumes what approaches it. But just because the model is mechanistically similar is no fatal Zizekian chiasmic grunt of guilt by association.

Oxbridge common sense English applied to the plural, speculative, poststructural realms of rigour is appreciated because after reading Heidegger, Derrida and Deleuze and Guattari the leap to use stylised new languages or terms are not necessarily warranted.

That leap to neologism should also be examined if we are coders of the void.

The challenge is two ways - that continental tradition use common sense language (speculations, ooo and current realisms are thanked) AND that Oxbridge philosophy draw closer to speculation, pluralism, multiplicitous thought and thought images like Whitehead did and that contemporary logic intimates.

The schizo makes clear sense and the whitebread couch potato agrees that a lot of life is dream in an everyday no bells and whistles way.

Though I can appreciate the drifts and recall the spectrum of topologies that was the experience of a mental health condition. I even have an archive of passable written work that to some were impressive and to me just agog I had achieved that. Articulating this history and work is fulfilling too. The unmanageability and alienation though were very difficult to live in. One of the many continuities in my life was the notion of abundance and my suspicious ambiguity at survivalist and scarcity world views - something I'm keener to today.