Science and Philosophy

Scientists will traditionally take centralised constructed logic and end at continua of complexity

Continental philosophers will posit decentralised nominalised diachrony as a language tendency but will affirm the univocal.

That's a hell of spectrum for both disciplines - and there's a dynamic relation

Personally I prefer scientist being philosophical than the other way around unless philosopher informed on early Copenhagen

Though Krauss was unfair to David Z Albert which is being noted in transdisciplinary circles as scientific bullying

Some philosophy is returning to truth discourse. To me, they had enough of the polysemic posture and are asking for articulation. Wonderful, a lot of the polysemy was lazy but here's to a nonludic revision of continental thought

Analytical philosophers don't get away scott free either - if postmodernity was wilfully ludic to the point of postured opacity then the analytic tendency for outlandish speculations comes for a challenge as well - the Swampman hypothesis and notion of perdurantism in question. Fine for me to work with as poet but otherwise a large scale philosophical non sequitur. A strain of Wittgensteinian fallaciousness is also noted and scoffed at - "I don't understand what you mean..." as rhetorical ploy has been disentangled as basically a metaphilosophical destabilising gesture which says more about the ignorance of this hackneyed Wittgensteinian ploy than the epistemological suspiciousness of the statement that ushers such Wittgensteinian gadfly flippancies as well like "I wouldn't know about that." Well as a many continental and analytical philosophers now counter - well you wouldn't know much about anything really.

Though in a grand political way this parlay, this current of curiousity and confluence is warranted for so many reasons.

Yet in my personal ethics

Scientists who weaponise their atheism can kiss my ass and philosophers who advise govt on just war can kiss my ass too

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.