09/7/23

Looking at Appendix 2 in Brian Kemple’s Book (2019) “The Intersection” (Part 16 of 18)

0151 After a century, Kant’s insights are reified into a slogan.

0152 At this time, Peirce considers the nature of sign-relations. The story is told in A Primer on Sensible and Social Construction (by Razie Mah, available at smashwords and other e-book venues). Peirce knows that Kant’s categories are considered necessary for science, but he cannot situate Kant’s categories using his understanding of sign-relations.

So, Peirce’s social construction follows the same pattern.

0155 Heidegger walks on stage around three decades later. At the time, only a few academics are familiar with Peirce’s (re)discovery of the causality inherent in signs and his proposal of three categories of existence.

0156 Heidegger starts as a student of philosophy. During this time, he reads a book on speculative grammar by the medieval scholastic, Scotus. But, the treatise is only attributed to Scotus. The real author is Thomas of Erfurt.

Then, Heidegger becomes a student of Husserl. Husserl’s phenomenology wrestles with the nature of science. Husserl proposes phenomenology (which is named after phenomena) in order to return to the noumenon, the thing itself, because science was on the verge of fixating on phenomena to the exclusion of its noumenon.

0157 I suppose that Heidegger realizes that what Husserl is dealing with (the Positivist’s judgment) does not extend to what Scotus (er… Thomas of Erfurt) discusses with his speculative grammar.

Eventually, Heidegger produces a social construction that bears the imprint of the hylomorphic structure that Husserl wrestles with.

09/6/23

Looking at Appendix 2 in Brian Kemple’s Book (2019) “The Intersection” (Part 17 of 18)

0158 So, how do these comments apply to what Kemple writes about language?

Okay, I plead “guilty”.

Perhaps, there is no application.

0159 Oh, I have an excuse.

I got distracted by the normal context of definition₃ bringing the actuality of a spoken word₂ into relation with the potential of meaning, presence and message₁.

Then, I realized that Saussure’s definition of spoken language, as an arbitrary relation between two systems of differences, parole and langue, can be expressed with the same hylomorphic structure as ‘what is’ for the positivist intellect. So does Heidegger’s das Sein des Seienden.

Then, I connected this hylomorphic structure to the actualities native to social construction.

0160 So why am I so easily distracted?

Surely, speech-alone talk is at the crux of the intersection between Peirce and Heidegger.

Why do I say, “speech-alone talk”, instead of “language”?

Perhaps, there is another story to be told.

See An Archaeology of the Fall, by Razie Mah, available at smashwords and other e-book venues.

Our current Lebenswelt is not the same as the Lebenswelt that we evolved in.

09/5/23

Looking at Appendix 3 in Brian Kemple’s Book (2019) “The Intersection” (Part 18 of 18)

0161 What about Appendix 3, titled “Synechism and semiosis”?

0162 Well, I best look into Appendix 4, which presents a helpful list of definitions.

“Synechism” is a principle of continuity. There are no hard and fast distinctions between possibilities, because firstness is monadic. In the empirio-schematic judgment, the dyad, a noumenon [cannot be objectified as] its phenomena, exists in the realm of possibility and obeys this principle. There are no phenomena without their noumenon. There is no noumenon without its phenomena. The hazards of synechism are yet to be deeply appreciated. For scientific inquiry, what happens when certain actors claim to be observing the phenomena of a noumenon which is not… um… obvious to other people?

“Tychism” is a corollary of synechism. Peirce envisions chance (er… possibility) as universal. Without possibility, there is no actuality or normal context. If there is an actuality that appears out of nowhere, in such a fashion that it has no normal context, then we are back to phenomena of a noumenon which is not… um… subject to understanding.

“Semiosis” is the action of signs. Signs are triadic relations. Triadic relations constitute the human niche.

0163 For the Lebenswelt that we evolved in, our ancestors adapt to an ultimate niche as well as many proximate niches. This means that hominin evolution is both convergent, with respect to our ultimate niche, and divergent, with respect to many proximate niches. The ultimate niche is the potential of triadic relations. The proximate niches are regional ecologies and environments.

Language evolves in the milieu of hand talk. Hand talk relies on the semiotic qualities of icons and indexes to motivate a relation between parole (hand talk) and langue (mental processing). As this motivated relation becomes more and more conventional (that is, habitual within hominin social circles), hand-talk gestures become more and more like signs in an arbitrary system of differences (that is, symbols). Grammar consists of symbolic operations within a finite set of symbols. By the time anatomically modern humans appear, hand talk is fully linguistic.

0164 Speech is added to hand talk with the appearance of our own species, Homo sapiens.

Humans practice hand-speech talk for around 200,000 years, with great success.

0165 Around 7,800 years ago, the end of the previous ice age raises sea-levels, flooding shallow geological basins such as what is now the Persian Gulf. In the process, two hand-speech talking cultures, one settled on the basin and one settled along the coast and river gorge, are forced into proximity. A pidgin and then a creole ensues. The creole is the Sumerian language (unrelated to the nearby Semitic languages). But, more importantly, this creole is the first instance of speech-alone talk.

At its inception, the Ubaid of southern Mesopotamia is the only culture in the world practicing speech-alone talk.

It is no coincidence that the world’s earliest civilization arises in southern Mesopotamia.

Speech-alone talk potentiates civilization.

0166 Our current Lebenswelt is marked by speech-alone talk. Speech-alone talk spreads from the Ubaid to the four-corners of the world, potentiating unconstrained social complexity wherever it goes.

7800 years ago, the world population may have been as many as seven million.

Today, it is seven billion.

Such is the significance of the first singularity, the transition from hand-speech talk to speech-alone talk.

0167 Heidegger is a German philosopher who strives to restart Western philosophy after it fumbles its founding charisma.

Peirce is a precocious American post-modern who becomes fascinated with one of the crucial questions asked by scholastic philosophers, “What is the causality inherent to the sign-relation?”

0168 Both these philosophers propose ideas that address a single question, “What is the nature of our current Lebenswelt?”

Their answers apply to a single actuality.

0169 I do not know the name of this actuality, but I do appreciate the significance of Kemple’s attempt to delineate an intersection (without being aware that the term, “intersection”, might have a technical definition that supports his inquiry).

An intersection is an actuality composed of two actualities, each of which has its own nested form.

0170 For these reasons, Brian Kemple’s book, The Intersection of Semiotics and Phenomenology: Peirce and Heidegger in Dialogue, deserves interest. While my examinations, so far, covering the term, “intersection”, and the appendices, are sparse, they are suggestive. There is a lot at play within the pages of this book.

05/31/23

Looking at Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein’s Book (2020) “A Hunter Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century” (Part 1 of 16)

0001 Twenty-two thousand years ago, during the maximum of the last ice age, people roamed (along with other large mammals) in a land that bridged modern-day Siberia and Alaska. Glaciers on the eastern (or American) side prevented humans from advancing further. Until they didn’t.

Humans found a way around the blockade. By ten thousand years ago, humans occupy both American continents.

0002 The Siberian-Alaskan landmass displayed one type of ecology (some would call it a frozen wasteland). Yet, Paleolithic people migrating into the Americas adapted to a large variety of ecologies (including the tropics).

0003 How could this be so?

The authors conclude that humans are adapted to niche switching. Humans culturally adapt to novel ecological niches by operating as both generalists and specialists. Humans are behaviorally flexible because they can oscillate between established traditions (which the authors call, “culture”) and problem-solving (which the authors call, “consciousness”). Consequently, humans can “switch” from one niche (such as ice-laden Beringia) to another niche (such as California’s San Joachim Valley).

0004 But, I wonder, “Are not traditions (‘cultures’) specialist oriented? The specializations may not be wildly complicated, but meaningful enough. For example, someone who does well at running with a lance might fit in to the specialty of hunting large game. Someone who is good at identifying mushrooms may fit into the specialty of fungi forager. So, everyone can be a generalist problem-solver, but also work as a specialist too.

“Plus, everyone, whether lance-bearer or mushroom-gatherer, must learn their craft, and must innovate in the face of new challenges.

“So, the human gift of ‘niche-switching’ indicates that humans can find ways to make a living in every ecology. The recent territorial expansion of anatomically modern humans into the Americas serves as an outstanding example.”

0005 Okay, then what is a “niche”?

The authors are modern biologists. When modern biologists hear the word, “niche”, they think “ecological or environmental conditions”. But, there is another technical definition for the word, “niche”, that expands that narrow frame.

0006 What is a “niche”?

The Darwinian paradigm can be diagrammed by following A Primer on the Category-Based Nested Form (by Razie Mah, available at smashwords and other e-book venues).

Here is a picture.

The normal context of natural selection₃ brings the actuality of adaptation₂ into relation with the potential of ‘something’₁, which biologists label “niche“₁.

05/24/23

Looking at Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein’s Book (2020) “A Hunter Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century” (Part 5 of 16)

0026 How to theorize the nature of the author’s portrayal of an omega principle?

Humans adapt to the potential of triadic relations. Triadic relations are indifferent to nature and culture. Nature is perfused with triadic relations. So is culture.

0027 How does the intersection change when passing from the biological to the cultural?

Here is my guess.

The niche_1H situates ‘something’ external to the species. Adaptations_2H exploit that ‘something’ in the normal context of cultural selection_3H.

The genome_1V situates ‘something’ internal to the species. DNA resides in lineages. So, this ‘something’ is foundational to a cultural lineage_1V and gives rise to the form of the cultural being_2V in the normal context of institutional development_3V.

0028 So, here is the resulting intersection.

0029 How about an application?

Here, I will develop a narrative… a theoretical expression… applying the omega principle to the authors’ professional trauma.

This theoretical expression does not capture the nightmare that these professors endured. Rather, it is a speculation about the evolutionary changes within their narrative. In particular, the intersection for biological evolution somehow applies to a contemporary shift occurring within cultural selection_3H and institutional development_3V. Figuratively, the intersection applies to a cultural episode of punctuated equilibrium.

0030 I start with the institution that these two professors labored in for fifteen years. Evergreen State College (pre-2017) is an institution that evolved in American civilization.

Here is a picture of the intersection for Evergreen State College (before 2017) at the beginning of the authors’ journey.

That is a start.

Further specification is required.

05/23/23

Looking at Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein’s Book (2020) “A Hunter Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century” (Part 6 of 16)

0031 How should I specify the elements in the prior diagram?

A little history may assist.

State colleges spring up to train returning soldiers after the Hot War Among Fraternal Ideologies (1938-1945 AD). The authors are employed by one of these colleges, located in the State of Washington. Then, the institution changes in 2017

0032 Let me consider Evergreen State College prior to 2017.

The adaptations_2V?

Obviously, the term goes with the faculty. Professors_2b(2H) are selected for by the college_3b(3H) for their disciplinary expertise_1b(1H). Disciplinary expertise_1b expresses the potential of empirio-schematic inquiry_2a, characteristic of such fields as physics, chemistry, biology, quantitative sociology, cognitive and evolutionary psychology, and so on. Empirio-schematic inquiry_2a is a style of rational thought_2a.

Diagrams for empirio-schematic inquiry are developed in Comments on Jacques Maritain’s Book (1935) Natural History. The empirio-schematic judgment is rational thought. However, it is not rational in the same way as Aristotelian or scholastic thought. Empirio-schematics characterize the modern Age of Ideas, which starts around 1600 AD. Scholastics characterize the Latin Age, stretching from around 300 to around 1600 AD.

0033 Here is the two-level interscope for the axis corresponding to Darwinism, for Evergreen State College, before 2017.

0034 Heying and Weinstein are selected as professors_2b and serve well, for one and one-half decades, until a shift in both cultural selection_3b and the actuality_2a virtually underlying their positions_2b.

0035 What happens leading to 2017 and beyond?

On the content level, an imitation empirio-schematics_2a fashions itself as a style of rational thought_2a. Consider the blog for April at www.raziemah.com, titled Looking at Gad Saad’s Book (2021) “Parasitic Mind”. Like all fashions, inquiries pursuing social construction, critical theory and social justice take on the appearance of ‘something’ beautiful in order to adorn the one who wears the fashion.

Something beautiful?

Think of an adornment that signals one’s virtue, while sparkling with the certitude that accompanies empirio-schematic research.

On the situation level, the ones who fashion themselves as “righteous, in addition to rational” are instructors_1b. Why? Instructors are defined by the potential of the faux empirio-schematics of social construction, critical theory and social justice_2a. Their reward is in a fascination of their own varieties of righteousness.

In contrast, administrators_2b exploit instructors_1b, just as adaptations_2a exploit a niche_1b, in the normal context of cultural selection_3b.

Here is a picture of the horizontal axis after 2017.

0036 In 2017, Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein resign their professorships at Evergreen State College.

05/22/23

Looking at Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein’s Book (2020) “A Hunter Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century” (Part 7 of 16)

0037 What about the vertical axis?

0039 The vertical axis of biological evolution goes with body development_3b, the phenotype_2b and the genome_1b. The genome_1b is the potential_1b of DNA_2a, an internal actuality that is defines the lineage. DNA_2a manifests descent with modification.

0040 How that translates into a metaphor for cultural development depends on the species… er… I meant to say… the institution.

An institution_2b is like the phenotype_2b. Traditionally, an institution_2b virtually situates a traditional mission_2a. So, a mission statement_1b manifests the potential_1b of a traditional mission_2a and supports the institution_2b.

Here is the corresponding two-level interscope.

0041 All this changes, leading to the trauma of 2017 at Evergreen State College.

Rather than a mission_2a, whose normal context_3a and potential_1a should be protected by long-standing tradition, the content-level actuality_2a changes to advocacy.

What is advocacy_2a?

I could say advocacy_2a is a type of mission_2a. However, it is the type of mission where the normal context_3a and potential_1a are generated by another institution (safely hidden offstage, so to speak). Advocacy_2a is like modified DNA_2a. Advocacy_2a supports indoctrination under the name of “education”. Advocacy statements_1b manifest the potential_1b of advocacy_2a.

Here is a picture of the two-level interscope.

0042 Now, I combine the above situation-level nested forms to visualize interscopes for pre-2017 and post-2017 higher education.

The following diagram presents the system that selected for Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein as professors_2H.

After the resignation of these professors, Evergreen State College may be portrayed by the following intersection.

0043 Higher education is a single actuality.

Before 2017, faculty_2H are selected on the basis of their expertise_1H.

After 2017, administrators_2H are selected for on the basis of their ability to manage instructors_1H (as well as other abilities).

The metaphorical niche_1H changes and so does the metaphorical genome_1V.

05/19/23

Looking at Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein’s Book (2020) “A Hunter Gatherer’s Guide to the 21st Century” (Part 8 of 16)

0044 Where did I leave off?

After 2017, Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein find that they no longer have jobs. But, surely, they remain professors.

0045 So what happens next?

The culture of podcasting on the internet_3H values (selects for) people_2H with disciplinary expertise_1H.

Yes, the podcasting “culture” is looking for pre-2017 types of professors_2H.

0046 Bret Weinstein launches the Darkhorse podcast, a very attractive production in the internet arena. He remains a professor. Now, he also professes more than biology.

And, that brings me to the book, which applies lessons from evolutionary theory to life in the 21^stcentury.

Podcasting and book-writing are very similar to higher ed. Each podcast has its own mission statement. Each podcast format displays a certain expertise. Advertisers support well-subscribed podcasts. Patrons support the podcast directly.

0047 Here is a picture of what (I suppose) podcasting looks like, in terms of an intersection that appropriates the relationality of biological evolution for cultural evolution.

0048 What label applies to the single actuality that is the union of professor_2H and podcaster_2V?

How about the term, “guidance”?

One watches podcasts for guidance.

0049 On that note, allow me to recall the full title of Heather Heying and Bret Weinstein’s book, A Hunter-Gatherer’s Guide to the 21^st Century: Evolution and The Challenges of Modern Life.

If the single actuality is “guidance”, then I ask the reader how phrases in the title associate to elements in the above intersection.

05/18/23

Looking at Brian Kemple’s Book (2019) “The Intersection” (Part 1 of 4)

0001 According to Neoplatonic legend, the descent of the soul starts with a small immaterial gem resting on an undefinable pillow in the presence of transcendental beauty. Then, a trap door opens and the little source of illuminationbegins to fall. As it descends, it accrues matter. Matter enters form.

One may say that the matter is evil and the soul, good, and conclude that the immortal soul becomes encased in corruptible matter. But, the story is more complicated, because the term, “matter” slyly includes the capacity to become entangled with purely relational being. Matter holds the capacity for meaning. Matter substantiates form. So Christians, following the complication, witness the baby as bearing a message. The message? Baptize me.

0002 The book before me is Brian Kemple’s The Intersection of Semiotics and Phenomenology: Peirce and Heidegger in Dialogue, published in 2019 by Walter de Gruyter Press (Boston/Berlin). The masterwork is dedicated to the memory of John Deely (1942-2017 AD), who served as Kemple’s professor.

0003 The book presents a complex argument. I, a simpleton, fixate on the titular word, “intersection”.

For me, the term has a technical definition, as formulated in the chapter on message in the e-book How To Define The Word “Religion” (by Razie Mah, available at smashwords and other e-book venues). An intersection is a single actuality composed of two actualities, each with its own category-based nested form.

Say what?

See A Primer on the Category-based Nested Form.

0004 A photon is an example of an intersection of two actualities: a wave and a particle. The normal context of a diffraction apparatus₃ brings wave properties of light₂ into relation with the potential of ‘observations of wavelengths’₁. The normal context of a metal plate₃ brings particle properties of light₂ into relation with potential ‘observations of the photo-electric effect’₁.

0005 Here is a picture.

0006 Here is another way to look at the photon as intersection.

0007 In the following blogs, I will endeavor to visualize whether Kemple’s use of the term, “intersection”, coheres with this technical definition.

In order to do so, I will locate two category-based nested forms, one for both Peirce and one for Heidegger, and see whether the two actualities meld into one.

05/17/23

Looking at Brian Kemple’s Book (2019) “The Intersection” (Part 2 of 4)

0008 The intersection is a technical term describing a single actuality constituted by two seemingly independent actualities.

Now I collect two nested forms from prior works by Razie Mah.

0009 For Peirce, I consider A Primer on Sensible and Social Construction. Point 0062 presents a three level interscope, depicting Peirce’s social construction. Here is a diagram of the virtual nested form in the realm of actuality.

0010 The content-level actuality_2a is the discovery that signs are triadic relations_2a. Triadic relations are luminous_2aand Peirce cannot situate that luminosity_2b within the modern philosophies of his day. This difficulty_2b situates the content-level actuality_2a and demands social construction_3c. Peirce realizes that three categories contextualize all experience_2c(because all experience utilizes signs_2a). The categories of firstness, secondness and thirdness are discussed in detail in chapter four of Kemple’s book.

0011 For Heidegger, I turn to Comments on Alexander Dugin’s Book (2012) The Fourth Political Theory. Point 0037 presents a three-level interscope for Heidegger’s construction of Being (Sein). Once again, the virtual nested form in the realm of actuality captures my attention.

Here is a diagram.

The normal context of inzwischen_2c (in between-ness) brings the actuality of Dasein_2b (the realization that Being is there (da-)) into relation with the possibilities inherent in Sein_2a (Being Itself).

0012 For these two virtual nested forms to serve as the nested forms for an intersection, the perspective-level actualities_2c, must take on the character of thirdness (over and above their location in secondness). This makes sense in so far as the perspective_c level corresponds to thirdness, the realm of normal contexts.

The same “taking on” applies to the content-level actualities_2a. They take on the character of firstness (over and beyond their location in secondness). This makes sense because the content_a level corresponds to firstness, the realm of possibility.

0013 Here is the resulting intersection.

An Archaeology of the Fall

A Horror Story by Razie Mah

Category Archives: Defining Religion