0796 Now, I repeat myself, more or less, with an awkward shift in associations.

On page 268, the author makes an important observation.  There is a popular saying that Soviet people (Russians in the USSR) think one thing and say another.  This is a joke.  This is also an act of will_1a, as opposed to truth_1a.  If I spoke_2awith truth_1a as the potential_1a underlying my intellect_3a, then one could estimate that what I think (as matter)_2a from the form of what I say_2a.

Obviously, there is a problem with previous associations to the Greimas square, where my (Russian) truth_1a (D) contrasts with my (Russian) will_1a (C), contradicts my Russian identity_3a (A) and complements the dyadic actuality of {what I think_2am [substantiates] what I say_2af} (B).

0797 The author thinks that the actuality_2a comports with George Orwell’s doublethink, where one holds two contradictory ideas in one’s consciousness.  Is that like one form and two matters?

Consciousness itself is doubled.  Each consciousness is intrinsically coherent.  Plus, the two consciousnesses do not seem to communicate with one another.  The person experiences a “split reality”.

0798 Does this “split reality” conform to the character of spoken language as two arbitrarily related systems of differences?

0799 The Greimas square may assist.

If I focus on my Russian identity (in a Soviet regime)_3a as a manifestation of my intellect_3a (A), then the following associations fall into place.

The subscript “om” stands for “originating matter”.  The “en” stands for “entangled matter”.

0800 The focal term (A) is my Russian identity (in a Soviet regime)_3a, corresponding to the normal context of the content-level of the interscope for the post-truth condition.

B contrasts with A.  What I say as a content-level matter_2ma substantiates (rather than entangles) my official consciousness as form_2af (B).

Somehow, what I say_2a changes from form to matter.  Plus, consciousness_2af stands as the form.

I suppose that the normal context_3a and the potential_1a must be different than before.

0801 Notably, this thing (B, matter and form) serves as phenomena for psychometric analysis by experts.

What are the experts trying to evaluate?

Obviously, Soviet experts are assessing my Russian will_1a (within the Marxist denkstyle) (C).

Currently, in the USDB, two types of experts are employed, each utilizing a scientific format in order to camouflage their theoretically incompatible denkstyles (of capitalism and of communism).  

Of course, expert valuations built by two incompatible ideologies and inscribed in disciplinary languages that mimic scientific layouts, may seem incoherent to people without academic credentials.

Consequently, many in the USDB no longer trust the science.

But, that is another story.

0802 Right now, my American will_1a (which underlies my intellect_3a) (C) speaks against what I say as matter_2aom and my official consciousness as form (B).  My American will_1a (C) complements my American identity_3a (in the USDBregime) (A) and, in doing so, partially accounts for the joke in point 0046.

0803 The joke is fulfilled when my private consciousness as form, which is a facet of my consciousness which is not official, entangles what I think_2am as matter, implying that what I think_2am cannot substantiate what I say_2af.

0804 Ha…ha…ha….was that an awkward shift in associations?

I suppose that the USSR and the USDB are not so… um… what was I going to say?

Maybe the following diagram will assist.

0805 I have been warned.

Never try to explain a joke.

Jokes are dangerous, just like confoundings.