Продолжение дискуссии о мета-модерне в группе "Дигитальная сфера"

Систематизация и связи

Философское творчество

Начало - http://philosophystorm.org/fragm-besedy-so-stefanom-taksistom-ssha-i-bruno-izobretatelem-mashiny-bogosloviya-kibernetikom-unive

Вы ответили Bruno

The beauty here, is that arithmetic explains all by itself why it is impossible to derive arithmetic from anything but less, or Turing equivalent. So, if we want just assume Digital Mechanism, we have to assume elementary arithmetic (or Turing equivalent). In fact, all what I say can be shown to be a consequence of two simple (but weird) axioms: Kxy = x and Sxyz = xz(yz). Those have been, discovered by Moses Shoenfinkel in Moscow in 1924. Now, to research truth is quite different than trying to make the world a better place. I do think that searching truth is a prerequisite for this for the long term, but I am not even sure of this. To be franc, I don't understand many of your point, but I am very simple minded, somehow, I understand only 1+1=2 and similar. Then with Mechanism, this is not just enough, it cannot be extended, for the ontology, and all the rest is extracted from listening to what the number already say, in their relative ways. I am not sure anything I say is simple, as it comes from 30 years of hard work, based on theorems often quite misunderstood (Gödel's theorems) , and what I say contradict 1500 years of Aristotelian theology (the belief in a primarily physical universe). But Pythagorus and Plato, did have the correct insight (with respect to this machine's or number's theology). With mechanism we get de Chardin as a theorem: we are not humans having spiritual experiences, we are spiritual being having human experiences. We are not material volumique bodies dreaming about numbers, we are numbers dreaming about bodies and volumes.

thanks, everything is clear you say "proven" The question is, what is the evidence based on? Aristotle answered this question. Unfortunately, postmodernism declares the search for truth to be self-deception. This is not a paradox. Truth is a myth about life. Life is a myth about the truth. The myth "I am intelligent" is at the heart of everything. Perhaps you call "Aristotle theology" something - which has nothing to do with Aristotle. Perhaps criticizing in vain. Perhaps you are simply repeating what he said 2500 years ago. To clarify - you need to re-read the analytics in the original. I personally do not see any differences; Aristotle's words are more precise. But I won’t argue. First you need to understand your every term. You write: "We are not material volumes of the body, but dreams of quantity, we are numbers that dream of bodies and volume." - I totally agree !!!! We are living computers, forgetting - sometimes - who we are, but remembering sometimes.

26 МАЯ 2020 Г., 08:43

Michael Papaiacovou

I'll read up on modernik stuff but for a reason I tend to ignore beliefs based on culture, it's like saying knowledge of the self comes solely from the mirror as an object.

It's stupid.

References lead to the start of the Nation State with the French Revolution like

@Andrei

noted leading into nationalist cultures, outrageous, ignorant beliefs.

History is wrong.

Michael Papaiacovou

Industry is not a product of culture, it's the other way around.

Michael Papaiacovou

Culture or Religion *

Brett Oda ответил(-а) Michael

Industry is not a product of culture, it's the other way around.

not really

Michael ответил Brett Oda

not really

Yes, really. De facto ignorance?

Brett Oda

Robots and humans co-evolve

Michael ответил

I'll read up on modernik stuff but for a reason I tend to ignore beliefs based on culture, it's like saying knowledge of the self comes solely from the mirror as an object.

It's stupid.

References lead to the start of the Nation State with the French Revolution like @Andrei noted leading into nationalist cultures, outrageous, ignorant beliefs.

History is wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man?wprov=sfla1

In the 1993 Foreign Affairs article, Huntington writes:

It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.

The End of History and the Last Man - Wikipedia

The End of History and the Last Man (1992), by Francis Fukuyama, is a book of political philosophy which proposes that with the ascendancy of Western liberal democracy, which occurred after the Cold War (1945–1991) and the dissolution of the Soviet Union (1991), humanity has reached "not just ......

en.wikipedia.org

Brett Oda

The clash of civilization is a bad analogy to reality. It's based on pro-western, pro-American, pro-military values.

It's chauvenistic and racist, but it's also just a bad metaphor for the current state of the world.

Michael ответил

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_History_and_the_Last_Man?wprov=sfla1

In the 1993 Foreign Affairs article, Huntington writes:

Some theorists and writers argued that human rights, liberal democracy and capitalist free market economics had become the only remaining ideological alternative for nations in the post–Cold War world.

Innovation is literally diverging from the norms. Aka Culture

Brett Oda

it depends

Michael ответил Brett Oda

It's chauvenistic and racist, but it's also just a bad metaphor for the current state of the world.

Michael ответил Brett Oda

it depends

This is what we have.

Modern day Politics validates it.

Brett Oda

Post-scarcity is already coming.

Michael Papaiacovou

Michael удалил сообщение

Robots progress, humans evolve. Society is the primitive myth with industry as its modern gods. Culture of the Cyanide is already established, we are at war with our selfs since culture and religion produced "society". * Look around.

Michael Papaiacovou

I agree with

@Bruno

that it's philosophically favorite to quest for truth, and that making the "world a better place" requires some sort of belief, that's the reason why we socialize, why we operate through an organized society.

Brett Oda

Aren't we all connected?

Michael Papaiacovou

@Andrei

, from my research, albeit primitive and through the current trends in technology and political science, I find that blockchain (and even more the combination with "AI" & and automatic contracting) can advance society through a new epoch of socioeconomic development, of course, merging corporatism and capitalism, socialism and the state, and ideology with philosophy to mitigate harms done and reduce "systemic risks" (!) and furthermore prevent social costs.

Albeit a belief stems from aesthetics, "that quest for beauty" the inner drive of the ancient Greek philosophers, towards a logical sequence to that effect, reason, to what I call a legitimate society.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

It's chauvenistic and racist, but it's also just a bad metaphor for the current state of the world.

meaningless muttering

Вы ответили Michael

This is what we have.

we have our lives

Вы ответили Brett Oda

Aren't we all connected?

unity requires sacrifice

Вы ответили Michael

@Andrei, from my research, albeit primitive and through the current trends in technology and political science, I find that blockchain (and even more the combination with "AI" & and automatic contracting) can advance society through a new epoch of socioeconomic development, of course, merging corporatism and capitalism, socialism and the state, and ideology with philosophy to mitigate harms done and reduce "systemic risks" (!) and furthermore prevent social costs.

I fully support !!! I regret that I can’t answer in detail now. I will write you later. Brett is right and wrong at the same time. He is just young. Maximalist. Thinks only of the private. He does not understand this as a general limit (imperative). The truth is in the middle. In creativity. But, he is looking for himself in the right direction. He needs time and life experience. His words are isolated from the meanings of culture. He does not see this yet. Combining words and soul is a feat. He will come to this unity.

Michael ответил вам

unity requires sacrifice

Yes, of illusions, very hard to do. Unity is kind of the knowledge of truth. Being young you have an advantage and disadvantages.

Вы ответили Michael

Yes, of illusions, very hard to do.

Unity is kind of the knowledge of truth.

Being young you have an advantage and disadvantages.

Yes,

- where are my 17 years old?

- on a large shed (name of the alley in Moscow)

- where are my 17 troubles?

- on a large shed https://youtu.be/_f6nY79Zdmo

- where is my black gun?

- on a large shed

- where am I not today?

- on a large shed

Высоцкий. "На Большом Каретном".

Для видеоряда использованы эпизоды из документального фильма "Владимир Высоцкий. "Я не верю судьбе". Страна - Россия, 2013г. Режиссер: Людмила Снигирева.

youtube.com

Michael Papaiacovou

Andrei Khanov

Bruno Marchal

I answer the question above. Once something si proven, you need only the evidence for the axioms chosen. The evidence for Mechanism is biology (Descartes, Darwin) and the confirmation by quantum mechanics (predicted from mechanism in his general shape). I don't have to add the evidence for elementary arithmetic, because this is already admitted in the term "digital". (I see 30 messages, I apologise in advance for not commenting more, as I have the exams now, at a distance, which is much more work, June will be even more busy this year). Best!

Вы ответили Bruno

Hi Bruno! I agree! Yes! nothing needs to be proved. The naturalness of the syllogism is the proof of any evidence. "The evidence for Mechanism is biology (Descartes, Darwin) and the confirmation by quantum mechanics (predicted from mechanism in his general shape)." and human thinking itself, fact. good luck with exams!

Andrei Khanov

I ran otherwise the pass will end we continue the camp with digital passes for life I'll be back later

28 МАЯ 2020 Г., 09:58

Bruno Marchal

Thanks, have a nice Thursday

@Andrei

, and others!

Andrei Khanov

4 ИЮН 2020 Г., 09:48

Brett Oda

eyo

Michael Papaiacovou

Aye

Brett Oda

Aye

Andrei Khanov

AIEO

Brett Oda

ey girl

Michael Papaiacovou

Basically "arithmetics" aka "measured economy" is not far fetched. Much of it goes in "dark", anti-enlighenment, mainstream practice, I don't know. Information Age. Good?

Brett Oda

thx bb~ word up

Andrei Khanov

Good morning!

Michael Papaiacovou

Michael ответил

Фото

It looks and feels good!

Andrei Khanov

Brett Oda

cool feet

Andrei Khanov

Brett Oda is necessary for us as a source of the point of view of the new generation. He will understand us - everyone else will understand. I have no resurgence against his participation in the project. But the project is a new space between different points of view. In order to accept his point of view on himself and coordinate with our such points of view, he must express it.

Michael Papaiacovou

https://books.google.com.cy/books?id=XwnE2kVzVPQC&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=post+contemporary+transcendence&source=bl&ots=cAZ6JYMlpA&sig=ACfU3U1jnqDbLCTyILmcpJ38poSSUH91Uw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj00YD56ufpAhURuRoKHS5hDV8Q6AEwDnoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=post%20contemporary%20transcendence&f=false

Andrei Khanov

4 ИЮН 2020 Г., 16:31

Brett Oda ответил(-а) вам

Brett Oda is necessary for us as a source of the point of view of the new generation. He will understand us - everyone else will understand.

I have no resurgence against his participation in the project. But the project is a new space between different points of view. In order to accept his point of view on himself and coordinate with our such points of view, he must express it.

In terms of what?

4 ИЮН 2020 Г., 18:23

Andrei Khanov

Так надо

4 ИЮН 2020 Г., 22:54

Brett Oda

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ckg-I57H4go

Jamie Wheal - Can We Evolve Our Consciousness From Ethnocentrism To Gloablcentrism in time?

How do we play the Infinite Game? And how will that help us make sense of a world in chaos? Jamie Wheal is one of the world's experts in flow states and tran...

youtube.com

We have to glimpse a Kosmocentric perspective in order to annex a globalcentric stance.

5 ИЮН 2020 Г., 00:24

Вы ответили Brett Oda

We have to glimpse a Kosmocentric perspective in order to annex a globalcentric stance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Mach

Ernst Mach - Wikipedia

Ernst Waldfried Josef Wenzel Mach (/ˈmɑːx/; German: [ˈɛɐ̯nst max]; 18 February 1838 – 19 February 1916) was an Austrian[8] physicist and philosopher, noted for his contributions to physics such as the study of shock waves. The ratio of one's speed to that of sound is named the Mach number i...

en.wikipedia.org

wrong link

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach%27s_principle

Mach's principle - Wikipedia

In theoretical physics, particularly in discussions of gravitation theories, Mach's principle (or Mach's conjecture[1]) is the name given by Einstein to an imprecise hypothesis often credited to the physicist and philosopher Ernst Mach. The idea is that the existence of absolute rotation (the distin...

en.wikipedia.org

this link

we owe nothing to anyone Before making theories, it is necessary to indicate who you retell and explain why this retelling of yours is relevant we are discussing much more serious things here

Brett Oda ответил(-а) вам

we owe nothing to anyone

Before making theories, it is necessary to indicate who you retell and explain why this retelling of yours is relevant

we are discussing much more serious things here

What could be more important than being a Kosmic citizen? If that is unimportant, then I will leave.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

What could be more important than being a Kosmic citizen? If that is unimportant, then I will leave.

stay here but speak correctly

Brett Oda ответил(-а) вам

stay here but speak correctly

What is correct? Who determines it?

Вы ответили Brett Oda

What is correct? Who determines it?

mind

Brett Oda

Who is mind?

Andrei Khanov

understand the theory of mindunderstand the theory of the mind of Plato, Aristotle or Confucius

Brett Oda

Those are all spin offs of buddha.

Andrei Khanov

bullshit

Brett Oda

I've attained seership. So, I can dismiss theories which do not sustain the infinite consciousness.

Andrei Khanov

words about theory are not equal to theory the theory of an object is not equal to an object not a single text is serious

Brett Oda

All of western philosophy is a footnote on plato.

Likewise all of eastern philosophy is a footnote to the mental rapture of nirvana.

Andrei Khanov

words about enlightenment are probably fraud we must not talk about knowledge, we must demonstrate it with our ability to communicate

Brett Oda ответил(-а) вам

words about enlightenment are probably fraud

we must not talk about knowledge, we must demonstrate it with our ability to communicate

communication is a fraud in the face of nirvana

You cannot speak about nirvana, because you have never attained it.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

All of western philosophy is a footnote on plato.

eastern - exactly the same, no difference

Brett Oda

Buddhism is independent of plato.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

Likewise all of eastern philosophy is a footnote to the mental rapture of nirvana.

the Greeks have the same thing

Brett Oda

You cannot understand that of which plato spoke with mere philosophy.

Brett Oda ответил(-а) вам

the Greeks have the same thing

Plotinus, Plato, these were transcendent beings But most of the greek population never attained the transcendent, they are footnotes

Вы ответили Brett Oda

Buddhism is independent of plato.

it is the same

Brett Oda ответил(-а) вам

it is the same

You must contextualize. Buddhism is more to the point.

Plotinus, Plato, these were transcendent beings

But most of the greek population never attained the transcendent, they are footnotes

like in india

Brett Oda

Pythagoras went to india

Andrei Khanov

pretty crazy words your words are not buddhism

Brett Oda

You literally have no clue what you are talking about with any of your philosophy

Brett Oda ответил(-а) вам

pretty crazy words

your words are not buddhism

you must have never heard of mahayana

Вы ответили Brett Oda

You must contextualize. Buddhism is more to the point.

you violate the main principle but you are young, gradually understand

Brett Oda

And you have never attained nirvana.

Through the process of 5 years I attained nirvikalpa samadhi at the age of 23

But what do I know? All of your philosophy is useless.

You are too old to understand.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

You are too old to understand.

Sorry, I'm not interested your words carry no information but one - you are still very young April, we will talk later, when you understand what a conversation is thank

Brett Oda

I'm sorry you are incapacitated to communicate.

You understand little of which you speak, yet you speak it.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

You understand little of which you speak, yet you speak it.

how do you know you are a child

Brett Oda

You call yourself a man, but act like child. That's how I know.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

You call yourself a man, but act like child. That's how I know.

all that’s true is that there’s nothing to talk about with you but just now

Вы ответили Brett Oda

You call yourself a man, but act like child. That's how I know.

you repeat the words of the interlocutor - this is very stupid

Вы ответили Brett Oda

I'm sorry you are incapacitated to communicate.

you mixed up this group with instagram for teenagers

Brett Oda

But see who is reacting? It's because your religious fantasies have no meaning when we speak about the reality and affairs of heaven.

Such a weak mind must react, because their edifice is not based on the logic of humanity, but rather ego.

Brett Oda ответил(-а) вам

you mixed up this group with instagram for teenagers

You will never understand nirvana, Tao, Plotinus, or anything with this attitude to those who have attained more than you, spiritually speaking.

You should at least be a kind, and meager man. Otherwise you are the manchild that Plato warned about.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

But see who is reacting? It's because your religious fantasies have no meaning when we speak about the reality and affairs of heaven.

There is an eternal abyss of misunderstanding between the two, the conversation makes sense only after solving this problem you just demonstrate this problem, it’s not interesting,

Brett Oda ответил(-а) вам

There is an eternal abyss of misunderstanding between the two, the conversation makes sense only after solving this problem

you just demonstrate this problem, it’s not interesting,

One with superior knowledge of the abyss.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

One with superior knowledge of the abyss.

Need to end the conversation sensation occurs only voluntarily, but you are not interesting to me if you want to continue, find the answer to the question "why are the words not serious? - Plato has an answer

Brett Oda

I even understood plato. You philosophy is muted, drastically doesn't make sense.

Who has the superior knowledge here? And you can easily see.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

I even understood plato.

You philosophy is muted, drastically doesn't make sense.

no go to sleep

Brett Oda

You must sleep in the grave with the dead philosophers. I have never seen such committment to delusion. Find buddha.

Menchildren are the curse of the humanity.

Вы ответили Brett Oda

You must sleep in the grave with the dead philosophers. I have never seen such committment to delusion. Find buddha.

Russian language can be very rude, you can’t even imagine how much better just say goodbye and go to sleep

Brett Oda

Go hug putin.

Andrei Khanov

Michael, I'm blocking this boy, sorry

Brett Oda

Fake knowledge.

Brett Oda ответил(-а) вам

Michael, I'm blocking this boy, sorry

this is a boy right here... for entire world to see When confronted on his philosophy

Michael, if you're in bed with this man please delete me

Andrei Khanov

5 ИЮН 2020 Г., 20:02

Brett Oda

fuck you

@Michael Papaiacovou

i'm out of your dumbass group

fuck you motherfuckers

Контакт покинул группу.

6 ИЮН 2020 Г., 04:57

Stephen Paul KIng покинул(-а) группу.

6 ИЮН 2020 Г., 12:47

Andrei Khanov

oops! I am sure that metamodern is intolerant: when for a person in the whole world there is only his own feeling, only his name of own feeling. And even - the exact definition of this name - already provokes the protest of this person. this a person can always go to the supermarket of names of feelings and buy his name as a commodity. any knowledge in metamodern is such a commodity. if the interlocutor of such a person is not obsessed with the same name of own feeling, then the person is ready to kill him, just not to think with his own head. The comfort of consuming information is more important than the information itself. Nothing can be changed, such persons are not subjective to conversation. I am very sorry that I provoked him. but it is his defense against the impulses of the him soul emanating from him subconscious. He will calm down.

ПН 16:26

Michael Papaiacovou

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qqf-pHDE9WQ

Quantum sovereignty: the Westphalian principle and the global governance of cyberspace

In this public seminar, Professor Paul Cornish reviews one important aspect of the contemporary debate concerning the governance of cyberspace and the direct...

youtube.com

Andrei Khanov

ПН 19:08

Michael Papaiacovou

https://cup.columbia.edu/book/posthumanism-in-art-and-science/9780231196673

Posthumanism in Art and Science | Columbia University Press

Posthumanism has come to synthesize philosophical, literary, and artistic responses to the pressures of technology, globalization, and mass extinction in the... | CUP

cup.columbia.edu

ВТ 08:37

+++++++++++++

ВТ 08:37

Andrei Khanov

СР 21:33

Michael Papaiacovou

https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/8697/volumes/v29/NA-29

The Emergence of the Posthuman Consumer and the Fusion of the Virtual and the Real: a Critical Analysis of Sony=S Ad For Memory Sticktm | ACR

ABSTRACT - As the world moves closer to new cybernetic life forms (i.e. self-regulating technological entities) a fundamental question arises as to what the term Ahuman@ means. An equally important question is whether we are entering a new phase of Aposthuman@ lifeworld inhabited by cyborgs composed...

acrwebsite.org

ЧТ 10:16

Michael Papaiacovou добавил Brent Cooper в группу.

Michael Papaiacovou

https://medium.com/the-abs-tract-organization

The Abs-Tract Organization – Medium

A Metamodern Think Tank for Global Civil Society and Absolute Social Philosophy, based on new insights in "abstraction.".

medium.com

this is

@Brent Cooper

work, would like to introduce you to our discussion

Brent Cooper

Hello.. this is a chat I had 2 weeks ago with some Russians, about metamodernis, FYI. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkzZhG4OjGQ

Metamodernism in Moscow

Discussion about Metamodernism with a class at the Moscow State Linguistic University.

youtube.com

Bruno Marchal

The big divide in metaphysics is in between the Platonic conception or Reality and the Aristotelian one. This divides Buddhism, Hindouisme, ... and even the Abramanic religion for a period of time. The Aristotelian believe that the fundamental reality is what we see/observe/measure. The Platonic is skeptical, and tend to believe that what we see/observe/measure is only a symptom of simpler first principles. (in relation with points made above).

Brent Cooper

It's late here.. I'll have to pick up on this tomorrow.

Michael Papaiacovou

dude your awesome

@Bruno Marchal

this is link to

@Brent Cooper

article https://medium.com/the-abs-tract-organization/cultivate-yourself-with-avantgardening-5e1ac2dea561

Cultivate Yourself with AvantGardening

Becoming a Successful Cannabis Consumer in 3 Easy Steps

medium.com

Michael ответил Bruno

Looking into (Axiom of) (downward) Causality,

...dynamicists argue that psychology should be (or is) the description (via differential equations) of the cognitions and behaviors of an agent under certain environmental and internal pressures.

The language of chaos theory is also frequently adopted.

http://home.oise.utoronto.ca/~mlewis/Manuscripts/Promise.pdf

home.oise.utoronto.ca

ЧТ 14:18

Andrei Khanov

oops!

again about meta-modern and metamodenism ....

How not to get tired?

Michael! Bruno! It is urgent to make an exhibition in the museum and publish a book. We will sell this book about the difference between meta-modern and metamodernism. And about the indistinguishability of the teachings of Parmenides and Plato and rationality (pragmatism and postmodernism). That's how many readers. They obviously need a book. I will translate the book into Russian

Вы ответили Brent

Hello.. this is a chat I had 2 weeks ago with some Russians, about metamodernis, FYI. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkzZhG4OjGQ

This topic is really exaggerated in Moscow, but I will not exaggerate interest in it. It’s more like Russian hype. Fashionable conversation topic for amateurs. The problem is deeper. The level of discussion should be improved.

Вы ответили Michael

Looking into (Axiom of) (downward) Causality,

...dynamicists argue that psychology should be (or is) the description (via differential equations) of the cognitions and behaviors of an agent under certain environmental and internal pressures.

The language of chaos theory is also frequently adopted.

http://home.oise.utoronto.ca/~mlewis/Manuscripts/Promise.pdf

Hi Michael! I am pleased to read your messages, everything is said, nothing needs to be supplemented. Saving forces.

Вы ответили Brent

It's late here.. I'll have to pick up on this tomorrow.

Please send me a link to your book. Reading the original is always more informative than listening to the author’s story about the success of his story. We already discussed this topic here ... and some of the participants in the discussion of us ... (quote "i'm out of your dumbass group, fuck you motherfuckers") and self-deduced. Start with your book itself. Thank!

Вы ответили Bruno

Hi Bruno! Yes! The grace of Thomas Aquinas is a consistent unity of the theory of Plato's discourse and Aristotle's holism. This is the concept of Pierre Abelard, rationality. The postmodern consensus of all discourses. Universal solidarity, regardless of the differences in points of view on the truth. But if you read Plato himself and Aristotle himself, then they talked about such a unity (soul, syllogism). Their theories were contrasted later in the era of the loss of rationality.

Andrei Khanov

Hello everyone! I will be glad to meet the new member of Brent Cooper. I'll try to delve into his book. Our task is not to argue about each other's shortcomings, but to enjoy communication based on an initial understanding of everything. I am glad that we all understand each other very well and I hope that new participants will follow the same path.

Andrei Khanov

truth cannot be expressed in words, but it can be shown to each other as a semiotic sign.

Andrei Khanov

I will inform our new participant in the conversation that we have already agreed that modern technologies (blockchain, virtual reality, quantum computer, etc.) help to visualize the concepts of ancient Greek (and eastern philosophy and archaic myth). This is a new myth about the technological era. There is no need to talk about him, but he can be demonstrated (revived) by words and deeds. No good book is about anything. The book is the semantic aspect of the semiotic sign of something. What? Inner clarity localized in everyone’s soul. I hope that our new friend will contribute to this discussion - as a sign. Will give him great stability.

ПТ 12:05

Michael ответил вам

this was a text i was going to reply on the conversation but emmited. -Words & Signs (aka National Deficit, Financial Derivatives, Non Performing Loans - Law Economy & Politics, Neoliberal Ideology - Democratic Goverment - Gurrus/Philosphers and Artists - Dollars/Rubles/Euros, software-code-law) are Empty Vessels, symbols THAT misrespresent reality and are(!) grand illusions(?). Logos, Brahman, the Universal Machine, can not -never- indicate to Reason, Nirvana, into themselfs, themselfs, they can indicate to Atman and The Self, furthermore to the Gears of the Thing, made visible, in a constructive (wellbeing) albeit abstract Form, the Divinity (our responsibility to represent...!!!.) That is not to say the science of consciousness did not progress, in Theory, either through "Sentience and Reason", indeed this is validated by the results in the span of 200 thousand years or so. On the other hand technology bearly hits the mark of having "transcendental qualities" be it spiritual in nature or otherwise indicating a "higher intelligence". One false idol of worship after another. (Eliminative Materialism?)

Michael Papaiacovou

putting pieces here and there: ---- "Information is neither matter nor energy, but it needs matter for its embodiment and energy for its communication." ----- -(Emperical) Knowledge cannot be communicated- (?) When a philosopher rearranges and communicates ideas, verbally in lectures, or as written words in a published paper, or as the bits of information in a computer memory, this is "information out of order."

ПТ 13:22

Вы ответили Michael

this was a text i was going to reply on the conversation but emmited.

-Words & Signs (aka National Deficit, Financial Derivatives, Non Performing Loans - Law Economy & Politics, Neoliberal Ideology - Democratic Goverment - Gurrus/Philosphers and Artists - Dollars/Rubles/Euros, software-code-law) are Empty Vessels, symbols THAT misrespresent reality and are(!) grand illusions(?).

Logos, Brahman, the Universal Machine, can not -never- indicate to Reason, Nirvana, into themselfs, themselfs, they can indicate to Atman and The Self, furthermore to the Gears of the Thing, made visible, in a constructive (wellbeing) albeit abstract Form, the Divinity (our responsibility to represent...!!!.)

That is not to say the science of consciousness did not progress, in Theory, either through "Sentience and Reason", indeed this is validated by the results in the span of 200 thousand years or so.

On the other hand technology bearly hits the mark of having "transcendental qualities" be it spiritual in nature or otherwise indicating a "higher intelligence".

One false idol of worship after another.

(Eliminative Materialism?)

Hi Michael! Honestly, I didn’t understand anything from this text of yours. Plato said "not a single written text is serious, because it is not God who writes and reads it, but man." This is the only truth about man. To see or not to see the signs of the soul. Everything else is vanity. I understand the connection between your words and your actions as such a syotic sign indicating your inner understanding of life. And I recognize you as an interesting interlocutor. But, when I see only written text, I don’t understand its context at all. This is the same case. There are no problems described in the text. Words about these problems - they speak only about the inaccuracy of the sign. I hope you return to your previous understanding.

Вы ответили Michael

putting pieces here and there:

----

"Information is neither matter nor energy, but it needs matter for its embodiment and energy for its communication."

-----

-(Emperical) Knowledge cannot be communicated- (?)

When a philosopher rearranges and communicates ideas, verbally in lectures, or as written words in a published paper, or as the bits of information in a computer memory, this is "information out of order."

In the second part of your text, the former clarity of thought returns. You are talking exactly about the same thing that I wrote to you a minute ago. Yes it is. There is a Confucian abyss of misunderstanding between people, just like between two parts of your text. One edge of the abyss - Description of the problem in words - this is custom, culture, corporate spirit, the generally accepted point of view (that there is a problem). The other side of the abyss is the sign of the soul, indicating that no problem simply exists and that this abyss itself is the reason for the human mind. The bridge over this godless is the mind. Reason was given to man in order to solve all contradictions, creating a bridge over the abyss (consensus, concept, grace, Zen, Bruno say "rationality") - as an artistic image, as a sign clearly indicating the unity of all parts of the soul. To argue is to seek this sign together. When a sign is built over the abyss between you and me, there is nothing more to argue about. It is necessary to join efforts and make the world a better place. How to do it? Helping other people overcome such an abyss within themselves.

Andrei Khanov

ПТ 19:29

Brent Cooper

@Andrei Khanov metamodernism is for amateurs? What do you think you know about it? Sure there are different pockets that aren't very interesting, but don't be arrogant. Any serious research will take you down deeper threads, which I have done and most others have not. I've not written a book, but my blog is a little over two books worth of content. By blog has some featured stuff near the top for onboarding, then the rest is in chronological order. Different things will be relevant to different people, but as I was telling Michael, I (ghost)wrote a book on Smart Cities last year, so that is the jumping off point for technical/business opportunities. But the rest of my work is quite diverse.

Modernism is an indexical, and all words mentioned it are a bit fuzzy to me. I prefer name with makes clear the ontological assumptions, like idealism versus materialism, or neutral monism. I might be Gard on this, but I think that philosophy and theology should come back to science, and as long as this is not done, we are in the obscurantist era. I can explain why the Aristotelian (materialist) assumption is logically incompatible with the Mechanist thesis (Descartes refined through the Church-Turing Thesis). With mechanism, the mind-body problem is reduced into a mathematical problem: deriving physics from the many modes of self-reference imposed by incompleteness. I can give references if interested. (I work on this since 40 years).

ПТ 22:53

Вы ответили Bruno

give references, i interested

a semiotic analysis of the schools of philosophizing was performed by Frank. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semyon_Frank

- see the picture.

Sorry, but there is no translation into English. I will transfer to you later. Frank's classification does not fundamentally differ from the theories of speech of Plato, Aristotle, the ancient Taoists, Confucius-Pythagoras, pragmatic semiotics, color models, quantum logic and hadron classification in nuclear physics.

Indeed, in this classification there is no modernism. Looking ahead I will say - this is "rationalism." These are synonyms.

Modernism is included in another classification of types of speech - in the theory of Plato's discourse and systemic psychoanalysis by Jacques Lacan.

It is necessary to agree on the numbering of terms:

1. Sense of idea (unity 2, 3, 4 - light or the absence of such unity - darkness, white and black, two options, obsession and passivity in psychoanalysis).

2. The name of the feeling of the idea ("symbolic" in psizoanalysis, blue, time in physics).

3. Drawing the name of the feeling of the idea (imagined in psizoanalysis, green, distance in physics).

4. Understanding the name of the feeling of an idea from its drawing ("real" in psychonalysis, red, mass in physics)

There are 24 possible permutations of 4 digits. This is a complete set of limits of thinking. Any such combination is a symbol of a self-sufficient worldview.

Modes of thinking (discourses, ideologies, worldviews):

1324 - modernism, this is the type of thinking of a true scientist, for example, Galileo or a true artist, for example Giotto (13-person speech: 1-obsession means 3-imagination-drawing of the name of the feeling of an idea; 24-dream-subconscious of a person: 2-symbol means 4- understanding).

3142 - modern, this is the type of thinking of an artisan (31-person speech: 3-imagination-drawing means 1-creative passivity; 42-dream-subconscious of a person: 4-understanding means 2-symbol-name).

1423 - postmodernism (aristotelism, pragmatism, rationalism, metamodernism), this is the type of thinking of a revolutionary, for example, Che Guevara (14-person speech: 1-obsession means 4-understanding; 23-dream-subconscious of a person: 2-symbol means 3-imagination- picture).

4123 - postmodern (metamodern), this is the type of thinking of a secret police officer, corrupt official, expert on a television show (41-person speech: 4-understanding means 1-creative passivity; 23-dream-subconscious of a person: 2-symbol means 4-imagination-drawing )

and 20 other modes of self-thinking.

All discourses are equal. All of them are the same prison of spirit.

All discourses compete with each other for primacy.

Historical epochs are characterized by a certain main discourse. History is the rewriting of historical texts in accordance with the victorious discourse

Postmodernism (metamodernism) is both a discourse and at the same time a call for a consensus of all discourses. This is a call to end the war and just start working together.

But both classifications (discursive and semiotic) are simply two different languages, like a ternary and a quaternary code. They are easily transferred from one to another.

In the context of the semiotics of the philosophical schools of Frank - modernism 1324 (a combination of salad color + violet color = gray color) is Aristotelian - speech as a statement (from general to particular) + dream, as a negation (from particular to general).

Plato's discourse is the syllogism of Aristotle. This is a semiotic sign in the logic of pragmatism and postmodernism. This is the target audience in marketing, physical quantity.

Modernity and modernism - this is "advertising" or "force".

In the classification of types of philosophy of Frank, this is "rationalism."

Modern is "obscurantism".

Postmodern (metamodern) is - "super obscurantism".

Postmodernism (metamodernism) is an intellectual protest against the "super obscurantist era".

But this is a war, obscurantist era - it gives battle to postmodernism, changes the contexts of words, turns the meanings inside out.

Andrei Khanov

Вы ответили Brent

I've not written a book, but my blog is a little over two books worth of content. By blog has some featured stuff near the top for onboarding, then the rest is in chronological order. Different things will be relevant to different people, but as I was telling Michael, I (ghost)wrote a book on Smart Cities last year, so that is the jumping off point for technical/business opportunities. But the rest of my work is quite diverse.

Hello!

pun in Russian: "arrogance" (vysikomerie) - is a "high measure" (vysokaya mera)

We solve space problems, we simply do not have time for a low measure.

Here everyone has written many books, it is not important for communication with each other. Let me remind you of the words of Plato "not a single written text is serious."

Here we talked a lot and came to a mutual understanding. What People say not with words, but with semiotic signs, words are their shell. But words also have content hidden in the soul and there is a connection between the external and the internal. Only the exact connection of the idea and the words about it works. Zen

Do not say anything about your book (the blog is also a book) - just send me a link to it. I will read and then answer. Now I have no opinion.

But I know Russia well.

If Michael invited you, then he believes that we will agree. Begin to negotiate.

Metamodern - we call it "super obscurantism". This is confusing exact terms. Digimodern. Replacing information with the comfort of its consumption. Semantic hallucinations.

Metamodernism is the same as high or moral postmodernism. The revival of the ancient myth of the human mind in the language of technology. This is a decoding of the blockchain signs of thinking.

We are interested in practical actions. We are discussing these actions. Samopiar is not interesting to us here. We already discussed the topic of metamodern and the previous speaker could not stand it and ran away from us.

I hope your thoughts are logical, please send links to the texts. Or tell your theory briefly.

Pay attention to the name of the group, try to understand what it is.

This is like Stanislaw Lem Solaris, but only around our planet Earth, an ocean of digitized human thoughts. It is located anywhere, it is the cipher of electrons in the processors of all computers.

We translate this text of the "sphere of fixed stars" from the quantum language of electrons into the human language and it turns out:

- Bruno has rational theosophy,

- Michael and I have an antique Greek philosophy of life. Theory of telos (life energy).

We believe that modern technologies (virtual reality blockchain) allow us to translate the philosophy of Parmenides, Plato and Aristotle to a contemporary. In our common opinion, this will make the world a better place. Bring in virtual reality

"digital sphere" is an art project.

Brent Cooper

All theory is a bit obscurantist.. I try to avoid that and be clear and concrete, even though "abstraction" is how I frame my work.. I dunno who you talked to, but there is definitely people full of shit, and I've been critical of other schools of thought.

Michael posted my link when I entered, it's here. https://medium.com/the-abs-tract-organization

The Abs-Tract Organization – Medium

A Metamodern Think Tank for Global Civil Society and Absolute Social Philosophy, based on new insights in "abstraction.".

medium.com

Andrei Khanov

Thank you, I understand you. I do not speak English, but I more or less understand the English text, Google can translate my words with an error. You have to take such a meaningful hallucination. I will read your text tomorrow. All the best! Your answer is rational, it pleases !!!

Brent Cooper

Right on, I appreciate it cuz I only speak english..

Вы ответили Brent

Right on, I appreciate it cuz I only speak english..

OK I hope Google does not fail, until everything is clear, I read You talk about metamodernism and call yourself a rebel - that’s good. The words are ambiguous, it is a fact. But this does not require listing all the semantic hallucinations of a contemporary. Abstraction is a symbolic form of an idea, that’s enough. In painting, this is a semiotic sign of the soul or painted paradise.

Andrei Khanov

"By using our mental abstraction to stare into the abyss, we can get but a glimpse of it; abstraction stares back at us." "I’m looking at the mountain, the mountain is looking at me." (Chinese sings 6th ec) it's about meta-recursion - man reflects the idea of nature with his thinking, but nature reflects the idea of man - his thinking

Brent Cooper

and society is becoming increasingly abstract.. our mental abstraction is expanding, becoming more complex.. mapping reality.. but yet so many people, even very educated people, make intellectual mistakes.. they commit failures in abstraction.

Andrei Khanov

I will stop on this for now, I will continue later, maybe I already understood what it is with you, but I will re-read it in the morning.

Brent Cooper

Вы ответили Brent

this is called metamodern = semantic hallucination = clip thinking = Alan Kirby's digimodern but it’s not only now, it’s always been the human mind is a bridge to the abyss of misunderstanding by people but this is a matter of significance, while I read about your call for the symbolic form of an idea ("idea" only in the symbolic (abstract in your opinion) context of Plato’s speech theory)

Andrei Khanov

Enough I am going to sleep! Continue in the morning. Thank. Interesting text.

Andrei Khanov

This is how I sleep

"Ultimately, in this formulation, abstraction exists earlier than humans; it is the process by which life develops."

namely, but this is not an abstraction in my understanding, it is the connection of the soul and the words about it, which is the "energy of life".

"I think - that means I exist" Parmenides, "I am" Descartes. This is a myth (picture of the world). The myth of Homo sapiens precedes man. A man is only trying to remember him. You definitely said that.

You use the term abstraction in the context of the combinatorics of abstract numbers.

Next is the retelling of Plato in your words.

Your four squares are an interpretation of the four stages of Plato's speech (read Plato's Seventh Letter, tag 343)

But there is a fifth stage of speech.

The semiotic sign is the combinatorics of one of three forms of an idea (1-abstraction, 2-example, 3-literal real, understandable), one of three meanings (1-hype, maxim, 2-fact, 3-rule of law - imperative) and one of three degrees reliability of the meaning of an idea in a sense-form (1-hypothesis, custom, cultural norm, question, self-irony, corporate spirit, corruption, 2-image, syllogism, Zen, concept, consensus, dicentre, unity of the signifier and the signified, 3-argument, answer, deconstruction of hallucination reconstruction of myth, spiritual discovery).

Matrix of semiotic signs:

111 113 133 333

112 123 233

122 223

222

Each of the 10 types of signs implies a permutation of numbers as you like. This is the matrix of hadrons (subatomic particles) in nuclear physics in the mid-20th century (1960). Postmodernism in physics. Theory of quarks and gluons. This is I Ching of ancient Taoists.

112 - proton, 122 - neutron.

This is a cube lattice. This is Aristotle's analytics, this is 2500 years old, the forgotten basis of logic.In the mathematics of the mid-19th century, this is a special unitary group, in the pragmatic philosophy of the late 19th century it is a matrix of all semiotic signs of thinking.Now this is a matrix of target audiences in marketing.

Division of a cube into three dimensions. The height from the denial of abstraction to its affirmation is a form of idea. It is long from particular to general - meaning and width from non-categorical to categorical. Including intermediate values.

But, exactly the same cube of Aristotle can be described by a combination of 8 peaks, 4 main and 4 inverse. 1, 2, 3, 4 and -1, -2, -3, -4.

Discourse matrix (simplified):

1234 1243 2134 2143

1324 1342 3124 3142

1423 1432 4123 4132

2314 2341 3214 3241

2413 2431 4213 4231

3412 3421 4312 4321

The full matrix is 64 elements. I Ching of Taoists.

This is already Plato's theory. It was reconstructed by Johann Goethe in 1810 and 1970 by Jacques Lacan. Color circle. The Vedic spirit formula is the unity (concept) of form and matter, method and restraint - 24 discourse options.

Discourse is the sequence of your four squares in the trajectory of a specific human thought, the navigation of thought in the space of thought. And each of your squares is a Platonic part of speech. But there is a downside to your square. The front and back sides of your square are like two independent coordinate axes, the real space of thought - the space of conceptual representations of a person about life - is at their intersection.

But there are differences in your theory of triangulation of thinking.

There is nothing offensive to repeat what is already known. Even Plato was not original. It is important to find a new context that is understandable to a contemporary. I'm interested in finding just that in your text. I am sure that I will find it.

A bit annoying text landmark on a teenager. But I ignore it.

Andrei Khanov

In physics, there is the so-called “standard model” - this is a table of “real” 12 subatomic particles (6 quarks and 6 leptons). This table connects the mass of a particle (energy) and its electric charge. This is a condition of reality.

An electric charge is an abstraction, the square root of the product of mass and length-distance of a particle.

1/1 projection of the photon onto the plane of the back 1/2

10/10 electron neutrino

100/100 electron

1000/1000 muon neutrino

1000/1000 upper quark

and further up to 10е10 - the projection of the Higgs boson on the spin plane 1/2

Only the substance is real for which the mass ratio of the electric charge is constant. A person simply does not see or understand other combinations, but they are.

Some particles duplicate each other.

There is also an “abnormal substance” (a combination of the upper red and lower green quarks) for which this condition is not strictly fulfilled.

The movement of anomalous matter in time is a nuclear reaction of the conversion of a proton into a neutron and vice versa. A neutron is a proton in the future, and a proton is a neutron in the past. There is the principle of uncertainty - a person is not able to distinguish between these two states of the time loop. This is perceived as an intranuclear force. When the arrow of time (in the mind of a person) takes on a direction, it is a nuclear explosion.

Atom is one of the cubic matrix.

Inside the black hole, the standard model is supposedly the opposite — the ratio of distance to mass. There are abnormal atoms where instead of mass there is a distance.

Your 4 squares in physics are 133-atom, 113-single field, 111-entropy and 131-mass flow (like in an hourglass). but there are 4 more antiquadrats (the reverse side of your sheet) 311-antiatom, 331-single antipole, 333-antientropy, 313-mass flow in time. Only 8 elements as elements of nature in the Taoists.

If you were to consider not four directions on the plane, but 4 dimensions, then your diagram would turn into a four-dimensional cube. If you were to consider 10 gradations of "(x) e " - the radii of the center of the cube to its surface - this would be the standard model of quantum chromodynamics.

So far, everything is clear, but you have to delve into your abstraction language.

I like your theory.

Andrei Khanov

the first text is clear. This is your retelling of the theory of grace of Thomas Aquinas - the 13th century. Grace is a consistent unity of triadism (cube 3 of sulfuricity - Aristotle holism) and the Quaternary theory of Plato's discourse (the same cube-matrix of human thinking). Grace (zen, barakat, laws, enlightenment) is a state of mind when, instead of contradicting these theories, a different understanding of life comes as a concept (consistent unity) of three-dimensionality and four-dimensionality at the same time. This is matrix theory. The four-dimensionality of a static universe is equal to the dynamics of its three-dimensional projection by Bernhard Riemann. Bruno will answer you more precisely. It is used in cybernetics. Don't be scared that there is nothing new in your text. This is 700 years old as everyone knows. We will decide how to present it to a contemporary. The problem is not the novelty, but the fact that a contemporary man does not want to know anything. This is the problem we are trying to solve. Michael! Thank you for finding an interesting interlocutor !!! Even the dream has passed. I read on.

Andrei Khanov

There is a good text about ternary and quaternary: "The beginning of pragmatism. The logical foundations of the theory of signs (set of 2 books) | Pierce charles sanders", 1893.

Andrei Khanov

Michael! I think this is useful to us. But, it is necessary to find an art form. The front and back of the picture at the same time. Hang a picture on a mirror wall? The topic of metamodernism is not disclosed, but can it be in other texts? Washed off the text between its front and back? Need to think. I see no contradictions - neither with the theory of rational theosophy of Bruno nor with the theory of the telos of Aristotle. I continue reading.

Andrei Khanov

11:15

Bruno Marchal

Lacan is not my favorite model of seriousness, but he was less incorrect than most about Gödel's theorem. Busy day, I will have to read the long conversation later. I am over busy this exam-at-a-distance period. Have a good week-end.

Andrei Khanov

Continued reading. The first text is the postgraduate level of a British university. If this is a student’s text, it’s simply brilliant. However, the spirit of the text is postmodernism, albeit without any expected puns, but this text is almost deconstruction, which is now very rare. It can be seen that the author writes about his own spiritual discovery - he writes about his understanding of the subject. He gives quotes that are troubling the scientific nature of his point of view. My mark. The author has the right to ignore this. The author needs a good scientific adviser, a deep study of the sources of citations is required, serious opponents are needed, and then the second (new) version of the text can claim a doctorate in philosophy. Shortcomings of the text: 1. Nothing new. Student work. 2. Philosophy has been ignored (if it doesn’t exist at all). In Russian universities, this is called "cultural poverty," a lack of education. 3. Obviously a lack of understanding of postmodernism. A deeper study of this modern philosophy is required. In particular, the principles of postmodernism (the a-principle of unity of the signifier and the signified, the b-deconstruction - it is necessary to clarify the author’s context, the connection with modernity, the c-pun is completely absent, this is a consequence of inattention to Greek ancient philosophy). 4. In this text, the term meta-modernism is not defined in any way. I continue to study other texts. But, I must note - despite the obvious shortcomings to me - this is an outstanding text. 99 percent of doctors of philosophy are not capable of such a thing. The author is promising. The author must be supported! But, what should he write further - there is his own choice. He must ask questions. Do not bother him. Summary: recognize and include in the project, offer to give a lecture. Criticism is only among themselves. There is a chance to agree.

Вы ответили Bruno

Hi Bruno!

Success in work!

Lacan's theory is a special case of Plato's theory. this is not important. Nothing new. Lacan suggested treating neurosis with Platonism. Christian churches do exactly the same thing.

Andrei Khanov

I read the text about the analysis of metamodern The text level is higher than the first. This is a serious study and concerns a specific contemporary topic. However, I repeat, this is not pure postmodernism (1423), this is a university (4231), but loyal to postmodernism. But postmodernism itself is about something else. Here, a simplified version, a reflection of postmodernism in university texts of the third tier, is considered here as postmodernism. Not the first. The author is British? Nowhere else has this been preserved. Therefore, in my opinion, "future metamodernism" means "the original postmodernism of the past, unknown to the author." This is an attempt to reinvent postmodernism. To restore the lost original from fakes 1970-2020. This is the cause of some errors. But these mistakes themselves are a characteristic of contemporary culture, a cultural norm. It’s difficult to fix them. It will be a feat. “Nordic thinking” I unambiguously associate with neo-Nazism. And the point. Anenerbe's ideology was very advanced and competed with American pragmatism. But, it was different, less abstract. The revival of ancient Greek philosophy is like a tree. Many branches and many different flowers. They argue with each other. When postmodernism is the central trunk. When the whole matrix of all thinking is understood, the disputes between its separate parts are no longer important. The contemporary - thinks superficially, with the aromas of these colors of thought, misses the structure - the tree of knowledge. The problem is the gap between the flower and the root. To live means to restore the connection between them. Talking about this is pointless, you need to act.

Andrei Khanov

postmodernism is the limit.

Andrei Khanov

there can be no super-postmodernism, it is a semantic hallucination. Not understanding the reasons - invent it again. Enough to read Rorty and Shusterman. Postmodernism in its "full version" by Richard Rorty - answered all questions - the revival of the myth will last forever, as well as its oblivion. The human mind rushes between these two edges of the abyss. This is a retelling of the theory of cofcy in a new language. After 30 years, Rortism was forgotten, it required a new change of language. Correct retelling of the spiritual discovery of the deep past is postmodernism, it is eternal. Like culture, oblivion of postmodernism.

Andrei Khanov

In any field of knowledge there is a mainstream and outsiders. In postmodernism, outsiders of Rortism re-invented it, calling it "metamodernism." University - a different worldview, its alliance with postmodernism - was temporary. Do not forget about hype, work for the public. Pronounce such theories that the sucker would be numb. The public does not understand anything at all in postmodernism and takes any stories for truth.

Andrei Khanov

postmodernism is about overcoming the philosophizing norm. metamodernism is postmodernism as such a norm of overcoming the norm. This was much discussed by Stalin, Mao Zedong and Muammar Kadaffi. The revolution must be eternal. Otherwise, the townsfolk will take power. But such an eternal revolution is the finale of civilization. A delicate balance of interests of people with different levels and directions of thinking is needed. Antique Greek philosophy answered all these questions, but was forgotten.

Andrei Khanov

actually this second text is very boring. enumeration of secondary details, a list of various misconceptions about postmodernism. The text level is high, but I'm bored, this is the most common lecture. An author can teach in college. The author did not understand the problem, did not offer any solution. Blah blah blah, fascism Blah blah blah, metamodernism attractor However, this may be of interest to the public. As a symbol of something abstruse and important. Anyway, no one will understand anything. Will sleep, fluttering on familiar words.

Andrei Khanov

I liked the first text more, but the second is much more professional and boring How is the term metamodernism disclosed? - this is determined by the cultural phenomenon that has taken place - "talk about mathemato-modernism" - the topic of conversations of third-level intellectuals (former outsiders who have become mainstream) this is a trick, this is not an analysis of the phenomenon yes, even if such an analysis existed, his author would be accused of plagiarizing the texts of Richard Rorty. reinterpreting Rorty is very difficult, he said almost everything Rorty described such metamodernism 30 years ago, calling it the corporate spirit or analytical tradition of philosophy.

Andrei Khanov

I read part 2 my opinion - the author initially explored an interesting topic, but then wanted to get into a party - abandoned his topic, shifting his attention to the hype of the fake metamodern theory I don’t care, the author can go his own way in any direction, this is his thought and his life But I think that something very interesting was missing, perhaps the author should get out of his head all this mumbo jumbo about metamodern and develop his own idea of the space of conceptual representations (maps of thinking) it is relevant and interesting we must support this search, but to say something about meta-modern is his personal right, but this is a completely different party, I personally am not interested in it, it will give only cheap popularity among students and pensioners I suggest to ignore this work of the author and evaluate only the first article but if you need a "lecture on smart topics for youth" - its text is the best of what I read about meta-modern

Andrei Khanov

the unfinished theory of abstraction and the theory of meta-modern are not logically connected in any way but bound by the fate of the author, this is his right

I acknowledge by my creative work the fact of the publication of the discussion on meta-modern as the author’s books on meta-modern this is a performance, but this text is exactly the same book

Andrei Khanov

read it ... indeed, this author’s study of meta-modem sources will be interesting to a wide young audience in Russia nobody will understand anything, but they will take a word for me personally, this is a serious scientific study of the delirium that meta-modern speakers say for hype in blockchain conversations at conferences - exactly the same thing This topic can be developed by adding reasoned criticism of such talk about meta-modernity But the first text, of course, fascinated me! I wish the author success in his scientific work! He will write his interesting book. He needs time to comprehend everything he said. Now this is just a draft of such a future book. There is no conflict of opinion and no conclusion.

Andrei Khanov, 20 Июнь, 2020 - 12:50

Andrei Khanov
Для комментирования войдите или зарегистрируйтесь

Дискуссии

Библиотека

Семинары

Поиск

Вход в систему

Продолжение дискуссии о мета-модерне в группе "Дигитальная сфера"