Sunday, September 20, 2015
woolly Logos
Strictly speaking, fuzzy logic pertains to cognitive computing.
Yet, alive mentalities involve living conceptualities that may seem ultimately fuzzy in no computable sense, more generative in their appellant ambiguities than algorithmicity can manage. Fuzzy temporality of a life shows itself born of fuzzy ontogeny that cannot be comprehensively retraced.
Topography may imply topology (domain) which may imply topogeny (individuation of conceptual facility). Tropology may become tropogeny, so to speak.
The most rigorously tenable conceptual inquiry can bring one to splendid heights of fuzziness, except inasmuch as we stipulate, axiomatize—or better: design—yet, by what orienting artistry, where to?
Design is drawn into preferable insightfulness for a better radiance of gravity in feeling a way among ways weaving into new ways of trending, never to be Singular in character.
So, intelligent design may cultivate itself from its gardening of emergent points (those uncountable little excursions of academia) that may not yet imply the better trending toward gestalt or belonging in a phenomenal ecogeny, yet may be drawn into a good flow of telic cohering, like discourses on consilience weaving the -ologies of inquirial domains.
So, what about the notion of “logos” that gets implicated by every -ology in the world? How does every -ography grow to imply its ownmost
-ology? And -ology implies -ogeny? “ont”-ology implies ont-ogeny?
In fact, of course, the genealogy of metaphysicalism dissolved the credibility of any pretense of stable Ont-oLogy. (“New Latin, from Late Greek onto-, from Greek ont-, ōn, present participle of einai to be — more at ‘is’”) No reconstructive genealogy is going to show high individuation to be computable. All so-called ontologies are part of evolving conceptuality—whose fuzziness can be fun to cultivate because the generativity of excursion furthers an ecology of conceptual adventuring.
I started this little excursion because I wanted to dwell with the meaning of ‘-ology’ in terms of a standard sense of ‘logos’ via Encyclopedia Britannica, which tritely shows political motives in conception of the Christian trope. It could tickle a Heideggerian because the politicality is just so transparent. In the beginning, ontotheology was less a metaphysics than a politics—which reminds me, this day of sentimentalist recollection (previous posting): He finalized Being and Time amid rapture with Hannah, for whom (he later avowed, age 60) the essential path in his career had been done (up to 1949, when he confessed this to her), as if she was his virtual companion on his extended country path, his idealized reader, his partner in so many recursive mirrorplays of textual unfolding (though relying on Arendt for understanding Heidegger is silly; her “Heidegger” is fiction). She was an exemplary audience, and he was the dramaturge.
I wander. I could focus on ‘logos’ manageably, crystalline relative to etymological woolliness—though not at a peripatetic scale like Heidegger. Besides, writing (“setting up,” he calls it: artwork, presentation) presumes artworking (“setting forth,” pathing toward the artwork) which presumes a generative interplay of research and revelation (fun realizations, ecstatic moments, etc. prior to artworking) that furthers. But I shy away from applying notions of “art” to my enjoyments. Conceptual adventuring is itself: inquiry, prospecting, gardening—flow, design, cultivation.
Relative to Heidegger, maybe a triad of research <—> revelation (furthering), artworking, and presentation (setting into media) is analogous to a triadic regard for advancing poiesis, advancing logos, and advancing ethos.
Or maybe the four alone (research, revelation, artwork, and presentation [writing/teaching, mediality]) belong together like a twofold-by-twofold recursive mapping: fourfolding of higher/lower conceiving (or comprehending) recursively braiding with inner-/outer-worldliness: researching the horizons (outer heights), divine discovery (inner heights), working the art (inner depth of individuation), and translating oneself relative to one’s times (outer landscape of receptiveness).
It's all such a woolliness, genesis, braidings of lineages in evolving itself.
