Philosophical Runimance

Today I would like the consider the concept the gall as an exemplus of a holon, and perhaps to even proprietize a further understanding the holon as a figure.

Background: Today in considering the term galden, which I used as 'method irronism' to link the terms and figures of golden, gall + din, generative alterity, generative space, time, and logopoeia.


Let's consider the gall.

If we 'kuns(t)ieve' of all matter as 'generative noise' or further, ontologically, as generativity, then the figure of [g.all] becomes the 'method irronism'. To give exegesis to this idea, let's consider the phrasal element, "Field as Impasse" or

FAI written in irronity as FIE!

This returns us to classical myth, and to the duality of the framing of chaos/order,
as Creation/Destruction via the figure of say Siva.

If every creation is also a destruction, then entropy and extropy are actually an holarchic figure framing generativity, or [g.all].

Now this isn't to say, we don't need to stop doing what we are doing, per se, but is, by and large a philosphical position and an ekphrastic device of non-ordinary, and really, non-human, contextualisation.

It is meant as a way of understanding the ümwelt.

A gall interrupts by functional insertion, and alters the spatial performance of a given structure, it alters its performance and fitness vectors.

If we universalize the figure of the gall, we achieve an organic analog of holarchy, or a conceptualization of ontology understood as processual interrelation, ie semiotic
determinism, or even structuralism.

A gall must be 'conscious' of an existing element's construction, or at least be able to complete, or exploit its structure in some way. [G.all] is agency redefined as potentiality within transitive set structures.

Space and time yield the medium of this structural interference, and material specificity provides the content of its deployment.

All of culture depends on [g.all] for its extension.

If we bring together the terms of chirality and chiasmus
in our consideration of the phrasal fragment "field as impasse"
and further apply selective amphibianist holonics, we find that

both 'field' and 'impasse' are universal and auto-deflating.

All of the world can be considered as 'field', and conversely as 'impasse'.

If we look at the opening phrases of the Tao Te Ching:


The tau (reason) which can be tau-ed (reasoned) is not the Eternal Tau (Reason). The name which can be named is not the Eternal Name.

Non-existence is named the Antecedent of heaven and earth; and Existence is named the Mother of all things. In eternal non-existence, therefore, man seeks to pierce the primordial mystery; and, in eternal existence, to behold the issues of the Universe. But these two are one and the same, and differ only in name.

This sameness (or existence and non-existence) I call the abyss — the abyss of abysses — the gate of all mystery.

Translated by John Chalmers (1868)

Here is the admittance of the paradoxical transduction of the copulatic nehushtan.
Or in Situationist parlance: The Map is not the Territory.

If this framing technology is universally understood and forms the basis for all world mythology, why then can not the semiotic aspect of human life be quantized
for an external systemics of progressive social modulus?

Answer: Atavism.

Look at the Inverted Siva at the heart of the irronist g'all word.

M Siva Ta(o)

Theeness is the Siva of Tao.

That is W(hole) of the answer.

:)

I love you, as Jesus loved you.

[usin']

"yo(l}ke-sign"