Saturday, August 18, 2012

...absurdus...


File:Tenniel red queen with alice.jpg



File:Extinction Intensity.svg



Our survival is permanently managed at the razor’s edge...

Is existence sisyphic?! Absurdus/absurda?! (Camus)

Existence is indissociable from experience: experience of oneself, experience of the others, experience of the world, of the cosmos...

Existence is always conditioned by experience and by the initial formative systemic conditions, which means that the systemic growth and development structurally depend upon imposed anticipatory determinating rules, rules of integrity.

Of course, the systems can rewrite and do rewrite their initial conditions, but it is exactly that: to (re)write, to (re)write from what is there, and what is there will always remain, as initial formative condition.

Experience is always, the experience of some thing, of ourselves, of the others…, experience incorporates limits, conditions with conditioning intersubjective phenotypic effects: the judgments that we produce, the choices we make, what we are, is always conditioned by (co)existence and the (co)experience of our (co)existence.

How does freedom fit here?! The question of autonomy?! The question of the arbitriu?! There are always some things that we cannot escape, we can choose between various paths available, but those paths must be previously available, and sometimes there are no paths, it is we who have to enact our way through. Perhaps our freedom is reduced to that. If we can, or not, enact the paths is not the point, the point is our self-determination, our effort, only there are we free. In this sense, Sisyphus was free.

 File:Punishment sisyph.jpg

 

Esse in re… esse in intellectu...

By: Maria Odete Madeira (Originally placed in this blog at 13/12/2009 but the guiling (?) singularity seems to have erased it:
 
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.pt%2Fgroup%2Ffilosofia-matematica-conhecimento%2Fbrowse_thread%2Fthread%2F1d3615509f6b5e1d&ei=QmsvULq_BoiXhQf72oCwDA&usg=AFQjCNFyG96oni3N-2uBciWpyin3M8rmhA&sig2=uoiEpEccig575Gkifi4-3Q&cad=rja)

Esse in re… esse in intellectu…, reality is that which resists to all the forms of negation…
Such as any other systems, all the systems said to be alive, follow an organizing genetics, conditioned by laws of structure that depend upon the initial formative systemic conditions, which means that the systemic growth and development structurally depend upon imposed anticipatory determinating rules, upon which the respective systems depend, in terms of integrity.

But what is a rule? What is the nature of a rule? What can be the ontological status of a rule? How can rules, that a system is unaware of and that, obviously, didn’t choose, condition all its life? All its choices? Its actions? Its paths? Because even if the system can rewrite its initial conditions, that rewriting will, still, be conditioned by its vital laws of structure.

In this context, what pertinence can there have the projection of scenarios, configured by pre-figurated degrees of freedom? Within what parameters would it be possible to consider planes of systemic transcendence?

Transcendence involves the concept of limit, to transcend is the act by which someone, or some thing surpasses or “escapes” the limits imposed by the immanence. An act of transcendence is an arbitrary act of projective opening that gifts the system with the ability to launch itself, or jump, towards outside of itself, in that which, with pertinence, can be designated by systemic jump, that is, the jump that installs in the systemic identity the ontological dyad, conceptually synthesizable as the other of itself, that which, in the system, is exterior and heterogeneous to the plane of immanence that determines it physically.

... experior haec exterior