philosophy

Good Example of Discursive Expansion of A Singular Linguistic Collapse.

Differential Logic, Dynamic Systems, Tangent Functors • Discussion 2

Differential Logic, Dynamic Systems, Tangent Functors • Discussion 2
— Read on inquiryintoinquiry.com/2018/10/05/differential-logic-dynamic-systems-tangent-functors-•-discussion-2/

Navigating the potential involved with the Collapse of narrative space can be understood through a psychoanalytical frame, begging a question of how to allow narratives to include a possibility for their own Avenue a dissolution without recourse to a post-traumatic fantasy.

10 thoughts on “Good Example of Discursive Expansion of A Singular Linguistic Collapse.”

      1. That was just the first of my personal associations to your comment beginning, “Contrary to Postmodern permissions of discourse, I do not propose that there are identities which span ontologies through terms necessarily. …” It’s always possible I missed both Foucault’s point and yours.

      2. Well…one can take F quote there as a grounds to make anything we want from discourse : if it makes sense then it is true. PM has opened the door to a lot of theoretical fudge: like the recent folks who submitted bogus papers that were actually published as legitimate work. (I reposted a few ago) F was pre-PM..

        But there’s a lot of theoretical jousting ; I think most claimed “PM” theory is based on a misunderstanding, a mistaken apprehension of the situation.

        My point is that while we are able indeed the construct any sense we are able, it doesn’t mean it has validity.

        So for example: I don’t know anything another differential calculus, but I was able to draw from your limited presentation a meaning that corresponds with a point I like to make: hence, it is at once an example of a collapsing of a particular narrative as well as an opening, and, the description of the case.

        This does not mean that differential calculus necessarily describes Personal Being; it merely means that Being arises to itself through various discursive analogies.

      1. 👽><🐷. Lol. Yes.

        Yours made for a good analogy.

        Contrary to Postmodern permissions of discourse, I do not propose that there are identities which span ontologies through terms necessarily. For example, the terms you use to talk about a topic and my appropriation of them. I do see a correspondence, but it is best to keep in mind the use of analogue in such cases as opposed to identity, I feel. We are less prone then to launch those so eagerly waiting for a grand coincidence into fantastical space. 🌌🌌🌌🌠🌌🌌🌌

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s