|
Post by neilnv2 on Mar 20, 2024 17:43:56 GMT -5
Grace Slick has this surreal lyrical habit of mixing movements and thought and perceptions. 'I keep thinking about the way You appear in my ears' So much is to do with movement, whether it's the four winds ('Manhole'), a gang of eagles ('Aerie'), or the above track where she is 'moving on through' and can 'Think light years ahead Or a thousand years ago'
First of all, thinking athletically, movement comes before thinking. Animals or athletes have an instinctive sense of rhythm, which is really just speed. S = D/T D/T is the rhythm you see in closing a distance. You move first, then the brain is able to think rhythmically. That is, to think through the perceptions.
There is no calculation, it's a rhythm. The calculation of velocity, distance and time is done in physics with Newton's calculus. As was noted awhile back, Newton invented relativity because relative movement is static in an inertial frame. Movement and stasis are the same; the frame of reference is static, not rhythmic.
The animal sense of movement connects thinking and perception rhythmically. Slick may instinctively imagine herself as an animal, having started with 'White Rabbit'. Animals are moving, and they are thinking, and they are perceiving.
And I think words are basically given this movement in the lyrical, poetic sense. Movement/rhythm are the same thing, and this enables the brain to think in a rhythmic sense.
You could also say that a body-in-motion has a flow related to its spontaneous geometry. The shapes it adopts have a harmony in a similar way to the shapes of a guitar chord. The movements of the body flow between shapes (see Tai Chi master Oct31.) The shapes are harmonious, and there is a primal rhythm that connects all the shapes.
Where there is movement, then, there should be spontaneous geometry (shapes), and the ability to think rhythmically. Whether one relates it to drugs or not (and Slick has a lot in common with R. Crumb in her smuttiness), this musical/lyrical reality is pretty clearly thinking with an animal's sensibility, not the static human one.
That is another way of saying that animal is superhuman. The animal is not an inactive thinker (Apollo). It is action first and this involves the shape of the animal. Animal shapes are Dionysian (hooves.)
So, this way of thinking takes one away from measuremt or analytical thinking and into the rhythms and spontaneous shapes of nature. Going back to Ochoa, one could say that the visual-based sciences are static (making detections), while sound and music are rhythmic and therefore thought and perceived through rhythm.
Because rhythm and the spontaneous forms are fundamental to nature, the ontology of sound is seeing things truly, and not through the lens of Apollo.
A lens is an instrument of experiment. It doesn't have to be since eyes are lenses, but the visual-based sciences make it so. An animal is harmonious movement in a rhythmic universe where thinking and perception are affected. In rhythm there is no calculation, and one is in a spontaneous universe of shapes.
Poetry supplies movement through rhythm. The lyrical/poetic sense sees these shapes, thinking through words in a rhythmic sense. Addendum On the comic book front, I got into a slight contretemps with Roy Thomas with some desultory stuff on X-Men '97 animation. I sent this abridged apologia, with the tagline that words without rhythm can be meaningless, despite any apparent meaning. Fairy tales with the woodsman and traditional pursuits follow characters in actions over the course of the story. "Comic books have in common with fairy tales that they use words rhythmically, literally with the rhythm of characters' movements. And like music they lyrically position the balloons (Lee mentions this on the DD dvd.)
When you read them you are thinking in a given rhythm to the perceptions (senses) of the characters. Words are not enough, you need poetry. Poetry is something that is easily lost which is why I'm so big on the classics."
|
|
|
Post by neilnv2 on Mar 23, 2024 6:37:37 GMT -5
Language enabled humans to do three key forward-looking things – to conceive of and plan future actions and to pass on knowledge. (I suppose that forward-thinking is true enough, though words also give the myth-making, and so nostalgia for the past (this is the appeal of X-Men '97 animation.) If nostalgia is memory, myths embody the poetic use of words that commits things to memory in rhyming couplets and so on (Homer.) So the act of thinking in a certain rhythm is also a way of memorising a story. The lyrical, heroic narrative poem.is a way of evoking the animal grace of the characters in descriptive passages. CL Moore in 'Jirel of Joiry' uses prose to almost poetic effect in the rich tableau-esque descriptions of animals, movements, statues, statuesque warriors, moats, marshes, sounds. Evoking memory and therefore thought are tied-up with the poetic use of language. The sounds of words are of course the syllables, as is made apparent in the lyrical speech or the song (whether syllables came before words is a debatable point, depending on how poetically-minded one is inclined to be!) What I'm getting to is words are much more than semantics as there's also the sound, constructed of syllables, not to mention musically the pitch. Words are sounds, though nowadays we write them, and the sounds evoke descriptive grace. Such descriptive grace you could say deconstructed words into syllables, rhythms and, if musically, pitch (JA's singing of 'your arrow' extends the syllables slightly bu joining the two words into one sound.) So, grace, emotional catchiness, evocation, memory all have a way of deconstructing words. What you could say, there, is that semantics has less relevance since you're dealing with sounds, not words (Dec13.) Where words are 'pure words' one is much more aware of semantics (relating or not to reality.) And the most pure form of words known is the conspiracy theory! Alan Moore says there are no conspiracies and I tend to agree; they are just words talking about words without getting to the root of the perception of rhythms and sounds that is reality without any scientific intervention Conspiracy theorists will never be poets because they are only thinking about words (perhaps conspiracy theories are part of a conspiracy to words?) Thinking and perception are connected rhythmically in a poetic frame of reference. As has been noted previously, inertial frames (Newton's invention of relativity) are static. One is 'just standing here' (Hyperdrive) perceiving events, rather events, rather than participating with the rhythms, sounds and movements oneself. Rhythmic perception connects thinking and perception in an animal sense. One is thinking much more poetically and in terms of movement, abd this registers on the memory. How one perceives things and uses words clearly affects reality substantially. Rather than use words semantically, in a group or in a traditional neighbourhood one uses the more expressive shouts, rhythmic patter, songs and pitch. In other words, the reality is both sonically and verbally different to one of individuals. Animal perception affects thinking and memory and therefore reality. So I would say this is part of the ontology of sound, here words and language. It's a participative reality that is far less dependent on semantics than our own, and far more on the perception of rhythms which affect thinking and memory (nostalgia, myth.) The most extreme forms of modernity are inertial frames of reference (the static observer), and conspiracy theories (words and semantics.) The answer to both is probably to reconstruct active communes with animals, whether ranches or something else. PS Bruce Lee, in 'Artist of Life', uses words almost to get round their obstructiveness. To get to the essence that is not actually verbal. 'A choice method, however exacting, fixes its practitioners in a pattern (combat is never fixed, but changes from moment to moment.) It is basically a practice of resistance; such practice leads to clogginess, and understanding is not possible, abd its adherents are never free because the Way of combat is not based on personal choice and fancies. The truth of the Way of combat is perceived from moment to moment, and only when there is awareness without condemnation, justification, or any form of identification.' (page 201)
|
|
|
Post by neilnv2 on Mar 25, 2024 10:51:57 GMT -5
Going back to Mar20, Bruce Lee is very big on the art of expression even if it's a fight, as that is the connection to the 'is'ness or 'such'ness of the moment. The seeming lack of thought, casualness of the action, free-flowing and dynamic. If casualness is part of reality, that could be part of the problem with 3D animation. A line can express movement rather than be moving. This points to the pedantry of 3D animation; in real life one gets rough impressions of things moving, an outline and the rhythm of the flight (see S=D/T.) Much of the physical sense of reality is atmospheric illusion, existing inside the mind or the imagination. If things exist inside the mind we have a psychic dimension where the movements take place. Colour and shape are appealing in 2 dimensions, whereas 3D loses the design element. The suggested impression of things and the suggested shape open the mind to the wider universe. The mind is open to suggestion snd design flow, both of which are lacking in 3D. This suggests the 'nostalgia" of X-Men TAS encapsulates dislike of 3D. If onevlikes something it's often intuitively correct (as John Clifton had it in TCJ#90, prev.) Comics and animation impress the mind with their flat eloquence, outline and focus for distance. We may live in a 3D world but the fact is that the impression is the reality. The free-form flow is the primal fertility of line (serpent), like jagged branches that move this way and that (Japanese prints.) From the primal dynamic is built all the different characteristics that we like. Without the sense of movement in the line there is no suggestion. Without the sense of life there can also be no death or melancholy. Expression is life and that carries the thought of death. This might seem heavy, but expression is life, the world of things. The themes in X-Men TAS and '97 are melancholy (departure of Prof X) and fairly fertile (Rogue with Gambit and in '97 with Magneto.) Expression carries with it life and death and therefore the thought of life and death. It doesn't need to be heavy but it is reality to the mind, whereas 3D is a convincing illusion that suggests calculation (Apollo) and not Dionysian physicality. As usual, without the physical, there can be no experience of psyche, only a hollow simulacrum. The Ontology of Cel-shading Pardon the long vocab but, if one is talking about what the brain perceives as real or attractive or a good look to have in this life, that is ontology of seeing, same as Ochoa terms 'the ontology of sound.' I wanna create a match because, as was mentioned, if you're operating in a group/social setting, sounds and sights are perceived together. Granted they're very different, they're not actually separated, but together. A group, or basically just a city-crowd, is a normal type of situation to be operating in; one hears sounds, one catches glimpses of ankles, eyebrows, caps, light and shade and so on, it's all completely normal. Especially if one knows someone, the brain will recognise a 'code' based on place, posture, shape, size, expression, so it may take no more than a casual glimpse ro recignize the person. 3D animation is the assumption we need everything, but in fact it's redundant; we only need enough for the brain to process and identify. This is why cartooning works as stereotypes; someone like CC Beck would savagely put down anyone who said old-time racial and physical stereotypes are not useful. We live in the physical world of flesh and blood (life and death, predator and prey, decay and revival.) In a world if action, we don't need to calculate velocity (S=D/T) and distance; it's instinctive as we move through a crowd. A reality based on calculation is a reality of the static observer. As previously noted, this is the reality of Newton's inertial frames (calculation of velocity, direction, distance, time.) Calculation is what leads to relativity which, as I've said before, is a parallel or machine reality. The world we see is the primal sense of movement in line, the physical energy or expression of things. Primitive Man related them to the cosmos and constellations. What attracts the psyche, the energy and movement of lines, contours, colours While an image may be static, the eye is attracted to movement. That's why I say that in a crowd the difference between sound and sight is less apparent. The brain is very selective and is guided by thoughts (wants, hunts.) So, 3D animation is what a static observer might see, but we in fact operate with primal rhythms and psyche (what they brain decides to process.) Cel-shading actually gives a 'suggestion' of 3D by using computer models and then coloring them more as flat shapes with shadow than as 3D forms. The fact is the brain doesn't want the calculated forms, it only wants a suggestion of them. We don't live in a calculated world or, at least, we may but we intuitively dislike it If psychic wants are history, that is very telling for the ontology of sight. The visual-based sciences clearly only refer to a static universe that may serve the needs of the machine relativity and mobile phone technology. (The calculated universe is probably one of frequency ratios or neoliberalism. After all, time has a frequency that is affected by the speed dilation around Earth. Electromagnetism is a technology that enables calculation. Calculation is not reality, it exists in the universe of frequency ratios. It's a technology or in other words Apollo. There is also Artemis or the moon. 'The Omega Man' with Charlton Heston has some very good lines on techno-fixation versus balance. 'One side keeps the other side going', says biochemist Heston in his raffish pad. He is an 'executioner', he 'scares me more than Mathias' says Richie. No one side is entirely on the side of right, which gives the movie its bite.) Robin James (prev.) If the calculated universe is one of the static observer, that could possibly include the neoliberal measure of harmony as a frequency ratio; individuals are not human beings but frequencies of marketing data. The measurement and analytics are in a parallel universe where there is no geometry (Apollo or form) or primal rhythm (Dionysus.) The former is represented in music by Western chordal harmony, the latter by Eastern energy of line pr melismatic syllables (melody, taken from Faraji, prev.) Visually, animation often uses 3D models (human geometry) which are shaded to flatten with colours and outline, giving energetic line or melody. This seems to imply there is no alternative to having human geometry with melodic line. The neoliberal measure of harmony (frequency ratios) can probably only progress in a similar way by digitally imitating or mimicking the 'real harmony of musical chords (geometry, the perfect 5th.) IE the two measures of harmony become mixed-up. But the implication is we can't do without geometry because it's fundamental to reality. One can't do without Apollo or Dionysus, so the illusory neoliberal measure is nowhere. This is somewhat like the scene in X-Men TAS where Beast or some other guy says that Apocalypse can't be destroyed because he is part of the fabric of reality. A static observer may not necessarily realize that the visual and sound are connected in this way, while in a group the musical harmony and chaos of sight and sound are much more apparent (an Arabian souk or any social economic gathering.) Basically, sound and sight are different but not separate in a group. They are together. They can be separated artificially, and one has the visual-based sciences and the neoliberal measure of harmony in sound. But both of these could be the same thing, that is, frequency ratios. Calculated Universe/Static Observer Silent Running 1972 In case anyone thinks I'm crazy, this is a brief rundown of a universe of 'absolute time'. The key question is, 'Can absolute time change?' and I asked UVS website. There was no reply, so this is my parallel universe answer loosely based on UVS 4-dimensional hyperspherical vortices. First off, time has a frequency and, barring any response from UVS, that's all I'd care to say. Speed is also s frequency (rate) and, in the logical universe of electromagnetism, the two are relative. That's all I'd care to say, not being a mathematician. Secondly, a UVS-model universe does nor have gravity (force), it has vortical attraction in 4-dimensions (spiral, whirlpool), so I'm going with this. Space and time are not connected, time is simply a frequency and independent. In this universe, the fabric of reality is geometry, and is totally spontaneous. In other words, it will inevitably adopt into circles, squares, triangles etc. The fabric is what constitutes 4-dimensional hyperspheric space (not time.)* The way this geometry coalesces into shapes is probably through harmonic rhythms. These two could be viewed as order (Apollo) and chaos or expression (Dionysus.) Anything that is settled will cultivate a casual sense of order and chaos, as with a garden. 'Silent Running' has the two aspects of a speeding spaceship, running on relative time, and the growing garden that is illuminated internally. Growth and the physical universe run on absolute time. Perception and thinking, action and hunting are influenced by absolute time. What is perceived such as the stars influence our psyche ** The fact that a logical universe exists means there are two measures of harmony (Robin James.) One is the Greek measure based on geometry (Apollo). The other takes place within an Apollonian universe of order, and is based on frequency ratios (neoliberalism.) However, since Apollo represents geometry, it should become apparent that the new measure is nowhere. Quite a good example is Neom City,which might attempt to establish a harmony of frequency ratios with a cybernetic culture. But the actual fabric of the city will be geometrical, and that should reestablish the old order*** That might happen with,say, a hanging garden like Babylon. Gardens are a sort of universe in themselves and influence the psyche. The chaos of decay and detritus is used by gardeners and gamekeepers to good effect. Another good example is EC sci-fi comics, where the logical control-panel sets-dowm on Dionysian gardens of gnarled branches and weird wildlife. * See Jan31, Feb5. Simple shapes are linked mathematically. Even the weird 4-D Klein can be constructed from a square that is bent to form a cylinder. A sphere you assume implies a cube because you could build a cube inside a sphere (and so on.) Forces do not actually tell you anything of that very simple and spontaneous construction. UVS also assumes aether as a type of physical substance for harmonics. ** Absolute time is to do with the body and action, twirling and forming shapes (acrobatics, dancing, playing.) Mainly harmony and rhythm. Relative time is to do with the head and calculation, screens, the neoliberal measure of harmony. This could affect sequential development of children, as well as the social milieu of musicality (the normal or old measure of harmony is musical.) In a group the scene is usually a mix of sound and sight and often children are heard over the general hubbub (pitch, natch.) *** "A passion in architecture is exploring the bridge between the physical and the meta." (Bianca Censori) I think the meta in this connection means the social milieu, with some economic pursuits. Architecture will have some degree of planning, but there is also spontaneous social activity. A city like Neom City will not have that, so it might be considered to be a city of individuals. They could then fall prey to the neoliberal measure of harmony (marketing.) The muezzim would operate under the old or musical measure of harmony, so that would be another case of two different measures mixed-up. There's no easy way out of that, apart from allowing the city to deteriorate and spontaneous social activity to get established. Families that socialise together and are somewhat ramshackle will adopt the old measure of harmony, with pitch and chop and change of rhythms. But then the city will no longer be cutting-edge smart. Taking Censori's quote at face value, the built environment and the social milieu should have some effect on eachother, they should both be under consideration. This happens when the measure of harmony is geometrical (proportion.) Quite often this would be domes. A city built entirely of glass and steel constructions might not have that. It would be more likely with art nouveau skyscrapers, or traditional mosques. Neom City is being sold as a 'green' project, but without the social harmony of musicality and the caravanserais of the desert it's going to be a hard sell.
|
|
|
Post by neilnv2 on Apr 1, 2024 12:31:21 GMT -5
A Denisovan circa 75,000 BC This link to methylates in archaic humans caught my attention. These are tags on the genome that are epigenetic: chemical markers that appear on the chromosome that are not genetic, and influence expression. What got my attention is that, by listing the markers, they get a good approximation of skull-shape in denisovan hominins circa 75,000 years ago. This seems to go way beyond the modern gene-paradigm in that it's genetically very difficult to fathom. The modern paradigm takes place within an Apollonian universe of order. However, Apollo represents geometry, so it would be easy to suppose that genes (data) are related to geometry. This was my basic proposal back in "the ontology of others" (Mar11, last bit.) Geometry (Apollo) and rhythm (Dionysus) are spontaneous events that occur at the right time and place. A marker occurs when the shape is already there. A human skull is approximately spherical, and very small changes marked by methylates will make a big difference. In other words, the simplicity of the underlying geometry makes changes to the gene-expression quite definite and deliberate. Otherwise, it is impossible to see how gene-expression alone can account for the skull shapes. Genes are incredibly complex, whereas geometry obeys simple rules relating sphere, cube, tessellation, arches, spirals that are totally spontaneous. The problem with the modern paradigm is that it takes place within the ordered universe of Apollo, and can't therefore recognise the necessity for geometry (harmony) that Apollo represents (see prev post.) Alongside harmony is rhythm, represented by Dionysus. This applies to inertial frames (prev) which replace spontaneous rhythm with the calculation of speed, time, distance by a static observer. The static universe of information is exclusive of spontaneity, and this leads to many confusions. It appears that early Homo co-evolved in Africa in small, isolated groups, which again implies small changes of the skull that were epigenetic, simple geometry. Co-evolution of similarities is certainly widespread. Homo neanderthalis had a wide head echoing that of denisovan. Geometry (harmony) and rhythm are easy to relate to the sonic paradigm that has been advanced by Ochoa and others. One way to put it is that Ochoa is describing an atavistic state where people moved through the jungle and hears sounds and their thinking and perceptions were influenced by sounds (rhythm, pitch.) But the atavistic state is simply what the Apollonian paradigm or mindset of static observation cannot appreciate (the visual-based sciences.) The Apollonian mindset where thinking independently is very difficult and heretical. Yet there are many types that could be classed as atavists who are hyper-intelligent. Of course, there's Robert Howard and his body-centric philosophy of acrobatic survival. Joan Armatrading has a unique blend of Dionysian licentiousness and rhythm, with an accomplished understanding of arrangement and pitch (melodic nuances.) Grace Slick and R. Crumb are both licentiously-inclined philosophers of rhyme and line. Byron, JM Synge, the philosopher Nietzsche. The scientific paradigm excludes what could be called the acoustic or poetic paradigm of simple expression (Nietzsche's aphorisms say more than several dictionaries.) Science complexities and makes thought difficult, confused; the active, body-centric world does not need to think too much as so much is spontaneous. An Armatrading circa 1980s My original correspondence with Noble (Sept19) was to do with time and place, and a small change (in gene-expression) will make a big difference WHEN IT'S ALREADY THERE (right time, right space.)* This is also clearly the aural paradigm of harmony (based on geometry) that is taking place rhythmically in time (with some pitch or melodic content.) An aural paradigm is very easy to relate to the idea of creativity in time, especially where there is a recurring refrain. Creativity is often seen in a recurring motif (as with Islamic decoration), and musically with melismatic syllables (pitch.) On the above track, Armatrading hollers the repeated 'ooh' on a descending scale. Creativity is something that changes over time, such that the first thing occurring refers to the second or the third.** Armatrading's lyrics are very body-centric, and on this album she outdoes herself with offhand smut, introing the first two tracks on side two (Tell Tale, What Do Boys Dream) with pointed bodily wit. Uncannily, the usually brooding songstress uses this album to push the pop-styles of the 80s, from Suzie Sioux to Suzie Quatro, utilising her uncanny ability to refine arrangements (whether entirely original or not.) Her intelligence is oh so human with the sly physical wit. Her approach is argumentative, zeroing-in on flaws in 'The Game of Love' with embarrassing certainty. The animal, the human as super-animal, has an intelligence in the sense of being affective. When Armatrading goes on the descending scale on 'ooh', the sounds have a negativity. This is thinking that is non-verbal, it is feeling the reality. This point is easily made with orchestral soul, say Minnie Riperton's Come To My Garden from 1970, where trills continually ascend and descend the scales, to Stax-type brass. Humans are uncanny animals (X-Men have that right) because they are able to put into pitch and tempo an abstract composition that has no use apart from that it is affective. Affection is the missing element of the modern paradigm, because it can only be heard (this clearly relates to Ochoa.) Ochoa and others propose a multi-ethnic approach to the aural which actually does seem to accord with the prehistory of Man. The three human variants cited above developed separately and what might be called ethnicity I to diverse cultures, utilising different tools for the varied habitats. Using the musical paradigm, creativity is not only multi-ethnic, but there is an ongoing creative act between subjects and objects, performer and listener/audience. In nature there is no affirmation, it is a type of chaotic harmony. Human societies may not fight but they quarrel, people argue. One can relate this to Ochoa's aural paradigm, whereby two groups do not always hear the same thing; what they hear us tinged by their preconceptions, especially as to what constitutes music (pitch, rhythm, animal sounds, mimesis.) Sounds, or animal noises, are sometimes thought of as 'lesser' and not music (Ochoa goes into this deeply.) However, thecyse of such sounds can have an abstract, superhuman quality. Basically, the frisson between 'lesser' and 'higher' is a very human aspect of creativity. The animal is a powerful and primal force. It is probably the one element the modern establishment lacks. Archaic humans are uncanny animals, abstract creators of superhuman ability. This ability is temporal, coming out of the underlying aspects of harmony, rhythm, pitch (melismatas.) These aspects are affective, and apply lyrically to the flippant wit and innuendo used by Armatrading. The intelligence that one perceives is that of the truth of living in a fully functioning body, as opposed to a head that is screenfed the affirmations of the modern paradigm of no place, no time, no biological sex (a type of zero.) There is no intelligence in the sense of human archaism. A guy like Noble may personally listen to music or read poetry, but he like everyone else is tied-in with the static visual-based sciences of the modern paradigm (see semantics Mar23.) * Conventional time and space, naturally. Absolute or rhythmic time (cogs, wheels) that builds beings in space. A fantasy version of this is found in P Djeli Clark's 'A Dead Djinn in Cairo'. ** ..and with possible intersections in space. Clark's story refers to 'alchemical wheels interlocking'. Where time and space are concerned, all of that has to be possible. It seems like scientists are trying to tell us we live in a parallel reality of relativity where we don't need to bother about normal time and place, where things are more or less rhythmically spontaneous. AI Finds Personality Shapes GenesJust as a sidebar, this link shows the typical circular argument of most AI-gene research. If you check the link, it says the same genes from a 'hub' regulate gene-expression in both humans and single-celled organisms In humans the hub is located in the brain and differentially controls three personality types, from 'self-aware' to 'less self-aware'. In single-celled organisms it enables RNA to adapt to environmental stress in synthesis. What the researchers say is that regulation of gene-expression in the hub could be the mediating-factor in the association between self-awareness and well-being (ie to be self-aware is associated with well-being.) However, that implies that changing one's personality can regulate genes, when the genes are there to differentially control 3 personality types.+ In other words, because genes theoretically control everything, there is a circular argument which disregards higher-level controls. This means the shape of the skull (enclosing the brain), the branding of the brain into specialised regions. Personality is not just a function, it is a development of time and place. Genes are not that, and any AI analysis just creates circular arguments that are spurious and mean nothing (words, semantics.) Single-celled organisms and humans may be genetically similar, but that seems to point to an obvious missing factor. + The confusion is that the genes regulate a personality, not that they ARE a personality. Being occurs in the brain-structure that is controlled by time and space (the ontology of.) Superhuman Intelligence (higher level, see Feb29 Poly Styrene, JA etc.) If one assumes the establishment paradigm is visual and static, there is no intelligence in the sense of human archaism, or superhuman animal. An animal exists in a sonic paradigm, where the perception of sound and pitch direct thinking. It is non-affirmative action, where quarrels are the order of the day. Archaic humans inherit this, and words are far less verbal and more to do with pitch, shouts, group babble. This affective reality is non-affirmative harmony (arguing) and musical rhythms. Higher-level intelligence will think through the perceptions of pitch and musical rhythms and in terms of action. Homeric epic poetry, recited or sung to groups of listeners. In a group, different types coexist, and it is argumentative. Verbal sparring and thinking probably developed this way. One ends up with the rhetoric of Pericles, which actually led Athens down perilous paths! In any event, argument and action are our inheritance from Greek civilization. It is affective, meant to affect and be felt by a group. Since a group is defined by different personalities what counts is the difference, not the similarities. What the visual-based sciences do is relate well-being to a certain personality-type, ie to create similarity. But this measure does not apply to an aural paradigm where the group has non-affirmative harmony (argument.) In other words, the measure of well-being does not measure the organic harmony (musical). It is outside the ontology of sound or poetry. One can relate this to Robin James and the neoliberal measure of harmony as a frequency ratio. Since well-being is defined by a certain personality, the frequency of that type will measure well-being (harmony So what you could say is that the visual-based sciences measure frequency (in genes or elsewhere) as opposed to organic harmony which is musical and argumentative (non-affirmative.) You could equally say it's a circular argument because genes are not a personality, they simply regulate a personality-type that exists in the organic harmony. Higher-level intelligence works through the pitch and rhythm of the organic harmony (through argument.) Words by themselves in the modern visual paradigm are simply semantic. They need to relate to a higher-level reality to be meaningful. [On a pop-culture level, Japanese anime Macross, especially Frontier, have an entire alien lifeform that communicate musically. Though they attack the fleet, pop icon Sheryl Nome, through her protégé Ranka Lee, sing of galactic acceptance, changing the course of the war. Lee is organically attuned to the aliens through her gut, in a subplot I've forgot.]
|
|
|
Post by neilnv2 on Apr 6, 2024 6:34:55 GMT -5
Video sent by my sister and her Spanish husband on a trip to Madrid icionrebelle2.blogspot.com/2024/04/blog-post_6.htmlThe intelligence of culture with performers and listeners, exploring pitch with melisma (melody), oriental or Greek origins. Grace Slick's non-verbal' intro Espana "Europe's last citadel"Higher-level Intelligence (2) Wow, I happened to catch Australian biologist Jeremy Griffith on interview, whose thesis is that the gene-base is "instinctive/moral", while the nerve-base is "intellectual", the former corresponding to "innocent cooperation" and the latter to "state aggression". He is also a follower of South African ethnologist Laurens van der Post so has a lot going for him. His manner is also a rad improvement on Richard Dawkins', casual with barroom banter attraction. Were I a woman I might fall under his spell, but I still think it's a case of someone who is convinced by their own logic and therefore sounds convincing. This could easily be the 'Anglo state of mind'; the prev post in gene-research was coordinated between Granada (Spain) and America (St. Louis) but the logical mindset is nevertheless the modern paradigm and could easily be called Newtonian/Anglo. Newton practiced inductive reason as does Griffith (from specific facts - or expt - a general thesis.) So, I was inclined to go among with his affable manner, until the logical mindset became gradually apparent and I switched 180°. Because the argument bears similarity to the one above, I think it's worth goi g into it a bit. First of all, Apollo is reasoned thought/technology, which isn't the same as a higher-level intelligence. The higher-level intelligence is organic harmony and therefore thinks through rhythms and perceptions. Animals are intelligent, but they do not reason. Humans develop from animals into argument, with pitch, shouting, rhythmic patter (rap.) Two groups of people may have different perspectives, preconceptions and will argue. To Ochoa (prev) music and sound canbe equivocal because the sounds can be animal (mimesis) and not thought to be music by one group of listeners. The performers and the listeners (in the jungle) are to some extent equivocal in what they hear. In any case, higher-level intelligence is percetual movement (muscles) and thought (monkeys on high branches etc.) Man is the arguing animal; high-level thought develops through arguing. Joan Armatrading's lyrics are argumentative and thoughtful (equivocal.) To some people, this might seem like a Black-type culture, but it is equally ancient Greek. The argument is not too different to Nietzsche (it could be extended, as was noted); two different things exist at the same time, and the harmony is non-affirmative (quarreling, jabbering, jostling.) Humans engage in reasoned debate, but they do not abandon harmony and rhythm. Instinct and reason are different but not separated. Like the observer on the street, sounds and sights are different but not separate; they are together. The visual-based sciences separate the visual (electromagnetism, ie radio etc.) and this is the rational universe (the modern paradigm.) The problem with Griffith's argument is that atmosphere, suspense and rhythmic crescendo are a state of being, they are not rational, they are harmonic.* Science, being outside the harmonies and rhythms of sound (affective over time), constitutes a parallel universe of logic. The neoliberal measure of harmony as a frequency (Robin James) is an instance of the trend (I think here one can easily combine with Ochoa's 'Aurality' even given that James seems to favor 'distorted neoliberal harmony'; that's argument, right?) If the gene-base is "instinct", one could wind-up counting the frequency of genes that constitute 'good' instincts, similar to the case in the above post. The point is, genes are not 'instincts', they are facts and logic. Instincts are perceived and initiated through harmony and rhythm. The brain branches into harmonious proportions of parts or specialised regions of nerves. Scientific thinking is really backwards, because facts and logic do not come out of thin air, they have to have a harmonious development (over time.) Genes are not instincts, they regulate instincts as they regulate 'personality types'. It's really the same circular argument that does not go into higher levels of development (than facts and logic) in time and space. Higher-level intelligence is animal (instinct) and thoughtfulness (argumentative.) Animals are not stupid, they are intelligent but non-rational thinkers (a pig in a factory-farm is probably more intelligent than the owners.) Higher animals are not cooperative; genes may well be cooperative since they are only chemical, not higher level functions (of the body, action.) Prometheus may well have been a rational thinker; that's not to be confused with intelligence, which animals also have (nervous systems and brains.) Medieval civilization was clearly less rational than us, yet it was totally intelligent. It was conflicted (ritual conflict, small-scale war, rebellion, the anti-pope, the Eastern Byzantine empire), and that is the super-animal or superhuman intelligence state-of-affairs. Same goes for Japanese samurai and the argumentative shogunates. Morality is not chemical; it is perceived and initiated by active social orders. It is conflicted and equivocal. All that is pretty convoluted; it's not persuasive in the sense that science is 'factual', but it is higher-level intelligence. Logic appeals to the ego and to the modern paradigm. It shouldn't be confused with the harmonies and rhythms that are thought through in * Incidentally, the Macross Frontier anime (prev post) relies quite a lot on suggestion with many atmospheric watercolours. The 2D animation style ties-in well to music and s multitude of narrative effects. 3D is much more tied to technical verisimilitude and much less to atmosphere. The nostalgic X-Men '97 is not quite on that level but is not bad. Nostalgia can just mean a variety of technique and artistry as distinct from Apollonian order. New Ideal Just a political footnote, I got listening to the above Ayn Rand podcasts, who say they are not neoliberals. Nevertheless, it's individual free-market while neoliberalism is 'compromised'. Rand was for intellectual wealth creation and creativity. However, she would not be for cowboys or the street-vibe of traditional quarters (Spanish, Black.) So I would say these latter are higher-level intelligence and creativity. Rand in practice is scientific as opposed to artistic, in the sense science is rational. The irrational or the body thinks and perceives through rhythm. That is a higher-level intelligence and creates atmosphere, the thrill of living or giving chase. It's not individual so much as argumentative. New Ideal may deny they're neoliberals, but whether it's state or not, the individual and the corporation seem to be common goals or the actual case.
|
|
|
Post by neilnv2 on Apr 9, 2024 6:10:46 GMT -5
Cosmopolitics The last para of the last post is essentially Cosmopolitics, as described by Ochoa dixit Stengers (prev), so I thought instead of a seven-volume treatise that might be read mainly by professional critics, I'd try about seven paras. Of course, I've not read Stengers either, only Ochoa, so can only give my impressions of a short review plus Ochoa's take. However, as Roy Thomas said in a reply re X-Men '97, life's too short to be concerned about everything that just happens to be part (or not) of a comics universe. I'm gonna start there, because my impression of Stengers' work is that she thinks science is a closed system. Not unbiased truth so much as practices and methods that have themselves some bias. Ouroboros is the circular snake that eats its own tail, where circular arguments prevail. But this sort of harks back to Kant, who tried to undercut scientific reason by saying essentially that nothing is known because we perceive it through our brains, which are structured in a certain way. Kant was trying to rescue religious morals and self-sacrifice, and Ayn Rand virtually destroys him in an online critique on lexicon. Her conclusion is, 'Existence exists - and the act of grasping that statement implies two corollary axioms: that something exists which one perceives snd that one exists possessing consciousness, consciousness being the faculty of perceiving that which exists.' That sounds sensible, and is a good place to start. If science is biased, it could be in a similar way to Rand, that is, to individual reason. Rand is also a very good writer, and science has to be sold as a good thing foe our well-being and so on by good writers/marketeers (Dawkins and Co.) Nietzsche is another philosopher who is a very good writer and it seems that one thing one can say is that things have to be read and have to be well-written. Nietzsche uses language as a poet would prosody - using a lot of aphorisms, passages of musical spaciousness ('Thus Sprach Zarathustra'), and a type of powerful simplicity that belies the complexity of thought. Rand says that 'Existence exists' and good writers, in order to have their ideas read, have no choice but to deal in the sounds of words as a poet deals in prosody - movementsof words, sounds and repetitions and rhythms. Marketeers, in order to sell something, have to deal in this. So this brings us back to the idea that sounds are fundamental to reality, and they have rhythm and harmony. If there are two measures of harmony (Robin James), science (or the neoliberal measure of harmony as frequency) can be sold with the Greek measure of harmonybas a geometrical proportion. This seems to point to the idea that one can't gey away from the Greek measure of harmony because it is a part of reality, while science deals in frequency and not reality per se. In other words, it is biased to frequency and sameness. This becomes 'well-being' (as in the examples on genes.) Science is biased, but it is still real, just a parallel reality (very convincing to the ego.) One has to say things are 'real', otherwise one is back with Kant that nothing is real apart from some vague moral order (of the head.) A parallel reality is a logical order that is calculated as opposed to perceived. As Rand says, perception is a given, and it takes place in absolute time (not relative.) We perceive and think through rhythm. That's why comic books are such a natural way to read (as I again said to RT, prev.) The characters' actions are lyrically matched to the words (sounds). Words are close to sounds, and even closer with the comic book effects. A higher-level intelligence is cosmopolitical because they are exposed to rhythmic sounds of their fellows, as well as others (animals.) Thevsounds are a function of other things such as atmosphere and a group dynamic, as well as weather (rain, wind), water, plus other senses (a pig in a factory-farm lacks all these even though it may still have the genetic predisposition.) Groups will shout and engage in idle banter, shit talking, brawling. Groups are argumentative and this gives them atmosphere. Writers have to write about something, to have content. Argumentation or the sonic reality provides content. As I've mentioned, Joan Armatrading is a master at writing argumentative lyrics and, in the above track, she delivers it with shouts. All the instruments are used to their best effect, including the voice. What I mean by higher-level intelligence is that it is real and argumentative, and about the body-in-action. It is not philosophy. An argument has two viewpoints, neither are right, or both could be wrong. It's the expression of personality without ideological constraints. Science, because it is biased to frequency of individuals (in marketing), is constraining. Cosmopolitics is an ethnic approach to identity, with nature as a sounding-board. It could be said to have a female bias. On the other hand, if there are two views to things and this is the feminine view it's a lot less biased than science, which just has the view of the individual reduced to a frequency. Postscript Having opened the gate to philosophy I've always noticed something odd about the '68 film '2001 A Space Odyssey'. The hyper-realism to me feels like a dream (it might be partly owing to the lack of plot.) Meanwhile,'73 film 'Dark Star' about hippies in space was filmed on a shoestring but feels real. The difference between the two films could possibly come down to argument. Pinback tells this story that everyone has heard on loop and the atmosphere is pretty grim, without actually throwing punches. The spaced-out guy just shuts himself off from his shipmates, having had his fill. Argument to us as human beings feels real, we can identify. This could easily be a link to our ape ancestors; we are fairly feisty and brutal. It need nor descend to all out thermonuclear war, as '2001" intro implies. It is more like a type of uncouth behaviour. Pinback told a story but could equally have been playing a well-hated tune on the mouth-organ. Humans have an inbuilt tendency to plague eachother, but it's not a flaw. It's identity and personality, an inbuilt tendency to rebel and start again. Why should we agree? Why should one group have all the rights? If we all agree it's the path to the frequency of the individual - who no longer exists as a strongly independent personality. Don't take my word for it. Just listen 'Sleight of Hand' is Armatrading's electric (not acoustic) album and, as OtisBlack on comments notes, she lets her animal go. Thinking through feeling is the super-animal, or superhuman intelligence. It's not philosophy so much as a type of fight. Going back to Jan1 (short story), music frees the spirit and the intellect, it moves forward, martialing the forces of personality with sound. The type of thought that is moving, perceiving, playing an instrument. It's not necessary to be an artist in order to react in the moment, but it is atmosphere and feeling where higher-level thought develops. The Greeks may have been known for philosophers but equally for their myths. When you are fighting or, moving or responsive you are in the hands of fate (Bruce Lee in 'Artist of Life' says in a fight you are not thinking, it is action and aim.)* The fates are the most powerful gods, the original ones (Harlan Ellison in 'Scartaris' portrays a god whose followers have abandoned them but who fate will recreate.) The ludicrosity of Kant's totally static metaphysics was aptly crushed underfoot by Rand; it's a pity she replaced it with the deification of reason, which also leads to the stasis of mind (the visual-based sciences.) *Another way to put it is people who think in a fight will lose because they do not react. Reaction comes first; a follow-up may require some adaptive thought. It's a case of the right type of thought and when. The Superhuman Animal This sounds pretty blunt. However, Joan is lyrically as blunt as they get and it is just a type of honesty when we live in a dishonest world. What is most dishonest of all is to say we are individuals, when we are groups. The group is distinguished by pitch, 'the presence of others' (ie animals) and argument. There is mimesis, there are shouts, whoops, the rhythmic patter of idle banter (see Feb16, Feb29.) JA is an observer of groups, she may be somewhat outside the throng, so this is where I say that in a group the aural and the visual are together, quarreling slightly with Ochoa. The observer uses intellect in order to write the music (sounds). Sterne's hard-and-fast division of visual (intelligence) and sonic (affective) doesn't apply in a group. Let's just say that groups are not philosophical things either; groups in philosophy are supposed to essentially inhabit the constructs (such as Plato's 'Republic'.) What this does is go back before Plato to the mythical division between Apollo and Dionysus, which Nietzsche developed (passim.) Myths are popular realities, they tend to be collaborative and they have inconsistencies (in comics these are retconned and reestablished, such as the hit animation X-Men '97.) JA is a fan of comics, which points to her being a myth-maker.* Myths are not philosophies of one individual mind; what Nietzsche attempted was inconsistent and infamously misinterpreted by Nazis and others. A superhuman in my criterion is the product of a group because the milieu, the moment-to-moment dynamic in the group is essentially animal. It's a body-centric milieu; monkeys are aerially accomplished and will fly from branch to branch babbling together or emitting whoops. This is also the ancient Greek athletic ideal. Greek athletes were naked and, for all we know, did emit whoops on wining the discus (as Jack Palance does in Godard's Le Mepris.) All this is a group dynamic that is distinguished by pitch, 'the presence of others' (in music, mimesis) and argument (or athletic competition.) Groups are not philosophical things, and they are inclined to be Dionysian. A group is argumentative, and tens to follow spontaneous urges (see prev on New York and Times Square gentrifying.) Dionysus is the origin of creative intelligence, being urges and antics that are felt more than thought-out. JA interrogates this with observational intellect. The two areas operate together, thought and unthought or spontaneous are the superhuman animal. Western philosophy with its individual reason (Kant being the acme) tends to ignore this area. While Nietzsche is widely read and cited, why is it that Rand widely influences mainstream thought of the neoliberal variety? I don't really know, but it could be there's a logic-board behind reality that represents valid principles of reasoning (by the individual, see Feb5.) In other words, there's a parallel reality that is measured by frequencies (the neoliberal measure of harmony, Robin James.); science is the theory behind it while neoliberal marketing is the practice. This reality is calculated, so that relativity consists of calculated time rather than perceived or absolute time. Relativity originates with Newton's inertial frames (prev) or the static observer, and consists of visual observations (as opposed to sonic.) The visual constitutes the electromagnetic spectrum (radio etc.) The calculated universe is the logical universe or Apollo. As noted before, inertial frames replce rhythm with calculation of velocity, distance, time, direction (S=D/T). Animals don't calculate this, of course, they rely on rhythm. So, if we are animal we inhabit the rhythmic universe, which might comprise astrological time (Earthspin.) If we are not animals, we use the relative universe. In that case, the rhythmic animal world probably is gradually replaced by individual reason (neoliberal marketing), or at least marginalised, undermined. * Greek dramatists such as Euripides rewrote myths continually. According to Nietzsche, Euripides was not 'classical' as he favored to far individual reason. photograph by Clive Arrowsmith 1976 'The Shouting Stage' The Shouting Stage (2) 'Elektra', Richard Strauss's high - octave opera The equivocal area of the superhuman animal intelligence. Here shot in an abandoned Berlin factory, Elektra skulks around like a furtive fox. The 'group' in this case are her family-relations, the murdered Agamemnon, her sister, returning brother Orestes who kills matriarch Clytemnestra and her lover. Chorus act as visual/aural commentary. [reply from Vincent possibly to follow]
|
|
|
Post by neilnv2 on Apr 14, 2024 9:11:12 GMT -5
Lest anyone thinks I'm something of a fan of Armatrading, this post is entirely devoted to The Oresteia by Aeschylus, covering the House of Atreus in Argos.
It starts when Agamemnon offends Artemis by killing a sacred stag, and boasting of the feat. In retaliation, she stops the wind from ferrying the Greek fleet from Aulis to Troy and they are beached. This sets off the entire cycle of epic poems (not only Homer) plus the later plays retelling the Bronze Age myths.
Agamemnon is told by the priest of Artemis he must sacrifice his first-born daughter Iphigenia for the fleet to sail. When he returns to Argos, his wife Clytemnestra gets her lover to kill him in his bath in revenge for the sacrifice of her beloved daughter.
Aeschylus's three plays mainly cover Orestes' revenge - with his sister Elektra - for the slaying of Agamemnon. However, this is only the start, as an alternate myth has Iphigenia being saved by Artemis, and a deer put in her place for Agamemnon to slice. She travels to Tauris as a priestess of Artemis, where she meets Orestes.
Thinking him dead, she now presides over a slaughterous priesthood that slays Greeks trespassing on the temple. Orestes is there to retrieve an image of Artemis, which Apollo has said will purge him of the sin of matricide. Iphigenia learns he and his attendant are from Argos, and asks one of them to take a letter. Reciting the letter, Orestes realizes it's his sister.
This play, by Euripides, was written sometime after The Oresteia, which features a similar plot where Orestes travels to Argos and Elektra doesn't recognise him. He recounts various proofs, such as an article of clothing she had made for him years earlier. Euripides' play 'Elektra' (featuring a different plot to Sophocles') mocks the proofs, saying it would be illogical for a grown man to still have a piece of clothing made when he was a youngster.
Of course, the classical era was known for comedies, which were performed at the same Dionysia festivals (Aristophanes being given the sole survivor.) It was an age of extremes, and the grim animal fangs of Elektra were offset by the offensive charm of 'The Lysistrata'.
The extremes are seen in Mozart's 'Idomeneo' where Elektra sees snakes (after losing Prince Idamante of Crete to Ilia.) Tragedy is a device for having characters let go to an extreme degree and literally behaving or singing like a super-animal. To Nietzsche, this is the Dionysian urge that is let loose, not as realism but as an emotionally cathartic act.
It's fairly easy to mock heroes, so Mozart's version is probably very true. Shouting and histrionic drama are, not in genes, but in the animal origin of noise (pitch) and letting loose in group rivalry, argumentative jabbering.
The intellectual observer sees something equivocal, a mixture of fighting and comic antics. 'Iphigenia in Tauris' is described as a tragi-comedy or an escape romance. To Nietzsche, this made him post classical. One could also say it's just another genre.*
'Though we might regret our parting We are bound to see it through' (I Really Must Be Going)
*Classics philosopher Michael Davis elaborates on this area. An image of a god has a power that is real to the worshipers. Once the gods are devices, they can change a ritual, as with Artemis at Aulis (saving Iphigenia.) In Euripides' play, it is the triumph of guile and the vanishing of the sacred (in the escape, where Iphigenia tells King Theos she must take the statue to the shore to be washed.)
There's an interesting point about an image having power and significance when it's not real. The reality is the worship. Deus ex machina makes the gods devices, and this happens at the end of Mozart's Idomeneo, and there is a happy ending (Idamente is not sacrificed to apease Poseidon.)
Nietzsche would probably go along with Davis. Alternatively, if one looks at tragedy as a genre, there are other genres. Tragedy is not realism, it is an acting out of animal urges, no holds barred (the road movie 'The Getaway' has a happy ending, so is not a tragedy.) My inclination is to say that genres are devices for human nature, and the gods might even see the joke.
If tragedy is a window into our 'thoughtless' animal natures, an intellectual would have an equivocal response. From that angle, Euripides' sort of softening of the iron rules of ritual is understandable.
I don't think being equivocal is the problem, since it is a human response to the superhuman or super-animal in nature. The problem nowadays is that we are too much bound by logos, and not by thoughtless action. Only very few people can have an intellectual response to the thoughtless antics of the group.
The one thing one might say about music, and specifically the Elektra aria, is that it is much easier for music and performers to exist in an equivocal state. Elektra is asking herself questions: why me, what next? She then goes into a screaming fit and temporary insanity. She then goes more or less quiescent. Such fever-pitch intensity can be conveyed musically, not through the written words or spoken words of philosophers. (Incidentally, the lecture I watched by Davis was in front of students, who asked one question which wasn't that relevant. The Platonic dialogue approach of asking questions can sometimes get more results, even if the answers are wrong. At least it means the mind is forced to work.)
The equivocal state fits the 'other', the animal, and is typically present in group situations and at night ('Love the neon Skyline Skinny burlesque queen' Back to the Night.) So it's not essentially a philosophical situation, it's atmosphere and milieu, colour, shouts, hollers ('Taking my Baby Uptown'.)
Logos assumes questions have answers, but the equivocal state exists in a state of continual argument. What I would say is this is not philosophy (with a single answer), it is mythic and musical, it exists in the moment and through the rhythms of speech amd song.
'Process'* MP Davis's lecture on Iphigenia concludes with several questions and answers (from students to him), so I guess I left too soon. It gets pretty interesting, since there is a double sense in which ritual has primacy (meaning), and reality is reduced to ritual (no meaning.) That equivocation depends on the belief (in sacrifice) which reduces animals or humans to meat.
Greeks very rarely sacrificed humans under great compunction. Nevertheless, an act of ritual sacrifice (of animals) puts one in the hands of the gods and the notion of blood and meat.
Davis's offhand remarks were also quite cool. If we lived in a "mechanical universe" we would automatically "know" it, or our bodies would. Euripides in the play "entertains the possibility " of rationalising everything (where Iphigenia carries off the statue as a ploy), which seems to fail as the boat gets stuck. Athena has to rescue them.
So I wouldn't say from that account it seems as if Euripides is being that mechanical; the gods are only to some extent negotiable. So, the question is really does ritual have meaning (blood, gods), or does reality have meaning? The former puts human life at the mercy of the gods (fate), while the latter is basically guile or human reason.
Davis partly answered that, because he said in a mechanical world we would automatically know things (the body's autonomic nervous system does this.) The problem with this is that, in actual fact, ritual is present in reality! The equation ritual versus reality is not the full story. Greek tragedy is a ritual, but we do recognise things in it that pertain to reality.
Ritualised forms of action are contained in groups and, as noted passim, groups are somewhat equivocal. The sounds and whoops have an animal flavour. The aggression, the dislike, the brutality, possible assaults on individuals ('Kind Words') are present in the actions.
As noted before, this may not be a philosophical question since it is in the nature of myth (heroic action.) When one is talking of myth, there is an equivocation in the bloodshed seen or shed. Myth and sacrifice entertain the notion of blood (the wielding of blades.)
This entails a world that is not fully known (rational). So, equivocation means a world that is not known by reason. Going back to Ayn Rand, to her the notion of an equivocal world would probably be laughable. And yet she uses in her writing style the flow of poetic prose.
Whenever one is told the world has to be rational, the people telling you are using words creatively (Dawkins.) When the neoliberal measure of harmony as frequency ratios (R James) is used to sell things via marketing processes, to salesmen will use the Greek measure of harmony as proportion (music.) There are always gonna be two measures of harmony mixed-up (passim.)
Poetry, music and ritual tragedy will always be used, and the reason is probably we don't live in a mechanical world. That would be pure process. IE the process will explain it.
Cutting out from the Greek a bit, when I asked UVS website if Relativity could be a mathematical conversion, that was what I was meaning. A universe of pure process could be calculated mathematically. But for that to be so, the rhythmic universe does not exist (does not have significance.) Since it does, there cannot be a universe of pure calculation.
Pending a response, all that can be said is that the mathematical conversion could easily be inertial frames (the static observer.) If this corresponds to the calculated universe, then all calculations take place within that universe.
Notes 1 The bearing of arms may be relevant here. Greek restraint (proportion) entails a manly use of force, a mistrust of governance. 2 'Macross Frontier' plot is a space-opera version of blood sacrifice (the Bajra) which conquers a rational scheme (Grace O'connor) of cyborg control over the galaxy. Ranka Lee affects the Bajra through song, and where the emotion is they triumph.
*In her critique of Kant, Rand points out that organisms process senses in order to get knowledge. Processes are actions. The definition is, 'a series of mechanical or chemical operations in order to achieve a particular end.' One might sense there a similarity to computers or genes. Yes, the brain processes data, but the body also moves. We are not inert; the difference between inert process (head) and muscular activity (body) is absolutely fundamental. The body is harmonuously proportioned, powerful. It has the ability of to act independently and to form groups which you might say is the definition of human societies. (I think the larger picture is processes are just that, while decisive action pits one thing against another, hunter against prey, so it is clearly powerful and so you eventually end up again with blood ritual. The notion of logical process is up against the idea of perfect knowledge, which is impossible and one always gets back round to rituals in societies and groups.)
|
|
|
Post by neilnv2 on Apr 17, 2024 5:42:32 GMT -5
Following the philosophical rigmarole, I came across this interview with JA by Sound&Vision. JA If I didn't know how my song should go, one of the engineers or producers would know. To me that's not right. I'm the writer, I should know.. METTLER Plus your name's on the top of the marque so ultimately everything reflects back on you...even when you're being an observational writer the listener has to believe it's coming from you...If any of this sounds false the message is diluted abs we don't believe you. That's a very fine line. JA Well, yes you're got it! Not many people I talk to get it. This song is simple observation, maybe she has elaborated on some stud outside a nightclub so it is a mix of truth and fancy. The singer is attracted to the strength of the scene and the song echoes this strength. It's her truth and has the taste and sensitivity of a simple ritual, sung in a reggae, bass-heavy style The belief in her song, self-belief, is a large part of THE truth (of the scene.) Belief is bound to be a partial lie because it is creative. We are attracted to this, attracted to the super-animal 'The Ram and the Peacock' who uses pitch and rhythm with superhuman ability. The superhuman combines the chaotic and Dionysian variety of nature in pitch and rhythm with intellectual observation in a creative act.* Song unites the two. The visual, as a science, can polarise them (see Mar10), and it almost takes a recognition of barbaric force to regain balance. In BWS's picture, it is almost as if the visual and aural are together; the wind chimes tinkling, the sun-dial representing movement. The scene may represent tragedy, chaos and blood, while the balance of forces is harmonious. Viewing the scene as a tragedy, it is taken to the extreme of grotesque slaughter. If you imagine the same scene as a street scene containing song, some minor bloodshed, some ritual display (male, female), one could say that the visual and aural are together. Within the picture, it is possible for subjects and objects to engage in ongoing creative acts. This could be assault, display, brutality. This theme is certainly contained in songs that are there to observe the real life of streets and crowds, containing sounds and movements. It's contained in the hollers, allusive lyrics, beat, pitch. *Borrowing from nature or mimesis. The sense of 'other' is connected to animal sounds, so the superhuman and the animal are associated sonically. One could probably extend it to literary figures of speech, hence also Greek drama. [Modern groups of people tend to be chummy, which makes one suspect they're not 'groups' but individuals. Harmony doesn't have to be devoid of aggression, assault. Maybe a sort of balance between maniac shooters and happy 'crowds'.] Lookback to Apr1 On a physical level, moment-to-moment dynamics in a group is animal, and animals are evolutionary. Higher-level intelligence is shaped by the group, by sounds, jabber, mimesis (others). Differences count, and genetic similarities are not evolutionary (link to ' AI Finds Personality Shapes Genes'.) One could postulate that in a group, response of individuals is fairly automatic to some stimulus (sound, aggressive act.) Automatic response involves a lot of body-coordination, and it may be the coordination itself that impacts on genes.* The link showed that genes organize into networks and control-hubs into modular control of types/expression. Ongoing creative acts within groups between subjects and objects includes competitive sports, or martial arts. Musically, this could be Wu Tan Klan. In a group, different types coexist and it is argumentative, verbal sparring and thought probably developed that way. Apr1 points out (or suggests) that genetic similarities are probably not evolutionary. Higher-level intelligence develops through group argument. That could include sports, the rhythms and hollers of sporting action. The 80s film 'Gregory's Girl' is a good example of the group acting together when the girls trick Gregory into following them round town. A group is active and argumentative, be it sport or social acts, carrying with it rhythm of movement and hollering, yacking. Within a group, differences create a frisson that is probably evolutionary. The attraction of Dee as she flows round the playing field. All these things are evolutionary acts of the human, or archaic body-centric action. Animals evolve into thought; animals have automatic responses. Higher-level thought can also be fairly automatic, and difficult to determine (to do with arranging previously existing knowledge in the brain.) Byron wrote epic poetry, such as 'The Corsair' according to him with little conscious volition. Poetry is felt, relying on knowledge already contained in the brain (higher-level structures, branches.) Logic of course is conscious thought, but it does not connect to animals. This is a human conundrum, because archaic humans are evolutionary. The automatic response is possibly needed for evolution, the coordinated response that comes from the group and intellectual observation of the group. *The autonomic nervous system has its own genes, obviously. Anything automatic is fully coordinated. The speculation is that the impulse to coordination impacts on genes, creating control-centres. It is the coordination itself that motivates events, the genes obey the motivation. It makes sense, as animals are motivated, to keep alive, to adjust continuously responses. Higher-level thought is not under specific gene-control, but it still holds that the coordinated thought is evolutionary and higher-level or super-animal. (Apparently genes coordinate things fully without themselves being coordinated, a fantastically false circular argument.)
|
|
|
Post by neilnv2 on Apr 21, 2024 7:57:44 GMT -5
A circular argument means one is referring to the same thing twice, as with the song. Taking a much wider perspective (than genes), individuals in a group have automatic responses that are highly coordinated by the body, and by autonomic nervous system. Logically, if genes can't coordinate things by themselves, they can coordinate the coordination. Logic dictates that, for the two things to be connected, the coordinated response are mapped onto gene-networks Since automatic responses are also fully coordinated, the mapping is done through repetition and sort of imprinting to create gene-networks (chemical imprinting, that is. Konrad Lorenz had a famous experiment of 'imprinting' himself on geese, who followed him as group leader.) If so, automatic responses (in a group) are evolutionary because they involve body-coordination. It's also a given that the brain is highly coordinated at higher levels of thought, even if thought is not specifically gene-networks. In other words, higher-level intelligence and the super-animal (athletic, muscular) do not originate in gene-control. The origin is coordination that can become imprinted on gene-networks and modular control hubs (prev.) Imprinting is a type of memory that can be physical. In a group, repetitive acts are frequently there. The work such as repetitive treading on clothes (fulling), work-songs, the lyrics. The banter and hollering and general shouting and hubbub.Bikke Some of this will go into the memory. The original imprinting of gene-networks are of evolutionary origin. The group as a type of higher-level argumentative area is s higher-level development that stimulates creativity and thought. Observation is a mixture of animal antics and superhuman ability (a previously noted.) Johnny Dyani in this traditional track has a running bass-line, variations of pitch, animal barking.* Bickering, good natured jostling, bully-boys, elders, discipline, flogging (the scene in 'The Harder They Come'). Where there is argument, there will also be discipline and hierarchy (in tribes, in nature.) Lorenz in wiki is cited for his aversion to 'domesticity', possibly relating to tribal hierarchy (in nature.) What is hierarchy but a sophisticated type of argument, instilling discipline? (Joan Armatrading is severely self-disciplined, a law unto herself.) Lindsay Anderson in If ( see website) portrayed a rebellion against traditional discipline and rituals in a British public school (which are ancient private institutions.) Anderson went to public school and the film is almost a love/hate story of that history. To follow or to rebel? *We seem to be told the complexity of genes is sufficient (for evolution). But to have no change is not evolutionary. Songs are evolutionary because they are memories of the super-animal, many things superimposed rhythmically. Arranged in layers, as JA says. Hierarchical or higher-levels of thought. Counter-evolutionary Coachella Konrad Lorenz seemed a bit worried about what he called "domestication" of the instincts. The opposite of that is 'wildness'. Magwaza put me in mind of cowbells and cowboys for some reason, and certainly the raucous hollering has an animal antic sound. Atmospheric sounds provoke the automatic body response; hear a cowbell and you start to holler in that direction. The group response can easily be related to what Lorenz calls "differentiated social instincts". The street-vibe of Mike Tyson's devil-may-care jostling in Brooklyn, or Joan Armatrading's No Love for Free are exactly the same idea of spontaneous social activity. Group responses are evolutionary because they provoke automatic body-responses. Sounds are rebellious; one is driven hither and thither, driven to whoop, to react, to get close for perceptions to function, smells, bodily antics. One can't be bored by automatic responses, it's almost an animal situation of non-thought. Coachella crowds appear to be acting far more like individuals. There are no rebellious individuals but only followers of social media who are easily bored by information (one can dislike an act but crowds are boisterous and an entertainment unto itself, responding with heckling and and so forth in spirited manner.) The head is easily bored whereas the body reacts instinctively and is driven by autonomic responses. The problem is that information is not actually evolutionary (whether on a phone or on a genome); there are no coordinated responses which automatically activate our instinctive drives. This is where evolution is and where boredom isn't. Information-rich systems are only there to fool us (again.)
|
|
|
Post by neilnv2 on Apr 24, 2024 5:14:11 GMT -5
I noticed a piece on Welsh singer Charlotte Church who has left her mansion abd 'spiritual retreat/school' to downsize. One suspects she got bored and desired company, despite being married. The spirit is very hard to construct from scratch. Dylan Thomas's 'Under Milkwood' concerns an incestuous Welsh village where spirit certainly runs free, along with flesh.
Possibly Church could have joined The Hellfire Club? There's also the generational aspect and traditional church rituals. As stated, one can follow a group or rebel, the two aspects are always present, as possibilities. If the spirit is there, one can rebel and it's often a love/hate affair (death/rebirth.)
A group is neither right nor wrong, according to Nietzsche. It just is (not 'justice', quoting from 'Planetary'.) It has power, physical and mental (emotional.) When Lindsay Anderson portrayed the ending of 'If' as a gunfught he was being very serious. He happens to be my step-uncle so I'm familiar with him via relatives (he certainly lost his mojo towards the end; the same could be said of Kubrick who chose Malcolm McDowell for 'Clockwork Orange'.)
While the film is often portrayed as a fantasy, his view is it was "all real". By that he probably meant in terms of the power of psyche. The rebel students find mysterious objects of a ritual order; they are enmeshed in ritual processes. It's heaven and hell.
If they are rebelling against formal education, there is something in that. The best people seem to be self-taught. There is no need to be told things if the mind can essentially work it out for itself; otherwise the mind is not being used (in 'O Lucky Man' there is a gag on the reciting of 'numbers', in this case of jail inmates.)
Skull link cites 30 gene areas that have been identified as contributing to skull-formation (statistically.) However, from the previous genetic example on personality types (Apr1), it's clear that there must exist a control-hub (or several) to coordinate all these genes.
We don't need to be told this as it's a logical certainty. The only thing that matters is the coordinated response (as in a group that exists) so that the formation exists. As stated previously, quite a lot is spontaneous geometrical shapes (sphere), and the remainder must be gene-coordination.
We live in an information-rich system, home to the brain. These rebels are completely serious in what they do, and sometimes life is serious, psychically and physically.
(Don't try this at home.) One way to look at the filming of 'If' is Lindsay had a free ride in that it was shot at a public school with the age-old vibes. The sense of ritual is really palpable, with the 'scum' (novices) forced to wait on the prefects in a medieval throwback (the angelic lad handing-out ammo on the rooftop.) Rituals are like music; they create certainty in an age of uncertainty. Is the world harmonious in reality or is it chaos? This question was posed of 'Iphigenia' (prev) and part of the answer is that chaos is the reality of Greek tragedy (Dionysus.) In other words, things are sort of contradictory. Rituals bring-in Dionysian chaos (blood, sacrifice) and sanctify it. Life and nature are chaos, let's admit it. The harmony of nature is affective, nit affirmative. LA thought rituals had ceased to have significance and one could say he replaced them in the film with mysterious, semi significant events (the bottled foetus.) If one says that rituals have a type of reality, they have to be felt. Feeling is at the heart of the film (the naked romp in the bar.) If the modern scene is so uncertain, it can't be felt, and this is another theme of 'O Lucky Man' (the sequel) with the bizarre science (the pig-man, not so bizarre now maybe). Some say science is a tautology, and the circular gene-centric argument is a case-in-point. If genes are treated as information, there is literally no limit to the amount of data that can be spooled-out. However, logically they cannot be information because the body consists of coordinated responses and systems (as described.) Eventually, scientists will find the coordinated systems that control genes, and these coordinated systems relate to rhythms and patterns in the body *(ie the two are one thing). This is a logical certainty, because we already know the body contains coordinated response systems. *Coordination is just a word for rhythms, patterns, networks involving multiple systems, neural, muscular. In this case, one is already outside of a purely scientific system since one is talking about the dispersal of energy in the world. If the world is not 'mechanical' (Apr14 'Iphigenia', Davis) it is not fully known or, in other words, it is wild. Wildness involves rhythms, patterns, networks which are to some degree coordinated and to an extent chaotic. A traditional group will have these (the Welsh village of Dylan Thomas's 'Under Milkwood'.) Within a group, responses are to some degree automatic and therefore evolutionary (per prev.) Traditional work in the field exposes the body to natural pathogens and strengthens the immune system. Wildness contributes also mineral springs, which to the Romans were deities. An evolutionary system is not fully known, it is equivocal and depends on the health and strength of the body. This could entail rituals that preserve natural deities of the earth. If a healthy body is going to react automatically to some natural stimulus and with coordinated responses, then it is an evolutionary response but it can never be fully known. Science can only find out what is known, and this can never be so of automatic coordinated responses that often occur in groups. Groups are evolutionary and musical and equivocal, and there is always the threat of chaos and tragedy. Hence the line taken by Davis on 'Iphigenia'; one cannot know everything in a non-mechanical world. It's a falsity that does not consider the animal and the super-animal.* [starred paras are changed] In other words, scientific method is a type of falsity that pretends things are information even though it's impossible. The harmony and the music are missing. They get away with it because information has certain uses, mainly for medical conditions and identification. What you could say is that rationality has gone way too far and just generates uncertainty. Science is heading for what might appear perfection, like Neom City in the desert; but it's based on falsity that crushes underfoot bedouins who have real power. Rituals and music are necessary for the body to act with coordinated power (we know it and it's visible.) That could be cowboys and cowbells, the sounds of the superhumam activity of the country. The body has a ritual strength and significance. A culture of the head (information) basically negates that, disempowers us. Education is not needed, powerful activity is. Rituals follow automatically. 'Stumble on some vital signs To make sense of this perception Or would you remain invisible to me?' Invisible (Let Your Blue Light Shine) Lookback to Mar7 Taking a cue from Mar7 and Cosmopolitics and the Bones Brothers Ranch link above 'Buffalo Song', there is a cosmic, elemental sense in which work is effortless and spontaneous and one gets back more than one puts in. This presupposes a group, and the link makes that very clear (neighbourly ranchers.) There is no money in it and it's hard work, so when I say 'effortless' I mean it is easy on the soul. The work is good for the soil and the soul and there are no negative vibes. 'We must cultivate the soil Not plough the surface of the wounds' (Still Waters, same album 2012) Mar7 was putting out the idea of a 'song for the herds' and one might ask what JA knows about dirt? (There's a good line from 'Cotton Comes to Harlem' where a gal is asked where she has seen cotton in Harlem. "In the movies", she replies.) I don't know about that, but Cosmopolitics is a situation that already exists (in nature) of an ongoing creative act between subjects and objects and the sounds of animals ('others'.) Armatrading is a cosmos in herself and music talks (the talking guitar on 'Invisible".) It's almost a native animal talent of the evolutionary superhuman, something that evolution leaves behind, instinct. The media spools-out words that tell us we are not instinctive animals to weaken us. As Zuckerberg remarked to Congress, Facebook is run by ads, as are most media channels. I was just thinking the other day, does anyone actually follow these ads? The media is run by the dollars of ads whether or not people watch them. What this seems to imply is that quantity is a dollar effect. I recently subscribed to Disney+ to get X-Men 97 animation which does happen to have an evolutionary, instinctive content (also probably influenced by the psychological Japanese mecha anime.) The dollar is an enabling tool, and makes possible such things as gene-editing for crops (via ads?), contrary to cosmopolitical, instinctive, atavistic sense of 'others' (animal sounds, ie because bugs and birds are animals on the same scene.) The Europeans have already allowed some gene-editing, but they are known for their counter-evolutionary tendencies. One possibility is that the Latins will advance a non-dollar and group-dominated counter-culture to the counter-evolutionary tendencies of the Anglo-world. This clearly requires some academic expertise, such as Ochoa, so here's another shout-out.
|
|