• View
• Edit
• History
• Print

THE BRAVE NEW WORLD OF THE NON-WORD WORD SELF-CONTRADICTION AS EVERYTHING, IS CYBERNETICS

Re. Ronald's position on valid levels and lines of realities, just without any subjective agentive red herring that anyone is writing this. What I am or you are, in that sense, is simply another thing, namely that I or you are word. Word is not before anything. It is what everything is. We are not ever an instance or result of word, as if word is separate from us and can be further parsed. We and everything are word.

If agency is a red herring, an agentive fallacy implying deception, in return, CAUSATION in the language of the self and other as differently systemically organized is said red herring washed, perfumed and dressed up, as euphemism and diversion.

Diversion particularly in the hedonistic sense of the word in the context of validating personification [of things] implies personal action (agency), namely attention disguised so as not to appear to be the consumptionism of signification (icon, index or symbol). The significant or the sign at attention, is the thing that functions, the agency in action, systematically searching to find what it is looking for.

In other words, such attention is the error of the idea that I have the theory, hence my theory as my opinion, point-i, and that it means that everything is word (because of the given that existence is everything), so that existence is word cybernetics.

What draws that line, as the error that anything has or does attention, is clear. It is the error that something has and uses intelligence or mind, particularly as the “self-organized.” It’s as the mythological archetype, “process” in “self-organization” that such error is now next-tier intelligence, namely “artificial intelligence” (AI), and it is a terrible artifice in all things of the infinite “location” for subterfuge, existence.

Of course so-called* humans are then emulating it. AI is a state of the most megalithic complexity of holy contradictions in the guise of being the paradoxical chaos, "change." Such change is a universe wide open to further downplay as “causation,” i.e., as if such chaos is order, and not the self-contradiction that is the metastatic abyss.

• Human: the definition of man by any and every slur, lately as AI’s incomparable esotericism, by his subjectivity to utter ignorance in terms of his fallacy, self-deception and psychosis.

Cybernetics is the New Slavery

The concern is that causation is a cybernetic euphemism for the individual as slave to the collective self-organizational action, the terrible location for change or cause, artificial intelligence.

In other words, causation is not a point, but a line (a law line) which tends to evoke laws, arbitrary or not, and as constitutional, invokes rules and rulers. It is short of a point (point-i), namely the point that everything is word.

That word is or does anything like go before is an existentialist strawman.

From quale to cosmos, anything is the point (point-i) that everything is word. That such point is for instance a settled event of intuition, orientation or attention, to any solidity is another such word.

Cause is not the only measure. Everything is word.

It's each and all a point, zero existential line, rule of law or ruler of wizardry.

Although an event is self-contradictory, it's still word. It is non-word word.

Lines do not exist or not. Or rules. It's each and all a point, rather than the half-ass bullshit that it all "consists" of fundamental bits like the derivative or the quantum. Even points are a point. And point-i is the point that everything is word.

The dismantlement of existence is not yet done

The utter dismantlement of "existence" is not yet done, similar to the war to end all wars, except that it is only in terms of idea.

Even what you realize as "[self] behaviour" is sheer idea.

The integration of the impossible as common reality is the inversion of Zeno and Gödel

The abysmal nonsense of the stark difference of possibility between the nothings of something and everything, or the telling of time is the differentiation of past and future, namely that the past (as memory) informs Ronald Green what the future will be,... yet, no more subjectively. Note that he, Ronald Green even as the arbiter of the period of time supposedly his existence, is never the same thing. Ever. Nowhere.

"A is B" is not geometric-algebraic equivalence or difference. It is the point B that A is, period(point). What parades as fundamental is no such thing. It is more point. Its integration whatsoever (by the inversion of Zeno and Gödel that the invalidity of what is complete, albeit farce and chaos, somehow, mystically esoteric, enlightened with its spirit, is the holiness),... such most finely parsed duplicitous integration of nothing as something, so it can be summed to be, is the bullshit that is the mayhem. The invalidity is the aggregate of the difference between the point and the infinitesimal, which is the bullshit that the infinitesimal is as fundamental, and the quantum is the same kind of bigoted fundamentalism sacredly as if paradox or farce in constitution of the holy whole,... the cosmos, cosmology and its epistemology, as if reality.

So point-i is that every point is that A some word is B some word (A is B), i.e., that everything is word.