Historia al contado fisiológico del ábaco, de los folios con cuadrícula y las coordinadas cartesianas

Y el cuento es el contar en si mismo cotidiano, sin acabar y respecto de objetos diferentes pero de la misma naturaleza o categoría, como la fruta o las alubias, monedas o montículos ya medidos de sal, por ejemplo.

Y fisiológico porque con la repetición real y física por la misma persona, día tras día y bajo cualesquiera exigencias circunstanciales, se acaba uno por adquirir una destreza cada vez mayor que pasa enseguida a una organización visual en filas y renglones de los objetos agrupados que uno va colocando;

Y la mayor destreza y rapidez del contar está precisamente en la configuración visual (para el contador humano) que permite ya un plano de conceptualización casi cartográfica y de imagen de la cantidad total de los objetos en cuestión pero según las cantidades parciales a asignar.

Porque el contar por una sola persona y respecto de grandes cantidades de una sola sustancia o objetos diferentes pero de la misma serie, hombre es una actividad en verdad física que exige una intensísima concentración de esfuerzo mental en verdad constante:

Y cuando te distraes, ¿cómo coño vuelves a iniciar la obra sin tener que volver a contar lo ya contado?

Y en realidad es el ojo humano que, seguro como esta en la cantidad de cada elemento agrupado, empieza naturalmente a ordenar los grupos en filas y renglones de forma mas bien óptica y a mayor rapidez de calculo a ojo de cubero que se dice (creo) respecto de la cantidad total y sumado de grupos ya medidos e independientes, que sin embargo ha de ser exacto (con precisión, eso que tiene el contar).

Pero como siempre en estas cosas es la repetición y la necesidad lo que empuja al ser humano a buscarse formas, trucos y maneras de hacerse con un mayor grado de control y manejo del asunto o actividad que le envuelve, espoleado siempre (igualmente) por alguna necesidad que según las circunstancias del momento que hemos de entender como imperativa…

¿Cual es pues la relación que con esto pudiera tener Renes Descartes (1596-1650) y particularmente respecto del mecanismo conceptual aun contemporáneo de las coordinadas?

O dicha de otra manera, ¿tendría algún interés pedagógico en explorar (conocer padeciendo) el origen real y fisiológico humano que Descartes solo conceptualiza y desarrolla, como una especie de fontanero con maña en lo simbólico y quien realiza una labor-el mismo-igualmente fisiológica enteramente en el plano semiótico-teórico?

Porque si el pensar (a igual que la semiotica) es fisiologico, ¿qué es en realidad la filosofía, exactamente?


Tema siguiente:
La violencia semiótica igualmente real y fisiológica de Allan Stewart Konigsberg (Woody Allen) en Annie Hall (1977), Zelig (1983), Hanna y sus hermanas (1987), Deconstructing Harry (1997), Vickey, Cristina Barcelona (2008), ect.


___________________





The physio-semiotics of anthropology
Human physiology + the semiotic = Anthroplogy

systemic possibility of individual physiological projection of the self towards the semiotic;

-Semiotic because living human systems cannot develop and sustain themselves around real, in-group physical violence.

-Although once semiotic-ly erected and defined, human collectives exercise real physical violence outward, towards other rival and opposing, human groups:

For human violence as shadow butler and real phantom custodian of man must be accomodated, unfailingly and one way or another.

Human physiology is a physiology of imposition at the heart (necessarily) of living human medium; human physiology does not "go away" as long as people are.

Accomodation of physiological violence in anthropolgy as anthropology becomes invigoration for people as the most systemically compatible, systemically viable form of the exercising of physiological impostion,

Through the aesthetic, sports, the living circumstances of money-and above all the semiotic contemplation of violence that is preferably and at its highest level tied with some form of moral, conceptual connection to political-psychological, philosophical complexities of human experience.

And so most people never actually have to take part in the reality of our violence that most of us only really know through the semiotic-but that still is physiological, nevertheless (that is the whole point of it);

Although some other human beings do actually have to walk knee-deep into it as both real, living agressor and victim-and then a corpse (most importantly as above all an image for you),

Otherwise you wouldn’t believe it, and would not take its reality seriously enough to mortify you and towards the greater invigoration of all our systemic, anthropological stability through time,

Amen.





The logic of burnt offerings in sacrificial anthropology
Is in fact a logical slight of hand as reversal of the order between cause and effect,

Probably most of all because the vulnerbality of man will not tolerate more than anything else the absence of moral weight and seriousness,

As the so-called unbearbale lightness of being; and so the rituality of burnt offerings as sacrifice is your big chance to take what are the effects of something you have absolutely no control over whatsoever,

And pretend that you are somehow, in some way, connected to its cause-through your postulated vilness, greed, excess and by hook and psycho-rational crook, as if there really were some kind of order you have somehow defied and that even in your defiance there is still and nevetheless the overseer and reciever, so help me god:

And the more valuable, dear and important to you that which you sacrifice is, the more powerful the illusion of power and devine force over you,

Like a child who the more he or she is punished, all the more ferverent is your love of father;

Except that often it was a child who in fact was sacrificed (what could be more dear to human beings?)

As really the cheapest trick of all in the whore house of weight-imposed, physiologically invigorated, human anthropology;

But at certainly an enormous cost in terms of a human medium that survives in its very communion, but at the cost of some of its members-as contradiction as real offense to logic itself.

Especially if you have to keep repeating (in a permanente exercising and renewal) the same physio-semiotic illusion of totemic impostion

Even if it is today only symbolic and a figment of the human mind of the carnal and closet covenants of multiple and varied chosen ones of this world,

In a Tom-and-Jerry anthropological dependence still today based on killing others to know your own belonging to one of the sundry chosen ones (fan club and covenant);

And the slaughter of other human beings is a physiologically invigorated means to what is only a form of existential, ultimatley totemic (‘of the mind’) comfort,

As just the accomodation of human violence, once again and as anthropology itself necessarily through the blood, flesh and bones of others,

Unfailingly over time and for as long as you need to know who you are.

And in this way,
You offend me.




[27aug15]





La TDT y la cuadratura del círculo:
La gran guerra por forjar valor real, economico-material de lo simplemente semiotico-humano y totémico.

Y no inicialmente conspiración político-mafiosa administrativa alguna:
-Gestión eficiente y smart del espacio electromagnético humano (mediatico, semiológico que no biológico-corporal);
-Uniformidad cultural semiótica se ha de considerar pues efecto y producto circunstancial, y no el objeto original del esfuerzo generalizado básicamente planetario de consolidación de buena parte del espacio real físio-mítico humano, en primerísima lugar parapetándolo de facto de cualquier presencia e intervención no administrativamente apta,

En la intención, eso sí, abierta de trazar coto técnico-real respecto del medio humano vivo en sí mismo, como espacio mediático único, oficial asentado sobre la circunstancia de captación efectiva y total del dispositivo comunicativo en su mecánica totalidad como la mismísima posibilidad humana y social de emisor-mensaje-receptor,

Algo así como la sagrada trinidad de lo secular humano sobre la que se asiente todo lo demás desde que el hombre es hombre como ser eminentemente social necesitado de una idealización moral-semiótica respecto de su vivir colectivo,


Sine qua non,

Y después históricamente de la agricultura.



____________________
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Televisi%C3%B3n_digit al_terrestre
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Asensio_Pizarro
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/G rupo_Zeta
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Cadena_del_Water






2sep15
Notes from the Underground Man on Minima Moralia by Theodor Adorno


ON THE OLD
…The violence which is inflicted on them makes us forget the violence they committed.
-Even their rationalizations, the once-hated lies with which they sought to justify their particular interest as the general one, show an inkling of the truth, the urge towards the reconciliation of conflicts, which the upbeat successor generation happily denies.
-Even the faded, inconsequential and self-doubting Spirit [Geist] of the elders is more approachable than the quick-witted stupidity of junior.
-Even the neurotic peculiarities and malformations of the older adults represent character, that which is humanly achieved, compared with pathic health, infantilism
raised to a norm. [OF THE YOUNG]




[Physio-semiotic/ and the semiotic:]
Different nuances around the same idea, that optical perception (especially) is morally (socially) connected, weighted especially in its aesthetic force on the perceiver (especially); because there is no fear like your physiology getting the upper hand over you in regards to semiotic, social norms (morality, in short):

‘Cause you don’t want to get your ass knocked out of the game that is social connection and belonging (and even less your being mauled by them if they have finally had enough of you and suddenly turn on you-a hundred pair of enraged human eyes and two hundred clenched fist (if my math is correct) as they bear down on you…

Because perception is projection, and thus must you also offensively (aggressively, proactively) perceive, always understanding exactly where you stand; for in your perceiving is once again the affirmation of self, in the affirmation of knowing what you are not (simply because it is physically foreign) but that still must meet the criterion of acceptability of the others (the physio-terror-of-opprobrium-hord)-or you at least need to know what could be the realm of possible consequences for you of what you are in fact perceiving in its moral-social implications, and when you are an advanced-stage player of the game, like me.]

MORE INFERENCES
-The aesthetic is part of human physiology and perception; is of permanent social-moral importance and weight (because perception is already preconfigured in fact before and prior to the social itself, genetically in individuals);

-The aesthetic is not just finger painting and/or a survey course of the history of art, but rather a defining aspect of physiology and people’s possibility of interaction with reality.

-Thus is the self to be understood more than ever before as in fact IMPOSSIBLE without the constant at least reference to what the group is; and so is actually A DICTATE OF THE GROUP in agricultural-based anthropology as individual human physiology raised to semiotic models of the collectively weighted;

-Making the real question as enigma, above really all else, the nature and origin of human consciousness.

(Outside, of course, of how to make a million dollars-don’t ever forget that!)



WITTGENSTEIN WAS THE DISLOYAL, ENGLISH GARDNER-PATIENT

(Notes on Minima Moralia by Theodor Adorno, section 50)

For the worth of a thought is measured by its distance from the continuity of what is familiar.
It is objectively devalued by the diminution of this distance; the more it approaches the previously established norms, the more its antithetical function disappears, and its claim is founded only in the latter, in the apparent relationship to its opposite, not in its isolated existence.

…the demand for intellectual honesty is itself dishonest. Even if one followed for once the dubious instruction, that the representation [Darstellung] ought to model itself precisely on the thought-process, then this process would no more be one of discursive progress from step to step, as the reverse, that insights fall to the seeker of knowledge from heaven. Cognizing involves on the contrary a network of prejudices, intuitions, innervations, self-corrections, assumptions and exaggerations, in short in dense, grounded experience, which is by no means transparent in all places.

Of this the Cartesian rule, that one should only turn to objects, “to whose clear and undoubted knowledge our mind [Geist] seems to suffice,” including all order and disposition which relates to such, gives as false an account as the opposing doctrine of the apperception [Wesenschau], which is nevertheless inextricably entwined with the former. If this latter denies what is logically right, which in spite of everything validates itself in every thought, then the former takes what is logically right in its immediacy, in relation to every individual intellectual act and not as mediated through the stream of the entire lifeconsciousness of the cognizer.

Therein however lies simultaneously a confession of deepest inadequacy. For if the honest thought unavoidably amounts to mere repetition – whether of what is already known, or of categorical forms – the one which renounces the full transparency of its logical genesis for the sake of the relationship to its object, always incurs a certain guilt. It breaks the promise which is posited with the form of the judgement itself. This inadequacy resembles that of the life-line, which runs on bent, diverted, disillusioning according to its premises, and yet solely in this course, because it is continually less than what it should be, may it portray under the given conditions of existence an unregimented one. If life fulfilled its determination straightaway, then it would forfeit the latter.

Whoever died in old age and in the consciousness of a guiltless, as it were, success, would secretly be the model pupil, who completes every grade with an invisible backpack, without gaps.

Every thought which is not idle, however, remains marked by the impossibility of the full legitimation, as we know in dreams, that there are mathematics lessons which we miss for the sake of a blissful morning in bed, which can never be made up. Thought waits for the day that it is awakened by the memory of what was omitted, and is transformed into teaching.


INFERENCES
Warrior anthropology of the physio-rational hunter (‘hombre a hombre’) who is because he is need-mind and body; social organization after agriculture basically deals with the control of this nature in people of being in need; and so teaching in the sense described here is like a voice beyond anthropological containment itself (but that because it is strictly of the semiotic, is itself contained still by physio-human, anthropological structure). And the teacher is thus the real warrior (because you can be a real physio-rational warrior if you are only of the semiotic); but no such rational violence that is finally free towards its own real and physical manifestation-behind whatever narrative pretext of progress and rocket rides to the moon and back-can living anthropological structure really tolerate.

The fact that you might think it can (or ever really could) is a very dangerous illusion you live in.

And the living of man’s physio-psychological violence through the power of rational, technical imposition came to substitute the lack of depth finally in man himself;

For historically, only with power could he seek to fill his own emptiness in the hollow, mold-man that he had turned himself into.

Simply because he didn’t know any better, and lived essentially trapped by his own physiological nature and will, finally and unfailingly towards imposition; and so surely the more humor you could eventually find in this, probably the better for everyone!


Wittgenistein
You can’t address what you can’t talk about;

Galileo
Removes the individual from the object that is nature itself (understood as a beholder not PHYSIO-ANHTROPOLOGICALLY connected to the object of contemplation).

Bacon
By assuming a radical dualism between observed nature and Man’s self-consciousness he was able to sketch the outline of a possible explanation of the former in purely mechanical terms. By thus submitting the whole of the observable world, including Man’s organs of thought and feeling, to the immense power of mathetical formulation he gave to succeeding generations the means of seemingly unending progress in the attainment of the mastery of Man over things; but at the cost of Man’s cosmical alienation. It was another Frenchmen who saw that ‘science without conscience is no other than the ruin of the soul’. Four centuries later we can see that it may be the ruin of the world. [W.P.D Wightman; closing words in Science in a Renaissance Society (1972)]


_________________



.