The macro/microcosmic Assholon

We've all heard of traditions that see the human body as a microcosm to the macrocosm, an "as above so below" metaphor that posits a metaphysical everything (One) that our bodies fully represent on the material plane (a special One). See for example this section of The Secret Teachings of All Ages. This is often depicted with da Vinci's famous drawing, below:

Wisconsin judge rules anti-union bill unconstitutional

Per this report Dane County circuit judge Juan Colas ruled yesterday that the union busting law WI passed violates both its state and the federal constitutions and is therefore null and void. Of course WI Governor Walker says this will be appealed, and as of the reporting it is unclear whether the law will remain in effect during the appeal. The good news is that the draconian law must now pass constitutional muster. The bad news is that both the WI state and the federal supreme courts have regressive majorities likely to uphold the law. Another reason why the coming election is very important in replacing these vestigial holdovers from a bygone era (i.e. cavemen and women), not just on the federal but perhaps more importantly on the state and local levels.

Maher on god and money

In his New Rules segment last night his special comments were devoted to god and money, since in the US our god is money. In noting that god should not be on money: "Because one is a supreme, all powerful entity that Americans worship above all else. And the other is god." In explaining why the Democrats left god out of their platform: "Perhaps because it's a platform and not a spell." In response Fox news pretended Christianity was under attack "to get old people hard." Romney responded that "I will not take god off of coins." To which Maher responded: "Taking a bold and unwavering stance against something no one has ever asked anyone to do."

Strange mereology indeed

Continuing from my last two posts, and the ongoing, autopoietic substance of the IPS OOO thread:

The answer to my conundrum is addressed in Chapter 5 of TDOO. In 5.2 he discusses the intensional and extensional relations of Badiou's set theory. In the former elements of the set are ordered in a particular way, whereas in the latter the elements can be related in multiple ways. I.e., elements in the latter are not defined by their relations whereas they are in the former. He relates this to his exo- and endo-relations respectively. So a particular suobject can be composed of smaller parts with their own substances, but their relations to the larger suobject are exo-relations. Whereas the organization of the endo-relations between those smaller parts is what is undecomposable in the larger suobject, what is particular to that suobject's substance. Hence the endo-relations themselves are not another suobject with substance but what make the larger suobject unique. 

Of holons and substances

Continuing from my last post, in trying to relate the notions of holons (Wilber) and substances (Bryant), I post some of the comments below to the ongoing IPS discussion of OOO.

theurj: Now one question I have--I have several but for now this one--can the elements of a suobject's substance, which themselves do not have substance, be considered holons? If we define something as an autonomous suobject, whether sentient or insentient, whether individual or social, and elements as defined by Bryant are without such autonomous substance, can they nevertheless be holons? In a way it seems Bryant is also distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate singularities based on their powers of organization. Edwards sees these organizational powers as the defining characteristic of holons. Bryant see substanceless elements as the organizational structure of endo-relations.

Of dominant monads and dominant gonads

Continuing from this post I’ll include the last comment and proceed.

Recall the following from TDOO, chapter 4.1, where Bryant qualifies the above. It is similar to Wilber's comments about this in Excerpt C * but there are differences. More on that later.

"To illustrate Luhmann's thesis, I turn to the simple example of a humble dialogue. For the last few years I have been fortunate to have the friendship of my colleague Carlton Clark, a rhetorician at the institution where I teach. Within a Luhmannian framework, this dialogue is not a communication between two systems (Clark and myself), but rather is a system in its own right. In this respect, Clark and I belong not to the system of this dialogue, but to the environment of this dialogue.... The dialogue is an entity itself that constitutes its own elements (the communication events that take place within it) and that is something Clark and I are bound up in without being parts or elements within the dialogue."

* See p. 50 and following. He even goes into a similar discussion about Luhmann on 60 and following.

IPS forum is a being with a life of its own

As is this blog, but that's another story for another day. Balder started a thread at IPS forum on his recent JITP paper. The ensuing responses to it led me to post the following:

As always you are a patient, compassionate educator Balder. If Joe had only joined our community of the adequate here he would have groked all that by now. We have all grown here through this forum, which as Bryant says is an object* in itself with a life of its own. And it is continually teaching all of us some new things and sloughing off some old things like the very in and out-breaths of any life. The forum is not in any quadrant but a full-fledged holon (suobject) with 4 quadrants, not just reduced to being an object in the old sense of being in a right-hand quadrant. Or something that can be looked at as a quadrivium. This is part of the problem with the little boxes of AQAL.

Want fact checkers at the debates?

Given the blatant lies we've seen recently in GOP politics wouldn't you like to see fact checkers at the debates? This petition drive is exactly for this purpose. I've copied-and-pasted below. Consider signing if you'd like the lies exposed real-time at the debates.

To be delivered to: Commission on Presidential Debates and the major TV networks

Have unbiased fact checkers at the presidential and vice presidential debates so that voters can base their decisions on facts rather than rhetoric. Voters must know what is true before they can make decisions that are in their own best interest and that of our country. It would be best if the fact checking is done during the commercials and then before the next round of debates, the fact-checkers' findings could be read without comment. This would be much more powerful than reading about it in the newspapers the next day.

Michael Moore on the upcoming election

Moore thinks progressives should not be overconfident, that if they are not vigilant and active Romney just might pull this off. This is partly due to many disgruntled auto workers in Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio where the polls are pretty much even. But didn't the bailout save the auto industry? Per Moore it saved Chrysler and GM corporations. To do so thousands of their workers had to be laid off with pensions and benefits reduced for those that stayed. And these people are really pissed off.

Maher's monlologue this week

His opening jokes this week were as usual funny and accurate. A few of my favorites:

On the Democrat convention: "Usually when liberals are this fired up it's because Republicans said something stupid about vaginas." Comparing Romney's speech with the President, First Lady and Clinton's speech: "It's like watching an armless guy painting with his ass." On Clinton's speech and how it devastated the GOP lies he quipped that Todd Aiken said "it qualified as legitimate rape." The GOP were so upset they countered: "No fair, not everyone has an ex-President who can speak." On Clinton pointing out arithmetic being beyond the GOP he said that was not fair to Sarah Palin, since "one thing that family can do is multiply." On John Kerry criticizing Palin, Palin ignorantly and humorously insulted herself by responding: "I think he diminished himself by even mentioning my name."