The Shadows of Totalization, Part XXXI
In my attempt to lie to myself, in order to disrupt any decipherable code of signifier to signified from developing (which would allow myself to straighten out my lie, would keep my lie from being a lie to myself) I seek a way of randomizing whatever signifier I would assign to these pictures.
I could say: this dot is (x,y,z,c,q,pe, gfy,fluty,a,12%....). Even better: this (xcmeyc,byem,123, @#c,c,d,…) is (x,y,z,c,q,pe, gfy,fluty,a,12%....)
I would do the same with this,
I won’t be bothered if I should happen to say the same for both, e.g. say about the upper, this (xy) is (#$) and about the lower, this (xy) is (#$).
The only hazard I care about now is keeping my process random, to keep it from congealing. Even if it should congeal in a much broader, wider, bizarre or complex coding, this would result in a failure to lie to myself.
I could say: this dot is (x,y,z,c,q,pe, gfy,fluty,a,12%....). Even better: this (xcmeyc,byem,123, @#c,c,d,…) is (x,y,z,c,q,pe, gfy,fluty,a,12%....)
I would do the same with this,
I won’t be bothered if I should happen to say the same for both, e.g. say about the upper, this (xy) is (#$) and about the lower, this (xy) is (#$).
The only hazard I care about now is keeping my process random, to keep it from congealing. Even if it should congeal in a much broader, wider, bizarre or complex coding, this would result in a failure to lie to myself.
posted by Yusef Asabiyah at 7:56 PM
7 Comments:
Yusef, I believe that the code of signifier to signified is already random. I think you agree. So it is in the repetition that an ORDER begin to adhere. So as long as there is no repetition of a code that has already been used. What this has to do with lying to oneself, is beyond my horizon of understanding.
The code of signifier to signified is arbitrary, not random.
I can switch from one code of arbitrary signifiers to another without succeeding in lying to myself, because among other things, I am capable of learning systems of arbitrary signifiers, once I catch on to the system (the code.)
But in a random (which would also be arbitrary(random systems are arbitary but not all arbitrary systems are random)) signification, I can't catch on to the code because there isn't one.
-Yusef
I dont see where it is you want to go with this.
If it is known where an investigation is going, is it an investigation?
-Y
I guess so. Maybe it would be a good idea to start by investigating your central premise though, that you want to be lie to yourself. You have not said a word in that regard. You are taking the central premise for the entire investigation for granted, to begin with. That is not a good start.
I'm not sure what you are asking for. Do you want me to explain my motivation for wanting to lie to myself? What I am hoping to accomplish? I'll be happy to comply--I just want to be clear on what you want.
-Y
Yes .. indeed so. What motivation? If it is just to prove or demonstrate a theoretical point or paradox, it is quite boresome as this has been done a thousand times.
Post a Comment
<< Home