Like a Gazelle

I am writing a book that is a testament to its own renunciation. In my fevered desire to withdraw our existence from the evil modes of sapient hunters, I look toward a different plane. Those legitimist concepts which haunted Gide and Faulkner, on the cusp, as I, those papal rants engendered by the irreverent tainting of Christ’s resurrection, entereth not into my journals.

I entered her. Her body rose in a psalm-like wave of tanned stomach and breast, her head digging backwards into the mattress. She was caving into me. I gave her all that she needed, and she let the black, sweet, overwhelming power-light of her existence to enter into the cleft aperture of my rod – the bitter chemo of her violent, odorous lubricants penetrated, burned, and stung the raw interior of my single, lone, seminal canal – the stunned, forest-like lanyard of my groin bemoaned and silenced; for which her knowledge of, she was like a gazelle.

Care must be taken, and ingrained. She renounced her existence for me – she littered, she rained upon my life a missive, of which the two of us, were risen to a plateau; and she ran like a gazelle there, and her breasts jarred with the spread.

Notes duplicate instructions

Arcane instructions. Duplicate instructions adjacent to this world (the truth sign is (P,Q)(TFTT), alternatively (X,Y(1011)). c, h, Planck length, atomic weight, ..., AN:NN. Notes.

Registrar

Possession is an attack concept. I don't buy it. It has been grammatically wrought in the human person as a subjunctive registrar requiring educated retrenchment. Thence, to the benign 'psychological acne' which traces-out the mneumonics of our learning curves and skill-acquisitions; a prosaic kernal seen in the 'deeper politics' of L.W.'s later 'work', required for putting out the fires of low intensity warfare waged against - the classes, in the broadest sense of the term.

reverse exclusion eq. cf cond.

(U – y = x) def.

(U – x = y) def.

:: ( (U – x = -y) ^ -(U – y = -x) ) → x <> y ↔ 1(x,y), 1(x,-y),1(-x,y), 1(-x, -y) ::

Disposition

φ. For each υ in Γ, υx and γt in Γ, if both (γ, υx) and (γ, γt) are elements of some functor Fu, then υx = γt.

f (γ, γt) ∙ (γ, υx) = φ (γ, γt) ∙ (γ, υx)

ψ. For each υ in Γ, υx and γt in Γ, if either or both (γ, υx) and (γ, γt) are not elements of some functor Fu, then υx ≠ γt.
f (γ, γt) ∙ (γ, υx) = ψ (γ, γt) ∙ (γ, υx)

3.333. ‘The reason a function cannot be its own argument is that the sign for a function is already contains the prototype of its argument, and it cannot contain itself.

‘For let us suppose that the function F(fx) could be its be its own argument: in that case there would be a function ‘F(F(f x))’, in which the outer function F and the inner function F must have different meanings, since the inner one has the form φ(f x) and the outer one has the form ψ(φ(f x)). Only the letter ‘F’ is common to the two functions, but the letter by itself signifies nothing.’

Wittgenstein is clear: 3.333. ‘This immediately becomes clear if instead of F(Fu) we write ‘(φ): F(φu) . φu = Fu’. That disposes of Russell’s paradox.’

It also disposes of the paradox of special relativity and declares that the very possibility of a situation ψ is eliminated. There is another way of writing this:

F: φ (γ, γt) ∙ (γ, υx) ↔ ((φ): F(φu) . φu = Fu)
F: ψ (γ, γt) ∙ (γ, υx) ↔ ¬ ((φ): F(φu) . φu = Fu)

And further. If i is an imaginary aggregate, or if it is merely and indicator, then:

F: φ (γ, γt) ∙ (γ, υx) ↔ ((φ): F(φu) . φu = Fu) = F (φ) ↔ i
F: ψ (γ, γt) ∙ (γ, υx) ↔ ¬ ((φ): F(φu) . φu = Fu) = F (ψ) ↔ ¬ i

This indicator has full forensic authority over the whole matter of a confused physics - both i and its negation ¬ i. The ultimate reduction.

One thing it demonstrates is the ultimate absurdity of Baez’s claim that functors should not have elements (he means, in the sense that sets do) simply because a functor is not strictly a set but enhances categories; this would be much too simplistic.

I personally tend to think that the indicator is representative and not procedural and that it represents the logical canvassing of physical reasoning – or, the logical indication of a metaphysics, although not the metaphysics itself.

I want to dispose of metaphysics actually by means of reducing physics to a logical indicator.

Wittgenstein's visceral attack

Wittgenstein’s visceral attack on the cogito was correct and called for. Removing the alibi – a criminal persona in any situation – of intellectual cover from metaphysical thinking was his merciful gift to a ruined world. He gave the gift of the Tomb and the Resurrection. An exegesis is not needed.

Mojo Pith

In a good theory of categories, the negation of a tautology would add a grammatically coherent segment to the tautology. That would would render a mojo pith to the historical failure to eliminate this aposteri and apriori shit.

Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier.

The animus of invoking aprioristic and aposteristic notions.

Gide on the cusp, as I.

Shards

In the Tractatus Wittgenstein routed philosophy and left us shards of profoundly orthodox beauty. One only need be lightly acquainted with Pierce to see that the theory of special relativity is also a mathematical proxy for other things. (When invoking Gödel’s frame, a proxy is elementally not a suggestion of either aprioristic or aposteristic suggestions.) Ignoring this would be like ignoring an indicator-species attempting to sell his presence to us directly in our midst.

It is not out of frivolity or excess that von Wright said of Wittgenstein that he was one of Germany's great writers. It is not by accident that Wittgenstein's interest in Goethe's color theory informs a lot of the basis of color theory to this day.

The Cartesian geist was not molded for negatives. There is reason to replace Bell's terse dichotomies with orthodox theorems whatever else is thought about it. This is mnemonic. It solves all problems. One mustn't lose one's rightful kills. There is no reason to live off the dirt. We should delegate the remaining mnemonic detritus to the dust bin of man's long murderous list of teleological fantasies. The Cartesian delegates failed at and murderously perpetuated this conundrum  - literally.

A Piece of Paper

1. The deontology of a mark on a piece paper is a primary characteristic.
2. The reality of Wittgenstein’s rough-cutting territorial advances into tautology begets a theorem of the lambda calculus.
3. That removes the structural alibis from all philosophical ampoules.
4. The notion of a quotient is up-sided by that removal.
5. The rightful territorial act is un-leashed.
6. This inserts the mnemonic-subjunctive into Frege’s Derivation of Hume’s Principle.
7. This garners the permissiveness for a demarcation of the mien characteristics of the human person.
8. That peels away the mnemonic detritus from the history of a person’s behavioral commitments. The detritus can be left aside. (There is no reason to live off the dirt.)
9. Wittgenstein’s paragraph on Gödel is a mnemonic-subjunctive. Cement is an ingredient of concrete, and not a synonym.

The steward has prerogatives. A diarist digs.

Literary Exception

Wittgenstein’s paragraph on Gödel is mnemonic-subjunctive. (Cement is an ingredient of concrete, and not a synonym.) With a gentle use of a tightened grammatical lanyard, Wittgenstein converted the disturbances between the two segments into a literary exception. The residual shards of the exception exhibit the merits of psychological detail through conceptual analysis that has not yet been equaled since Stendhal wrote The Red and the Black. It is the true conveyor of the resistence to manipulative propagation of low-intensity warfare thrown upon the classes by elitists. Their birth certificates and social security numbers are on record.

Wittgenstein's 'conversion' of the disturbances between the two segments was a diagnosis; and a therapeutic discernment that decoupled the dichotomy of a tautology from its modern officiations - in the guise of a mnemonic-subjunctive. (As seen in his later work, it informed Frege's Derivation of Hume's Principle.) The depth of the psychology in this case is that of the informed retrenchment of an educated and experienced individual.

Decoupling Meeds

The mark of a line on a piece of paper is at most a nuance of deontology. Parchment itself is a 'statement' of the husbandry of the meeds of human skills (e.g., hand movements parsed at µm.)