Knowing vs. Understanding

"Where is the Life we have lost in living? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"

- T. S. Eliot

---

"What I cannot create, I do not understand"

- Richard Feynman 

Franz Kafka, "Dearest Father" (the problem of knowledge derived from Recognized Authority/ SuperEgo vs Understanding thru Self-Creation/ Ego).  Authority vs. Auteurity?

from Wiki:

The Name-of-the-Father (Nom-du-Père) is a central concept in Jacques Lacan’s psychoanalytic theory, referring not to the biological father, but to a symbolic function that introduces the subject into the realm of language, law, and desire. As a signifier, it plays a structural role in mediating the child’s relationship to the mother’s desire, instituting the Oedipus complex, and making possible the formation of subjectivity. First emerging in Lacan’s seminars in the 1950s, the concept builds on Freud’s model of the father in the Oedipus complex but is reinterpreted through structural linguistics and semiotics. Lacan’s Name-of-the-Father acts as the "no" (non) that forbids incest and inaugurates the symbolic order. It is the master signifier anchoring the symbolic system. In the event of its foreclosure, as in psychosis, the symbolic order collapses, and the subject becomes vulnerable to hallucinations, delusions, and a breakdown in meaning. In Lacan’s later teaching, the concept is pluralized—Names-of-the-Father—to reflect the transformation and decline of paternal authority in contemporary society. This article traces the development of the Name-of-the-Father from its Freudian roots, through Lacan’s structuralist reformulation, and into contemporary psychoanalytic theory.

"Intelligence is a fixed goal with variable means of achieving it"

-William James 

The Perils of Identity: Sincerity, Authenticity, and Profilicity

...and why so many "Progressive" Liberals are Struggling to Find a Safe Space of Affirmation from their General Peer (critics).

The Censorship Industrial Complex:  Creating and Gatekeeping Online Safe Spaces for Progressive Liberals Since 2014

The answer though, isn't simply to insist everyone thicken their skins.  It's to modify and make "age appropriate" the expectations of everyone as to the nature of both "sincerity" AND "authenticity" in Identity formation... teach that we must all compromise our identity in fulfillment of the many various and distinct social roles and group identities we must share in order to coexist (and thrive).  We are all more than our sexual identities and that not everyone can, or needs, be supportive of it.  The "trans" community need to accept this (hence all the trans/ trantifa killings (suicides by cop) of late.  Remember the old playground adage, "I'm rubber, you're glue.  Everything you say bounces off of me, and sticks to you!" How about, "I know you are, but what am I"?,  I certainly do.

Alysa Liu, Olympic Champion

The Nature of Surplus/ Excess

... is "Enjoyment". Sex stricly for reproductive purposes isn't nearly as enjoyable as sex for serving fantasy/ fetishistic purposes  No wonder marriage evolved AWAY from the arranged varieties and towards casual/ serendipitous and spontaneous forms.

So Glaucon was right and Socrates wrong in Plato's argument for the ideal "Republic".  Injustice is an "luxurious excess".  Justice is pure utility w/o excess.  Utility is insufficient.  "Happiness" requires "excess".  And the "pursuit of happiness" IS the pursuit of excess!

from the Jowett Summary of Plato's "Republic"

Yes, Socrates, he said, and if you were providing for a city of pigs, how else would you feed the beasts?

But what would you have, Glaucon? I replied.

Why, he said, you should give them the ordinary conveniences of life. People who are to be comfortable are accustomed to lie on sofas, and dine off tables, and they should have sauces and sweets in the modern style.

Yes, I said, now I understand: the question which you would have me consider is, not only how a State, but how a luxurious State is created; and possibly there is no harm in this, for in such a State we shall be more likely to see how justice and injustice originate. In my opinion the true and healthy constitution of the State is the one which I have described. But if you wish also to see a State at fever-heat, I have no objection. For I suspect that many will not be satisfied with the simpler way of life. They will be for adding sofas, and tables, and other furniture; also dainties, and perfumes, and incense, and courtesans, and cakes, all these not of one sort only, but in every variety; we must go beyond the necessaries of which I was at first speaking, such as houses, and clothes, and shoes: the arts of the painter and the embroiderer will have to be set in motion, and gold and ivory and all sorts of materials must be procured. 

True, he said

.The "utility" of "uselessness"

A product's "symbolic" AND pre-symbolic value 

(producing meaning)

from Google AI: 

 « Plus-de-jouir » (surplus enjoyment) est un concept introduit par Jacques Lacan dans son Séminaire XVII pour désigner un excès de jouissance qui dépasse le principe de plaisir et la satisfaction symbolique. Analogue à la « plus-value » de Marx, ce reste de plaisir est produit par le renoncement à une satisfaction totale.

A products's value does not simply emerge from the 'reality' of the utility of the object to the consumer (use value).  It is a "transference/ transcendence" of use AND imaginary/symbolic/ and pre-symbolic surplus values through Das Ding and that constitute its' value's totality (visible + hidden values) and that establish the commodity's price.

from Google AI:

In Lacanian psychoanalysis, das Ding (The Thing) represents an absolute, pre-symbolic, and lost object that constitutes a central, structural lack (manque) around which human subjectivity is organized. It is the "Real" that cannot be symbolized, often associated with the primordial, lost mother-object, acting as a "lethal abyss". 

Das Ding (The Thing): Introduced via Freud and developed by Lacan, it is the void or the unrepresentable object that lies beyond the symbolic order. It is the goal of desire that can never be reached, only orbited. 

Manque (Lack/Loss): The subject is constituted by this fundamental lack. The objet petit a (object-cause of desire) is what remains of das Ding after it has undergone symbolization, representing the "lost object" in everyday life. 

Relationship: Das Ding is the ultimate, unattainable object, while manque is the experience of its absence, driving desire as a "metonymy" or "want-to-be" (manque-à-être). 

Das Ding is often described as the "beyond-of-the-signified". It is the primordial outside of the subject, serving as the "structural a priori condition for memory

A miser (or collector) savors the surplus value of the packaging rendering the commodity inaccessible as a form of symbolic/ pre-symbolic surplus enjoyment (Plus de jouir) obtained through enjoyment's  very denial.... refusal to open and remove the packaging that makes the commodity inaccessible that would diminish its' exchange value (violating the "sacred" adyton).  For ultimately, all desire is derived through the preselected desires of Others.  And the very moment in which a desire is obtained (packaging removed), it is transformed into a desire for something new, something different.

Loosening the Gordian Knot: The Rise of Populism

...and No, Trump is No Alexander the Great!

The Institutions Established in 1945 were starting to crumble LONG before Trump came Along.  Reagan/ Thatcher was merely a desperate gambit aimed at saving them , that FAILED.

...and then along comes Elon.

Antimemetics Division Hub

from Wikidot:

An antimeme is an idea with self-censoring properties; an idea which, by its intrinsic nature, discourages or prevents people from spreading it.

Antimemes are real. Think of any piece of information which you wouldn't share with anybody, like passwords, taboos and dirty secrets. Or any piece of information which would be difficult to share even if you tried: complex equations, very boring passages of text, large blocks of random numbers, and dreams…

But anomalous antimemes are another matter entirely. How do you contain something you can't record or remember? How do you fight a war against an enemy with effortless, perfect camouflage, when you can never even know that you're at war?

Welcome to the Antimemetics Division.

No, this is not your first day.

from Wikipedia: 

The mimetic theory of desire, an explanation of human behavior in relation to culture, originated with the French historian, literary critic, and philosopher of social science René Girard (1923–2015). The name of the theory derives from the philosophical concept mimesis, which carries a wide range of meanings. In mimetic theory, mimesis refers to human desire, which Girard thought was not linear but the product of a mimetic process in which people imitate models who endow objects with value.[1] Girard called this phenomenon "mimetic desire", and described mimetic desire as the foundation of his theory:

"Man is the creature who does not know what to desire, and he turns to others in order to make up his mind. We desire what others desire because we imitate their desires."[2]

Mimetic theory has two main parts – the desire itself, and the resulting scapegoating. Girard's idea proposes that all desire is merely an imitation of another's desire, and the desire only occurs because others have deemed said object as worthwhile. This means that a desirable object is only desired because of societal ideas, and is not based on personal preference like most believe.[3] The mimetic desire is triangular, based on the subject, model, and object. The subject mimics the model, and both desire the object. Subject and model thus form a rivalry which eventually leads to the scapegoat mechanism.

The scapegoat mechanism has one requirement for it to be effective in restoring the peace; all participants in the removal of the scapegoat must genuinely believe that he is guilty. It is also essential that the scapegoat cannot strike back afterwards, so it is common for him to be killed. Once he is gone, peace will quickly be restored, further confirming his "guilt". However, the scapegoat is chosen arbitrarily. The resulting peace is borne from violence, and this form of violence controlling violence has existed since the beginning of civilizations.[4]

Girard believed that we cannot truly escape this mimetic desire, and that any attempts to do so would simply land you playing the game of mimesis on a different level. A new desire for peace must develop in order for the violence of scapegoating to end. However, the model for this desire must somehow rise above the tendency to scapegoat.[5]

In more recent years, mimetic theory was expanded by colleagues and critics of Girard, including Jean-Pierre Dupuy from the angle of economics, Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe from the perspective of philosophy, and Nidesh Lawtoo from the angle of mimetic studies. Mimetic studies argues that not only desires, but all affects are mimetic.[6]

Oh wait, Now I Remember...

On Profilicity and Facebook Profiles...

Duck Face in a Public Restroom

Veronica Forrest-Thomson, "Through the Looking Glass"

Mirror, mirror on the wall

show me in succession all

my faces, that I may view

and choose which I would like as true.

Teach me skill to disguise

what’s not pleasing to the eyes,

with faith, that life obeys the rules,

in man or God or football pools.

Always keep me well content

to decorate attitude and event

so that somehow behind the scene

I may believe my actions mean;

that one can exercise control

in playing out a chosen role;

rub clouded glass and then,

at will, write self on it again.

But if, in some unlucky glance,

I should glimpse naked circumstance

in all its nowhere-going-to,

may you crack before I do.

Richard Feynman's Magnetic Personality...

 from Google AI:

Magnetism and its underlying laws allow for the simulation of time moving backwards at a quantum or wave level. While thermodynamic time moves forward, manipulating spin dynamics with magnetic fields can make quantum systems, such as nuclear spins in molecules, appear to reverse their evolution. Specific experiments using magnetic fields can force particles to behave as if time is reversed, such as reversing the direction of magnetic fields and particle currents. 

Key Concepts in Magnetic Time Reversal: 

Quantum Spin Reversal: Researchers have used strong magnetic fields to manipulate the spin of particles (like in chloroform molecules), forcing them to evolve back to their original state, effectively reversing the thermodynamic arrow of time. 

Electromagnetic Time Reversal: Scientists have demonstrated that electromagnetic waves can be reversed in time by creating "time interfaces" using metamaterials with high-speed switches, essentially acting as a "time mirror". 

Time-Reversal Invariance: The fundamental laws of electromagnetism are generally time-reversal invariant, meaning the equations work the same forward or backward, allowing for theoretical reversal of physical processes. 

Limitations: While these experiments create conditions where time appears to move backward for specific particles or waves, they do not constitute reversing the overall flow of time for the universe. 

Geomagnetic Reversal: Earth's magnetic poles periodically swap (north to south), which is a "reversal" of the field, but this is a physical flip of the magnetic field over thousands of years, not a reversal of time itself.

...words, words, words

...that always reflect BACKWARDS in the mirror.

Rene Magritte, "Not to be Reproduced" (1937)

Excerpt from Analysis

Paintings are the representations of the subjects from the perspective of the artist. What we believe we are seeing may or may not be the truth as the artist intended.

And that is not a bad thing – the ambiguity is what envelops paintings with mystery, allowing your imagination to kick in.

I believe this point is critical in understanding Magritte’s painting.

Not to Be Reproduced confronts us with two opposing realities: the incorrect reflection of the man vs. the correct reflection of the book. The painting is disquieting because it fails to meet our expectation to see the face and frontal body of the man in the mirror.

With this incongruity, Magritte is calling on our capacity of contemplation and imagination. He does not want the viewers to simply look at the painting and appreciate it as it is (which we probably would, had Magritte painted an accurate reflection of the man). Instead, he wants us to reflect on the contrasting realities, and experience the mystery that the painting evokes.

By painting a reproduction of the man’s back (as opposed to a reflection) we are also forced to question what we see, to question the reality of the narrative.

This has very much to do with the idea of the unreliable narrator.

Every work of art displays a subject in terms of how the artist envisions that subject. By introducing fictional physics (the impossible reflection of the man), Magritte incorporates an unreliable narrative into this painting.

The French copy of Edgar Allan Poe’s novel The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket that stands on the mantelpiece is very pertinent to this aspect of an unreliable narrative.

The protagonist of the novel, Arthur Gordon Pym, is a prototypical unreliable narrator (click here for our analysis of Poe’s novel). Pym’s narration contains contradictions, dubious events and even a confession from him that he may be fabricating some parts of his account

Zero Point Energy + Zero Point Time (the Present) = Consciousness on the Edge of the Dirac Sea?

Trapped Inside the Tesseract

But Which Direction in Time is it Moving...

...To the Perspective of the Observer, or that of the Artist?

Time's Chirality Gets Trapped in Structure, Breaking the Mirror When it Emerges from the ZPE Dirac Sea, but Achiral Up Until Then?