Scene: El Valle Grande. Patricia's Apartment. Science a n d Philosophy Workshop.
Philosophical Dialogues XXII
By Franz J. T. Lee
(To study the
theoretical and logical aspects of Einai, of Theory a n d Thought,
the Philosophy Students have organized an evening "Science
a n d Philosophy"
Workshop. They have invited Prof. Coseino to assess them in their academic endeavours to understand
the implications and complications of Dialogics. The session begins.)
Indira: Prof. Coseino, we welcome you to this session of our study group, to our "workshop", which is programmed for four hours. Thus, please prepare yourself for a unique mammoth experience. All students gathered here seriously want to study, to be a n d to exist students; they want to learn to act a n d to think, to think-for-themselves, no matter what brain strain or drain they may face. Those who have other interests refused to attend this forum and they clearly expressed disinterest. In fact, we were fascinated by their sincerity, by their choice, because we would not welcome faked courtesy and sterile indifference here. Hence, the sky is the limit, as far as our ontic deliberations are concerned this evening.
As you could imagine, the last lectures on Thinking
a n d Thought not only provided "food for thought", but also food for
severe headaches. Hence, to arrive more prepared in future lectures,
we have decided to organize this "study group". We are sure we will tarry
a while investigating Intellect a n d Reason, that
is, Einai-In-Itself
a n d Einai-For-Itself. In the past lecture
we illustrated how in the History of Philosophy, Intellect /a
n d Reason had interchanged their epistemological hegemony. With your
invaluable assistance, today we want to elucidate very carefully what we
understand by , Sensatio, Intellectus
and Ratio.
Coseino: Thanks. I am really honoured by your invitation. However, please note that I will participate like any "normal" student. We will all be students a n d professors. Hence, in this "workshop", you can address me as Coseino. I noted that you have delicious supplies of food and drinks for thought. How about a "Maltin Polar Beer" and some Potato Chips? Are you sure that they are not "cloned", and that they do not contain Prozac or some other Mind Control concoction? Oh! Where is my Marlboro 100? At least, here one can enjoy a smoke undisturbed by smoggy, foggy controlled "minds".
Indira: Here you go, Coseino. We especially bought a packet of Marlboro 100 for you.
Coseino (taking a heavenly puff): Surely, polluted, smoggy air, pills, Ritalin, Prozac, aerobics, body-building, all have no class with this lovely, godforsaken Illuminati product. However, to replace it, on our small farm, we are already growing our own bio-dynamic tobacco. Soon we will "export" Pandemonium Cigars. Marx and Che would have loved to join our smoke session, accompanied by Stone Age Old "Bushmen", who, smoking dagga like chimneys, all had lived -- on an average -- over 100 years, in spite of the vicious African living conditions. I have no idea what is the "normal" life expectancy for Prozac, shit and pot "smokers". And exactly they, like parrots, all join the Illuminati, "no-smoking", death squad, harassment campaign.
Mahatma: Coseino, you excite my appetite. Please, could I have a Maltin Polar too? Also pass me an "arepa" and an "empanada". Unfortunately, I don't smoke. Patricia, do you know where my pills are? I forgot to take the pink one, the 25th one, at 7.00 PM today.
Coseino: Surely, Mahatma, you can't be serious. Are you joking, just pulling my leg?
(Laughter. After everybody has been richly served, the session begins.)
Albert: Let us begin to analyse the "moments of a non-relation", of a relation at rest, of a cosmic relation.
Alfred: I understand bingo. In other words, absolutely nothing.
Coseino: That is an excellent beginning. It's our lingo! You are liberating yourself from patrian, ideological cobwebs. You are starting to think, to enter the domain of Einai.
Indira: Now, to begin the ontic tango, as far as I can recollect, it is pertinent to explain once more our understanding of a Non-Relation, of a Self-Relation, of an Auto-Reflection, of a Non-Bezug. More precisely, of Rest. Of course, all these terms are hypothetical, they will be adjusted, corrected and revised all along our Ontic Voyage.
Jeanette: Do you mean that a Non-Relation is not understood in a formal logical manner, in a dualistic fashion, as what a Relation is not?
Patricia: Au contraire, a Non-Relation is an essential moment of a Relation. Rest is a cosmic moment of Motion. Just as there exist Relations, so there are Non-Relations.
Coseino: But, the latter,
that is, Non-Relations, exist precisely as That what Relations are
not, how they -- how Motion -- do not exist!
Non-Relations are Rest-Relations;
in the Patria: Death-Relations!
Other connotations are: Thing-Relations, Money-Relations, Ahistorical-Relations, as Marx called them: Commodity-Relations; Alienation-Relations.
In our terms, Nature /a n d Society Relations, in nuce: Labour, Labour-Relations.
Patricia: Also, in Einai, in Thought, as Intellect, a Non-Relation exists as an essential moment of a Relation, of Motion, of Reason; otherwise, the former would not be called a type of Relation, viz., a Non-Relation. Also a Relation cannot exist as Relation-In-Itself (then, it will only be, be at rest, in repose), it always exists as Non-Relation a n d Relation, as Relation-In a n d For-Itself. In short: it exists simply as: Reason.
Coseino: Excellent! Excellent! My Dear!
Albert: I have another problem. Let me explain it. Now, please take heed. This query exists on the E=mc2 -degree of ontic deliberations.
In the same way, as in "mega-nothing" (macrocosmos or mega-black-hole) the Relation has levels (Rest), exists as degrees (Motion) and transcends as various mensions (Bezug), similarly in micro- a n d macro-cosmos, in Einai, the Non-Relation has numerous levels of non-relatedness. Hypothetically, let me attempt to demonstrate some of them.
a) Cosmos, ONLY non-related to itself , thus the Satz: Cosmos ;
b) Cosmos, ONLY non-related
to itself and non-related to Non-Relation, to Rest, to
"and", thus: as elaborated in our class, as the Satz:
Cosmos and;
c) Cosmos, ONLY non-related
to itself and non-related to Non-Relation, to Rest, to
"and",
and non-related to Einai, thus the Satz : Cosmos and "and" Einai.
a), b) and c) are not identical non-relations, but they are three moments of the very same Non-Relation.
For example, in the Patria, A man, a worker,
Marx,
are three moments, which are not identical, of the very same:
The working man Marx.
working = a certain level of Rest, or of the Tendency towards Rest, towards Death, of a Non-Relation, of Alienation, the Negation of Emancipation, of Labour.
man = maltreated Cosmos, /Cosmos, Cosmos patrianized, Cosmos which "labours", which works and which does not act. This is the famous "human being", who everybody claims to be! It has another variant or level: God, God-Man, the Illuminati, Big Brother, who does not work, but controls work, has power over labour, who /reasons, who sows and reaps Alienation, Capital and Profit, Globalization and Property Rights .
Marx: the Zenith of Emancipatory Negation within the Patria, together with his teacher, Hegel, a Father of Disalienation, of the Theory of Alienation, of disalienating Labour, of emancipating the Worker.
Now, we know who the hard-working man, Marx, really is, and how he exists.
Hence, when we identify, when we talk about the hard-working man, Marx, we better be incisive and precise.
Let us have a brief coffee intermezzo, and then we will continue.
Indira: Coseino, could you explain to us what Albert has developed in terms of Sensatio, Intellectus and Ratio?
Coseino: I'll choose the easy, simple one: Actio or Sensatio. I leave explaining the other two to you and Patricia.
Patricia: So very sweet of you, Coseino! You are a real "gentleman": for complex and dangerous ventures and adventures: Ladies First!
Okay! You begin: Gentlemen First!
Coseino: We have to remind that we differentiate precisely between Acting, Perceiving, Thinking about Acting and Perceiving, Thinking about Thinking itself. We are using the term "actio" to identify an Act, also to differentiate our Act from any philosophic actus or actus purus.
On this level, Acting is an attribute of Cosmos, of Us, because We are Cosmic Beings. It is what we have called Rest, a Self-Relation, a Non-Relation. Here Rest, Self and Non- should not be understood in the way how these concepts are generally explained, rather they should be grasped in the context of the past deliberations within the framework of our philosophy.
Also it should be remembered that Acts are not Thoughts, although both can be expressed by specific words in language. Because of a miserable denaturalization and dissocialization process, generally called "education", we have not been taught to differentiate with scientific stringency exactly what is an actio, an Act, and how it is expressed in language, from how a Thought does exist, and with which concepts it should be interrelated in words. We cannot imagine what a chaotic disaster has been developed in our brains, and what an anarchic catastrophy exists in our daily conversations and debates. Hence, we can express Acts in Words, and these Words we simply call Acts. They are not products of Thoughts, but of Acts themselves.
Karl: Coseino, I assume that you are leaving Actio, and are now moving towards Sensatio, kindly give us some concrete examples. As you have always warned, I must admit that Thinking is really heavy stuff; it exists very complex, extremely complicated. I barely can follow, but I am trying, trying very hard to activate my intellectual neurones. I am converting myself into the hard-thinking Karl.
Coseino: Great, Karl. Now, Cosmos can perceive itself, can reflect its own Acts, for example, it can reflect its own Pico Bolivar way down below in its own lagoon. Pico Bolivar and the Reflection of Pico Bolivar in the lagoon are not identical, but they are two "sides" of Cosmic Identity all the same. They are two cosmic moments. The former, Pico Bolivar, which is reflecting itself, is an Actio; the latter, the reflection in the lagoon, which is not the former, is a Percept, is a Sensatio, an intellectual reflection in the "human" mind, as Thought-Thing, as Gedankending. Not only "human beings" have "senses", a dog, a mountain, a fig tree, all can perceive, have sensorial perceptions, have Sensations, have Sensatio. Cosmic Acts and Percepts have an "and"-relation, a reflexive, an auto-, a non-Bezug. Sensatio is Cosmic Perception of Cosmic Action, is Einai-In-Itself, is Intellect. Its perverted level in the Patria, as /Intellect, is intellectual Labour. This is being converted into a Commodity, into Private Property, protected by Copyrights! You follow the concrete example, Karl?
Karl: Yes, I do.
Coseino: Now, Indira, it's your turn. Please explain Einai-In-Itself, Intellect, Verstand, intellectus, to us.
Indira: Now, it is necessary to non-relate the realm
of Cosmos to the domain of
Einai. We auto-relate Acts and Percepts (Thought-Things)
to Thought about Them, to Thought About Thought-Things, to
Thought-In-Itself, to Intellect. We arrive at (Acting and Perceiving) and Intellect, also named
Einai-In-Itself.
Again, we must observe that although Thinking or Thought exists as " a n d "-Relation, within Einai, yet Thought-In-Itself, Einai-In-Itself, has an "and"-Relation, a Non-Relation, a Relation at Rest, an Auto-Relation vis-a-vis Acts and Percepts, and to Cosmos itself in general.
This happens because Thought as such, as Cosmic Thought, as Intellect itself, in order to grasp Cosmic Action, has to be essentially non-relational, auto-reflexive.
Coseino: Take heed:
In this case, at this LEVEL, we do not only act, we act and think, we
think about thought-things; here we are ONLY using our Intellectus,
not yet our Reason, which exists as Thinking about Thinking-Itself,
which exists as Intellect
a n d Reason, as Einai-In-a n d-For-Itself.
Karl: What does it mean to think-in-itself?
Bill: Amplifying Karl's question: Are there simple versions, free versions, beta-versions and share wares of Thinking?
Coseino: Bill, I like your Web lingo, your Information Highway Cool Talk!
Bill: Coseino, I'm trying. One has to be in: brb!
Coseino: Thanx! Bill.
Patricia: Karl and Bill, leaving the fun aside, there are different levels a n d degrees of thinking. One level is "think-in-itself". You see that thinking, which everybody claims to be able to do, is not just a unilateral everyday joint venture. As Coseino always underlines, it is a n d exists really very complex and complicated. Bill, of course, there are free "thinking" versions, beta-versions, which you could upload from your Home PC to "What's Cool?" or which you could download from the "Spider Man Web", but they belong to ideology, to "freedom of speech and thought", to democracy, to rabbling and babbling; they are thinking non grata here in our Philosophy Workshop.
Furthermore, Intellect non-relates Act and Percept and Concept in Words and Language. Also we can identify Intellect as: Actio and Sensatio and Intellectus. As we will see later, Einai has a "contradictory", an a n d - relation: it is Einai-In-Itself (Intellect); but it exists as Einai-In-a n d-For-Itself (Reason). We are now only concerned with its Is-Nature, with its non-relativeness, and not with its "contradictory Existence". But, Indira, I like co-operation, relatedness, socialization, please continue!
Indira: To answer Karl's question, at this stage, on this degree, which is a level and degree, we are thinking-in-itself, and we are utilizing our language tool to express ourselves, to intercommunicate ourselves.
But, we are still thinking about acting Cosmos, about essential perceptions, about our Cosmic nature, about our active Praxis, about essential, cosmic, "human" being. We are not yet thinking-for-itself, i.e., we are not yet only reasoning. Also we are not yet thinking-in- a n d -for-itself, which is the way in which reasoning überhaupt exists.
Coseino: Well said, outstanding argumentation.
Mahatma: Indira, but what is intellectualizing? In the Patria, in modern Globalization, what is that, which has become Property, a Commodity, during the process of Accumulation of Capital and Reason?
Coseino: Within the framework of our discussion, it is a bit too early to reply to this excellent answering question. Other prerequisites have to be present to tackle this majestic trilemma. Let me show you the way towards these inaccessible heights.
And how will anybody understand Hegel’s Logic or Phenomenology of the Mind when (s)he does not have the foggiest notion what dialectical thinking is all about? The macabre irony of the whole story is, that hundreds of thousands of students study Hegel across the globe with an archiformal logical mind. You can now imagine who is able to understand our debates, what is meant by our Invisible a n d Invincible Principle!
(Again a Coffee
Pause. With militant optimism and audacious attitudes the valiant
student crew chat about their new intellectual discoveries,
about their mental renovation, about the perilous voyage into the unknown,
towards transcendental excellence. Then, la lutta continua!)
Patricia: In the previous session, we have focussed on Thinking-In-Itself; de facto we were thinking-in-itself. In other words, as stated before, we have been setting our thinking ability into action, in actus. Albert, you spoke about the E=mc2 degree of Thinking, well, here we go, enjoy it now!
We stated that Intellectus, Einai as Einai-In-Itself, or Einai-In-Itself as Einai, actively thinks, thinks-in-itself about the Non-Relation: Cosmos and "and" and Einai (as Einai-In-Itself).
Simplified : the Intellect thinks-in-itself about the Satz: Cosmos and Einai.
Now, let us refer to the "contradiction", to the "double
existence" of Intellect, of Einai-In-Itself. In this case, A is not only
equal to A, A is also equal to Non-A.
A=A a n d Non-A.
At the moment we are discussing the following aspect of this "theorem":
A=A and Non-A.
What does this signify? The moment when we enter the realm of thinking, even of active thinking, of thinking-in-itself, we also have to commence with our thinking process, in order to understand any level and degree, or degree, or level a n d degree of thinking.
Our topic is identified as Intellect, as Einai-In-Itself, as Active or Cosmic Thinking, as Thinking-In-Itself, as A=A and Non-A.
Einai-In-Itself can be a Satz (Cosmos and Einai)
(A=A); it can also be the Affirmation in a Gegensatz
(Cosmos a n d Einai) (A=A a n d Non-A),
as Einai-In-Itself a n d Einai-For-Itself. Hence, the Gegensatz
Cosmos a n d Einai, simply is a short form of stating :
{(Cosmos and "and" and Einai-In-Itself) a n d Einai-For-Itself}.
This is the "double nature" of Einai-In-Itself, of Intellect. The two moments are not separate; they form the same Einai-In-Itself. In the thinking process we have to take these two moments into account.
Karl: A simple question, within a complex circumference: How is Intellect being exploited?
Patricia: Karl, I'll try to tackle this problem. Coseino, the astute pathfinder, has deviated us on a rather serpentine track through thorny terrain. Let us digress a n d regress from our previous logical argumentation and indicate the essential difference between our Intellect and the patrian intellectus.
In this way we can demonstrate how the patrian intelligentsia, the intellectual or cultured classes, whose Intellect is now exploited as Intellectual Property, have come into existence.
We have to recollect what has been explained before already, i.e., the Essence of the Patria as maltreated Nature /and perverted Society, which we have identified as a denaturalization and dissocialization process, as Nature /a n d Society. Also we should bear in mind the patrian attitude towards Nature and Matter; the latter are devilish, they must be exploited unilaterally. Society, sometimes euphemistically called "Civil Society", should have a "human", a male relation to Nature; Mother Nature must be domesticated, she must be dominated, in short, she must be exploited economically in the service of "human" procreation, of "human" need, in fact, of "human greed".
Adam: This sounds biblical,
like the Apocalypsis, like the "Day of Final Judgement",
please be more concrete.
Patricia: According to "common sense", to ideology and theology, forever there must be formal logical barriers between "Adam" and the "Snake", between "Society" and "Mother Nature". On the one hand, some Men exploited other Men and Nature; on the other hand, other Men insisted that only Nature must be subjugated and that the exploitation of Man by Man, of Society, should be halted. Throughout the "History of Philosophy" we encounter this dualistic Subject and Object Non-Relation: not our Non-Relation, the formal-logical one, the /Non-Relation !
Jeffrey: This reminds me of our previous class, of the infamous Marxian "division of labour", the splitting up of the " a n d " Relation between Nature a n d Society, reducing it to a simple "/and" Non-Relation", to Nature /and Society, as an exclusive "/and" Non-Relation.
I think that this marks the crucial point of the emergence of Labour, of Physical and Intellectual Labour, as the Essence of the Patria. We could say that Labour is the painful Birth of the Patria, but it is also its inglorious Exodus from History.
Karl: Could anybody explain to me this "Intellectual Exodus from History"?
Jeanette: I'll take a bite into this sour apple. The tearing apart of Nature a n d Society, of Cosmos a n d Einai, also resulted in the unilateralization of Einai, of forever freezing it as ONLY /Einai-In-Itself. This, of course, serves the accumulation of Capital, the economic exploitation of Nature, and the physical and intellectual exploitation of Man, of his Labour. For this very reason, Nature, physical labour and intellectual labour could be converted into commodities, into private property. The ruling classes, the philosopher-kings, enjoyed the earthly fruits of their own Verstand und Vernunft, they philosophized accordingly, they lived by the "sweat of the brow" of the outcasts from Paradise. They made sure that no "contradictions" entered their kingdom, no " a n d ", and surely, no AND.
The "Wrath of Jahwe" and "Nothing" make sure that no outcast would ever dare to re-enter Paradise, to encounter History again. Also "Copyright Laws" and heavy penalties safeguard that Intellect never ever contradicts itself, that it always expresses itself concretely, that it does not escape from the world market economy, from Globalization.
Coseino: That is what I call a brilliant observation.
Any historic or even patrian event is not unilateral; it does not only have a single meaning, a unique interpretation. There are no one-sided absolutely "true" facts. Any event, any "news item", any "scientific result" is related to its observer, to the specific circumstances, to the ideology of the day, to the interests of the reigning pressure groups, to errare est humanum, and to so many other things.
Jeffrey: Once you remarked something about "Placing The Earth in a Square Black Hole", what did you mean by that?
Coseino: In Europe, in the year 1000 A.D. , having discovered that the Earth is round and that it revolves around the Sun and to report this in the "local newspaper" surely would have assured a one-way ticket directly to the burning stake. Nowadays, every baby knows this "fact"; and, who knows what we will think about the shape of the Earth in the year 3000 A.D? Perhaps we will then try to fit the round Earth into a square Dark Hole !
This is the problem with "scientific verification and data"! How do the "historic facts" differ in the "Verwoerd" and the "Mandela" epochs?! In the Verwoerd era they spell doom with White racist hegemony, in the Mandela heyday: The Future is Black! Poor History Students! In the Soviet Union, "contradiction" was in its element, at least, everybody mumbled about "dialectics"; in the "West", to contradict oneself is the guaranteed password for maximum safety in a mad-house.
En passant, we cannot just take any "raw" material, data and facts to verify or disqualify our scientific inquiry and philosophical method.
I know that Karl always wants "practical", "concrete" examples, that he is a "busy body", wanting to do dozens of things "at the same time", at various places, if necessary, he even wants to do "travelling in time", and to act in "parallel universes", which is really an excellent thing, which demonstrates an active body and mind, which is something very rare to encounter these days, but as a result of the above deliberations, it is not always very easy and simple for us to give excellent examples with regard to our research methods and conclusions. Furthermore, our very method, our concepts, our philosophy undergo changes, because what they analyse is/are also transacting, transforming and transcending it-/themselves, and again the latter is/are directly related to our own acting-thinking-surpassing.
Also, we can take any well known "historic fact", and yet our interpretation will be different from the "normal" one-sided inculcated explanation of the state of affairs. All this has nothing to do with the "real, true version"; also, we are not interested in the "copyright" of any "absolute truth" about anything anywhere. This venture we leave to profit-seeking marauders.
Karl: Fine. I understand, but so easily I will not allow you to escape. Coseino, please, as summary, give me a concrete example of Cosmos, Cosmos Acting, of Einai-In-Itself, of Intellect. I am sure you could do it.
Coseino: Karl, you surely over-estimate my humble intellect and my limited intelligence, but let me tell you an ontic story, titled:
Snow-capped Pico Bolivar (Cosmos) reflects itself (acts within) in its own cosmic Lagoon, at its very "feet". We see three things: Pico Bolivar, its Reflection, the Lagoon. Also, as cosmic beings we act, we see. This is an example of our cosmic non-relation: Act and Percept. It is an and-relation, a relation--at--rest.
Now, a gifted peasant woman from the nearby "Nevada Village" also sees this panoramic brilliance. In order to earn a living, she decides to paint this magnificent scenery. If she did it for herself, and if it was not intended for the market, then there would have been no problem with her historic Nature a n d -Society-Relation, also not with her immediate cosmic or natural "and"- Relation; she would not have worked nor would she have entered the general patrian labour process.
But, in conformity with Meridenian patrian reality, at the week-end, she sells her paintings on the Soto Rosa Market. Many foreign tourists buy her paintings. They sell like hot arepas in London, Frankfurt, Paris and New York. She becomes very famous, she paints more and more, she and her paintings are in demand on the European and American markets. She is the newly discovered virtually real "Picasso".
Her Act and Percept and Intellect, her Cosmos and Einai-In-Itself
become valuable goods. Certain paintings are more in demand; those which
she especially likes to paint do not sell at all. Hence her painting ability
is now directed and controlled by market forces, by supply and demand. She
becomes, she is being converted into a Nature
/a n d Society Relation,
into a Labour-Relation. She is being transformed into a "human being", as
billions of others.
A huge multinational company which is always looking for sex tourist market lagoons suddenly discovers her; she is employed, she is converted into a wage-slave prostitute; she sells her body and its products for a certain fee. Her cosmic being and acting become goods on the market; also Pico Bolivar, its Reflection and its Laguna. Her Acting and Perceiving and Intellectual Thinking are frozen into indifferent non-relations; they are cut off from any possible rational potentialities. She has lost the capacity of contradiction, of a n d - relations. She is copyrighted, she has become the Intellectual Property of International Capital, she is completely "globalized".
Now, Karl, you see: the above is an example of our method of verification, which ranges from Pico Bolivar to World Globalization.
Now folks, I have to be off. It is very late, and the Valle has become extremely cool, what a cool cosmic action. I leave you with the Document: Wilhelm Reich & Orgone Theory , please study it very dilligently.