adding page because of this..

Explore meaning. Play with an adversarial arrangements of kenning to tap at analogy network. Listen to the echos.
https://t.co/tKYg4sb4ux https://t.co/DgMkP8yZrN

Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/ultimape/status/818470875309678593

What *ARE* words?

Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/ultimape/status/817712084997853184


wikipedia small

When can we talk about a “house” or a “mansion” or a “shed”? The same can be said about verbs, in all the languages in the world: when should we stop saying “walk” and start saying “run”? The same happens, of course, with adjectives:

when must we stop saying “yellow” and start saying “orange”,

or stop defining as “black” and start saying “white”, or “rich” and “poor”, “entrepreneur” and “worker”, “civilized” and “primitive”, “man” and “animal”, “beast” and “sovereign”, “christian” and “pagan”, or “beautiful” and start saying “ugly”, or “bad” and start saying “good”, or “truth” and start saying “false”, “determined” and “free”? Or “in” and “out”, “here” and “there”, “now” and “then”, “past” and “present” and “future” and “eternal”?

thinking of separate rooms at idec

interconnectedness prejudice graphic



Thus, complete meaning is always “differential” and postponed in language; there is never a moment when meaning is complete and total.

and so.. shaw communication law.. lanier beyond words law.. et al



Roland Barthes remarked that “those who fail to reread are obliged to read the same story everywhere”. This wry comment summarizes the phenomenon of different experience for each iteration.


All such ideas imply self-presence and totality. Différance, instead, focuses on the play of presence and absence, and, in effecting a concentration of certain thinking, Derrida takes on board the thought of Freud’s unconscious (the trace), Heidegger’s destruction of ontotheology, Nietzsche’s play of forces, and Bataille’s notion of sacrifice in contrast to Hegel’s Aufheben.

“Différance is not only irreducible to any ontological or theological—ontotheological—reappropriation, but as the very opening of the space in which ontotheology—philosophy—produces its system and its history, it includes ontotheology, inscribing it and exceeding it without return.”


What this suggests to Stiegler is that grammatology—a logic of the grammè—must be supplemented with a history of grammatisation, a history of all the forms and techniques of inscription, from genetics to technics, each stage of which will be found to possess its own logic. Only in this way can différance be thought as the differing and deferral of life (life as the emergence of a difference from non-life, specifically as the deferral of entropy), and as the difference from physis through which the human must inevitably be defined (the human as the inauguration of another memory, neither the memory of genetics nor that of the individual, but rather a memory consisting in “inscription in the nonliving,” that is, technical memory).

makes me think of how much time we spend.. using words.. ie:

Instagram’s Privacy Policy: Rewritten, So Kids Can Understand It dlvr.it/N4Gm6N

and how bad that is for us ie: too much ness

entropy ness –

4 min – it’s like the universe has a witness protection program for its energy and we call that entropy…

thinking ps in the open ness.. no need for all the words.. policies.. because we’d be swimming in idiosyncratic jargon ness of approaching the limit of zero/infinity in meaning ness



differentiation ness

Perhaps the smaller iterations we make to checking ourselves, our unique-ness, onlyness, and allowing for that in others, the less prejudice we will see/experience/create.