a Plist thematic trope....

David Morris fqmorris at gmail.com
Thu Aug 6 22:07:35 CDT 2015


A common Eastern way to measure/perceive/describe Reality is to use double
naught adjectives.  The "Naught/notNaught" adjective is the most slippery
kind. It isn't this thing/concept, but it isn't not that thing/concept.
"Is-ness" is only understood as a paradox, and only experienced by
spiritual (real) channels. Every Eastern description is first negated, but
that negation is also negated.  The goal of that spiritual path is to
always question ones's perception of Reality as an invitation for a higher
inherent reality to emerge, almost a paradox -embracing madness, Ultimate
Reality.  A challenging path, to say the least.

David Morris

On Thursday, August 6, 2015, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
>
> Alfred Habdank Skarbek Korzybski ([kɔˈʐɨpski]; July 3, 1879 – March 1,
> 1950) was a Polish-American independent scholar



> He thought that certain uses of the verb "to be", called the "is
> of identity" and the "is of predication", were faulty in structure, e.g., a
> statement such as, "Elizabeth is a fool" (said of a person
> named "Elizabeth" who has done something that we regard as foolish).
> In Korzybski's system, one's assessment of Elizabeth belongs to a
> higher order of abstraction than Elizabeth herself. Korzybski's remedy was
> to deny identity; in this example, to be aware continually that "Elizabeth"
> is not what we call her. We find Elizabeth not in the verbal domain, the
> world of words, but the nonverbal domain (the two, he said, amount to
> different orders of abstraction). This was expressed by Korzybski's most
> famous premise, "the map is not the territory". Note that this premise uses
> the phrase "is not", a form of "to be"; this and many other examples show
> that he did not intend to
> abandon "to be" as such. In fact, he said explicitly[citation needed] that
> there were no structural problems with the verb "to be" when used as an
> auxiliary verb or when used to state existence or location. It was even
> acceptable at times to use the faulty forms of the verb "to be," as long as
> one was aware of their structural limitations.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20150806/f4c18794/attachment.html>


More information about the Pynchon-l mailing list