terminal 0
unfinished
NEFX - Sorcusibe.txt ? Comments ? The logic of the language is more important than the individual may be inclined to think -- not just because of facility and avoidance of dire error in acting according to them, but in understanding the nature of the thing being denoted in tandem with it in order to better understand the true nature of universal fundamentals. ? Otherwise one is liable to conflate the sign of one with another as being the category or case thereof, perhaps out of habit from seeing the two commonly used in denoting a case. ? Specifically, one must consider even common denotation for there being a form of shift, an entering thing, and a result. ? Crucial in any case is understanding of necessary language of all this reality for facility of one’s self and others, particularly beings at large — that is to say, denotation for a more universal language. ? This may have determine consistent patterns between multiple results and yet at certain (say, quantitative) thresholds change in their pattern, and not necessarily at the same interval of discrete possibilities in a world of possibility given. ? Here then we can see the nature of the world of possibility in that which invariably results from the form of the category in question and in the nature of these possible results' interrelation (at least in terms of pattern of “distance” [literal or figurative] between each other). ? In such case the concreteness of the resulting thing invariably corresponds with that of the entering thing in consideration. ? Of the “entering” or “exiting” things may default worlds of possibilities be considered for common facility where none are specified, such as all known to be concretely possible. ? We set a form of conception that can then be consulted both in deciphering and anticipating fundamental relations on one hand (particularly those operating outside of prior knowledge or control of beings like ourselves), and accordingly engineering one likewise for results from the practical to (at least in the very long form of beings' history yet to be beheld) the transcendental. ? If we consider situations (engineered or not) in which a thing may compound itself, results are only of a compounding in accordance with that which is entered for compounding. ? We can better grasp the nature and ramifications of this category in working out one of its many possibilities. ? The result is often thought of as exiting from the relation into which the former thing entered, though it may rather inhere in the original thing or its world at least in logical determination, much as a tree may inhere in a seed; and this “exiting" thing likewise results from its own world of possibility, though it depends largely on the original world or more specifically the nature of action (engineered or not) upon the entering thing. ? It concerns the entry of a thing from a world of possibility, and the result of another thing that may or may not be identical. ? Specifically, the category in question concerning fundamental units and relations concerns the shift of one into another, or the universal law (at least as is so far conceived) for that occurrence to be. ? But it begins with a full definition of that category. ? Here in this space of practice the individual becomes truly a journeyer, drinking endlessly of the sea of categories of categories and relations of relations. ? Finally, we think of the precise methods for working out cases of these categories. ? We think of the entire system of denotation for these various categories and their respective components, ideally in the relation of each's conception in collective thought of beings historically. ? We think of the categories of such categories and according rules in their working out. ? We think of what these categories are composed of both in concept and in denotation. ? We note any possible reverse or inverse forms of these categories and their use. ? Bearing this in mind then, we take these fundamental categories (fundamental insofar as they facilitate common understanding by beings heretofore) of these fundamental things (fundamental in that they comprise known reality) in terms of key components necessary to their working out and understanding, as well as testing methods in more determining the boundary of their nature. ? Granted, the culturally ingrained (however lengthily across time and generations) one-word evocations of the nature of these categories, such as in commonly taught subjects, shall be avoided henceforth except cursorily as the context may dictate, in order that the true content of their natures and relations be more deeply absorbed without mental funneling into known references with their own cultural-spatio-temporal connotations and therefore without being limited to a culturally conditioned time and place but rather at least attemptedly more of the universality that they are of. ? Accordingly, this category should have its own defined range of at-least main features. ? More specifically, the individual must determine by universal law which such category should be the first in an “ingredients list” of determining a case of these fundamentals. ? In examining the fundamental units and relations (at least those most minutely conceivable) that govern known reality, the individual should take great care to (for facility of one’s self and others) establish which rigidly defined categories of such units or relations must be thought of and used when determining a case or nature of such fundamentals.