Towards a General Model of Thought and Behavior Part 4: Hiearchical Text and Integration of Subject Object Interposition and The Nature of Control.

In any given system, general control arises as a joint, direct and inverse integration of the Greatest Common General Circumstance of Subject or Object Occurrence to the Least Common Individual Result of Subject Object Integration.

Control begins as a necessity of error in perspective and illusion such that, error as any change in general system equilibrium, is part of the process in establishing the the Subject as Inherent. The Thermodynamic exchange of variables of heat, is the second part. Establishing a field of counter-inter-positional elements of that which is, that which is not that which is, and that which binds them both while being defined by neither is the foundation of that which is inherent.

.

  The Subject, that which is inherent is Necessary.

Object, that which is constructed from that which is inherent, is Probable. This General Model is the basis upon which all systems derive overall control.

For an understanding of specific control we are left with the Concept of Constancy.

 We know, because of the Third Law of Thermodynamics, Absolute Zero cannot exist Heckert 2006. Therefore heat is a constant. We also know that because of Newton's Inverse Square Law and the equivalence principle Wikki 2010, gravity too is a constant. However, in terms of  general system occurrence we know we can infer cause and effect as a continuum.

"Cause and effect: there is probably never any such duality; in fact there is a continuum before us, from which we isolate a few portions - just as we always observe a motion as isolated points, and therefore do not properly see it, but infer it. The abruptness with which many effects take place leads us into error; it is however only an abruptness for us. There is an infinite multitude of processes in that abrupt moment which escape us. An intellect which could see cause and effect as a continuum, which could see the flux of events not according to our mode of perception, as things arbitrarily separated and broken - would throw aside the conception of cause and effect, and would deny all conditionality (Nietzsche 112).  

Therefore, as a continuum in much the same fashion as the perception of color, there is a Constancy of Occurrence of either Subject or Object in every system where there is a Necessity of Error in perspective and illusion.

A reading of Wittgenstein, in part, gives us this formulation:"...We use the word composite...in an enormous number of different and differently related ways...what are the simple constituent parts of which reality exists...what does it mean to say that we can attribute  neither being nor non being to elements...it makes no sense to speak of an element's being (non-being) when everything we  call destruction lies in separation...of elements...the concept of 'number' is defined s the logical sum of...individual interrelated concepts...it need not be so...For I can give the concept 'number' rigid limits...but I can also use it so that the extension of concepts is not closed by a frontier... (46, 47,50,68)

The Constancy of Occurrence, then, in relation to the idea of integration suggested by our number model (-1 0 1) is where we also derive our argument for the Joint, Direct and Inverse sub parameters of Subject Object integration as an ongoing and eternally reoccurring Interposition

At  this point, the question of textual production and power must be addressed. In doing so, we must first establish what we further argue are the general parameters common to all thought and behavior.


Therefore, we have, foremost, the concept of text and textual production. First I affirm Margaret Paternak's observation regarding Michel Foucault namely that:

"...at his best, Fouccault  is one of the most powerful critics of liberal practices...but...where liberalism equates the political and legal dimensions of power with the state...Foucault fuses the social and political dimensions of power with the apparatus of the state (1987).

Yet, what Foucault does accomplish for our argument is to furnish us with an armature of external structure for our General Theory of Thought and Behavior. As the following diagram illustrates is, according to his reading of Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon :

...from the enclosed disciplines...an immediately generalizable mechanism of panopticism...serving as an intermediary between them, linking them together...making it possible to bring the effects of power...to the most distant elements...(235)

This external structure then, provides for us an understanding of The Greatest Common General Circumstance of Subject or Object Occurrence as a joint, direct and inverse possibility in the constitution of what is and is not perceived about that structure as well as the actuality of  integration facilitated by all avenues of power and probable power at work within a given system.
Again, in reference to to the model, our concept of The Least Common Individual Result of Subject Object Integration comes to us from a reading of Jaques Derrida's Archive Fever wherein the author describes and discusses his concept of The One.

...The One as self-repetition can only repeat and...affirm and...engage itself in this repetition...it orders to promise...self confirmation in a yes, yes...the anarchive in short...carries the law in its tradition...the substrate and the subject of law...(78).Although apparently counter intuitive, the fundamental cornerstone of control in any system of thought and behavior , is to a greater or lesser degree, a negation of that which is in relation to that which is not that which is.This brings us back to our original diagram of inherency .

Namely, that which is must always oppose that which is not. In any given system then, when we speak of Control, we must first realize that all systems are controlled first according to this basic precept. Whenever we seek to exert external control in any system then, we must first come to grips with that element, also inherent in any given system, that contains neither counterpostional element, yet both are in whole or in part defined by.

Applications

When we talk about a General Model of Thought and Behavior we, at least I am, tempted to plunge back through history and literature and take a another look at what supposedly happened and decide for myself if I do indeed agree and why or why not. As tempting as that project sounds, we will save that journey for future posts. Instead, for the purposes of this post we will close by briefly discussing contemporary issues and their relevance to the theory we have discussed.

Cutting thriough all the jargon and references, ultiamtely what we are saying here is that:
1) All situations are the result of a existing system.
2) All situations as the result of a system of interrelation have at their core, one central issue around which the entire situation evolves and exists.
and 3) Control in any situation is dependent upon isolating that core element and effectively moderating its direction of effect to the overall system.

For example,  in the  Gulf Oil spill Crisis what is the central issue? In such a complex problem, depending on your approach and your needs at the time, there is more than one core issue involved in this situation.
The central issue in the Spill itself is the area being displaced at the point of eruption.

We know that the blowout preventer at the bottom of the ocean in that region is malfunctioning although relatively intact. We also know that the Blow Out preventer system is based on an Acoustic Pattern Recognition Software based operational system. Since the majority of the leakage is coming from damaged or ruptured riser lines, then it is safe to assume that in order to regain control of he Blow Out Preventer Device, we need to re enable that device to receive a new set of instructions.
Since the Core issue, is the Preventer itself, and the device is still relatively intact, repairing the hardware and software package to receive a new set of proper instructions, is one best way to go at this point. An engineering problem? No. An Electrical and Engineering problem? Most probably.
Recollection of the already spilled oil is another matter entirely. In this situation, our core issue is not the oil spill itself, it's the behavior of the oil while it is in the water that's the problem.
Control the flow of ocean current and you inevitably control the damaging effects of spilled oil in the environment.
An Emergency Oil Reclamation and Anti-Spill Device as depicted in the following illustration that would impede the current flow is the best way towards regaining control of the current situation in terms of environmental clean-up.

Another example of  focusing on the core issues of a given situation can be found in the current Arizona Border situation. In that particular instance, it is commonly believed that illegal immigration is the central issue. But in my theory of thought and behavior, illegal immigration is only one consequent of the overall reality of circumstance. In my opinion, the central issue invoved in so called illegal immigration is not in those who choose to come across the border no matter what the cost. It is in the BIG MONEY that finances those illegal crossings. That, in my opinion, is the central issue to the problem at the border. Stop the flow of big money there,and you stop the illegal flow of immigration at the Arizona border.

In my own personal narrative, I have been trying for quite some time to get a position as a student teacher in Speech here in Ann Arbor. As of this writing, sad to say there as been NO SUCCESS. However, in my general theory of thought and behavior, the central issue here, in my particular situation, is not in expecting the College  of Education at Eastern Michigan University to find a place for me, although, that wold be nice. The central issue here in my situation, is how committed I am to the profession of education.
According to my theory of thought and behavior, what I need to do is get involved and remain involved in anything remotely involving education. Volunteer: seek out any and all tutoring opportunities in my field. Actively look into Summer opportunities to get involved in Children's Theatre or any writing workshops that may be available.
Get enough real life experience, where you can, if you need to, go an alternate route towards Teacher Certification.

The point is, in the General Theory of Thought and Behavior I am proposing the one overriding element inherent in any situation we may come across, is that there is usually one inherent condition upon which the entire situation revolves.

Understanding what that core element is the key to control in any system of interrelation, we may encounter.

For our next post we will discuss the system of counteraesthetics which this general approach to thought and behavior strongly suggests.

Thank you and good night.

 

Towards a General Model of Thought and Behavior: Part 3 Subject Object Integration and Control Through Understanding The Counteraesthtics of Hiearchical Text and Integration.

Towards a General Model of Thought and Behavior, Part 3: Subject Object Integration and Control Through Understanding The Counteraesthtics suggested by Hiearchical Text and Integration of Imperative and Intuition.
Thomas Eugene Krawford Jr
Ann Arbor MI.

Any theory, whether that regarding the physical or the metaphysical world, is not a discovery: it is merely a successful general description of a fact of process already in place in the natural world. This general theory of thought and behavior is no different in that regard. That said, we have already some controversial assumptions pertaining to our overall discussion.

In prior posts, we  began our general model with the Nietzschean argument set forth in The Birth of Tragedy that: (in terms of art and life) there exists a necessity of error in perspective and illusion (10). We have attempted to redefine the general concept of error as any expression or act that alters the existing flow of change at work in any system of  energy exchange. Human systems, we have argued, are systems of energy exchange where  the exchange of "heat" is, I maintain, the most fundamental non-verbal language responsible for all aspects of communication, experience and memory.

In this sense then, as argued by Wittgenstein (Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus; Philosphical Investigations), language remains an inherent system of establishing first internal, then exterior order in joint, direct and inverse expressions of understanding and order .

But we have gone further.

In order to make this transformation we have employed several positivist sub-transformations. Namely: the Second Law of Thermodynamics' Corollary of Deforming Potential applied to a given element of a given system:

(-1 0 1) where two counter oppositional elements are bound by a third element, neither contain, but both are defined by in terms of the the system' general identity.

The negative and positive elements will both deform their potential in relation to the zero element both are bound by, but neither contain. 

We have also employed the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics to further establish our argument for the nature of that which is inherent in any given system, human or otherwise.

As this and the following diagram indicates, it is my general contention that for any given system where three elements that share at least one common vertice, this basic interrelation will exist and it will lend itself to an integration of its elements based solely on the defroming potential of the two counter opposing elements in joint, direct and inverse relation bound by a third element neither one is, yet both contain.
And as the second diagram suggests, the basic structure of inherency is determined by the nature of the the exchange of heat in terms of deforming potential, relative to that system integrity as a bound field of joint, direct and inverse relation. The result of which is the constitution of necessary subject.

From here, in terms of thought and behavior, we can safely say that there is a necessity of error in perspective and illusion such that the Subject, that which is inherent, is necessary. Furthermore, by implication we are also arguing that inherent nature as a closed natural system is also a capacity of inherent equilibrium.

At this point we revisit Hegel's concept of synthesis as that concept informs our next objective: the constitution of that which is probable; The Object constructed from that which is inherent.

Whereas Inherency as we have described it, involves inherent capacity, our argument for The Object as constructed from that capacity, involves aspects of quantity that are not necessarily inherent, but nonetheless just as fundamental in the dynamics of General Thought and Behavior.

Daniel Berthold-Bond's Hegel's Grand Synthesis: study of being thought and history, goes in depth into Hegel's ideas of  the object as that quantity which is:

...implicit in it's immediate appearance...the fuller knowledge requires that we make implicit what is implicit in object...(13)

Berthold-Bond makes the connection between Hegel's work and that of Martin Heidegger in so far, that the concept of absolute existence: that "self" initiated altering of mind where object is developed into truth is argued to be the result of human centeredness (19).  But both in terms of Hegel's Grand Synthesis and Heidegger's Relativism, I argue the central issue here involves looking at the system of thought and behavior interrelation, not necessarily as an anthropomorphic abstraction but as a relatively closed, yet dynamic system of energy exchange where error represents a change in general direction of general outcome. Hence, its inherent necessity to the overall system's general success and longevity.

Basically then, we reaffirm our initial claim that The Object: that which is constructed from that which is Inherent, is probable, its nature itself, derivative of the requirements necessary for the exchange of various aspects of heat energy particular to that given system relative to the occurrence of that system in the environment where it is jointly, directly and inversely substantiated (borrowing again from Wittgenstein) by its integration.

This model places the Hegelian Dialectic: thesis, antithesis and synthesis into a more pragmatic and constructive frame. In the model, if we assume that Object is thought, that which is constructed from a Subject inherency arising from system energy exchange,  then as Geoff Boucher argues:

"The Hegelian reply to postmodern discourse theory is as powerful as it is simple. Postmodern discourse theory presupposes exactly what it omits: the totality of an intersubjective rationality expressed in the medium of a shared language. Laclau and Mouffe are caught in the standard performative contradiction of postmodernism, namely, in the very gesture with which they deny the possibility of a shared universe of meanings they demonstrate that their argument relies on such a totality for its intelligibility. What their argument says (the constative value of the propositions) and what it does (its performative character) by being said are in contradiction with each other - hence, a 'performative' contradiction.
In the moment in which the theory is articulated, the discursive totality it represents is by definition unintelligible to every other discursive framework. Yet the theory makes a direct appeal to the Left in particular to adopt postmodern discourse theory... Hence its intelligibility stems from the shared meanings it holds with a handful of other discourses, not from some intersubjective totality. (2000).

In terms of intersubjective totality then, I return to my adaptive positivist assertion that since according to our reading of the Second Law of Thermodynamics:

Inside an isolated system, in order for a process to proceed, Δ S > 0.  Such a process is said to be spontaneous.  A process for which ΔS < 0 is called non-spontaneous and is impossible for an isolated system. (http://www.genchem.net/thermo/laws.html ).

Since the totality of any system depends on and is substantiated by the conservation of energy inherent in that system, then what is inherent in that system must also, by definition, substantiate that system's subsequent construction and maintenance based on that capacity that is considered inherent to that system.

Therefore, as The Subject is Necessary, that which is Inherent, The Object, that which is constructed from that which is inherent must be, by definition, Probable.

At this stage of our argument, the implications for our general understanding of control are not clear

.Where we will go in the next post will be an assertion that there is thus a Constancy of Occurrence of Subject and Object in Joint, Direct and Inverse Relation to the other from the Greatest Common General Circumstance of Subject or Object Counter-Occurence to the Least Common Individual Result of Subject Object Integration.

In the next post, we will also discuss the post structural and post modern implications of this assertion from a combination of Derridean and Fouccalutian formulations as those concepts relate to the current state of affairs in the Gulf of Mexico, The Arizona Boarder and our own Personal Narrative.

Thank you.