"The Hole Story" by Cecil Touchon
Hermeneutics
...
...
...
Mathematical Analysis
Machine Learning and Topology
A Survey of Topological Methods
...
Notes:
A hole is an in-between-ness.
In-between-ness is a gap in the whole, a gap not on the edge(s).
In-between-ness is a lack in the parts, a gap on the edges that meet to form the whole.
Asemics too is an in-between-ness.
...
An Asemic Geometry of In-Between-Ness
...
Fulu looks to be a kind of spirit writing (Fuji).
Indeed, Wikipedia now defines fulu as "asemic Taoist magic symbols and incantations".
Works of fulu look to have (or to have had) semantic content, but over time, the need for semantic content may have fallen out, leaving works of fulu asemic.
Per the Wikipedia, here is the narrative at play in this de-semantic process:
... scholars of Taoism such as James Robson and Gil Raz have claimed that the incomprehensibility of written forms is central to the talisman's perceived authority and efficacy, and is one of talismanic script's defining features.
During the Eastern Jin Dynasty (317–420), it was already considered unnecessary for users of Taoist talismans to be able to decipher the writing on them in order for them to be considered efficacious. Ge Hong noted in his Baopuzi that as long as the inscription was authentic, successful use of the talisman did not depend on whether the user was able to decipher its script. By this time, the talisman's illegibility had already become a sign that they were of divine authority and held supernatural provenance. (from Dominic Steavu)
An aside for Hegelians: ... , note the Hegelian dialectics at play here, with Aufhebung operative, but ... .
...
A Reflection:
Tortoise Shell Markings in the Dragon Bones Series
by Cece Chapman and Jeff Crouch (2020)
Linguistic Turn
History of the Linguistic Turn
Pragmatic Twist of the Linguistic Turn
Language of Thought
On the Language of Thought (Stanford)
Language !~ Thought
Language and Thought Are Not the Same (NIH)
On Interoperability
Note: This argument looks to be extensible--
that is, a means for making relationships beyond language itself.
On Cormac McCarthy
On the Bodily
Deep Ecology (Arguments for Signaling We Usually Ignore ... )
While Deep Ecology (earth.org) itself is often associated with radical theory and/or with radical politics, Deep Ecology, the Substack publication, generally concerns brilliant observations loosely coupled with conjectures concerning our inter-relatedness as/with beings in nature.
Indeed, the overarching theme for Deep Ecology (Wikipedia) is environmentalism or environmental philosophy.
Deep Ecology holds a general thesis that we are evolutionary beings, and as such, we may have abilities that beings in our evolutionary path also have. We have, in other words, shared capacity with nature. And we have, so the argument goes, not so much lost this capacity as suppressed/ignored/forgotten it. The imperative: We need to look to nature to find this capacity again. Hence, the brilliant observations.
How well this thesis works is one matter, but the purpose of citing Deep Ecology is not to criticize its argument so much as exploit a few aspects of it.
The argument Deep Ecology makes in this post (Feeling It) posits a conception of feeling as pre-linguistic. It also asserts how we are trained, so to speak, to ignore feelings that so arise, feelings that arise without the supplement of a near immediate interpretation, an interpretation which requires language.
More so, we are also wont to avoid unfounded conjecture. Indeed, as presented in this post (Feeling It), we might be inclined to link an ill feeling in the morning, a premonition, to a friend found injured in the afternoon, but we force ourselves to forgo this unwarranted reasoning.
And, of course, being so trained, we do not ask ourselves why such a feeling might have come to be at all. We ignore it as superstition/coincidence. Deep Ecology, meanwhile, conjectures that such feeling might be a hidden capacity.
For our purposes, we take this argument to imply that thought happens without language.
One Next Step
By Definition / Of Definition
A Stochastic of Meaning
By Any Other Name
Gambling versus Prediction Markets
Value
A Thematic of Asemic Scale
On the Margins
In the Spotlight
Nearby History
Authors and Related Works
Heinrich Böll
Albert Camus
Klaus Mann
Philosophical ~ Literary Themes
Weighing In
Asemic Writing
Asemic Writing (Between Asemics and Polysemics)
Asemics as a theory of writing (asemic writing), in part, investigates the gap between language and its visual representation (i.e., calligraphy, ...).
Asemics as a theory of writing also investigates, in part, the relationship between the asemic (i.e., that without meaning) and the pansemic (i.e., that with all possible meaning, but also the polysemous, i.e., that with many meaning possible meanings, ... ).
Asemic writing, in short, investigates a certain kind of gap. This investigation is an asemics of scale.
Asemic writing itself is often heavily invested in the linguistic turn, which asserts the necessity of language for certain kinds of expression. However, asemic writing has no need for such a foundation as it functions very well without it and readily makes itself avialable for use with affect theory and the like.
...
Asemics is also related to writing via the condition of dysgraphia.
Asemics is also related to a medical condition related to writing called asemia.
But asemics need not be about writing.
Asemics is about gaps.
...
Asemic Otherwise
Asemics is also a form of analysis that pertains the same sorts of conditions asemic writing does.
...
Asemics is about scale.
...
