Showing posts with label 2023. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2023. Show all posts

Sunday, December 31, 2023

oosjert / EZE, 2023

 


Asemic Engagement with Ab-Sen(c/s)e / EZE, 2023

Asemic Engagement with Ab-Sen(c/s)e


Notes on the Aesthetics of Merleau-Ponty


Klee on the Unseen


Merleau-Ponty formulates with remarkable precision the primary ontological theme: "What is proper to the visible [le propre du visible] is to have a layer of an invisible in the strict sense, which it renders present as a certain absence." It is this occult, secluded layer of invisibility that painting renders visible, that—in the words of Klee that Merleau-Ponty pieces together—painting annexes to the visible. It is because of painting’s engagement with this invisibility, which, while of the visible, also lies outside the realm of visible things, that Merleau-Ponty is led finally to what he calls the ontological formula of painting. The formula consists of words, written by Klee in 1916, that were inscribed on his tomb. They bespeak painting’s engagement beyond the here and now of visible things. Merleau-Ponty cites them in French translation: "Je suis insaisissable dan l’immanence." In Klee’s German the formula reads, "Diesseitig bin ich gar nicht fassbar" ("I cannot be at all grasped on this side, in the here and now"). [from "Freeing the Line" by John Sallis in Merleau-Ponty at the Limits of Art, Religion, and Perception]


Asemics opens up the invisible as instantiations of meaning and of unmeaning, this, where the invisible reveals itself as statistical possibilities and as gap between.


On Eye and Mind

Seen and Not Seen






Thinking the Visible 

Making Science and Engineering Pictures

Spur to Interpretation



Friday, December 22, 2023

Saturday, December 16, 2023

The Quus toward an Asemic Condition / EZE, 2023

The Quus toward an Asemic Condition


57 + 68 = 125

57 + 68 = 5

This is just as well art:

57 + 68

So too these statements:

57 + 68 = 125

57 + 68 = 5

There may be a shout for explanation.

There may not.

There may be an auto-correction.

There may not.

Indeed, the semantics of these statements may or may not produce much of any kind of truth.

They could also bring about a bit of confusion, but confusion requires something ... .

And did you notice?

Just confusion?

An attempt to intervene for the sake of clarity.

And there may even be statement denial.

There may not.

But history is another kind of collection, true or not.

As we live in these conditions now, we make our conditions norms, and norms serve as our rules whether our rules call for compliance or call for change or call for definition ... or call for something or other ... but then, what happens next?

Else-wise, the asemic condition often escapes such activity. For meaning in this way, the asemic condition usually lacks.

Soon enough, philosophy engages the asemic condition and blurts out "paradox."

But no paradox is likely here as silence too belongs to music.

Yet the intervention begins, sort of.

And will the intervention allow for the asemic condition? or move to meaning?

What is it?


Kripkenstein Denies an Appeal to Rule-Following for Private Language



Hoverflies

Kripkenstein


Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language

Quus is That? 


Postscript

The Ends/End of Greek Rationality

Infinitely More

Tuesday, December 12, 2023