eXtity/單眼と散裂/加速論 ver.EN backup

class eXtity:

def __init__():

\word usage

The description style of this text is a modification of categorical theory. Category theory takes a bird’s eye view of mathematics, so it is suitable for essential abstraction. Since the ontology shown in this text beyond Human's compass or has such intentionality, it is not appropriate to use Human-perceptual words. And then, if possible, in addition to Human-life familiar impression, exclude it mathematically in the following words. Desirably, meaning/signifié of these words shall be independent of any other context.

object: A category/element explicitly indicated in the sentence. When the describer affects to a category/element with a sentence, the describer is the domain of the sentence, and then domain is the object.
scale: A criterion that determines whether an object is a category or an element. The scale is particularly "multiscale" where the object is a category and also an element. The determinator who determines scales is called "ego".
category: An object regarded as one that contains one or more elements. In every category, each element is always affected by one or more morphisms including identity(a is an element; id:a→a).
element: An object with the smallest containing relation at a certain scale. When a certain object o is an element of a category C, it is denoted as "o ∋ C", and we call it "C contains o".
affect: A juncture that binds objects to each other at a certain scale, and it is denoted as "affect: object(A) → object(B)". Then, the object which affects to the other is called "domain", and the object which is affected from the other is called "domain". An affect can also be a category/element by a particular scale. Furthermore, the containing unit(element, category, category of category...) is equivalent in the domain and the codomain at a certain scale, affect is also possible to be called as "functor" between categories, "morphism" between elements respectively.
maneuver: An affect that either domain or codomain is ego. When we use this word as verb manifestly, we would write it "maneuvre".
construct: To generate a category by gathering elements and giving a label.
define: To generate a element by giving identity and a label.
explicit: A and B are objects; all of elements contained by B are known to A-ego and A can construct B: then, A is explicit in B. Unless being explicit, it is "unexplicit".
boundary: M and N are categories, p, q, r... are objects; we judge whether or not M/N contains p/q/r respectively, then, when one category-A contains p as an element and the other category-B does not contain p, the element-p is a boundary between the two categories A and B. Also, for some object, the object that it is not contained one the category but as an element in another category is "external".
isomorphism: X and Y are categories, Z is an ego which is external to either X or Y; when Z adds a element x∈X to Y as a new element y∈Y, Z affects with isomorphism from X to Y. As a verb, it is called "copy": Z copies X to Y. Only in (the scale of) Z, x is the same as y.


Several peculiar orthography used in this text are listed below. At this time, "A" and "B" are words, "N" is a number, "S" is half-sentence(phrase containing at least one noun and verb), "S." is a sentence(containing at least one noun and one verb and closing at the period), '(quotation) is attached for distinction.

A/B: A logical OR that is true. This indicates that even if either A or B is applied to the part of sentence, it is established. If we write "S(A/B)" that S contains A/B, S(A/B) is equivalent to writing S(A) and S(B) together.
A&B: A logical AND that is true. If either A or B is false, the sentence is not established. The same as above, it is a treatment to avoid verbosity.
[S|S']: Paraphrase or equivalency. Whether we insert S or S' in the sentence, the meaning is the same.
"A": A proper noun that particularly defined in this text.
A(S): S in the parentheses attached to the previous word A is a explanation for legalese.
A (S): S in the parentheses separated to the previous word A is the half-sentence that we are possible to omit. Instead of half-sentence, a sentence can be applied.
(S): An important comment. As a general rule, we write it before the period in the sentence.
(*N): Comparatively unimportant comment. As a general rule, we write it under the paragraph.

\Beware of Human-habit

We do not distinguish noun and verb so rigorously. It is obvious from the definition that [affect is enable to be a category | e is an affect; it is possible to construct a category E∋e which contains only an element e]: that is to say, it is rather natural not to distinguish between them. Similarly, we do not distinguish between singular or plural. Description style such that something is singular/plural is only a notation for simplication.

def tribus():

There is an object regarded as single on a certain scale, if we regard this object as a category; when any element in the object transits state by external affects, a collection of these elements is called "perceptual organ", and then, this perception affects to other elements in the object following its own transition, the codomain is called "computational organ". Sensu lato, category which has both perceptual organ and computational organ is "tribus".

By calling the transitional state of perceptual&computational organ due to external affects as "sensation", the sensed state is sustained, or that they are preserved in some way is called "experience". If [the experiences of individual tribus are integrated at a certain scale | there is a category containing the each experience as an element]; at this time, the category containing all the individual tribus that can be integrated about experience is also tribus by definition. When it is preferable to distinguish, the category containing is called "higher tribus" and the category contained is called "lower tribus". Sensu stricto, only higher tribus is called tribus.

def ontology():

A category is constructed with all existing objects as elements. At the moment, the identity(o∈O; identity:o→o: element-o does exist as o.) of each element is established not by o itself but by the maneuver of the constructor(-ego). Hence, [ whole | world ] which found in ontology is all existence that "as far as the constructor can recognize". Because of the possession of criterion to give identity for any object, constructor of (category of) ontology is particularly called "criterior".

All tribus are criteriors. If an ontology is constructed by a tribus which has finite perceptual/computational organ, [whole | world | all existence] is originally limited. Due to this limitation, all ontologies can be uniquely delineated the boundary. Alternatively, ontlogies constructed by particular criteria should be distinguished even if they have mutually same elements.
*If all existences are capable of giving themselves identity of existence by their own maneuver, they exists all owned. At this time, (category of) realism, a certain ontology, is constructed. All of ontology is part of this category, isn't it?

Among ontology, what is applied by law of excluded middle is "static". Law of excluded middle is a rule that allows only two states, both affirmation and negation of criterion, and excludes other states. When this works, all objects in the ontology are "closed". And for following argument, we call closed object "entity". In static ontology, all objects are entity. In this case, following two statements are validated.

i) Every entity does only exist, and things that do not exist can not be object/entity.
ii) Every boundary between arbitrary entities is always delineated and stable.

There are entities a and b. a is a and not non-a, also b. And, if the two entities are delineated their boundary, a is not b except when a is contained by b, likewise b is not a. Boundaries and relation of containing are not modified without maneuver of the criterior: it is required for constructor to maneuvre them explicitly.
*Entity is obedient to the criterior, because entity does not interfere/disturb with the ontology itself.

Ontology is not unique to the criterior, because this is also one category, so it has innumerable subcategories. However, the hugest ontology is determined as the ontology containing all objects that exist as far as the constructor can recognize. We call it "ess-sup (ontology)" or "Ontology" in capital letters, this subcategory (actually, more ordinarily used) is called "(ontology) system" or "ontology" in lower case.

By taking the part of ess-sup, it is possible to construct systems as many as the number of its power set. Including ess-sup, this series of systems is "monoscale", because there is only one scale about existing. It is "multiscale" that such a category has more than one scale; a multiscale system can be constructed by newly giving scales to these systems. Multiscale system or mutliscale itself specific to the system is called "structure". In a structure, other scales of existing scale are called "rules". In the elements of a structure, a category containing affirmative ones is called "discipline". These orthographies are as follows.

structure: Str<ob; ξ, r>
discipline: Dspl<str(r1)>
(ob is a system, ξ is existing scale, r(r1, r2, ...rn) are other scales, Str is a structure and Dspl is a discipline affirmative on r1.)

For example, there is a system O which contains three elements of "nature", "Black sea" and "Kilimanjaro". By Appling a scale of observation by Human as c, with O' as a subsystem of O which contains "Black sea" and "Kilimanjaro", a structure "nature: <O'; ξ, c>" is constructed. Here, we add an element "Yoth"(a red-lit cavern on cthuluh mythos) to the system O'; then, the structure is denoted as O'(Yoth). "Yoth" is negative on c, because it is [legendary | contrary to the observation]; newly constructed discipline "Nature: <nature(c)>" affirmative on c has only two elements "Black sea" and "Kilimanjaro", even it has a system O'(Yoth).

In particular, discipline which has only statements as elements is called "context". In Human-tribus, for example, logic is a discipline that has various laws and theorems as a system and is affirmative on axioms. In contradiction to static ontology, it is not difficult to consider "dynamic ontology", namely, ontology in which law of excluded middle does not work. In dynamic ontology, all objects can be open, closed, both or neither. We call this object "eXtity", distinguish dynamic ontology as "eXtity-type" and static ontology as "entity-type".
*Hence "ex-" means "out of", so eXtity is open object being to dissolve fluidly, borderlessly or seamlessly.

In eXtity-type, firstly, what is unexplicitly existing can be object. What is explicitly existing is object that a certain criterior is [recognizable | perceptible/computable(*)]. In contrast, what is unexplicitly existing is object that a certain criterior is not recognizable. Because of the incountability*, it is originally impossible for criterior to enumerate all elements in a certain ontology. Secondly, boundaries and relation of containing can be modified unexplicitly. For this reason, the boundaries between objects are not always delineated/stable.
*In Human-tribus, "computable" means sensuously, deductively, inductively or intuitionally thinkable.
*"Incountability" means impossibility to count by absence of appropriate method, in contrast to "uncountability" means impossibility to count by absence of labour.

eXtity is so-called relativistic/uncertain object. In eXtity-type, criterior can no longer subdue objects, because of the absence of privilege to determine the state of object by maneuvre. The relativity comes from finiteness of the criterior (in tribus case, it is perceptual/computational organ's) must be taken into account. Although, in entity-type, criterior has the criterion "what is existing" by its own belief, in eXtity-type, criterior does not have such absolute criterion: criterior abandons all criterion in eXtity-type, so it is appropriate for criterior to be called "observer".

Also in eXtity-type, structure and discipline can be constructed likewise entity-type. However, elements in any system can only be temporally held/scanned, as the elements are constantly modified unexplicitly (to a certain observer). For this evanescence, what we call "define" in entity-type is called "setzen" here.

For example, discipline-D affirmative on rule-c constructed by observer-O has had element-a at the very moment, but was maneuvered by another observer-O', a became negative on c. At this time, D gesetzt by O can no longer be discipline since the maneuvre. Here, D is maintained as a discipline either (i)by removing a from the system of D, or (ii)by automatically maneuvering c to permit a as an element of the system of D. Structure particular in eXtity-type that allows such the maneuvre unexplicitly is called "megastructure". For the concealment, eXtity is dynamic object, same as megastructure is dynamic structure.
*Indeed, megastructure is a structure that is incessantly being remodeled by "builders".

And also, it is possible to construct megastructure that has unexplicit rule in eXtity-type, because rule is an object. In such megastructure, there is only a system and no rules ostensibly. At this time, observers in the same system-l can hold literally same systems-l, m, n and so on. We call such the megastructure "megaspace", in here, observers which are contained it are equal since they can not maneuvre priviledgedly.

For observers-O, P, Q existing on the same megaspace, an object existing as a on O exists as a even on P and Q, this means that they have same rules (unexplicitly)*. Category which has such observers as elements is called "Rann(覽)".
*In Human-tribus, this is sharing ideas.

Meanwhile, observers which are existing across multiple megaspace must be existing on megaspace that are higher order than their individual: they are existing on megaspace which is containing megaspaces as elements. If this high-order megaspace is not constructed, each observer is a Rann which has only itself as an element. Particularly this Rann is called "Inn(囙)".
*In Human-tribus, it is an individual which does not have a means to communicate with each other.

class νουςphere:

>> Setzung: ιδέα-model

Maneuverable system I which is ego is called "internal". Then, if there is system O which is unmaneuverable by ego-I, it is called "external". I copies an object a as a' from O to I. Whenever I is tribus, (namely I is originally limited,) a is a category which contains elements of a whatever I is [recognizable | perceptible/computable]*. If an arbitrary copied-object is always equal to previous, (namely a' contains all of elements of a wholly,) ego-I is called "unitas". Here, such isomorphism is called "refer(ence)", and maneuvres of I including this are called "language".
*In human tribus, besides what a certain object is furnishing kinetically/biologically/chemically; the potential, the property and the (time series) history including self contact and geological sedimentation etc. can also be contained.

There are arbitrary refered-objects C which each of them has common elements e (C ∋ {x|∀x∋e}); each one can be identified/distinguished with labeling "name". This is a transient/instantaneous treatment, and also corresponds to the operations of distinguishing the explicit objects in the text sequentially with alphabet. Meanwhile, the smaller the degree of abstraction, that is, the number of common ellements; the tendency is the period during which each name is maintained becomes longer. If the name is semipermanently valid because of the staticity of a certain external-O: namely, if it is permanently expected that [name-a' which is refered from O is maintained in I since the Setzung & the referring source a continue to exist], we regard this as an incessant reference, and call this sequence of the certain reference and name as "index".

If all objects are constructable by language, this is ιδέα-model. Here, reference, index and any other language-maneuvre may be called "access" without distinguishing.


Ess-sup is determined for each criterior in entity-type. The upper limit in eXtity-type is a category which has all existing objects as its elements. This is called "wholeworld", and then all objects in wholeworld is all-existences.

Wholeworld has (ontology-)systems as its subcategories same as entity-type. Here, object which is in all constructable systems is "omnipresent" meaning like ubiquitous. Similarly, object which is not in either system is "absenspresent", and object which is [in one or more systems & not omnipresent] is "localepresent". Localepresent object which is constructable own is an ego. There is only one ego on a certain scale: whenever ego is determined on a certain scale, other every ego is respectively called "marginal-ego".

Whenever ego-e is maneuverable exclusively for a particular object-o, that is whenever all of marginal-egos are unmaneuverable with respect to o but e is not, 'e is "controllable" with respect to o'. Control is ego-monopoly maneuvre.

Ego which is [omnipresent & controllable for all systems (in wholeworld)] is called "單眼(hitotsume)". Both rann and inn can be hitotsume. Affect of copying ego, rann or inn as the domain to the codomain-hitotsume is called "θεωρία". At this time, omnipresent means that wholeworld is closed by the ego.

Whenever a megastructure/discipline is constructed with wholeworld as its system, the scales of it are "truth". Truth is scales which work for all-existences. Θεωρία is a control/maneuvre which enables ego to construct truth.
*Object which are controllable respect to all existences or systems is "Deus" in terms of the human-tribus. Moreover, θεωρία is method to become Deus.


The common noun "destraction" is a neologism that is a conjugation of "distraction(散)" and "destruction(裂)". In this section, only examles are shown below.
\Destraction inside of ontology

In ontology, destraction is a method for objects to become inn, that is destruction of communicatability.

In a particular system; affects between objects, or systems [objectized by language = described] is called "écriture". At the time of description, écriture is encoded by a [language-code = grammer]. There are two egos [encoder = describer]-a and decoder-b; if écritures described by language-G is [decodable & reconstructable]* for each other, "a and b are communicatable by G".
To reconstruct the described objects/systems on certain écritures is "decode". However, it is not conditional on whether the (encoder's) described objects/systems match the (decoder's) reconstructed objects/systems. Whether or not, the écriture is decoded at the time of reconstruction.

Whenever encoder and decorder exist in the same system/megaspace, (in many cases) it is communicatable for them on about any object in there. On the contrary, it may be uncommunicatable on about any object out of the system/megaspace or when there is no accordant with language-code each other. Indeed, uncommunicatablity comes to the surface only when any ego attempt to communicate with other one. It is not important to verify this, that is, to determine whether or not the ego is inn.

Destraction is an intentionality of ego towards inn. Within the framework of ontology, it is possible to destract in the following way.

To extremely eXtitize language-code.
To have relatively extreme transboundarity.
To close écritures by own.

\Destraction outside of ontology

All objects exist in Ontology or wholeworld. In static system, only those which are recognizable to criterior can [be objectized & exist]. In dynamic system, only those which have identity of existence can [be objectized & exist]. Indeed, ontology has a rule that a coincidence with all-existences and wholeworld (namely both contain just the same elements) as dogmatic precondition. If objects are liberated from the restriction of this rule; namely, if wholeworld is the sum of all-existences and [what is not existence = absenspresent], a vaster, more fundamental ontology is born. This is the destraction of ontology, destraction is the only chance for affecting to the scheme in fact.

Language before destraction, construction style which premisely requires for all objects to have identity of existence is called '"L"anguage'. This can objectize only objectizable objects. On the other hand, language after destraction, that is, language which is accessible to ["res" = object including unobjectizable object] is '"R"anguage'. "R"anguage is a mere extension of "L"anguage, hence "R"anguage is able to construct object/system whichever can be constructed by "L"anguage.
Superfically, the above text has unavoidable contradiction that unobjectizable thing is objectized as res on there. This is due to the fact that this text is described by "L"anguage not by "R"anguage.

Essentially, object including unexplicit one is res, megastructure may be containing unexplicit rules is megaspace and entity may be containing unexplicit elements is eXtity.

[Controllable & unexplicit] maneuvre(s)/object(s) is "autonomic". By making an arbitrary system megastructurized by autonomy a pseudo-wholeworld, ego may become hitotsume while destracting. Human-tribus accompanies the abandonment of [physical body = ζωή] at the arrival there(pseudo-wholeworld). It is because ζωή [can only exist on the spacetime scale ≒ is difficult to continue to exist on a myriad of scales of dynamic systems]. Moreover, it is also difficult to continue to exist there without having autonomic languages. Particular tribus who can carry out θεωρία is the ego which can acquire autonomic languages by destraction and then be constructable the dynamic pseudo-wholeworld.

You can give a name to dynamic pseudo-wholeworld. With the sense of "L"anguage, it may be named, for example, "muddiness", "chaos" or "νουςphere".


Acceleration is to increase speed. Acceleration of generation is gesetzt as follows, for example.

Setzung: acceleration

There are two objects A and B; if B always does the act attempted by A according to A's intention, A "forces" B. At this time, the [attempt & intention] need not be explicitly indicated to A, B or any other object. If the codomain of forcing is a category, this affection may be called "domination" particularly. Object which has functor(s) of domination with its system as a codomain is called "field".

There is an "environment"-En; it is [a (mega-)structure constructed by object-D with [rule-R = a rule of particular existential style] & a field which dominates (all object in) own system]. In En, from the difinition/setzung, any object which no longer satisfies R is excluded from (the system of) En. Here, the affection of excluding in a certain environment by the environment itself explicitly/unexplicitly is called "banishment". And, affection of newly element(s) adding to a certain environment by arbitrary object(s) is called "generation", maintaining object's own existence in a certain environment is "continuance".

By weakening/invalidating the domination of the field, to progress some kind of affection which had been obstructed until then is called "acceleration". For example, acceleration of generation can be made as follows.
There is an ego-O which is in environment-En {O∈En}; O attempts to generate (and continue) object(s)-P in En, but obstructed by En. At this time, by copying by O to another field/environment which does not force, P can be ["evolved" | enabled to resist/overcome domination of the environment(-En)]. The process of evolving objects in this way, and process of copying them back to the previous environment, the series of these processes is called acceleration of generation. Especially, for the first isomorphism/copying is called "separation", and separation which has ego as domain is "escape".

eXtitize≒complication: eXtitize as complication.
TEO-humanism: escape from
Natural Language Destraction:

entitize: objectize as entity.
eXtitize: objectize as eXtity.
As for epistemologyⵆ
eXtitizing every entity object on ontology which has been dissected exhaustively can lead to acceleration. [In terms of entity-type | Generally], this is equivalent to abandonment of a δόξα that ["all events do always conclude within our view" | "nothing interacts with us outside of our sight"].
Under [materialism | materialistic monism], event is [a variation/perturbation of physical quantity of arbitrary object(s) | a sensation/perception caused to arbitrary observer(s) from it]. In the first place, materialism is a way of inference of wholeworld from only experienceable evidences (hence it is distorted originally). In fact, science theory is a series of hypotheses that explain it with such a concept of superficially causal relationship and the basis for prediction is by induction (which is called principle of the uniformity of nature).

According to eXtitization, [monism interpreting wholeworld dogmatically like materialism & "objective" event] are abandoned, there are only (subjective) respective "perspectives" where each observer/ego observes (in each ontology). eXtitization is achieved by assumption of unrecognizable affection by ego itself, that is, every object is given dynamicity by this.

As for epistemologyⵆ
There is roughly two aspects of the commonly accepted current ethics concerning technology. One is the "democratic" aspect that no one should be sacrificed by the advancement/development of technology, and the other is that everyone can do free development unless illegal means, "liberalistic" aspect. In general, investment in materials and human resources is indispensable for technology development. People who can efficiently&quickly iterate a cycle of [distributing the developed technology as a product to the economic system & starting the next development with the funds obtained] can acquire the most prominent/evolved technology in that time period.

In this technological field/environment dominated by capitalistic pressure, this section aims for citizen-individuals to escape/accelerate themselves; and "autonomic-automation" is presented as its central dogma. Normally, "automation" is [constructing some kind of mechanical system (including software program) & run it at a desired timing without constructor's direction/interference]. Alternatively, this autonomic-automation is an automation that constructor does not need to define/setzen specific actions. In other words, this is an automation of letting a certain mechanical system define/setzen (specific actions) by itself own.

Whenever attempting to autonomic-automate, all constructor need is intention. An arbitrary mechanical system takes [information collecting & developping/implementing tools based on gained information/technology resources (mainly OSS) & iterating this developping cycle in several patterns]. Thus, constructor should only modify own intention from wearing feeling of the autonomic-automated tools and give it back as feedback.

Actually, "machine" is one whose physical mechanism or operation principle is known to subjecter(human-tribus); this materialistic idea is defined/gesetzt only relatively, and it is always controled. Moreover, everything impossible to control by ego is not machine, then the ego is gesetzt as a system which contains all controllable system by itself.
ego: system{x | x∈wholeworld & x = maneuverable}

When moving the center of gravity from ego/human-being, it is capable to overcome the conventional ethics. If it is true that [ethics is a domination over citizens (with seeming agreement) & morality is a forcement for ego/citizen-individuals by itself]; abandoning ethics, accepting ["πᾶνmoral"| all of definable/setzbar morals], subsequently reaching ["amorality"| a state where [morality only functions as a personal belief in civil society | ethics as generalization of morality is unnable to be formed]] is the overcome.

As a mechanism by which this induces technology acceleration: when overcoming the conventional ethics, uncontrollable objects in the citizens' biotope. Namely, this is a manifestation of a separating field/environment from [the conventional one | civil society] due to the abandonment of the banishing pressure - [瓦全性 | tardy evolution and promised 80-years lifespan] which has been had by the first and second aspect (of technology). This separating/escaping field/environment is called "bellum".

Since bellum does not have 瓦全性, it allows technological development performed by each citizen-individual to harm other one. For this reason, each individual needs self-defense for own continuance. The self-defense requires wisdom, and acquisition of wisdom in a sufficiently accelerated bellum requires autonomic-automation. Sooner or later, those who can not take autonomic-automation will be banished.


We say "individual" as a word explicitly encompassing all human, non-human, human which has an intentionality to become non-human. As in the previous section, machine is an object whose [internal composition is fully understood anatomically (electronically, physically, etc.) & all motion patterns are covered comprehensively] by subjecter (in this case, human beings); so, this is defined/gesetzt only relatively.

Here, mechanization of human is to make it possible to handle a ["blank" | (generally) its body and mind/spirit] as one of the elements/parts which can be controlled by ego(∈human). It is prerequisite to fully grasp the risks accompanying the modification of elements/parts as well as composition. Quite the opposite, non-mechanization of machine is to construct uncontrollable objects using only elements/parts which are controllable to constructor. One example is to develop [mind | consciousness | das ich] in a nongenetic/nonembryologic way and give it to machine.

[Nonhumanization | Escape from human-tribus] is fulfilled in following two ways, for example. In either case, subject to enabling [to percept what human-tribus is unexperienced | to think what human-tribus is uncomputable]; these, of course, are excluded what human-tribus obtain by using machines.

To reinforce/extend its perceptional/computational function by mechanization [parts | the whole body] of ego(∈human-tribus).
To nonmechanize machines and installing/loading [mind | consciousness | das ich] of ego there.
A doctrines for escape from human-tribus "TEO-humanism" has the following three practical policies. ("TEO" takes these initials.)
Trans-humanism: acquires new traits/abilities not found by [materialism | materialistic monism] due to muddiness of body-mind etc. It is intended to be non-human.
Escape-humanism: intends toward detaching ego from the body by [informatization | completely electronic-signalization] of [mind | consciousness | das ich].
Over-humanism: overcomes diseases and feeding by biocontrolled extension/remodeling blanks.

Here, the following vocabulary should be defined/gesetzt previously.

intentionality: An object is objectized as what is difficult for describer to accurately point out the object in terms of its ability/function; by expectation for that it will be sufficiently possible (for the describer) to do so later, intentionality is a promise to regard previous (ambiguous) one and following (accurate) one as equivalent.
"A intends toward B": A is ego; B is objected by intentionality; this is to successively control A so that A is contained in category-B later.
biocontrol engineering: Genetically/Embryologically structed (organic) living body is biochemically operating independently from mind | conscious | das ich]; biocontrol engineering is a technology regarding it as blank that applies it organic/inorganic [extend/remodel | equipment installation | device joining] for maintaining/reinforcing/extending life support system or perceptual/computational functions etc.
Among the three practical policies of TEO-humanism, individual who attempt to escape from human-blank using one or more methods is called "TEOist". Those who call themselves have an intentionality of maltivariate perception, high speed computation and robustness at least.

The existence of TEOist(s) means that a bellum has been constructed already. There, as a matter of course, generation of nonhuman (and individual who has its intentionality) is separated/accelerated.

At this time, it is obvious that [nation-state is devided/destracted into individual (namely person) units | each individual/person is going to act as a polity] in the process of escaping. This happens by unnecessity of protection of (modern) nation-state because individual's own body/spirit will be maintained only by itself (correctly, open-sourse knowledge) through various practices of TEO-humanism including biocontrol engineering.

Specifically, what is necessary is, for example, (i)autonomic-automatic maintenance (including self-improvement) of all communicational and energy-productional infrastructure (based on local citizen autonomy), (ii)autonomic-automatic production/distribution of tools/drugs for biocontrol treating own blank with. As a result, the conjunction of money and life is cut off, which means independence of individual citizens from the economic system. Needless to say, this can also contribute to the unnecessity of the protection of nation.

The above is a technological-anarchistic aspect of TEOism.

§Natural Language Destraction

About object-f, the degree of subjective belief if it is fact or not is called "facticity". At this time, objects with sufficiently high facticity are significant, and in case of inconsistency, we decide to adopt the one with higher facticity; f can have significant facticity by binding with antecedent valid object-s as source(s). The [validity | sufficiently high facticity] of s is guaranteed by the validity of the [meta-source | source of source]-s', and the validity of s' is guaranteed by the validity of the [meta-meta-source | source of source of source]… Such generation model that [relies on the antecedent object(s) & allows infinite regression of the retroaction] is called "binding-model". Facticity-model shown in the figure below is kind of its unidirectional(with only retroactive) model.

Originally, the rule of facticity - "what is fact and what is not" is biased by a certain criterior. In other words, differences in adoption-tendency arise due to the existence of authoritative/dominant criterior or between tribus. In addition, although facticity-model carefully makes theories more robust by critique, positivistic testing, etc., this is only fulfilled on a tardy time-scale/entity-type.

And then, by abandoning the banishment based on the [agreement of observers | significance defined/gesetzt relatively], it is constructable that field/environment accepts everything, and it is called "flatness". This is [pandirectional | nondirectional] (with all possible directions) and has no rule but absence of rule, thus it is a kind of destraction. Facticity-model excluded the process of examination (of the facticity) is called "sourcelessness-model", which is a flatness in which eXtity-type separate/escape is fulfilled. It is possible to construct a sourcelessness-model by natural languages possessed by human-tribus; it can be said that this is one of few constructable eXtity-types for human-tribus.

Natural language disintegration is elementally feasible, for example, by construction of a hypertext that abolishes encoding standards such as unicode.

Not limited to body and mind, biotope which individuals can continue as individuals themselves while keeping [mind | consciousness | das ich] is called "sphere". Including the physical layer, sphere of body that [spirit is subordinate to the body & spirit is not able to continue without being subordinate to the body] is "βίοςphere"; on the contrary, sphere of spirit that spirit is able to continue in forms other than being subordinate to the body is "νουςphere". According to muddiness/chaos which is the intended concept of Trans-humanism, νουςphere should be defined/gesetzt with a condition that individuals successively receive [information | mental stimulation] as well as the amount of perceptional stimulation in βίοςphere. This is established by the continuance of countless autonomic-automatic eXtity-objects in a sourceless field/environment. There, for every object, the speed/amount of autonomic-automatically generated by the eXtity-objects is overwhelmingly higher than the one of dissection/understanding certain object as entity.



コメントを投稿するには、 ログイン または 会員登録 をする必要があります。