After putting a lot of effort I arrived to the following formula that is helpful to me
A line can be read like this:
The mode [#MODE#] extracts out of being-as-other (which I imagine as a short of a beehive, a mess of activity) the alteration of #alteration# (so I imagine out of this undifferentiated mess, which reminds a bit the "Waters" at the beginning of the Bible, coming forth the #alteration#) which is brought forth through the extension of trajectories of #trajectory# that constantly overcome the hiatus that consists of #hiatus# , and these trajectories move on when the flow of the mode #felicity condition# rather than #infelicity condition# and finally the flow of the mode in the trajectories leaves in its wake #beings to institute#.
For example
The mode [FIC] extracts out of being-as-other (which I imagine as a short of a beehive, a mess of activity) the alteration of multiplying worlds (so I imagine out of this undifferentiated mess, which reminds a bit the "Waters" at the beginning of the Bible, coming forth various "worlds"- actually the type "world" together with multiplicity, rather than worlds with specific details) which is brought forth through the extension of trajectories of triple shifting (time, space, actant) that constantly overcome the hiatus that consists of vacillations between material and form , and these trajectories move on when the flow of the mode makes something hold up, makes believe rather than causes to fail, loses and finally the flow of the mode in the trajectories leaves in its wake dispatches, figurations, forms, works of art.
I still have questions though:
A.When a being tries to pass the hiatus of [FIC] but the felicity condition is negative does this mean that the trajectory stops there or does it mean that the trajectory continues but the quality is somehow compromised?
If for example I am a director, can my theatrical play fail "partially" to move fictionally?
B.How do [FIC] trajectories (to take an example) begin and end? In what whay can an assembly bring forth the beginning of a [FIC] trajectory when nothing was there?
(Experientially it must be like at some point finding suddenly myself in medias res: I was a person holding a pen and now I am somebody who already remembers a recent past of having been visited by the Muse)
C. Beings circulate and achieve their subsistence through passes through other beings but also beings are instituted and left at the wake of the flow taking place in the trajectories and also it seems that there are beings that "Visit" collectives (?) (for example humans, like the [MET] beings) to articulate on them the alteration that they carry.
So there are beings of different compositions (single or multimodal) and having different functional roles relative to the trajectories.
"Being" seems like a term that does too many things in the MOE book.
A line can be read like this:
The mode [#MODE#] extracts out of being-as-other (which I imagine as a short of a beehive, a mess of activity) the alteration of #alteration# (so I imagine out of this undifferentiated mess, which reminds a bit the "Waters" at the beginning of the Bible, coming forth the #alteration#) which is brought forth through the extension of trajectories of #trajectory# that constantly overcome the hiatus that consists of #hiatus# , and these trajectories move on when the flow of the mode #felicity condition# rather than #infelicity condition# and finally the flow of the mode in the trajectories leaves in its wake #beings to institute#.
For example
The mode [FIC] extracts out of being-as-other (which I imagine as a short of a beehive, a mess of activity) the alteration of multiplying worlds (so I imagine out of this undifferentiated mess, which reminds a bit the "Waters" at the beginning of the Bible, coming forth various "worlds"- actually the type "world" together with multiplicity, rather than worlds with specific details) which is brought forth through the extension of trajectories of triple shifting (time, space, actant) that constantly overcome the hiatus that consists of vacillations between material and form , and these trajectories move on when the flow of the mode makes something hold up, makes believe rather than causes to fail, loses and finally the flow of the mode in the trajectories leaves in its wake dispatches, figurations, forms, works of art.
I still have questions though:
A.When a being tries to pass the hiatus of [FIC] but the felicity condition is negative does this mean that the trajectory stops there or does it mean that the trajectory continues but the quality is somehow compromised?
If for example I am a director, can my theatrical play fail "partially" to move fictionally?
B.How do [FIC] trajectories (to take an example) begin and end? In what whay can an assembly bring forth the beginning of a [FIC] trajectory when nothing was there?
(Experientially it must be like at some point finding suddenly myself in medias res: I was a person holding a pen and now I am somebody who already remembers a recent past of having been visited by the Muse)
C. Beings circulate and achieve their subsistence through passes through other beings but also beings are instituted and left at the wake of the flow taking place in the trajectories and also it seems that there are beings that "Visit" collectives (?) (for example humans, like the [MET] beings) to articulate on them the alteration that they carry.
So there are beings of different compositions (single or multimodal) and having different functional roles relative to the trajectories.
"Being" seems like a term that does too many things in the MOE book.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου