Wake up call.

An experimental course of study I have been participating in for over a year now, has bought to my attention the work of Professor of Philosophy of Sciences and Technology, Bruno Latour. This man has a lot of novel and challenging ways to re-frame the human condition in light of our current (early 21st century) circumstances. Some quotes I excerpted from a keynote he delivered to the International Seminar on Network Theory: Network Multidimensionality in the Digital Age, in 2010, have become a “wake up call” for me;

To believe in the existence either of the individual or of society is simply a way to say that we have been deprived of information on the individuals we started with; that we have little knowledge about their interactions; that we have lost the precis conduits through which what we call the whole actually circulates. In effect we have jettisoned the the goal of understanding what the collective existence is all about.

Instead of THE “individual v’s society” problem, we are now faced with the multiple and fully reversible combinations of highly complex individual constituents and multiple and fully reversible aggregates. The center stage is now occupied by the navigational tools.

When Lippmann said the public is a phantom, this was not a way to say it does not exist, but on the contrary a plea – and a somewhat desparate plea – to make it appear through the intervention of the right tools.


There is work underway here MACOSPOL toward making this possible through sufficient information exchange, not only qualitatively but also quantitativley. And, there is a theme emerging in my awareness of things from what I consider to be a “holistic” or “global” perspective (something which has been the focus of my personal self-development for decades). The theme seems to be:
“Can we please have a conversation that addresses “the TOPIC”; adequately, sufficiently, concisely,  accurately, dispassionately, and COHERENTLY.”

Evidence of this can bee seen not only in Latour’s lab’s project but also in developments of a Game of Understanding at this site and in the work of various others who are in pre-alpha development without public documentation available.

I had put notions of the possibility of a sufficiently developed discourse ever emerging, or of being able to apply the type of thinking that takes “everything” in to account, aside for a while. I have been exploring what it actually takes to legitimize such a direction. Now I am back on track with this work and look forward to following developments as they arise.

Context and Content: Manifest Universe

What follows is the raw text interpretation output of a ‘download’ received 28/11/2012


State space, field of potentiality, featureless, receptive, fundamental essence. Can be understood as “source as ground” which is fundamental and ubiquitous to all that is. Is pre requisite for arising of:

Information, defined as discernible difference, arising as initial instance of information process. Occurring within and as information space.

Information actualises in information space as LIVE, running iterative instances of multiple varieties of interactions of differences, and as structure of information space itself. Yes, the whole context is a living being.

All this arising anterior to perception and prior to the arising of the notion of the passing of time (microgenesis of the cognitive occasion ref. Jason Brown)

Experiential context is underpinned and rendered/animated by minimum requisite complexity arising from the field of potential as possibility.



sentience (Photo credit: undergroundbastard)


Awareness in self-reflection through sensoria is first instance of experience – first feedback loop returns information to the structure in a form it can engage with/or not. All particulars are manifest within this context. Sentient beings are instances of a particular class of entity.
Once awareness is connected, attention can arise, be drawn, held and directed, is available to be applied. At this point arises the pure, raw potential for intelligence, which is neutral. Intelligence is self-aware sentience gradually being realised and actualised.

Attention to objective is intention.

Intention can be influenced, disciplined, directed, crafted and applied. Attention can be drawn, in ways that influence focus of intention, before self-reflexive consciousness arises. Applied attention to the nature of the attractor can reveal aspects of the predisposition of the sentient entity, to itself through self-reflection, or to an observational entity.

Choice is fundamental and often based upon enactment of preconditioning of subconscious rather than present awareness. Focussed intention toward development of capacities which engender “gnosis” or direct knowing of the nature of the situation in which it appears we find ourselves, and our experience of it, is voluntary yet not optional for most effective interactive outcomes.

Realising that there are many ways one can become motivated, captivated, inspired, driven, devoted and disciplined, over the complex variety of manifest possibilities – the question arises as to what compels, or is likely to be a sufficient attractor for, this path/course/journey to be chosen and committed to by a diverse group of potential participants?

At the point where a practice commitment to said self-exploration, discovery and development methods is the conscious choice and enactment of free will of the individual, the inquiry as to what is required can begin. There is much to master, much of which is unavailable as an option until certain “undergraduate” fundamentals are embodied and enacted. A primary requirement is a willingness to know “the self” (which is the same self in every one, a common sense of being existent).

This is the process of sentience actualising itself, as experience of itself, as and through all beings simultaneously. Present sentient awareness knows itself as that which is being given rise to, in the context of the possibility for complex universal phenomenological manifestation.

The passing of time appears to the observational intelligence as a result of records of qualitative state changes, held in memory at various scales and resolutions, and made available to reflective recall, in the conscious and subconscious aspects of the sentient entity. These records of previous experience combine to establish the parameters of the ensuing possible range of experiences.

The corporeal aspect of the embodied entity is provided with multi-channel, signal analysis enabled sensor networks. It is able to attain stable manifest phenomena as it’s experience and appearance due to the attractor of subtle fluid, dynamic, interactive, energetic structures which are encoded specifically to render said experience. Realisation of the complexity and capacity of this aspect of manifest arising as our experience is one of the outcomes of commitment to a practice path.

Once these realisations are stable and actively engaged, the intelligent sentient entity can begin a practice of inquiry (into the nature of the relations between the multiple instances of combinatory possibilities in various interactive agentic entities, and the contextual underpinning of their very possibility). The processual field of potential is engaged directly as an act of agentic will. Combined/networked/focussed meta-agents can exert “pull” on the structure of the state space. The particular structural qualities of these meta-agents, generate pull dynamics which influence/constrain the field of possibilities.




Enhanced by Zemanta