te'a
ah.. if process and aliveness relating, then processing happening ‘continuiously’. If academia/whiteness/patriarchically occurences continuing then Whiteheadian workings and happenings becoming congealed and failing towards their own process-happeninging.
Thus, becomes ‘looking at Whitehead’ as ‘academic study’ but as congealed into thingification as he theorises ‘against’.
So since ye asked ‘what else is possible’ iye do not agree about ‘burnign the house analogt.
But ratehr, walking the talking….
thankiy responsing Douglasing wherein some wayes speaking of ‘well’ indicating aye performativity demonstrating within such text as wrote herselfing through fingerings and happenings theye say from tyeme to timye ‘te’a’ wrote or writing happening arising, comethe momenting.
writing aas came in such ‘locationign’ as whiteness say ‘above’ but whereaas Peoples of lands maybe spake not of ‘above’ such spaicialising coming as she doth in a myned conditioning of such as theye labeling ‘the West’ thoigh no west cometh.. looking ‘west’ from here this bodyie-selfing findeth Turtle Island and later findeth ‘the East’ thoguh continually gazing towareds West .. and likelywaaws East arriveth in the mynd of where perchancing Importance cometh and arising thinkings of stasising UPON Earth whereass of coures all arishing wihtin and withness.
So perchancing, finding means of wariting writing sans constructing with the verbing ‘to be’ may allow and also discarding as maye happen, nounification such as ‘subject’ and ‘object’ and instead, playe in verb and happenings and so forthe..
finding .. seeking languaging of felt sense not of ‘congealed feelings’ and naming.. and companying wiht Peopling. Releasing pressureing … finding depthing, conditioning, myned – incarcerationing, bye such happenings … allowing, writing, voicings occure who speaking through and come as theey will when liberated bye incarcertationing into ‘normalcy’ and finding allowing freerangings clumsy as childe and tottering, abandoning ‘knowing’….
iye wonder if iye can tell the difference, given that the construction of the very language Whitehead and i presume other process-alleged thinkers, are employing. IN other words they are (as iye am modelling right this minute) reinforcing by the linguistic structures, nounification and word-order, a kind of ‘legibility’ that by its very nature, is part of if not the whole of ‘the problem’.
He’s talking ‘about’ process but he and most normative English Germanic-based language – users are employing (and as i said already, iye happen to be conforming to in this observation/assertion) a language structure and architecture that gives the lie to the very processingthinkingfeelingsensinghappeninging that they argue for.New words don’t do anything whilst the structuring and insistance upon ‘legibility’ are the means of presenting someway-happening ‘other than itself’ ie other than the noun-based language.
I’ve just basically demonstrated this, because i’m talkikng ‘about’ in a language that forces and constrains. It talks about but it cannot without moving away from presumptions which in circular fashion reinforce the language and vice versa, actaully come alive. Not by this means, at least!
this “she referred to physical, mathematical, chemical, and bioligical “laws” in her response to me, and I simply shared with her the idea of misplaced concreteness.”
how wondrous… for some reason also this tickles me and iye find grinning happening all over this face…delight, too….!
and iy now on a quest to find out what ‘concreteness’ means in this regard.. perchance it’s to be found in the moon piece? or is ‘concreteness’ related to concrescence (perchance that would be going tooo far in your context there wiht all the folk in the conversation), and for sure iye way behind the rest of the class in gathering the meanings of any of the terms of Whitehead … a bit like being introduced to a crowd of folk .. and then remembering none of them. 1 on 1 might have managed to land, but a crowd (and iye have what’s called ‘face blindness’.. well it’s one thing to hear new lingo, but quite another to try to congeal into some sort of form what is simultaneously declared to be formless (even ”process” in English Nounificdation congeals to a ‘thing’ even when declaring otherwise..) oh well
ooh Jessica thrilled feelings to find the Right Question Institute.. and wishing iye found there some free coaching for myeself! i imagine there will be some resources if iy poke about there a little longer.. but so many tiems iy bwecome ‘dumb’ in the face of institutions that have power over me and mye fate (and mye life would have been very different if that had not been so…)
therefore your enquiry re teaching ‘science’ and the feels of thy moving away from ‘curricullum demands’ or so iye imagine it.. and the question of ‘does ‘teachng’ exist’.. and what is education ‘for’ when we then apply a ‘subject matter’ and want to oblige somethng of ‘teaching about’ when the ‘about’ is in question..which is not about not asking questions.. it’s soemthing far deeper . it’s taking me an entirel lifetimem this ‘de-colonisation’ of mye mind-heart self, where the relentless method of English Language would encase us back innto her little comfort zone of ‘never mind dear, we can eventually learn all there is and then we will be Knowledgeable.. (and then what? whoever asks ‘and then what’? No.. we seque to ‘why’ and then back again to ‘how’ but what are we asking all these questions for? hmmm
@Matt… do ‘happenings’ or concressences occure in such a manner that they ‘appear as if they are continuous’? iye on whatever scale, there would be little releation relation to tyme per se… one (thoguht they are all interrelated and not seperate) happening (concresence) occuring like dominoes falling onto each other so to speak? so it’s impossible for any ‘concresence’ to not already ‘be’ in future in effect.. because it can’t hold back (so to speak) but its (sic) influence must by nature also ‘have’ future within it.. and even if the ‘decisions’ of that future that is to become concresencing, has some means of options of precision of path, nevertheless that is all built into the former concresence or ‘happening’. it has to be. Becuse relationality ‘is’ all there ‘is’ ontologically speaking. So relationality cannot only relate sideways to ‘a present’ because there isn’t really a present that stays still.. so by the time (sic) a happening (concresence) on large or small scale occurs, its’ already influenced both sideways relational bodies (happenings) and also future as well as decomposing happenings.
I have no idea how to put this in words but it’s a sense of that all together one after teh other but also as (iye sense ) tyme has more than one ‘trajectory’ or ‘direction’ then iye do not see how the ‘preseent’ cannot influence what we in Modernism call the past but as the past is here also, can influence becaues it was influenced when the next concresence happen tht was born out of it sort of.Yikes.. how the heck to get ‘that’ into language.. sorry if it seems the ravings of a madman (sic) to the normal.. but really i do know what iye treyingto articulate just making a pigs ear out of it. And makng several questions too…if they can be found in the comppost ..
this:
earth’s hipflasks……………..
aie.. iye like that Chris. .and so it occurse to ‘mye’ that there may not be ‘time’ between actual occassions… that as happenings (VERB), despite a notion of a ‘discreet happening’ as if some form or congealment turned happening (verb) ito A Happening (noun) its necessarily informing next happeningnessing. In this manner, there cannot be an ‘end’ to continual happening (actual occasion) but only an instant of ‘recognition’or prehension that leads (those invovlved closest.. becase there can be no ‘happenining that is not related to ‘god’ and is not related to what apper to be ‘everyo other happening’ despite mye being forced to employ noun langauge whaen iye wish fain to speaking beinging.. ie verbing processing.
Weirdly Whitehead and others employ a notion of ‘process’ by using a Noun word for happpeninging.. which makes his lexicon ever tougher and more dispiriting because the language denies the very rhythms and expressions of what it appears he’s pointing towards. Thus incongruence and incoherence accompany his vailaiant efforting to be legible whilst pointing towrared the illegibility of happeninging whose time (har.. time.. oh i was goign to mention time) has not happened yet.Yikes..
so hem.. trouble with time. Iye happen to not experence time as ‘linear’ nor to i find time to ‘exist’ .. other htan to refer to happenings.. but not in any reasonable legible form but tinme in mye wo4ld moves about soemthong something wicked and streches an d collapstses opun upon her selfing at most inconvenitiaent times.. (times. sic) but if onely she’d done that at Heducation Hinstitutions iye might have bunked off and been all the better and have a far more feral and interesnting mind had iye done so instead of mye striggle and struggles to reove remove the noose from mye neck of modernity and ‘whiteness’ and neurotycpaliality of expectation and ‘how life is’.. to which iye promplty on cue fall through the cracks yet again..with some relieve, really.
ooh! this: https://www.thedictionaryofobscuresorrows.com/word/enouement
(and iye eagerly look for ward s to reading the respolnses ye garner (iye being on e without that former ‘knowledge’ and thus it seems even less able than ye declare thyself to be and the evidence of thy writing bears mye out on this one 🙂 would that iye focused upon the recordngs in rhe ways ye have, rather than in mye ‘back brain’ where faeriess dance about and queer questions insert their wayis in the cracks.. so iye fail to frame qusetions such as thine, despite wishing iye have..
hello Ben, iye enjoying thy response and a keen sensing of what in my less than concise manner here, iye express. My response to thee is in ‘advance’ of following up thy link as iye discovered wheneever iye click a link here it boots me out of the Site and iye have the tedious and annoying task of jumping thorugh about 4 hoops to find mytself back where i began (and iye nod to Alice who knows all about the Red Queen).
So from the title and descripton, sounds like she wrote ‘my’ book for mye! Iye shall wander over there now and no doubt will find sisterhood right therein. …Thankye Ben!
thankye Matt, iye enjoy the chance to check these matters with ye.
To mye delight, the entire book is Free to download (in sections) and iye spent anenjoyable hour doing so last night (whch also serves to familiariaise myeself with the sense of how she organsise (ie her frame). So that felt marvellous.. whereas any actual book that requires actual money then calls upoln a specific resourse iye fail the test of.. ie no coffer to cough up from …Nevertheless, iye enjoy seeing your guidance towares the so called ‘poetic’ though really all life comes as ‘poetic’ until Man (sic) managed to burn witches and thus the ‘wise woman’ who knows all about such as has been pushed into the Dark, the lid on her coffin being a matter of The Church and an insistnace on ‘the pinnacle of Man’ (sic)..
Poetic cannot unless in the mind-pole of ‘Man’ (sic) be anythng other than .. and there ‘is’ ontologically speaking no ‘other than’.but iye digress.
iye was sent this overnight by a friend who understands somethingof my wayes. And iye read with keen interest ,and deep appreication this article which iye accessed in full. But.. now that iye fetched up here in the heady wonderlands of Whitehead and some of his inter-influencers and some of his ‘difficulties’ but not least, his dates and the milieu he fetched up in (and iye wold love to know what schooling he received in Dorset, that being a stone’s throw from where iye currently dwell) or rather, soemwhere between where iye was born and where iye unhapplity dwell stuck in incarceration like Omelas’s child in a toxic Civilization called a ‘city’ for short).. but anyway… sorry to take up space and time in thesee writings of wayward and allegelly non linear non ‘succinctness’ a story being not what i was taught a ‘fact’ was.. heh.
But here we go. Mye quuestion, if ye tolerated this far down the page, is.. why is’nt’ Whitehead mentioned in this proposition, this Paper and theorising?https://jabsc.org/index.php/jabsc/article/view/7909/6699
Why is Whitehead absent as a reference?
If Whitehead has shifted the whole direction of enquiry as it would appear in the paper.. how come he isn’t acknowledged and brought into the frame overtly?
Or is my question a mistake.. and the paper is not even remotely scaffolded upon Whiteheadian explorations?@ Bill meay iye put mye tricksterish oar in here and suggest..
“It means literally: “whatever is an arising dhamma, that is a ceasing dhamma,” or, more succinctly and colloquially: “whatever arises ceases.” Sariputta, who became the Buddha’s foremost disciple, is also said to have uttered this phrase as an expression of his insight on first hearing a summary of the dharma. [Horner (1951), p. 54]”iye cannot feel that ‘whatever arises ceases’ is a ‘succinct’ version of “whatever is an arising dhamma, that is a ceasing dhamma,”
Here is why.. the former ie the ‘so called succinct’ version brings a certain congealment, a ‘westernised’ model of ‘thingification’ and with it, that permits the ‘this is that’ ontological statement that hides that thingification in plain sight.
The former ‘ “whatever is an arising dhamma, that is a ceasing dhamma,” does also employe the very devil of the English Conquestian AE lingo .. the verb ‘to be’ which does not arise universally in language and thus in ‘worldview’ and relational fields of at least soem indiginous cultures. The ‘this IS that’ construction seems one so ubiquitoues in the ‘west’ that finding a manner of writing or speaking ‘sans’ that pesky verb wiht all her baggage and presumptioning, can confound (and takes.. like finding our ‘um’ or our filler words.. a great deal of time and attention and care!) but .. back to where iye was..
The flowing, verbing manner of “whatever is an arising dhamma, that is a ceasing dhamma,” becomes not a fixity, meme, or congealed thing pinned to a wall like a dead butterfly for inspection, but a living, dynamic mysterious but clear vibrancy.Or so it seems … iye sense them as speaking in very different tongues from each other, and the one conforms to some Noun-based ‘thing’ of the (so called) western ‘so called civilisation mindset) and the other, escapes…….
Wonder what ye make of this?
thanks Matt.. in the timespace between asking, and finding thy responlse, iy’d found the Cobb so that’s wonderful.
Iye also in my ramblings came upon this and have been fascinated.. can ye reasure me that iye not diving down wrong rabbit holes but have found another good writer on the Whiteheadian Headiness? I dare say you have mentioned this book somewhere but my head has burst into pieces and whatevr its contents might once have been.. there is now no ‘structure’ to lay much of any such data-kind of memory down on, as iye experience a process of undoings (grin)The Metaphysics of Experience: A Companion to Whitehead’s Process and Reality
Elizabeth M. KrausMatt, i realised most folk here would not expect mye beginner’s question but.. iye still confused between an ‘actual occasion’ and an ‘individual’ and an ‘actual entity’.
is there somwerhee sowm somewhere ye can point me to so mys beginners lexicon can progress in mye bonce, please?
@Christine…..wow Christine, iye touched by thy feels… and ‘rhythm of becoming’ had mye seeking some moving imaging, perchances soundlings for to give response in acknowledgemetn.. but alas that search brought this into mye wayes and thus iye share her here, in some not inconsiderable wonderment…
https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9781935408765/the-form-of-becoming