Comments:


folkert     Tue, Jun 5, 2007  Permanent link
And there you have it—the great mystery, questioning itself. Nice line-up of strange loops of infuriatingly circular logic. I think I can asnwer some of these, but then again, that's a contradiction already. Syntax is awesome. "Isn't the self the manifestation of our behaviours which are merely the result of our environment?"—I think so, but, this environment can also be entirely created by the self. SpaceCollective is one such example. This puts you back at the chicken. (basically, I have no idea.)
Xarene     Wed, Jun 6, 2007  Permanent link
Yes, the environment (call it a siteGins and Arakawa) is perceived by the self. The perceptual site is the initiating site of all sites (house, room, sofa). Nothing happens without kinesthetic instigation, therefore no site will exist without a body. Surroundings need to be defined with bodies moving within them. Temporal flow pre-exists space.

The body is also sited. The body, being a site, is non existent without kinesthetic instigation, making the space/site of the body obsolete because it is the result of a pre-existing event. But what is the source of events which site the body? Its not a circling... it is looking deeper within each element which contains another and another and...

The I is an organism that behaves as a person (think of it as "I _____" (fill the blank with things persons do like read, run...)). Organisms deploy; persons ascribe. I think I can say that the organism deploys the person in order to ascribe. Ascribing and selfing are taking ownership, therefore the organism that ascribes through the person, creates the self and becomes the self. The self is the I ?!

The I can land on any site, not just the body. The body is enslaved by the I. The I is shapeless but helps define the shape of the world. (Yes, just like SpaceCollective. It is a perceived site.) Sites are not constructions but possibilities.

This is all tentative.