Cannibalplanet Crankblooming

<iframe width="400" height="100" style="position: relative; display: block; width: 400px; height: 100px;" src="http://bandcamp.com/EmbeddedPlayer/v=2/album=2379157476/size=venti/bgcol=FFFFFF/linkcol=4285BB/" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0"><a href="http://cannibalplanet.bandcamp.com/album/crankblooming">CRANKBLOOMING by CANNIBALPLANET</a></iframe>
http://cannibalplanet.bandcamp.com/album/crankblooming

Adrian Johnston: Second Natures in Dappled Worlds [1/2]

Adrian Johnston

An amazing rising philosopher of freudian-lacanian psycho-analysis, Hegalian neuroscientific philosophy worthy of mores ears:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45CcpGWiqXc&feature=related

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/45CcpGWiqXc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Corporate Contagion

Becoming Hardcopy Now

(for those properly impatient

grab it here)

series2

Well folks, a spontaneous second databend series has emerged, before the first could take shape, out of image creation for the ""Corporate Contagion" Comes to Hardcopy" uncreated event. In any case, en-joy - and if you live in the area expect to see some fan-tabulous packages around soon!

In (h)omage to the biomech of the past, I introduce you to the "Biodig" of the now:

To repeat the same, but in the recombinatory jest of Jetztzeit (en twa mystical nunc stans), I present you                                                                           "darksunnewdawn"

& a return of the old,

refracted in the new:

For those sensitive to the sight of the hard sciences, I give you a reason to continue your fascination,

                                                                   "Attractor Flux"

In its disambiguated form we have;

"Quantum Flux"

&

                                                                     "Chaos Attractor"

Corporate Contagion Ad 1
                                                                       "Techno-Tiki"

Corporate Contagion Ad 2
                                                                           "Memeish"

Corporate Contagion

A playable theory game. You can download Corporate Contagion here. It is currently only available for PCs but at some point in the not too distant future it will also be available for Macs and mobile devices. If you do not have a PC and want to download it sooner than I act, leave a comment or email me and give me some impetus. For those many who enter the inner workings of the corporate world through this game, feedback would be most graciously appreciated.

"In a nutshell, the theory works great with this illustration:

    The Hegelian dialectical formula: A (thesis) versus B (anti-thesis) equals C (synthesis).

    Example: If (A) my idea of freedom conflicts with (B) your idea of freedom then (C) neither of us can be free until everyone agrees to be a slave. "

           Another triumph of mis-understanding, if only a better knowledge of the function of meconnaissance was had a biting critique could ensure, but a simple sense of the logic will do to bring articulated clarity.

A (thesis) verses B (anti-thesis) equals C (synthesis) is a wrong formulation. Since A is first in the alphabet aswellas in this formulation let's begin with it:

A (thesis).

           The relational term 'verses' is not the most appropriate because it leaves open the possibility of a conflict between two contrary forces, which on its own is correct, but making possible setting against A the term B is wrong. If we take thesis to = A then the term anti-thesis, in-itself, says not-A and although B may be a case of not-A it is not not-A. The denial or negation of the thesis, A, is not a determinate statement. i.e., it is not B. The negation of A is an indeterminate statement, i.e. not-A. To borrow a wonderful analogy by Michael Kosak; if asked, “Where are you going?” and you respond: “I am not going to the theatre,” this is a reference to the theatre in the mode of rejection. Not going to the theatre is not saying that one is going to the protest; it is saying nothing other than not-A. From this we can again reformulate the logic:

A (thesis) is Negated by itself

A (thesis) is negated by not-A(anti-thesis).

           That these two terms in this relation 'equal' something is a strange formulation at best. It may be better to say that the two terms in this relation in-form each other in the sense that they co-determine each other. We can formulate this thus:

A is negated by not-A yielding A/not-A.

          The end of such a line of logic then would be a contradiction if not understood to be not the pairing of the two original terms but their simultaneous negation and assertion. This should thus be read that A is present insofar as not-A is present and vice-versa, not-A is present insofar as A is present. Both being co-dependently present in 'A/not-A' "ambiguity in some form must be present because no final distinction into separable compartments such as A not-A, 'true' and 'false,' or present and absent can be achieved."

       Perhaps a better phrasing of this example that is not distracted by utilitarian purposes would be:

(A) I have an idea of freedom, (not-A) What is that idea of freedom?, (A/not-A) That it is Self-determined.