jonamo_cat (![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} jonamo_cat) wrote,@ 2009-01-02 20:35:00 |
|
essay, subject-object question!
Between the subject and the object there is considered to be the transcendental form of the relation. The logical description of the interacting processess.
The primary object is recognised as being an illusion of subjective experience, refined into a temporal space. The secondary, objective, is seen as the transcendental language of relations between objects. The logic that relates the primary object, as an object, to the subject, as an object.
Transcendental objectivity thusly expands the systems of objects and identifies all systems as being constructed of objects, and removes subjectivity as far as possible from the formula.
Transcendental subjectivity on the other hand must recognise that all objects are dependent upon the subjective element, and that all objects ultimately are formultations of the subjective elements.
A trend must be evidenced from within the relations of systems of objects, into a general form of the nature of relations themselves. Other than logic alone, but generalisable into a rule that is seen precisely within the subjective itself.
What from the object can be implied or infered about the subject?
VS
What from the subject can be implied or infered about the object?
Within every object there are a multitude of subjects, and each subject percieves in the idea of the object, the other subject, distinctly from eachother do they percieve eachother. But also they percieve something of the shared exchange, from the potential for the exchange, from the potential for one perception, and one object, there is an ante-perception and ante-object, as well as the transcendental subject-element that is proportion of being that is shared, and the transcendental object-element, which is ......logic?
The Object
involves the neccessary pressence of a system, which, engaged in completing itself, and becoming temporarily whole, establishes the identification of the subject with "something" exturnal. On the basis of the complexity of the subject to be the so-called conscious "half" of the system in its becoming whole. But, also dependent upon the existence of the subject as subject and as a source for objects.
The Subject
as a system is a form of sequencing, aligning its self into synchronicity with the elements and patturns of elements that are percievable as extensions and completions of its own inturnal sequences.
The patturns within the sequences themselves being dependent upon a neccessary multiplicity of potentialy summable parts.
Subject-Object
The orderly satisfaction of the parts/elements into a satisfied sequence, into a state of wholeness, and the idea of object. The object is between a number of subjects, and all subjects recognise the object as a mixture of itself, the other, and the state of wholeness.
Where along-side something, or set of things, there is knowledge, between the divisible elements of that thing there is being.
Wherin even the smallest particle or element of "matter" so far as it can be known, is known through the combination of the subject and the object.
What the object implies about the subject is close to meaningless.
even if what is being reflected upon is known directly through referecnce to itself only, what is communicated in the knowledge, as relating to itself, upon reflection upon the analytic fact(?) (of its own self reference) the perception, and what is reflected back upon the perciever, as the identity of the "object" of awareness is beyond comparrasum between two people.
Between the subject and the object there is considered to be the transcendental form of the relation. The logical description of the interacting processess.
The primary object is recognised as being an illusion of subjective experience, refined into a temporal space. The secondary, objective, is seen as the transcendental language of relations between objects. The logic that relates the primary object, as an object, to the subject, as an object.
Transcendental objectivity thusly expands the systems of objects and identifies all systems as being constructed of objects, and removes subjectivity as far as possible from the formula.
Transcendental subjectivity on the other hand must recognise that all objects are dependent upon the subjective element, and that all objects ultimately are formultations of the subjective elements.
A trend must be evidenced from within the relations of systems of objects, into a general form of the nature of relations themselves. Other than logic alone, but generalisable into a rule that is seen precisely within the subjective itself.
What from the object can be implied or infered about the subject?
VS
What from the subject can be implied or infered about the object?
Within every object there are a multitude of subjects, and each subject percieves in the idea of the object, the other subject, distinctly from eachother do they percieve eachother. But also they percieve something of the shared exchange, from the potential for the exchange, from the potential for one perception, and one object, there is an ante-perception and ante-object, as well as the transcendental subject-element that is proportion of being that is shared, and the transcendental object-element, which is ......logic?
The Object
involves the neccessary pressence of a system, which, engaged in completing itself, and becoming temporarily whole, establishes the identification of the subject with "something" exturnal. On the basis of the complexity of the subject to be the so-called conscious "half" of the system in its becoming whole. But, also dependent upon the existence of the subject as subject and as a source for objects.
The Subject
as a system is a form of sequencing, aligning its self into synchronicity with the elements and patturns of elements that are percievable as extensions and completions of its own inturnal sequences.
The patturns within the sequences themselves being dependent upon a neccessary multiplicity of potentialy summable parts.
Subject-Object
The orderly satisfaction of the parts/elements into a satisfied sequence, into a state of wholeness, and the idea of object. The object is between a number of subjects, and all subjects recognise the object as a mixture of itself, the other, and the state of wholeness.
Where along-side something, or set of things, there is knowledge, between the divisible elements of that thing there is being.
Wherin even the smallest particle or element of "matter" so far as it can be known, is known through the combination of the subject and the object.
What the object implies about the subject is close to meaningless.
even if what is being reflected upon is known directly through referecnce to itself only, what is communicated in the knowledge, as relating to itself, upon reflection upon the analytic fact(?) (of its own self reference) the perception, and what is reflected back upon the perciever, as the identity of the "object" of awareness is beyond comparrasum between two people.
