We've now implemented the SPIRAL SELECTOR@{NOUMENON} concept for the
ONTC, DEME, MALE and FEME linguistic notions.

Since the memeBrain Chat deployed English with accents we've changed
this to "Lingua Franca" as a generalised term for the Romanised alphabet.

To test this we parsed President Macron's tweet (x): "J’ai fait bondir
les gamers." <https://x.com/emmanuelmacron/status/1703065883617231135>

melant tous les arts. {@14: Sup: 30 - BOLD RESOLUTION: YI (#568); Ego:
54 - UNITY: K'UN (#568)}

YOUTUBE: "THEY SEEK HIM HERE - SCARLET PIMPERNEL: ENCORE!"

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dbs0-jIAht4>

#1380 - MALE CHECKSUM TOTAL: #568 as [#80, #5, #80, #5, #30, #5, #20,
#10, #200, #40, #5, #50, #800, #50] = pelekízō (G3990): {UMBRA: #957 %
#41 = #14} 1) to cut off with an axe, to behead;

#1526 - MALE CHECKSUM TOTAL: #568 as [#80, #100, #70, #10, #200, #300,
#1, #40, #5, #50, #70, #400, #200] = proḯstēmi (G4291): {UMBRA: #818 %
#41 = #39} 1) to set or place before; 1a) to set over; 1b) to be over,
to superintend, preside over; 1c) to be a protector or guardian; 1c1) to
give aid; 1d) to care for, give attention to; 1d1) profess honest
occupations;

Our leisurely Sunday logical thinking activity will be to implement the
URL start options for each of the ONTC, DEME, MALE and FEME linguistic
notions

On 16/9/2023 12:35, dolf wrote:
> STATUS UPDATE @1230 HOURS: The scope of the functions within our Date /
> Time Heuristic {} concept are accessible via the Savvy.GNOSIS {} as
> payload module and therefore amenable for our SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
> dialectic data representation...
>
> H505@{
>   {@1: Sup: 40 - LAW / MODEL: FA (#40); Ego: 40 - LAW / MODEL: FA (#40)},
>   {@2: Sup: 41 - RESPONSE: YING (#81 - MALE DEME IS UNNAMED {%0}); Ego:
> 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#41)},
>   {@3: Sup: 71 - STOPPAGE: CHIH (#152); Ego: 30 - BOLD RESOLUTION: YI
> (#71 - MALE DEME IS UNNAMED {%2})},
>   {@4: Sup: 70 - SEVERANCE: KE (#222 - MALE DEME IS UNNAMED {%12});
> Ego: 80 - LABOURING: CH'IN (#151 - MALE DEME IS UNNAMED {%16})},
>   Male: #222; Feme: #151
> } // #151
>
> TELOS TOTAL: #151
>
> DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #525
>
> MALE: @81 + @222 = #303
>
> FEME: @71 + @151 = #222
>
>
> GRUMBLE (#222, #151)@[40, 40, 41, 1, 71, 30, 70, 80]
>
> GRUNTLE (#392, #373)@[40, 40, 80, 40, 40, 41, 41, 1, 31, 71, 61, 30, 50,
> 70, 49, 80]
>
> Thusly we've completed that action for our present DEME {} concept and
> because we may in the future require processes to occur between the
> ONTIC {}, MALE {} and FEME {} concepts we'll replicate our present code
> as tomorrow's logical thinking activity...
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/reason/selector.json>
>
>
> -----------------
>
> For those who are keeping pace with our self education as informal
> research project, you'll see that we already have some reference
> conveyed within our subordinate DEME {} concept within SPIRAL
> SELECTOR@{} concept.
>
> Since there are likely to be complex screen / data dynamics as actions
> over which we might have little control, for example:
>
> a) The Savvy.DEMEIDEAS {} object which are requisite for the DEME {}
> concept might not be present (whether deleted / or not loaded) so we
> check for its viability within the concept {} know() function and make
> an other fetch request which then does a refresh() of the screen dialogs
> and thereby completes its operation.
>
> b) The Savvy.ONSCREEN {} object stores a copy of the params which are
> used for the refresh() process and therefore to ensure an integrity with
> the subordinate {} concept within SPIRAL SELECTOR@{} concept we have a
> devised a task automation named flipSelectorContext () which ensures
> params object has the right data context.
>
> flipSelectorContext: function (act) {
>
>     for (var i = 0; i < Savvy.ONSCREEN.length; i++) {
>         if (Savvy.ONSCREEN[i].concept == act.form) {
>             Savvy.ONSCREEN[i].params.form = act.data.context;
>             Savvy.ONSCREEN[i].params.data = act.data;
>             return (true);
>         }
>     }
>     return (true);
>
> }
>
> As we continue with our DEME {} concept it is likely we'll adopt a
> similar dialectic data representation as we presently use within the
> Date / Time Heuristic {} concept, so we'll need to look at the scope of
> those functions.
>
> That will be our logical thinking task for the weekend...
>
> On 15/9/2023 07:20, dolf wrote:
>> This is just our informal note so that we can do further informal
>> research: Whilst we may understand the CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE as a
>> philosophical conception being a logical quaternary as a pivotal
>> septenary construct:
>>
>> FORMULA OF UNIVERSAL LAW:
>> FORMULA OF HUMANITY:
>> FORMULA OF AUTONOMY:
>> FORMULA OF PROGRESSION:
>>
>> The consideration concerning our selective CASE STUDY example of #237
>> - USE OF FORCE, is whether the CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE can also be
>> devised as a METALOGIC CONSTRUCT consisting of an ONTIC / DEME IDEA
>> STEM with either a template META-DESCRIPTIVE (#40, #41, #81) standard
>> or non-standard (ie. the meta-descriptive elements as metakosmeo and
>> in being ONTIC can be deployed by any formulation including
>> repetition) AGGREGATION AND ASSOCIATIVE ONTIC / DEME IDEA CHAINING
>> where the teleological IDEA with NOUMENON redaction is a BLOOM / BLOME:
>>
>> -- The state of being first-ranked or of first priority.
>> -- (rare) An appellation for Jesus Christ, among other religious figures
>>
>> FORMULA OF UNIVERSAL LAW: #237 - USE OF FORCE
>> FORMULA OF HUMANITY: + #40 - LAW / MODEL (FE) = #277 - RIGHT TO PLACE
>> A TEST
>> FORMULA OF AUTONOMY: + #41 - RESPONSE (YING) = #278 - RELAXATION
>> FORMULA OF PROGRESSION: + #81 - FOSTERING (YANG) = #318 - PUT TO DEATH
>> BY VIOLENCE
>>
>> So we'll need to devise another ACTIONABLE TASK to then browse, select
>> and defined a viable CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE and export the {} objects
>> in progression of our informal research.
>>
>> However before we can undertake that goal, we'll need to implement the
>> visualisation of those various ONTIC / DEME / MALE / FEME dataset {}
>> extrapolations within our SPIRAL SELECTOR@{} concept.
>>
>> And that will be our logical thinking task for the present time.  And
>> our fist action will be to visualise the DEME {} concepts.
>>
>> On 13/9/2023 06:41, dolf wrote:
>>> IN SUMMARY THEN WITH RESPECTS TO STATE AND ITS #491 - AGENCY
>>> (AMBULANCE, POLICE, SES, HOSPITALS, FIRE BRIGADE, ARMED SERVICES etc)
>>> AS THEN A FOUNDATION TO PRODUCTIVITY GAINS, INTEROPERABILITY AND
>>> ESSENTIAL COMPONENT FOR TRANSITION TO AN INFORMATION ECONOMY WITHIN
>>> THE COMMONWEALTH:
>>>
>>> #237 - USE OF FORCE
>>>
>>> + #40 - LAW / MODEL (FE) = #277 - RIGHT TO PLACE A TEST
>>>
>>> + #41 - RESPONSE (YING) = #278 - RELAXATION
>>>
>>> + #81 - FOSTERING (YANG) = #318 - PUT TO DEATH BY VIOLENCE
>>>
>>> The sort of lawless woke mind virus which is rampant in America
>>>
>>> <https://x.com/BoekDolf/status/1701432517251985584>
>>>
>>> 2ND TWEET:
>>>
>>> The hypothetical question is whether we can as cyber warfare deploy
>>> the SUPERNAL cushioning with a temporal heuristic to monitor, remedy
>>> or disrupt the favourable responsiveness as mindset by inducing
>>> hostilities and civil war:
>>>
>>> #375
>>> #443
>>> #337
>>> #380
>>> #393
>>>
>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.09.12&time:14.00&heuristic>
>>>
>>> 3RD TWEET:
>>>
>>> Thusly theoretically the ontic / deme STEM meta descriptor of the
>>> ontological categorical imperative conveys both in an inherent
>>> simplicity as dialectic progression and complex dynamic by a
>>> teleological hierarchy which temporal or conscious / subconscious
>>> steeping to assay compliance as an universal rule of peace agreement
>>> between parties.
>>>
>>> #375 <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?telos:375>
>>> #443 <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?telos:443>
>>> #337 <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?telos:337>
>>> #380 <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?telos:380>
>>> #393 <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?telos:393>
>>>
>>> On 10/9/2023 11:09, dolf wrote:
>>>>
>>>> #237 - USE OF FORCE + #41 - RESPONSE = #278 - RELAXATION
>>>>
>>>> #1388 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL #278 as [#600, #1, #30, #1, #200, #1,
>>>> #50, #300, #5, #200] = chaláō (G5465): {UMBRA: #1432 % #41 = #38} 1)
>>>> to loosen, slacken, relax; 2) to let down from a higher place to a
>>>> lower;
>>>>
>>>> #1388 as [#20, #8, #100, #400, #60, #800] = kērýssō (G2784): {UMBRA:
>>>> #1728 % #41 = #6} 1) to be a herald, to officiate as a herald; 1a)
>>>> to proclaim after the manner of a herald; 1b) *always* *with* *the*
>>>> *suggestion* *of* *formality*, *gravity* *and* *an* *authority*
>>>> *which* *must* *be* *listened* *to* *and* *obeyed*; 2) to publish,
>>>> proclaim openly: something which has been done; 3) used of the
>>>> public proclamation of the gospel and matters pertaining to it, made
>>>> by John the Baptist, by Jesus, by the apostles and other Christian
>>>> teachers;
>>>>
>>>> WE ALREADY HAVE TWO PENTAMORPHIC NORMALISATION / TEMPORAL HEURISTIC
>>>> CANDIDATES FOR #318 - PUT TO DEATH BY VIOLENCE:
>>>>
>>>> GRAPPLE (330, 318)@[12, 76, 30, 45, 57, 42, 31, 21, 4] PROTOTYPE
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.09.11&time:02.05&heuristic>
>>>>
>>>> GRAPPLE (468, 318)@[79, 62, 23, 38, 39, 10, 47, 15, 5] PROTOTYPE
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.09.11&time:21.45&heuristic>
>>>>
>>>> #650 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL #318 as [#30, #200, #300, #70, #10, #40]
>>>> = râshâʻ (H7563): {UMBRA: #570 % #41 = #37} 1) wicked, criminal; 1a)
>>>> guilty one, one guilty of crime (subst); 1b) wicked (hostile to
>>>> God); 1c) wicked, guilty of sin (against God or man);
>>>>
>>>> [#30, {@1: Sup: 30 - BOLD RESOLUTION: YI (#30); Ego: 30 - BOLD
>>>> RESOLUTION: YI (#30)}
>>>>
>>>> #200, {@2: Sup: 68 - DIMMING: MENG (#98 - MALE DEME IS UNNAMED
>>>> {%24}); Ego: 38 - FULLNESS: SHENG (#68 - I DO NOT THAT WHICH
>>>> OFFENDETH THE GOD OF MY DOMAIN {%42})}
>>>>
>>>> #300, {@3: Sup: 44 - STOVE: TSAO (#142); Ego: 57 - GUARDEDNESS: SHOU
>>>> (#125)}
>>>>
>>>> #70, {@4: Sup: 33 - CLOSENESS: MI (#175 - I AM NOT A TRANSGRESSOR
>>>> {%22}); Ego: 70 - SEVERANCE: KE (#195)}
>>>>
>>>> #10, {@5: Sup: 43 - ENCOUNTERS: YU (#218); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS,
>>>> DISTORTION: HSIEN (#205)}
>>>>
>>>> #40] {@6: Sup: 2 - FULL CIRCLE: CHOU (#220 - I CURSE NOT A GOD {%38}
>>>> / I CURSE NOT A GOD {%38}); Ego: 40 - LAW/MODEL: FA (#245)}
>>>>
>>>> Our next activity is to implement the ONTIC / DEME / NOUMENON MALE /
>>>> FEME REDACTION as SPIRAL SELECTOR@{} reporting so that we might get
>>>> some sense of IDEA chaining ...
>>>>
>>>> Which will commence from next Thursday the 14 SEPTEMBER 2023.
>>>>
>>>> We ought to once again stress here that whilst our neural linguistic
>>>> pragma as informal research is derived from a hebrew / greek
>>>> biblical lexicon source that this is "...exceedingly broad as a
>>>> premise and could in my self educated perspective: be a procedural
>>>> rule, a dialectic derived from an expert opinion (or chatGPT) or
>>>> some other descriptive narrative..."
>>>>
>>>> Our usage of this lexicon source is threefold:
>>>>
>>>> a)    those languages comprising 22 or 24 phonemes is then amenable
>>>> to our context of temporal markers / continuum / linear progression
>>>> as base-7: 24 x 7 x 13 = 6D x 364 = #2184 days x 49 = 6J = 294 x 364
>>>> or 293 = 365.2423 days;
>>>>
>>>> b)    those languages are subject to substantial academic rigour;
>>>>
>>>> c)    that lexicon is widely translatable into other languages.
>>>>
>>>> CHATGPT: The Bible is one of the most translated books in the world.
>>>> As of 2022, the full Bible has been translated into 724 languages,
>>>> the New Testament has been translated into 1,617 languages, and
>>>> parts of the Bible have been translated into 1,248 languages. These
>>>> numbers may vary slightly depending on the source and the criteria
>>>> for translation. The Bible has been translated from the original
>>>> Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek versions into different languages,
>>>> including sign languages.
>>>>
>>>> It is conceivable then that a DIALECTIC obtained from a superlative
>>>> language description of a PROBLEM / SYMPTOM DESCRIPTION / TEXT BOOK
>>>> CASE might also suffice.
>>>>
>>>> Hypothetically what's needed is some teleological descriptor by
>>>> which a viable sense of IDEA chaining might be observed.
>>>>
>>>> NECROMANCY (gk. #652 = νεκρομαντεία: ONTIC: #180; DEME: #237 - USE
>>>> OF FORCE; MALE: #442; FEME: #328 - LAST TABLE TALK IDEA;
>>>> GRUNTLE@[#1059, #770]): A conjuring involving the dead as loosely,
>>>> any sorcery or witchcraft, especially involving death or the dead,
>>>> particularly sorcery involving raising or reanimating the dead.
>>>>
>>>> #9 as [#1 - CENTER (CHUNG), #6 - CONTRARIETY (LI), #2 - FULL CIRCLE
>>>> (CHOU)] /
>>>> #429 as [#20, #1, #2, #6, #400] = ʼôwb (H178): {UMBRA: #9 % #41 =
>>>> #9} 1) water skin bottle; 2) necromancer; 2a) necromancer, one who
>>>> evokes the dead; 2b) ghost, spirit of a dead one; 2c) *PRACTICE*
>>>> *OF* *NECROMANCY*; 3) one that has a familiar spirit;
>>>>
>>>> AS WE NOTED THE META-LOGIC AUTONOMOUS #EIGHT DELIMITER ASSOCIATED
>>>> WITH THE DEME EXTENT #237 - USE OF FORCE --> #40 - LAW / MODEL (FE)
>>>> --> #277 - RIGHT TO PLACE A TEST THAT IT SEEMS LIKELY AS
>>>> METAPHYSICAL NOMENCLATURE TO BE ABLE TO DEVISE FROM AN ONTIC / DEME
>>>> STEM AN ASSOCIATION OF THE META DESCRIPTOR SPECTRUM:
>>>>
>>>>              | + #1 - CENTER
>>>> #237 - USE OF FORCE -     | + #41 - RESPONSE
>>>>              | + #81 - FOSTERING
>>>>
>>>> #237 - USE OF FORCE + #41 - RESPONSE = #278 - RELAXATION
>>>>
>>>> #1388 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL #278 as [#600, #1, #30, #1, #200, #1,
>>>> #50, #300, #5, #200] = chaláō (G5465): {UMBRA: #1432 % #41 = #38} 1)
>>>> to loosen, slacken, relax; 2) to let down from a higher place to a
>>>> lower;
>>>>
>>>> #1388 as [#20, #8, #100, #400, #60, #800] = kērýssō (G2784): {UMBRA:
>>>> #1728 % #41 = #6} 1) to be a herald, to officiate as a herald; 1a)
>>>> to proclaim after the manner of a herald; 1b) *always* *with* *the*
>>>> *suggestion* *of* *formality*, *gravity* *and* *an* *authority*
>>>> *which* *must* *be* *listened* *to* *and* *obeyed*; 2) to publish,
>>>> proclaim openly: something which has been done; 3) used of the
>>>> public proclamation of the gospel and matters pertaining to it, made
>>>> by John the Baptist, by Jesus, by the apostles and other Christian
>>>> teachers;
>>>>
>>>> #237 - USE OF FORCE + #81 - FOSTERING = #318 - PUT TO DEATH BY VIOLENCE
>>>>
>>>> #821 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL #318 as [#5, #200, #500, #1, #60, #5,
>>>> #50] = spházō (G4969): {UMBRA: #1508 % #41 = #32} 1) to slay,
>>>> slaughter, butcher; 2) to put to death by violence; 3) mortally
>>>> wounded;
>>>>
>>>> [#5, {@1: Sup: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO (#5); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL:
>>>> SHAO (#5)}
>>>>
>>>> #200, {@2: Sup: 43 - ENCOUNTERS: YU (#48); Ego: 38 - FULLNESS: SHENG
>>>> (#43)}
>>>>
>>>> #500, {@3: Sup: 57 - GUARDEDNESS: SHOU (#105); Ego: 14 -
>>>> PENETRATION: JUI (#57)}
>>>>
>>>> #1, {@4: Sup: 58 - GATHERING IN: HSI (#163); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG
>>>> (#58)}
>>>>
>>>> #60, {@5: Sup: 37 - PURITY: TS'UI (#200 - I AM NOT A ROBBER OF
>>>> SACRED PROPERTY {%8} / I AM NOT A ROBBER OF SACRED PROPERTY {%8});
>>>> Ego: 60 - ACCUMULATION: CHI (#118 - MALE DEME IS UNNAMED {%5})}
>>>>
>>>> #5, {@6: Sup: 42 - GOING TO MEET: YING (#242); Ego: 5 - KEEPING
>>>> SMALL: SHAO (#123)}
>>>>
>>>> #50] {@7: Sup: 11 - DIVERGENCE: CH'A (#253); Ego: 50 - VASTNESS /
>>>> WASTING: T'ANG (#173 - I AM NOT GIVEN TO UNNATURAL LUST {%27})}
>>>>
>>>> #821 as [#5, #300, #40, #70, #6, #400] = hashmâʻûwth (H2045):
>>>> {UMBRA: #821 % #41 = #1} 1) a causing to hear, a report, a
>>>> communication;
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.grapple369.com/?lexicon:H6,H202,H476,H1497,H2203,H2470,H2487,H2710,H3233,H3295,H3381,H3406,H3899,H4725,H4758,H4759,H4760,H4791,H4796,H4836,H5632,H5768,H5804,H5953,H5955,H6030,H6094,H6225,H7105,H7114,H7323,H7563,H7804,H7999,H8043,H8437,H8458,G132,G680,G1014,G1015,G1016,G1447,G1653,G2327,G2361,G2476,G2517,G2919,G3004,G4637,G4638,G4868,G4969>
>>>>
>>>> FORMULA OF UNIVERSAL LAW: #365 = #360 - PATHOS + #5 - GROUNDING OF
>>>> ACTION --> #237 - USE OF FORCE PENTAMORPH
>>>>
>>>> #THREE:    #98 as #17 - HOLDING BACK (JUAN)
>>>> #FOUR:     #139 as #58 - GATHERING IN (HSI)
>>>> #FIVE:         #237 as #75 - FAILURE (SHIH)
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.8.29&time:11.05&heuristic>
>>>>
>>>> #277 - RIGHT TO PLACE A TEST PENTAMORPHS AS UTILITARIAN #491 -
>>>> AGENCY FUNCTIONS <-- THERE ARE MULTIPLE POSSIBLE ASSAYING CANDIDATES
>>>>
>>>> #THREE:     #138    as #57 - GUARDEDNESS (SHOU)
>>>> #FOUR:     #139    as #58 - GATHERING IN (HSI)
>>>> #FIVE:        #277    as #34 - KINSHIP (CH'IN)
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.08.31&time:16.05&heuristic>
>>>>
>>>> FORMULA OF HUMANITY: #364 - TEMPORAL HEURISTIC --> 4.5 x #81 -->
>>>> #451 - PRAXIS OF RATIONALITY SPECTRUM (#452 ... #532)
>>>>
>>>> FORMULA OF AUTONOMY: 9x9x9 = #729 as @1 - SELF + #728 - MORPHOS.
>>>>
>>>> FORMULA OF PROGRESSION (#40 - LAW / MODEL (FE) DIFFERENTIATION
>>>> BETWEEN #237 - USE OF FORCE --> #277 - RIGHT TO PLACE A TEST):
>>>> Kant’s most prominent formulation of the Categorical Imperative,
>>>> known as the Formula of Universal Law (FUL), is generally thought to
>>>> demand that one act only on maxims that one can will as universal
>>>> laws without this generating a contradiction. Kant’s view is
>>>> standardly summarized as requiring the ‘universalizability’ of one’s
>>>> maxims and described in terms of the distinction between
>>>> ‘contradictions in conception’ and ‘contradictions in the will’.
>>>> Focusing on the under appreciated significance of the simultaneity
>>>> condition included in the FUL, PAULINE KLEINGELD argues, by
>>>> contrast, that the principle is better read as requiring that one be
>>>> able to will two things simultaneously without #215 -
>>>> SELF-CONTRADICTION (ie. is the GAUGES controller deployment then
>>>> causal for an aberration of ONTIC / DEME grounding?), namely, that a
>>>> maxim be one’s own and that it be a universal law. This amounts to a
>>>> new interpretation of the FUL with significant interpretive and
>>>> philosophical advantages.
>>>> <https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/kant-2017-0006/html>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7/9/2023 08:55, dolf wrote:
>>>>> We've completed our logical thinking task for today which was to
>>>>> nest our RESULTS {} concept code segment into a loop so that it is
>>>>> contingent upon additional pentamorph binary mask associations.
>>>>>
>>>>> We'll still need to test for any ANOMALOUS behaviour that will more
>>>>> readily become apparent as we complete our SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
>>>>> reporting stage of development.
>>>>>
>>>>> Although we don't presently utilise this feature, when deploying
>>>>> the ?run URL action, we've added a capability to pass parameter
>>>>> variables to the main () function within the ACTIONABLE TASK
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?run:Pentamorphic%20Normalisation&date:2023.9.7>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6/9/2023 14:06, dolf wrote:
>>>>>> We've now transitioned the "Pentamorphic Normalisation.json" code
>>>>>> to deploy
>>>>>> the search result pentamorph binary mask associations as clusters
>>>>>> in which
>>>>>> we convey a hierarchy of matched criteria.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tomorrow's logical will be to nest this code segment into a loop
>>>>>> which is
>>>>>> contingent upon additional pentamorph binary mask associations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Our actionable task should then be completed and we'll leave the
>>>>>> consideration of a Pentamorphism against any grapple @[] to some
>>>>>> other
>>>>>> actionable task.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> STATUS UPDATE @ 1330 HOURS ON 5 SEPTEMBER 2023:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have some intermediate code in place which makes a
>>>>>>> determination on
>>>>>>> masking associated to the pentamorph grouping so that we can
>>>>>>> suitably
>>>>>>> evolve the processPentamorphs() function which now deploys four
>>>>>>> binary
>>>>>>> states:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - penta as the nature of the pentamorph grouping
>>>>>>> - flags [] array conveying the match criteria in the pentamorph
>>>>>>> - met [] array to the record conveying nature of any match to the
>>>>>>> telos
>>>>>>> [] array
>>>>>>> - met [] array to each pentamorph node
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Such that for example the telos [298, 333] search array produces a
>>>>>>> result where the record met [4, 0] array and the flags: [0, 0, 0,
>>>>>>> 0, 4]
>>>>>>> array when set to that criteria, it means the telos condition 298
>>>>>>> is met
>>>>>>> in the MALE field of the MORPH5 and consequentially the met: [4, 0]
>>>>>>> array in that pentamorph node will similarly reflect the condition.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Such that if the MORPH5 with a specific met: [4, 0] criteria is
>>>>>>> disconnected from the main record entry we'll still know that the
>>>>>>> telos
>>>>>>> 298 and not the 333 condition is met.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having completed that logical thinking task, we'll next have to give
>>>>>>> consideration as to what organisation criteria we deploy for our
>>>>>>> results
>>>>>>> representation: it's more likely we'll be concerned with the
>>>>>>> teleological criteria as a priority to which pentamorph.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Accordingly, we'll wind back the intermediate code which was
>>>>>>> requisite
>>>>>>> for stabilising our processPentamorphs() function as our next
>>>>>>> logical
>>>>>>> thinking task.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/9/2023 07:26, dolf wrote:
>>>>>>>> During our hiatus we've been busy identifying viable consciousness
>>>>>>>> instantiated rationalisation methods for GNOSIS EX MACHINA...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To state it concisely such involves:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1)  Redaction of speech into its memeBrain form consisting of
>>>>>>>> neural
>>>>>>>> linguistic pragma which provides the meta-descriptors associated
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> magnitude of a teleological reprise;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2) We then deploy our praxis pairing method to determine by
>>>>>>>> dynamic natural
>>>>>>>> association (DNA) the categories which need resolution.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3) From those categories deploy a relative natural associator (RNA)
>>>>>>>> as selector for ontic / deme and noumenon idea chaining.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So as we continue our pentamorphic / temporal heuristic
>>>>>>>> development we'll
>>>>>>>> want to be mindful of the nested Platonic solids paradigm for
>>>>>>>> action:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> #65 (5) - neural linguistic pragma
>>>>>>>> #34 (4) - praxis of rationality
>>>>>>>> #15 (3) - ontic / deme and noumenon chaining
>>>>>>>> #111 (6) - meta logic grapple @ []
>>>>>>>> #175 (7) - pentamorph (doing)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which is quantified  as then #260 - actionable [#1807 = sṓzō
>>>>>>>> (G4982):
>>>>>>>> (computing) save (a file)] within the relative #369 - sphere
>>>>>>>> (meta verse)
>>>>>>>> of operation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> #1082 as [#200, #800, #10, #7, #5, #10, #50] = sṓzō (G4982):
>>>>>>>> {UMBRA: #1807
>>>>>>>> % #41 = #3} 1) to save, keep safe and sound, to rescue from
>>>>>>>> danger or
>>>>>>>> destruction; 1a) one (from injury or peril); 1a1) to save a
>>>>>>>> suffering one
>>>>>>>> (from perishing), i.e. one suffering from disease, to make well,
>>>>>>>> heal,
>>>>>>>> restore to health; 1a2) to preserve one who is in danger of
>>>>>>>> destruction, to
>>>>>>>> save or rescue; 1b) to save in the technical biblical sense; 1b1)
>>>>>>>> negatively; i) to deliver from the penalties of the Messianic
>>>>>>>> judgment; ii)
>>>>>>>> to save from the evils which obstruct the reception of the
>>>>>>>> Messianic
>>>>>>>> deliverance;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So we have much work to do on our pentamorphic normalisation and
>>>>>>>> spiral
>>>>>>>> selector development.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> We return again to this informal research observation: "as we
>>>>>>>>> note from
>>>>>>>>> this heuristic #507 - TELEOLOGICAL INSTANCE
>>>>>>>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.8.22&time:6.5&heuristic>, there
>>>>>>>>> is not necessarily an inclusion of any ontic / deme grounding
>>>>>>>>> premise to
>>>>>>>>> our perpetual dynamic as process for which we might have to
>>>>>>>>> rely on some
>>>>>>>>> other sapient knowledge as neural linguistic pragma of utilitarian
>>>>>>>>> circumscribed experience."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is exceedingly broad as a neural linguistic pragma premise
>>>>>>>>> and could
>>>>>>>>> in my self educated perspective: be a procedural rule, a
>>>>>>>>> dialectic derived
>>>>>>>>> from an expert opinion (or chatGPT) or some other descriptive
>>>>>>>>> narrative
>>>>>>>>> which this instance is a poem with an amended title that then
>>>>>>>>> deploys the
>>>>>>>>> GRUNTLE (to place into good humour) as a noumenon redacted
>>>>>>>>> #1139 --> #148 /
>>>>>>>>> #248 selector to then
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> EDWARD ROSS:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At the root of true and eternal personal unhappiness is death.
>>>>>>>> At the root
>>>>>>>> of time wasting and unending search for the real meaning of life
>>>>>>>> is death.
>>>>>>>> At the root of religions and countless metaphysical and
>>>>>>>> existential theory,
>>>>>>>> hypothesis and cults is death.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Though not the dying itself or the pain of it, or the leaving of
>>>>>>>> the loved
>>>>>>>> ones behind, or the leaving of wealth, or being put into a grave or
>>>>>>>> scavenged by vultures, but the very concept of the End of Me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, the meaning of life in collectives stretches differently.
>>>>>>>> Collectives impose their own version of mortality / immortality.
>>>>>>>> Collectives exist because they understand the needs of the
>>>>>>>> individuals and
>>>>>>>> prey on those needs and understandings to ensure the continuity
>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>> collective by stretching the meaning of life beyond the
>>>>>>>> individual into a
>>>>>>>> realm of collective needs, rewards and punishments.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So why is death or rather meaningless lives are at the root of
>>>>>>>> all ills?
>>>>>>>> Why shouldn’t they? Cattle are not philosophically or existentially
>>>>>>>> challenged. They do not philosophise about life, nor do they invent
>>>>>>>> religious scriptures or cults. They live in collectives and from
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> collective that they receive security and love. They are not
>>>>>>>> worried about
>>>>>>>> continuity outside the collective and when one leaves for the
>>>>>>>> slaughterhouse others mourn it for a chew or two and get on with
>>>>>>>> life.
>>>>>>>> Opposite to this are humans, who has constructed a set of needs
>>>>>>>> beyond and
>>>>>>>> above what we can independently or collectively can satisfy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The continuity after death is not certain. Zeal-full or
>>>>>>>> otherwise believers
>>>>>>>> of life after death are well organised, motivated and willing to
>>>>>>>> commit
>>>>>>>> what deems necessary to guarantee their continuity at whatever
>>>>>>>> personal or
>>>>>>>> collective costs, committing some of the worst atrocities.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The nonbelievers, on the other hand, are more than happy to use
>>>>>>>> and abuse
>>>>>>>> what may come, for they suffer no fear of retaliation after the
>>>>>>>> expiry
>>>>>>>> date.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In either case the definitiveness of death and the ambiguity of the
>>>>>>>> continuity of life after it,  is at the root of all human ills.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <https://x.com/edwardross01/status/1697925442286788994>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> TWEET:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This: "root of religions and countless metaphysical and
>>>>>>>> existential theory,
>>>>>>>> hypothesis and cults is death"
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Parthenogenesis --> #65, #41, #17
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Pythagorean theorem: #5 = #4 + #3
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nested Platonic solids as pentamorphic paradigm of nihilism.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've saved your comment for analysis
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2ND TWEET:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If I use the praxis pairing method -> ontic / deme idea chaining:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Collectives exist ... realm of collectiveness needs" = #60 /
>>>>>>>> #617 | #12 /
>>>>>>>> #528
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Get deme: #617 gives #666 - teléō (G5055) and thereby we have a
>>>>>>>> bipartite /
>>>>>>>> tripartite paradigm to then muse ultimate ends / good
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>