We've now completed our leisurely Sunday logical thinking activity which
was to implement the URL start options for each of the ONTC, DEME, MALE
and FEME linguistic notions

<http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?ontic:452,411&deme:472&male:123&feme:400>

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 next activity will be to implement the TELOS {} concept within our
SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}

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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

We've given some preliminary thought on how to efficiently bring any on
screen dialog to the foreground by introducing an [ ] action element upon
the dialog frame.

This theoretically only involves moving the ONSCREEN [] array nth entry to
being the last entry and then adjusting the yOffset / y variables.

We're just having to verify any non conformity issues with respects to the
MOVE {} and ONSCREEN {} move {} objects -- am I duplicating a MOVE {}
object and then changing the size dynamic which might have a consequence on
the yOffset / y delta change?

And extending the simple 2 dialog scenario where our coding retains the
dialog position dynamic and toggles a dialog to the foreground.

We've implemented the TELOS idea {} concept in our SPIRAL SELECTOR@{} and
we notice there is an expansive ONTIC / DEME infusion within the Hebrew /
Greek lexicon as having an implication on epistemological premise.

Accordingly we're going to today focus on completing the STRONGS {} concept
which will convey the LEXICON entry with the BIBLOS narrative occurrence
links.

We'll shortly implement the URL start option for multiple LEXICON entries:

<http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?lexicon:H505>

dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> wrote:
> We've now completed our leisurely Sunday logical thinking activity which
> was to implement the URL start options for each of the ONTC, DEME, MALE
> and FEME linguistic notions
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?ontic:452,411&deme:472&male:123&feme:400>
>
> 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 next activity will be to implement the TELOS {} concept within our
> SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
>
> 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
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

We've decided to delay implementing the "bring screen dialog to the
foreground" feature until we've undertaking our development on the
following ACTIONABLE TASK:

Given a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292,
FEME: #358] devised from an impress of mind associative to a bomb blast.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Groundwork/IBAC%20Note%2020230926.pdf>

We'll consider an actionable task to query temporal neural linguistic
pragma for noumenon resonance and if it is optimal for vitality

RULES BASED?

We are not as informal research seeking to transgress the boundaries of
professional faculty knowledge, neither are we venturing into the
Artificial Intelligence realm but rather ours is a metalogic concern...

Our informal research as existential philosophical goal is to firstly
visualise through enquiry by date / time and perhaps IDEA categories the
available neural linguistic pragma such that if a vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324,
DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurs can it then be considered as
being steeped or an immersive action pragma memeBrain.

What is then the relationship and process of mediation by means of the
temporal neural linguistic pragma for noumenon resonance in order to
facilitate an optimal recovery from the adverse event as vitality.

To give an example:

If have a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #???, DEME: #???, MALE: #???,
FEME: #???] as a multi-media object being then a known cause with a
corresponding psychological effect (eg: a COCA-COLA advert), can one
schedule it at a specific time in association to vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324,
DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurrence and then mediate the
chaotic state towards a condition of well-being?

#107 - NOUMENON RESONANCE FOR 27 SEPTEMBER 2023 / DEME CHECKSUM
TOTAL: #318 as [#1, #6, #50, #10, #600] = ʼôwn (H202): {UMBRA: #57 % #41
= #16} 1) vigour, generative power; 2) wealth; 3) physical strength (of
men and behemoth);

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

<http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?deme:237,277,278,318>

NOTE ON COMMONWEALTH: From common (“public”) +‎ wealth (“well-being”).
From c. 1450 as common wele (commonweal). In the form common-wealth
(common welthe) from c. 1520, used by Tyndale in the sense "secular
society" in particular, for which other authors preferred publike weal.
Also from the 1520s treated as a synonym or loan-translation of res
publica (republic) (Rollison 2017:67f).

On 20/9/2023 06:58, dolf wrote:
> We've given some preliminary thought on how to efficiently bring any on
> screen dialog to the foreground by introducing an [ ] action element upon
> the dialog frame.
>
> This theoretically only involves moving the ONSCREEN [] array nth entry to
> being the last entry and then adjusting the yOffset / y variables.
>
> We're just having to verify any non conformity issues with respects to the
> MOVE {} and ONSCREEN {} move {} objects -- am I duplicating a MOVE {}
> object and then changing the size dynamic which might have a consequence on
> the yOffset / y delta change?
>
> And extending the simple 2 dialog scenario where our coding retains the
> dialog position dynamic and toggles a dialog to the foreground.
>
> We've implemented the TELOS idea {} concept in our SPIRAL SELECTOR@{} and
> we notice there is an expansive ONTIC / DEME infusion within the Hebrew /
> Greek lexicon as having an implication on epistemological premise.
>
> Accordingly we're going to today focus on completing the STRONGS {} concept
> which will convey the LEXICON entry with the BIBLOS narrative occurrence
> links.
>
> We'll shortly implement the URL start option for multiple LEXICON entries:
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?lexicon:H505>
>
> dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> We've now completed our leisurely Sunday logical thinking activity which
>> was to implement the URL start options for each of the ONTC, DEME, MALE
>> and FEME linguistic notions
>>
>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?ontic:452,411&deme:472&male:123&feme:400>
>>
>> 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 next activity will be to implement the TELOS {} concept within our
>> SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
>>
>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

We've decided to delay implementing the "bring screen dialog to the
foreground" feature until we've undertaking our development on the
following ACTIONABLE TASK:

Given a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292,
FEME: #358] devised from an impress of mind associative to a bomb blast.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Groundwork/IBAC%20Note%2020230926.pdf>

We'll consider an actionable task to query temporal neural linguistic
pragma for noumenon resonance and if it is optimal for vitality

RULES BASED?

We are not as informal research seeking to transgress the boundaries of
professional faculty knowledge, neither are we venturing into the
Artificial Intelligence realm but rather ours is a metalogic concern...

Our informal research as existential philosophical goal is to firstly
visualise through enquiry by date / time and perhaps IDEA categories the
available neural linguistic pragma such that if a vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324,
DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurs can it then be considered as
being steeped or an immersive action relative to the pragma memeBrain?

What is then the relationship and process of mediation by means of the
temporal neural linguistic pragma for noumenon resonance in order to
facilitate an optimal recovery from the adverse event as vitality.

To give an example:

If we have a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #???, DEME: #???, MALE:
#???, FEME: #???] as a comprehensible multi-media object being then a
known cause with a corresponding psychological effect (eg: a COCA-COLA
advert), can one schedule it at a specific time in association to a
vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurrence and
then mediate the chaotic state towards a condition of well-being?

#107 - NOUMENON RESONANCE FOR 27 SEPTEMBER 2023 / DEME CHECKSUM
TOTAL: #318 as [#1, #6, #50, #10, #600] = ʼôwn (H202): {UMBRA: #57 % #41
= #16} 1) vigour, generative power; 2) wealth; 3) physical strength (of
men and behemoth);

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

<http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?deme:237,277,278,318>

NOTE ON COMMONWEALTH: From common (“public”) +‎ wealth (“well-being”).
From c. 1450 as common wele (commonweal). In the form common-wealth
(common welthe) from c. 1520, used by Tyndale in the sense "secular
society" in particular, for which other authors preferred publike weal.
Also from the 1520s treated as a synonym or loan-translation of res
publica (republic) (Rollison 2017:67f).

On 20/9/2023 06:58, dolf wrote:
> We've given some preliminary thought on how to efficiently bring any on
> screen dialog to the foreground by introducing an [ ] action element upon
> the dialog frame.
>
> This theoretically only involves moving the ONSCREEN [] array nth entry to
> being the last entry and then adjusting the yOffset / y variables.
>
> We're just having to verify any non conformity issues with respects to the
> MOVE {} and ONSCREEN {} move {} objects -- am I duplicating a MOVE {}
> object and then changing the size dynamic which might have a consequence on
> the yOffset / y delta change?
>
> And extending the simple 2 dialog scenario where our coding retains the
> dialog position dynamic and toggles a dialog to the foreground.
>
> We've implemented the TELOS idea {} concept in our SPIRAL SELECTOR@{} and
> we notice there is an expansive ONTIC / DEME infusion within the Hebrew /
> Greek lexicon as having an implication on epistemological premise.
>
> Accordingly we're going to today focus on completing the STRONGS {} concept
> which will convey the LEXICON entry with the BIBLOS narrative occurrence
> links.
>
> We'll shortly implement the URL start option for multiple LEXICON entries:
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?lexicon:H505>
>
> dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> We've now completed our leisurely Sunday logical thinking activity which
>> was to implement the URL start options for each of the ONTC, DEME, MALE
>> and FEME linguistic notions
>>
>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?ontic:452,411&deme:472&male:123&feme:400>
>>
>> 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 next activity will be to implement the TELOS {} concept within our
>> SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
>>
>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>

Hopefully today, we'll have implemented the calendar which will be a
semantical morph obtained from our earlier grumble prototype...

<http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?run:Temporal%20Noumenon%20Resonance>

We've noted from discussion elsewhere that there will be a need to
update our neural linguistic pragma to avoid a potential bias towards
nihilism which might be consequential to the usage of FIVE final form
letters within the HEBREW prototypes and so after completing this
ACTIONABLE TASK we'll undertake that activity.

http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?run:Temporal%20Noumenon%20Resonance

Overnight we updated the semantic form of our ACTIONABLE TASK to include
an auto function and we note in terms of code execution (ie. we did a
for {} loop with a mod % 100 == 0 increment) that this auto function()
will be actioned before the main() is executed.

Our metemprical / metaphysical philosophical question is not unlike the
neural linguistic problem resolution method (magnitude --> meta
descriptor) as the observed dynamic (ie. we observed in concise
discourse from someone formerly educated in philosophy) quantum pairing
to the #451 - PRAXIS OF RATIONALITY SPECTRUM (note: that this has a
corresponding ONTIC / DEME, or event MALE / FEME associators as pragma).

QUESTION: If a vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358]
occurs can it then be considered as being steeped or an immersive action
relative to the pragma memeBrain?

Thusly if any NOUMENON RESONANCE occurs, what then has precedence as
dynamic process: either ONTIC / DEME grounding as cause or the MALE /
FEME dialectic noumenon redacted element as then an effect where each is
a magnitude against the meta-descriptor element (ie. does it need to
even have an equivalence since it is a metakosmeo with a telelogical /
temporal resonance).

It's seems reasonable that the meta-descriptor element is focal point
for change, but does this manifest like our primative SPIRAL
SELECTOR@{SCENARIO} prototype.

By that I mean, if the ONTIC / DEME grounding is the cause, the
manifested change is the quantum of POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF
OPPOSITES, however if the MALE / FEME dialectic element is the effective
cause quantum of change is the preceding dialectic.

So many questions, which will doubtlessly keep our mind occupied for
years to come.

On 27/9/2023 07:01, dolf wrote:
> We've decided to delay implementing the "bring screen dialog to the
> foreground" feature until we've undertaken our development on the
> following ACTIONABLE TASK:
>
> Given a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292,
> FEME: #358] devised from an impress of mind associative to a bomb blast.
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Groundwork/IBAC%20Note%2020230926.pdf>
>
> We'll consider an actionable task to query temporal neural linguistic
> pragma for noumenon resonance and if it is optimal for vitality
>
> RULES BASED?
>
> We are not as informal research seeking to transgress the boundaries of
> professional faculty knowledge, neither are we venturing into the
> Artificial Intelligence realm but rather ours is a metalogic concern...
>
> Our informal research as existential philosophical goal is to firstly
> visualise through enquiry by date / time and perhaps IDEA categories the
> available neural linguistic pragma such that if a vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324,
> DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurs can it then be considered as
> being steeped or an immersive action relative to the pragma memeBrain?
>
> What is then the relationship and process of mediation by means of the
> temporal neural linguistic pragma for noumenon resonance in order to
> facilitate an optimal recovery from the adverse event as vitality.
>
> To give an example:
>
> If we have a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #???, DEME: #???, MALE:
> #???, FEME: #???] as a comprehensible multi-media object being then a
> known cause with a corresponding psychological effect (eg: a COCA-COLA
> advert), can one schedule it at a specific time in association to a
> vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurrence and
> then mediate the chaotic state towards a condition of well-being?
>
>     #107 - NOUMENON RESONANCE FOR 27 SEPTEMBER 2023 / DEME CHECKSUM
> TOTAL: #318 as [#1, #6, #50, #10, #600] = ʼôwn (H202): {UMBRA: #57 % #41
> = #16} 1) vigour, generative power; 2) wealth; 3) physical strength (of
> men and behemoth);
>
> 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
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?deme:237,277,278,318>
>
> NOTE ON COMMONWEALTH: From common (“public”) +‎ wealth (“well-being”).
> From c. 1450 as common wele (commonweal). In the form common-wealth
> (common welthe) from c. 1520, used by Tyndale in the sense "secular
> society" in particular, for which other authors preferred publike weal.
> Also from the 1520s treated as a synonym or loan-translation of res
> publica (republic) (Rollison 2017:67f).
>
> On 20/9/2023 06:58, dolf wrote:
>> We've given some preliminary thought on how to efficiently bring any on
>> screen dialog to the foreground by introducing an [ ] action element upon
>> the dialog frame.
>>
>> This theoretically only involves moving the ONSCREEN [] array nth
>> entry to
>> being the last entry and then adjusting the yOffset / y variables.
>>
>> We're just having to verify any non conformity issues with respects to
>> the
>> MOVE {} and ONSCREEN {} move {} objects -- am I duplicating a MOVE {}
>> object and then changing the size dynamic which might have a
>> consequence on
>> the yOffset / y delta change?
>>
>> And extending the simple 2 dialog scenario where our coding retains the
>> dialog position dynamic and toggles a dialog to the foreground.
>>
>> We've implemented the TELOS idea {} concept in our SPIRAL SELECTOR@{} and
>> we notice there is an expansive ONTIC / DEME infusion within the Hebrew /
>> Greek lexicon as having an implication on epistemological premise.
>>
>> Accordingly we're going to today focus on completing the STRONGS {}
>> concept
>> which will convey the LEXICON entry with the BIBLOS narrative occurrence
>> links.
>>
>> We'll shortly implement the URL start option for multiple LEXICON
>> entries:
>>
>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?lexicon:H505>
>>
>> dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> We've now completed our leisurely Sunday logical thinking activity which
>>> was to implement the URL start options for each of the ONTC, DEME, MALE
>>> and FEME linguistic notions
>>>
>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?ontic:452,411&deme:472&male:123&feme:400>
>>>
>>> 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 next activity will be to implement the TELOS {} concept within our
>>> SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
>>>
>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Hopefully today, we'll have implemented the calendar which will be a
semantical morph obtained from our earlier grumble prototype...

<http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?run:Temporal%20Noumenon%20Resonance>

We've noted from discussion elsewhere that there will be a need to
update our neural linguistic pragma to avoid a potential bias towards
nihilism which might be consequential to the usage of FIVE final form
letters within the HEBREW prototypes and so after completing this
ACTIONABLE TASK we'll undertake that activity.

<http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/actions/Temporal%20Noumenon%20Resonance.json>
<-- *CORRECTED* the link

Overnight we updated the semantic form of our ACTIONABLE TASK to include
an auto function and we note in terms of code execution (ie. we did a
for {} loop with a mod % 100 == 0 increment to test it) that this auto
function() will be actioned before the main() is executed.

Our metemprical / metaphysical philosophical question is not unlike the
neural linguistic problem resolution method (magnitude --> meta
descriptor) as the observed dynamic (ie. by means of a concise discourse
from someone formerly educated in philosophy) quantum pairing to the
#451 - PRAXIS OF RATIONALITY SPECTRUM (note: that this has a
corresponding ONTIC / DEME, or event MALE / FEME associators as pragma).

QUESTION: If a vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358]
occurs can it then be considered as being steeped or an immersive action
relative to the pragma memeBrain?

Thusly if any NOUMENON RESONANCE occurs, what then has precedence as
dynamic process: either ONTIC / DEME grounding as cause or the MALE /
FEME dialectic noumenon redacted element as then an effect where each is
a magnitude against the meta-descriptor element (ie. does it need to
even have an equivalence since it is a metakosmeo with a telelogical /
temporal resonance).

It's seems reasonable that the meta-descriptor element is only a focal
point for change, but does this manifest as AUGMENTATION / AMELIORATION
dynamic / static DELIMITER like our primitive SPIRAL SELECTOR@{SCENARIO}
prototype.

By that I mean, if the ONTIC / DEME grounding is the cause, the
manifested change is either the quantum of POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY
OF OPPOSITES, however if the MALE / FEME dialectic element is the
effective cause then quantum of change might be considered the
preceding (or the entire) dialectic.

So many questions, which will doubtlessly keep our mind occupied for
years to come.

On 27/9/2023 07:01, dolf wrote:
> We've decided to delay implementing the "bring screen dialog to the
> foreground" feature until we've undertaken our development on the
> following ACTIONABLE TASK:
>
> Given a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292,
> FEME: #358] devised from an impress of mind associative to a bomb blast.
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Groundwork/IBAC%20Note%2020230926.pdf>
>
> We'll consider an actionable task to query temporal neural linguistic
> pragma for noumenon resonance and if it is optimal for vitality
>
> RULES BASED?
>
> We are not as informal research seeking to transgress the boundaries of
> professional faculty knowledge, neither are we venturing into the
> Artificial Intelligence realm but rather ours is a metalogic concern...
>
> Our informal research as existential philosophical goal is to firstly
> visualise through enquiry by date / time and perhaps IDEA categories the
> available neural linguistic pragma such that if a vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324,
> DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurs can it then be considered as
> being steeped or an immersive action relative to the pragma memeBrain?
>
> What is then the relationship and process of mediation by means of the
> temporal neural linguistic pragma for noumenon resonance in order to
> facilitate an optimal recovery from the adverse event as vitality.
>
> To give an example:
>
> If we have a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #???, DEME: #???, MALE:
> #???, FEME: #???] as a comprehensible multi-media object being then a
> known cause with a corresponding psychological effect (eg: a COCA-COLA
> advert), can one schedule it at a specific time in association to a
> vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurrence and
> then mediate the chaotic state towards a condition of well-being?
>
>     #107 - NOUMENON RESONANCE FOR 27 SEPTEMBER 2023 / DEME CHECKSUM
> TOTAL: #318 as [#1, #6, #50, #10, #600] = ʼôwn (H202): {UMBRA: #57 % #41
> = #16} 1) vigour, generative power; 2) wealth; 3) physical strength (of
> men and behemoth);
>
> 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
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?deme:237,277,278,318>
>
> NOTE ON COMMONWEALTH: From common (“public”) +‎ wealth (“well-being”).
> From c. 1450 as common wele (commonweal). In the form common-wealth
> (common welthe) from c. 1520, used by Tyndale in the sense "secular
> society" in particular, for which other authors preferred publike weal.
> Also from the 1520s treated as a synonym or loan-translation of res
> publica (republic) (Rollison 2017:67f).
>
> On 20/9/2023 06:58, dolf wrote:
>> We've given some preliminary thought on how to efficiently bring any on
>> screen dialog to the foreground by introducing an [ ] action element upon
>> the dialog frame.
>>
>> This theoretically only involves moving the ONSCREEN [] array nth
>> entry to
>> being the last entry and then adjusting the yOffset / y variables.
>>
>> We're just having to verify any non conformity issues with respects to
>> the
>> MOVE {} and ONSCREEN {} move {} objects -- am I duplicating a MOVE {}
>> object and then changing the size dynamic which might have a
>> consequence on
>> the yOffset / y delta change?
>>
>> And extending the simple 2 dialog scenario where our coding retains the
>> dialog position dynamic and toggles a dialog to the foreground.
>>
>> We've implemented the TELOS idea {} concept in our SPIRAL SELECTOR@{} and
>> we notice there is an expansive ONTIC / DEME infusion within the Hebrew /
>> Greek lexicon as having an implication on epistemological premise.
>>
>> Accordingly we're going to today focus on completing the STRONGS {}
>> concept
>> which will convey the LEXICON entry with the BIBLOS narrative occurrence
>> links.
>>
>> We'll shortly implement the URL start option for multiple LEXICON
>> entries:
>>
>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?lexicon:H505>
>>
>> dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> We've now completed our leisurely Sunday logical thinking activity which
>>> was to implement the URL start options for each of the ONTC, DEME, MALE
>>> and FEME linguistic notions
>>>
>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?ontic:452,411&deme:472&male:123&feme:400>
>>>
>>> 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 next activity will be to implement the TELOS {} concept within our
>>> SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
>>>
>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

We found a reference within the Sefer Yetzirah (before 200 CE) states in
#24 to Chapter 2:3, "the fact that these letters are not mentioned in
the Sefer Yetzirah may be indicative of there extreme antiquity."

"But woe unto you, *scribes*-G1122 and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye
shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in
yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in." [Matthew
23:13]

<http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.10.1&bible:Matthew@23:13>

#700 as [#3, #100, #1, #40, #40, #1, #300, #5, #10, #200] = grammateús
(G1122): ...

G1122@{
{@1: Sup: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN (#3); Ego: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN (#3)},
{@2: Sup: 22 - RESISTANCE: KE (#25); Ego: 19 - FOLLOWING: TS'UNG (#22)},
{@3: Sup: 23 - EASE: YI (#48); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#23)},
{@4: Sup: 63 - WATCH: SHIH (#111); Ego: 40 - LAW / MODEL: FA (#63)},
{@5: Sup: 22 - RESISTANCE: KE (#133); Ego: 40 - LAW / MODEL: FA (#103)},
{@6: Sup: 23 - EASE: YI (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS {%21} / I DO
NOT CAUSE TERRORS {%21}); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#104 - I COMMIT NO
FRAUD {%7})},
{@7: Sup: 80 - LABOURING: CH'IN (#236); Ego: 57 - GUARDEDNESS: SHOU
(#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9} / I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9})},
{@8: Sup: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN (#240); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO
(#166 - I AM NOT SLUGGISH {%11})},
{@9: Sup: 14 - PENETRATION: JUI (#254); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS,
DISTORTION: HSIEN (#176)},
{@10: Sup: 52 - MEASURE: TU (#306); Ego: 38 - FULLNESS: SHENG (#214)},
Male: #306; Feme: #214
} // #700

It appears that it is a #PENTA thesis (Chapter 1:13) upon the language
itself and the Kabbalistic Tree "It is significant to note that all five
families are present in the Bereshit (H7225), the first word of the
TORAH." [p 103]

#913 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#2, #200, #1, #300, #10, #400] \
#918 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#2, #200, #1, #300, #10, #400, #5]
= rêʼshîyth (H7225): {UMBRA: #911 % #41 = #9} 1) first, beginning, best,
chief; 1a) beginning; 1b) first; 1c) chief; 1d) choice part;

THREE MOTHERS MALE LETTERS
MEM - WATER (CHOKMAH) YOD
SHIN - FIRE (BINAH) HE
ALEF - AIR / BREATH (SIX) VAV

DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 - ROMAN PROTOTYPE #TWO

#480 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#6, #8, #20, #40, #400, #6] =
chokmâh (H2451): {UMBRA: #73 % #41 = #32} 1) wisdom; 1a) skill (in war);
1b) wisdom (in administration); 1c) shrewdness, wisdom; 1d) wisdom,
prudence (in religious affairs); 1e) wisdom (ethical and religious);

#1067 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#5, #2, #10, #50, #400, #600] =
bîyn (H995): {UMBRA: #62 % #41 = #21} 1) to discern, understand,
consider; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to perceive, discern; 1a2) to understand, know
(with the mind); 1a3) to observe, mark, give heed to, distinguish,
consider; 1a4) to have discernment, insight, understanding; 1b) (Niphal)
to be discerning, intelligent, discreet, have understanding; 1c)
(Hiphil); 1c1) to understand; 1c2) to cause to understand, give
understanding, teach; 1d) (Hithpolel) to show oneself discerning or
attentive, consider diligently; 1e) (Polel) to teach, instruct; 2)
(TWOT) prudent, regard;

#114 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#10, #80, #10, #8, #6] = pûwach
(H6315): {UMBRA: #94 % #41 = #12} 1) to breathe, blow; 1a) (Qal) to
breathe; 1b) (Hiphil); 1b1) to cause to exhale or breathe; 1b2) to puff,
snort; 1b3) to excite, inflame; 1b4) to puff, pant for it; 1b5) to
breathe out, utter; 1b6) to blow, blast;

#1388 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 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;

#156 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#50, #70, #30, #6] = naʻal (H5275):
{UMBRA: #150 % #41 = #27} 1) sandal, shoe;

"And *preached*-G2784, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after
me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and
unloose." [Mark 1:7]

<http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.10.1&bible:Mark@1:7>

#531 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #5,
#10, #50] \
#692 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
#200, #8, #10] \
#892 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
#200, #8, #10, #200] \
#1266 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #800] \
#1271 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #5,
#800] \
#1404 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
#200, #70, #400, #200, #10, #50] \
#1734 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
#200, #800, #200, #10, #50] = metanoéō (G3340): {UMBRA: #1271 % #41 =
#41} 1) to change one's mind, i.e. to repent; 2) to change one's mind
for better, heartily to amend with abhorrence of one's past sins;

"The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and
shall condemn it: because they repented-G3340 at the preaching of Jonas;
and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here." [Matthew 12:41]

#563 - ONTIC CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#200, #1, #300, #1, #50, #1, #10]
= Satanâs (G4567): {UMBRA: #753 % #41 = #15} 1) adversary (one who
opposes another in purpose or act), the name given to; 1a) the prince of
evil spirits, the inveterate adversary of God and Christ; 1a1) he
incites apostasy from God and to sin; 1a2) circumventing men by his
wiles; 1a3) the worshippers of idols are said to be under his control;
1a4) by his demons he is able to take possession of men and inflict them
with diseases; 1a5) by God's assistance he is overcome; 1a6) on Christ's
return from heaven he will be bound with chains for a thousand years,
but when the thousand years are finished he will walk the earth in yet
greater power, but shortly after will be given over to eternal
punishment; 1b) a Satan-like man;

"If Satan-G4567 also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom
stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub." [Luke
11:18]

"Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I
send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light,
and from the power of Satan-G4567 unto God, that they may receive
forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by
faith that is in me." [Acts 26:17-18]

"One of the mysteries of the Sefer Yitzirah is the fact that double (ie.
the final form) letters are not mentioned. These double letters are the
ones which have different forms in the middle and at the end of a word:
MEM (40: 600), NUN (50: 700), TZADI (90: 900), PEH (80: 800), and KAF
(20: 500). As the TALMUD states, the forms of these letters were
forgotten, and later reinstituted by the prophets. There is absolutely
no reference to these doubles in the Sefer Yitzirah.

The Kabbalists, however, draw a parallel between the five phonetic
families (ie. known to the ZOHAR which recording the teachings of Simeon
ben Yochai (c. 100 CE) although this antiquity is rejected by some) and
the five double (ie. final form) letters." [Sefer Yitzirah, Kaplan, page
103]

#1340 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#1, #3, #100, #1, #400, #30, #5,
#800] = agrauléō (G63): {UMBRA: #1340 % #41 = #28} 1) to live in the
fields, be under the open sky, even at night;

"And there were in the same country shepherds abiding-G63 in the field,
keeping watch over their flock by night." [Luke 2:8]

YOUTUBE: "ANNIE LENNOX ANGELS FROM THE REALMS OF GLORY LIVE VATICAN 2017"

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fO4ggX95an8>

Since the biblical textual narrative gives precedence to ONTIC / DEME
and MALE / FEME redaction to noumenon grounding instead of the thesis of
nothingness we've updated our neural linguistic pragma to avoid a
potential bias towards nihilism which might be consequential to the
usage of FIVE final form letters within the HEBREW prototypes.

On 28/9/2023 11:58, dolf wrote:
> Hopefully today, we'll have implemented the calendar which will be a
> semantical morph obtained from our earlier grumble prototype...
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?run:Temporal%20Noumenon%20Resonance>
>
> We've noted from discussion elsewhere that there will be a need to
> update our neural linguistic pragma to avoid a potential bias towards
> nihilism which might be consequential to the usage of FIVE final form
> letters within the HEBREW prototypes and so after completing this
> ACTIONABLE TASK we'll undertake that activity.
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/actions/Temporal%20Noumenon%20Resonance.json> <-- *CORRECTED* the link
>
> Overnight we updated the semantic form of our ACTIONABLE TASK to include
> an auto function and we note in terms of code execution (ie. we did a
> for {} loop with a mod % 100 == 0 increment to test it) that this auto
> function() will be actioned before the main() is executed.
>
> Our metemprical / metaphysical philosophical question is not unlike the
> neural linguistic problem resolution method (magnitude --> meta
> descriptor) as the observed dynamic (ie. by means of a concise discourse
> from someone formerly educated in philosophy) quantum pairing to the
> #451 - PRAXIS OF RATIONALITY SPECTRUM (note: that this has a
> corresponding ONTIC / DEME, or event MALE / FEME associators as pragma).
>
> QUESTION: If a vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358]
> occurs can it then be considered as being steeped or an immersive action
> relative to the pragma memeBrain?
>
> Thusly if any NOUMENON RESONANCE occurs, what then has precedence as
> dynamic process: either ONTIC / DEME grounding as cause or the MALE /
> FEME dialectic noumenon redacted element as then an effect where each is
> a magnitude against the meta-descriptor element (ie. does it need to
> even have an equivalence since it is a metakosmeo with a telelogical /
> temporal resonance).
>
> It's seems reasonable that the meta-descriptor element is only a focal
> point for change, but does this manifest as AUGMENTATION / AMELIORATION
> dynamic / static DELIMITER like our primitive SPIRAL SELECTOR@{SCENARIO}
> prototype.
>
> By that I mean, if the ONTIC / DEME grounding is the cause, the
> manifested change is either the quantum of POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY
> OF OPPOSITES, however if the MALE / FEME dialectic element is the
> effective cause then quantum of change  might be considered the
> preceding (or the entire) dialectic.
>
> So many questions, which will doubtlessly keep our mind occupied for
> years to come.
>
> On 27/9/2023 07:01, dolf wrote:
>> We've decided to delay implementing the "bring screen dialog to the
>> foreground" feature until we've undertaken our development on the
>> following ACTIONABLE TASK:
>>
>> Given a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292,
>> FEME: #358] devised from an impress of mind associative to a bomb blast.
>>
>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Groundwork/IBAC%20Note%2020230926.pdf>
>>
>> We'll consider an actionable task to query temporal neural linguistic
>> pragma for noumenon resonance and if it is optimal for vitality
>>
>> RULES BASED?
>>
>> We are not as informal research seeking to transgress the boundaries
>> of professional faculty knowledge, neither are we venturing into the
>> Artificial Intelligence realm but rather ours is a metalogic concern...
>>
>> Our informal research as existential philosophical goal is to firstly
>> visualise through enquiry by date / time and perhaps IDEA categories
>> the available neural linguistic pragma such that if a vEVENT@[ONTIC:
>> #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurs can it then be
>> considered as being steeped or an immersive action relative to the
>> pragma memeBrain?
>>
>> What is then the relationship and process of mediation by means of the
>> temporal neural linguistic pragma for noumenon resonance in order to
>> facilitate an optimal recovery from the adverse event as vitality.
>>
>> To give an example:
>>
>> If we have a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #???, DEME: #???, MALE:
>> #???, FEME: #???] as a comprehensible multi-media object being then a
>> known cause with a corresponding psychological effect (eg: a COCA-COLA
>> advert), can one schedule it at a specific time in association to a
>> vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurrence
>> and then mediate the chaotic state towards a condition of well-being?
>>
>>      #107 - NOUMENON RESONANCE FOR 27 SEPTEMBER 2023 / DEME CHECKSUM
>> TOTAL: #318 as [#1, #6, #50, #10, #600] = ʼôwn (H202): {UMBRA: #57 %
>> #41 = #16} 1) vigour, generative power; 2) wealth; 3) physical
>> strength (of men and behemoth);
>>
>> 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
>>
>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?deme:237,277,278,318>
>>
>> NOTE ON COMMONWEALTH: From common (“public”) +‎ wealth (“well-being”).
>>  From c. 1450 as common wele (commonweal). In the form common-wealth
>> (common welthe) from c. 1520, used by Tyndale in the sense "secular
>> society" in particular, for which other authors preferred publike
>> weal. Also from the 1520s treated as a synonym or loan-translation of
>> res publica (republic) (Rollison 2017:67f).
>>
>> On 20/9/2023 06:58, dolf wrote:
>>> We've given some preliminary thought on how to efficiently bring any on
>>> screen dialog to the foreground by introducing an [ ] action element
>>> upon
>>> the dialog frame.
>>>
>>> This theoretically only involves moving the ONSCREEN [] array nth
>>> entry to
>>> being the last entry and then adjusting the yOffset / y variables.
>>>
>>> We're just having to verify any non conformity issues with respects
>>> to the
>>> MOVE {} and ONSCREEN {} move {} objects -- am I duplicating a MOVE {}
>>> object and then changing the size dynamic which might have a
>>> consequence on
>>> the yOffset / y delta change?
>>>
>>> And extending the simple 2 dialog scenario where our coding retains the
>>> dialog position dynamic and toggles a dialog to the foreground.
>>>
>>> We've implemented the TELOS idea {} concept in our SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
>>> and
>>> we notice there is an expansive ONTIC / DEME infusion within the
>>> Hebrew /
>>> Greek lexicon as having an implication on epistemological premise.
>>>
>>> Accordingly we're going to today focus on completing the STRONGS {}
>>> concept
>>> which will convey the LEXICON entry with the BIBLOS narrative occurrence
>>> links.
>>>
>>> We'll shortly implement the URL start option for multiple LEXICON
>>> entries:
>>>
>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?lexicon:H505>
>>>
>>> dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> We've now completed our leisurely Sunday logical thinking activity
>>>> which
>>>> was to implement the URL start options for each of the ONTC, DEME, MALE
>>>> and FEME linguistic notions
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?ontic:452,411&deme:472&male:123&feme:400>
>>>>
>>>> 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 next activity will be to implement the TELOS {} concept within our
>>>> SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

It ought to be noted that the other DEME value #214 associated to noumenon
redaction of the word for scribes #700 as [#3, #100, #1, #40, #40, #1,
#300, #5, #10, #200] = grammateús (G1122) as then further suggesting the
theological issues is the thesis of nothingness as nihilism as five final
form letters v's ONTIC /
DEME and MALE / FEME redaction to noumenon...

#121 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #214 as [#1, #30, #40, #50] = ʼalmân (H488):
{UMBRA: #121 % #41 = #39} 1) widowed, forsaken, forsaken as a widow;

#121 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #214 as [#1, #30, #40, #50] = ʼalmôn (H489):
{UMBRA: #127 % #41 = #4} 1) widowhood;

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows'
houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the
greater damnation." [Matthew 23:14 (KJV)]

dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> wrote:
> We found a reference within the Sefer Yetzirah (before 200 CE) states in
> #24 to Chapter 2:3, "the fact that these letters are not mentioned in
> the Sefer Yetzirah may be indicative of there extreme antiquity."
>
> "But woe unto you, *scribes*-G1122 and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye
> shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in
> yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in." [Matthew
> 23:13]
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.10.1&bible:Matthew@23:13>
>
> #700 as [#3, #100, #1, #40, #40, #1, #300, #5, #10, #200] = grammateús
> (G1122): ...
>
> G1122@{
> {@1: Sup: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN (#3); Ego: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN (#3)},
> {@2: Sup: 22 - RESISTANCE: KE (#25); Ego: 19 - FOLLOWING: TS'UNG (#22)},
> {@3: Sup: 23 - EASE: YI (#48); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#23)},
> {@4: Sup: 63 - WATCH: SHIH (#111); Ego: 40 - LAW / MODEL: FA (#63)},
> {@5: Sup: 22 - RESISTANCE: KE (#133); Ego: 40 - LAW / MODEL: FA (#103)},
> {@6: Sup: 23 - EASE: YI (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS {%21} / I DO
> NOT CAUSE TERRORS {%21}); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#104 - I COMMIT NO
> FRAUD {%7})},
> {@7: Sup: 80 - LABOURING: CH'IN (#236); Ego: 57 - GUARDEDNESS: SHOU
> (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9} / I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9})},
> {@8: Sup: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN (#240); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO
> (#166 - I AM NOT SLUGGISH {%11})},
> {@9: Sup: 14 - PENETRATION: JUI (#254); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS,
> DISTORTION: HSIEN (#176)},
> {@10: Sup: 52 - MEASURE: TU (#306); Ego: 38 - FULLNESS: SHENG (#214)},
> Male: #306; Feme: #214
> } // #700
>
> It appears that it is a #PENTA thesis (Chapter 1:13) upon the language
> itself and the Kabbalistic Tree "It is significant to note that all five
> families are present in the Bereshit (H7225), the first word of the
> TORAH." [p 103]
>
> #913 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#2, #200, #1, #300, #10, #400] \
> #918 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#2, #200, #1, #300, #10, #400, #5]
> = rêʼshîyth (H7225): {UMBRA: #911 % #41 = #9} 1) first, beginning, best,
> chief; 1a) beginning; 1b) first; 1c) chief; 1d) choice part;
>
> THREE MOTHERS MALE LETTERS
> MEM - WATER (CHOKMAH) YOD
> SHIN - FIRE (BINAH) HE
> ALEF - AIR / BREATH (SIX) VAV
>
> DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 - ROMAN PROTOTYPE #TWO
>
> #480 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#6, #8, #20, #40, #400, #6] =
> chokmâh (H2451): {UMBRA: #73 % #41 = #32} 1) wisdom; 1a) skill (in war);
> 1b) wisdom (in administration); 1c) shrewdness, wisdom; 1d) wisdom,
> prudence (in religious affairs); 1e) wisdom (ethical and religious);
>
> #1067 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#5, #2, #10, #50, #400, #600] =
> bîyn (H995): {UMBRA: #62 % #41 = #21} 1) to discern, understand,
> consider; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to perceive, discern; 1a2) to understand, know
> (with the mind); 1a3) to observe, mark, give heed to, distinguish,
> consider; 1a4) to have discernment, insight, understanding; 1b) (Niphal)
> to be discerning, intelligent, discreet, have understanding; 1c)
> (Hiphil); 1c1) to understand; 1c2) to cause to understand, give
> understanding, teach; 1d) (Hithpolel) to show oneself discerning or
> attentive, consider diligently; 1e) (Polel) to teach, instruct; 2)
> (TWOT) prudent, regard;
>
> #114 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#10, #80, #10, #8, #6] = pûwach
> (H6315): {UMBRA: #94 % #41 = #12} 1) to breathe, blow; 1a) (Qal) to
> breathe; 1b) (Hiphil); 1b1) to cause to exhale or breathe; 1b2) to puff,
> snort; 1b3) to excite, inflame; 1b4) to puff, pant for it; 1b5) to
> breathe out, utter; 1b6) to blow, blast;
>
> #1388 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 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;
>
> #156 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#50, #70, #30, #6] = naʻal (H5275):
> {UMBRA: #150 % #41 = #27} 1) sandal, shoe;
>
> "And *preached*-G2784, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after
> me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and
> unloose." [Mark 1:7]
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.10.1&bible:Mark@1:7>
>
> #531 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #5,
> #10, #50] \
> #692 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
> #200, #8, #10] \
> #892 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
> #200, #8, #10, #200] \
> #1266 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #800] \
> #1271 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #5,
> #800] \
> #1404 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
> #200, #70, #400, #200, #10, #50] \
> #1734 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
> #200, #800, #200, #10, #50] = metanoéō (G3340): {UMBRA: #1271 % #41 =
> #41} 1) to change one's mind, i.e. to repent; 2) to change one's mind
> for better, heartily to amend with abhorrence of one's past sins;
>
> "The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and
> shall condemn it: because they repented-G3340 at the preaching of Jonas;
> and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here." [Matthew 12:41]
>
> #563 - ONTIC CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#200, #1, #300, #1, #50, #1, #10]
> = Satanâs (G4567): {UMBRA: #753 % #41 = #15} 1) adversary (one who
> opposes another in purpose or act), the name given to; 1a) the prince of
> evil spirits, the inveterate adversary of God and Christ; 1a1) he
> incites apostasy from God and to sin; 1a2) circumventing men by his
> wiles; 1a3) the worshippers of idols are said to be under his control;
> 1a4) by his demons he is able to take possession of men and inflict them
> with diseases; 1a5) by God's assistance he is overcome; 1a6) on Christ's
> return from heaven he will be bound with chains for a thousand years,
> but when the thousand years are finished he will walk the earth in yet
> greater power, but shortly after will be given over to eternal
> punishment; 1b) a Satan-like man;
>
> "If Satan-G4567 also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom
> stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub." [Luke
> 11:18]
>
> "Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I
> send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light,
> and from the power of Satan-G4567 unto God, that they may receive
> forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by
> faith that is in me." [Acts 26:17-18]
>
> "One of the mysteries of the Sefer Yitzirah is the fact that double (ie.
> the final form) letters are not mentioned. These double letters are the
> ones which have different forms in the middle and at the end of a word:
> MEM (40: 600), NUN (50: 700), TZADI (90: 900), PEH (80: 800), and KAF
> (20: 500). As the TALMUD states, the forms of these letters were
> forgotten, and later reinstituted by the prophets. There is absolutely
> no reference to these doubles in the Sefer Yitzirah.
>
> The Kabbalists, however, draw a parallel between the five phonetic
> families (ie. known to the ZOHAR which recording the teachings of Simeon
> ben Yochai (c. 100 CE) although this antiquity is rejected by some) and
> the five double (ie. final form) letters." [Sefer Yitzirah, Kaplan, page
> 103]
>
> #1340 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#1, #3, #100, #1, #400, #30, #5,
> #800] = agrauléō (G63): {UMBRA: #1340 % #41 = #28} 1) to live in the
> fields, be under the open sky, even at night;
>
> "And there were in the same country shepherds abiding-G63 in the field,
> keeping watch over their flock by night." [Luke 2:8]
>
> YOUTUBE: "ANNIE LENNOX ANGELS FROM THE REALMS OF GLORY LIVE VATICAN 2017"
>
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fO4ggX95an8>
>
> Since the biblical textual narrative gives precedence to ONTIC / DEME
> and MALE / FEME redaction to noumenon grounding instead of the thesis of
> nothingness we've updated our neural linguistic pragma to avoid a
> potential bias towards nihilism which might be consequential to the
> usage of FIVE final form letters within the HEBREW prototypes.
>
> On 28/9/2023 11:58, dolf wrote:
>> Hopefully today, we'll have implemented the calendar which will be a
>> semantical morph obtained from our earlier grumble prototype...
>>
>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?run:Temporal%20Noumenon%20Resonance>
>>
>> We've noted from discussion elsewhere that there will be a need to
>> update our neural linguistic pragma to avoid a potential bias towards
>> nihilism which might be consequential to the usage of FIVE final form
>> letters within the HEBREW prototypes and so after completing this
>> ACTIONABLE TASK we'll undertake that activity.
>>
>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/actions/Temporal%20Noumenon%20Resonance.json> <--
>> *CORRECTED* the link
>>
>> Overnight we updated the semantic form of our ACTIONABLE TASK to include
>> an auto function and we note in terms of code execution (ie. we did a
>> for {} loop with a mod % 100 == 0 increment to test it) that this auto
>> function() will be actioned before the main() is executed.
>>
>> Our metemprical / metaphysical philosophical question is not unlike the
>> neural linguistic problem resolution method (magnitude --> meta
>> descriptor) as the observed dynamic (ie. by means of a concise discourse
>> from someone formerly educated in philosophy) quantum pairing to the
>> #451 - PRAXIS OF RATIONALITY SPECTRUM (note: that this has a
>> corresponding ONTIC / DEME, or event MALE / FEME associators as pragma).
>>
>> QUESTION: If a vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358]
>> occurs can it then be considered as being steeped or an immersive action
>> relative to the pragma memeBrain?
>>
>> Thusly if any NOUMENON RESONANCE occurs, what then has precedence as
>> dynamic process: either ONTIC / DEME grounding as cause or the MALE /
>> FEME dialectic noumenon redacted element as then an effect where each is
>> a magnitude against the meta-descriptor element (ie. does it need to
>> even have an equivalence since it is a metakosmeo with a telelogical /
>> temporal resonance).
>>
>> It's seems reasonable that the meta-descriptor element is only a focal
>> point for change, but does this manifest as AUGMENTATION / AMELIORATION
>> dynamic / static DELIMITER like our primitive SPIRAL SELECTOR@{SCENARIO}
>> prototype.
>>
>> By that I mean, if the ONTIC / DEME grounding is the cause, the
>> manifested change is either the quantum of POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY
>> OF OPPOSITES, however if the MALE / FEME dialectic element is the
>> effective cause then quantum of change  might be considered the
>> preceding (or the entire) dialectic.
>>
>> So many questions, which will doubtlessly keep our mind occupied for
>> years to come.
>>
>> On 27/9/2023 07:01, dolf wrote:
>>> We've decided to delay implementing the "bring screen dialog to the
>>> foreground" feature until we've undertaken our development on the
>>> following ACTIONABLE TASK:
>>>
>>> Given a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292,
>>> FEME: #358] devised from an impress of mind associative to a bomb blast.
>>>
>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Groundwork/IBAC%20Note%2020230926.pdf>
>>>
>>> We'll consider an actionable task to query temporal neural linguistic
>>> pragma for noumenon resonance and if it is optimal for vitality
>>>
>>> RULES BASED?
>>>
>>> We are not as informal research seeking to transgress the boundaries
>>> of professional faculty knowledge, neither are we venturing into the
>>> Artificial Intelligence realm but rather ours is a metalogic concern...
>>>
>>> Our informal research as existential philosophical goal is to firstly
>>> visualise through enquiry by date / time and perhaps IDEA categories
>>> the available neural linguistic pragma such that if a vEVENT@[ONTIC:
>>> #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurs can it then be
>>> considered as being steeped or an immersive action relative to the
>>> pragma memeBrain?
>>>
>>> What is then the relationship and process of mediation by means of the
>>> temporal neural linguistic pragma for noumenon resonance in order to
>>> facilitate an optimal recovery from the adverse event as vitality.
>>>
>>> To give an example:
>>>
>>> If we have a CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE [ONTIC: #???, DEME: #???, MALE:
>>> #???, FEME: #???] as a comprehensible multi-media object being then a
>>> known cause with a corresponding psychological effect (eg: a COCA-COLA
>>> advert), can one schedule it at a specific time in association to a
>>> vEVENT@[ONTIC: #324, DEME: #190, MALE: #292, FEME: #358] occurrence
>>> and then mediate the chaotic state towards a condition of well-being?
>>>
>>>      #107 - NOUMENON RESONANCE FOR 27 SEPTEMBER 2023 / DEME CHECKSUM
>>> TOTAL: #318 as [#1, #6, #50, #10, #600] = ʼôwn (H202): {UMBRA: #57 %
>>> #41 = #16} 1) vigour, generative power; 2) wealth; 3) physical
>>> strength (of men and behemoth);
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?deme:237,277,278,318>
>>>
>>> NOTE ON COMMONWEALTH: From common (“public”) +‎ wealth (“well-being”).
>>>  From c. 1450 as common wele (commonweal). In the form common-wealth
>>> (common welthe) from c. 1520, used by Tyndale in the sense "secular
>>> society" in particular, for which other authors preferred publike
>>> weal. Also from the 1520s treated as a synonym or loan-translation of
>>> res publica (republic) (Rollison 2017:67f).
>>>
>>> On 20/9/2023 06:58, dolf wrote:
>>>> We've given some preliminary thought on how to efficiently bring any on
>>>> screen dialog to the foreground by introducing an [ ] action element
>>>> upon
>>>> the dialog frame.
>>>>
>>>> This theoretically only involves moving the ONSCREEN [] array nth
>>>> entry to
>>>> being the last entry and then adjusting the yOffset / y variables.
>>>>
>>>> We're just having to verify any non conformity issues with respects
>>>> to the
>>>> MOVE {} and ONSCREEN {} move {} objects -- am I duplicating a MOVE {}
>>>> object and then changing the size dynamic which might have a
>>>> consequence on
>>>> the yOffset / y delta change?
>>>>
>>>> And extending the simple 2 dialog scenario where our coding retains the
>>>> dialog position dynamic and toggles a dialog to the foreground.
>>>>
>>>> We've implemented the TELOS idea {} concept in our SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
>>>> and
>>>> we notice there is an expansive ONTIC / DEME infusion within the
>>>> Hebrew /
>>>> Greek lexicon as having an implication on epistemological premise.
>>>>
>>>> Accordingly we're going to today focus on completing the STRONGS {}
>>>> concept
>>>> which will convey the LEXICON entry with the BIBLOS narrative occurrence
>>>> links.
>>>>
>>>> We'll shortly implement the URL start option for multiple LEXICON
>>>> entries:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?lexicon:H505>
>>>>
>>>> dolf <dolfboek@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> We've now completed our leisurely Sunday logical thinking activity
>>>>> which
>>>>> was to implement the URL start options for each of the ONTC, DEME, MALE
>>>>> and FEME linguistic notions
>>>>>
>>>>> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?ontic:452,411&deme:472&male:123&feme:400>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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 next activity will be to implement the TELOS {} concept within our
>>>>> SPIRAL SELECTOR@{}
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

It ought to be noted that the other DEME value #214 associated to
noumenon redaction of the word for scribes #700 as [#3, #100, #1, #40,
#40, #1, #300, #5, #10, #200] = grammateús (G1122) as then further
suggesting the theological issues is the thesis of nothingness as
nihilism being the five final form letters v's ONTIC / DEME and MALE /
FEME redaction to noumenon...

#121 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #214 as [#1, #30, #40, #50] = ʼalmân (H488):
{UMBRA: #121 % #41 = #39} 1) widowed, forsaken, forsaken as a widow;

#121 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #214 as [#1, #30, #40, #50] = ʼalmôn (H489):
{UMBRA: #127 % #41 = #4} 1) widowhood;

#728 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #214 as [#10, #1, #7, #10, #700] = ʼâzan
(H238): {UMBRA: #58 % #41 = #17} 1) to hear, listen; 1a) (Hiphil); 1a1)
to hear, listen, give ear; 1a2) to be obedient, harken; 1a3) to hear or
listen to prayers (of God);

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows'
houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive
the greater damnation." [Matthew 23:14 (KJV)]

On 1/10/2023 14:16, dolf wrote:
> We found a reference within the Sefer Yetzirah (before 200 CE) states in
> #24 to Chapter 2:3, "the fact that these letters are not mentioned in
> the Sefer Yetzirah may be indicative of there extreme antiquity."
>
> "But woe unto you, *scribes*-G1122 and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye
> shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in
> yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in." [Matthew
> 23:13]
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.10.1&bible:Matthew@23:13>

#490 - ONTIC CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#6, #4, #30, #400, #10, #40] =
deleth (H1817): {UMBRA: #434 % #41 = #24} 1) door, gate; 1a) a door; 1b)
a gate; 1c) (fig.); 1c1) of chest lid; 1c2) of crocodile jaws; 1c3) of
doors of the heavens; 1c4) of an easily-accessible woman;

>
> #700 as [#3, #100, #1, #40, #40, #1, #300, #5, #10, #200] = grammateús
> (G1122): ...
>
> G1122@{
>   {@1: Sup: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN (#3); Ego: 3 - MIRED: HSIEN (#3)},
>   {@2: Sup: 22 - RESISTANCE: KE (#25); Ego: 19 - FOLLOWING: TS'UNG (#22)},
>   {@3: Sup: 23 - EASE: YI (#48); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#23)},
>   {@4: Sup: 63 - WATCH: SHIH (#111); Ego: 40 - LAW / MODEL: FA (#63)},
>   {@5: Sup: 22 - RESISTANCE: KE (#133); Ego: 40 - LAW / MODEL: FA (#103)},
>   {@6: Sup: 23 - EASE: YI (#156 - I DO NOT CAUSE TERRORS {%21} / I DO
> NOT CAUSE TERRORS {%21}); Ego: 1 - CENTRE: CHUNG (#104 - I COMMIT NO
> FRAUD {%7})},
>   {@7: Sup: 80 - LABOURING: CH'IN (#236); Ego: 57 - GUARDEDNESS: SHOU
> (#161 - I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9} / I AM NOT A TELLER OF LIES {%9})},
>   {@8: Sup: 4 - BARRIER: HSIEN (#240); Ego: 5 - KEEPING SMALL: SHAO
> (#166 - I AM NOT SLUGGISH {%11})},
>   {@9: Sup: 14 - PENETRATION: JUI (#254); Ego: 10 - DEFECTIVENESS,
> DISTORTION: HSIEN (#176)},
>   {@10: Sup: 52 - MEASURE: TU (#306); Ego: 38 - FULLNESS: SHENG (#214)},
>   Male: #306; Feme: #214
> } // #700
>
> It appears that it is a #PENTA thesis (Chapter 1:13) upon the language
> itself and the Kabbalistic Tree "It is significant to note that all five
> families are present in the Bereshit (H7225), the first word of the
> TORAH." [p 103]
>
> #913 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#2, #200, #1, #300, #10, #400] \
> #918 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#2, #200, #1, #300, #10, #400, #5]
> = rêʼshîyth (H7225): {UMBRA: #911 % #41 = #9} 1) first, beginning, best,
> chief; 1a) beginning; 1b) first; 1c) chief; 1d) choice part;
>
> THREE MOTHERS            MALE LETTERS
> MEM - WATER (CHOKMAH)        YOD
> SHIN - FIRE (BINAH)        HE
> ALEF - AIR / BREATH (SIX)    VAV
>
> DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 - ROMAN PROTOTYPE #TWO
>
> #480 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#6, #8, #20, #40, #400, #6] =
> chokmâh (H2451): {UMBRA: #73 % #41 = #32} 1) wisdom; 1a) skill (in war);
> 1b) wisdom (in administration); 1c) shrewdness, wisdom; 1d) wisdom,
> prudence (in religious affairs); 1e) wisdom (ethical and religious);
>
> #1067 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#5, #2, #10, #50, #400, #600] =
> bîyn (H995): {UMBRA: #62 % #41 = #21} 1) to discern, understand,
> consider; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to perceive, discern; 1a2) to understand, know
> (with the mind); 1a3) to observe, mark, give heed to, distinguish,
> consider; 1a4) to have discernment, insight, understanding; 1b) (Niphal)
> to be discerning, intelligent, discreet, have understanding; 1c)
> (Hiphil); 1c1) to understand; 1c2) to cause to understand, give
> understanding, teach; 1d) (Hithpolel) to show oneself discerning or
> attentive, consider diligently; 1e) (Polel) to teach, instruct; 2)
> (TWOT) prudent, regard;
>
> #114 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#10, #80, #10, #8, #6] = pûwach
> (H6315): {UMBRA: #94 % #41 = #12} 1) to breathe, blow; 1a) (Qal) to
> breathe; 1b) (Hiphil); 1b1) to cause to exhale or breathe; 1b2) to puff,
> snort; 1b3) to excite, inflame; 1b4) to puff, pant for it; 1b5) to
> breathe out, utter; 1b6) to blow, blast;
>
> #1388 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 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;
>
> #156 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#50, #70, #30, #6] = naʻal (H5275):
> {UMBRA: #150 % #41 = #27} 1) sandal, shoe;
>
> "And *preached*-G2784, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after
> me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and
> unloose." [Mark 1:7]
>
> <http://www.grapple369.com/Savvy/?date:2023.10.1&bible:Mark@1:7>
>
> #531 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #5,
> #10, #50] \
> #692 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
> #200, #8, #10] \
> #892 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
> #200, #8, #10, #200] \
> #1266 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #800] \
> #1271 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #5,
> #800] \
> #1404 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
> #200, #70, #400, #200, #10, #50] \
> #1734 - DEME CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#40, #5, #300, #1, #50, #70, #8,
> #200, #800, #200, #10, #50] = metanoéō (G3340): {UMBRA: #1271 % #41 =
> #41} 1) to change one's mind, i.e. to repent; 2) to change one's mind
> for better, heartily to amend with abhorrence of one's past sins;
>
> "The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and
> shall condemn it: because they repented-G3340 at the preaching of Jonas;
> and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here." [Matthew 12:41]
>
> #563 - ONTIC CHECKSUM TOTAL: #306 as [#200, #1, #300, #1, #50, #1, #10]
> = Satanâs (G4567): {UMBRA: #753 % #41 = #15} 1) adversary (one who
> opposes another in purpose or act), the name given to; 1a) the prince of
> evil spirits, the inveterate adversary of God and Christ; 1a1) he
> incites apostasy from God and to sin; 1a2) circumventing men by his
> wiles; 1a3) the worshippers of idols are said to be under his control;
> 1a4) by his demons he is able to take possession of men and inflict them
> with diseases; 1a5) by God's assistance he is overcome; 1a6) on Christ's
> return from heaven he will be bound with chains for a thousand years,
> but when the thousand years are finished he will walk the earth in yet
> greater power, but shortly after will be given over to eternal
> punishment; 1b) a Satan-like man;
>