Schemas Theory Overview

Part 9

Exploring Worldly Domains

Kent D. Palmer [email protected] http://kdp.me 714-633-9508 Copyright 2019 KD Palmer All Rights Reserved. Not for Distribution. older: SchemasTheoryOverview_09_20190321kdp01a older: SchemasTheoryOverview_09_20190322kdp02a older: SchemasTheoryOverview_09_20190329kdp03a old: SchemasTheoryOverview_09_20190405kdp04a old: SchemasTheoryOverview_09_20190406kdp05a with appendix old: SchemasTheoryOverview_09_20190406kdp06a without appendix new: SchemasTheoryOverview_09_20190410kdp07a slight change Draft Version 01; unedited 2019. 03.21-29-04.07 http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5298-4422 http://schematheory.net http://emergentdesign.net ResearcherID: O-4956-2015

Key Words: Schemas Theory, Systems Theory, Form, Pattern, Meta-system, OpenScape, Domain, World, Spacetime, Phenomenology, Structure of a Pattern, Essence of a Form, Nucleus of a System, Locus of a Meta-system, Systems Science, Systemology, Schematology, Monadology, Facet, Monad.

Abstract: A closer look at the schemas emphasizing here Domains and Worlds.

Even though the main information (surprise) of Schemas Theory is contained in the relation between System/Meta-system and to Special Systems, there is still something to be said about the next pair of Schemas going up the hierarchy which is the Domain and World Schemas. The Dual of the ‘Formal Structural System’ described by Klir in Architecture of Systems Problem Solving 1 is the ‘Domain World Meta- system’. This is a Schematic Tapestry2 that is the context for every Formal Structural System which is also a Tapestry itself. And these two Tapestries cover the realm of

1 Klir, George J, and Doug Elias. Architecture of Systems Problem Solving. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2003. 2 A continuity beyond the networking of these schemas with each other. https://www.academia.edu/38535146/Network_MetaSchemas

1 direct experience, with the other schemas3 being scaffolding exit outside the realm of direct experience. The question here is how the Domain and World Schemas augment what we already have discovered about the Meta-systemic OpenScape. The way I normally think about the Domain is that it is a Discipline such as those represented by Departments in Universities that are thematically organized. They are all about rigor and discipline of viewpoints that work together given a specific theme or subject matter. There may be a diversity of Opinion related to the Appearances that Phenomenologically appear regard the subject of study, but there is normally substantial agreement about the Ontos, Episteme and Paradigms that are the background to Theory production in a given discipline. Design Science is a Discipline that considers the domain of all possible approaches to Design. Systems Science (Systemology 4 ) is the domain that covers all of the various versions of General Systems Theory. One day there may be a ‘Schemology’ or Schemas Science that studies all possible and embodied Schemas used by human beings to comprehend Spacetime and perhaps other species as well. Schemology might study the question whether there are different schematizations in different cultures? Where a Domain is a restricted economy of viewpoints the World would be a general economy of viewpoints encompassing all possible and actualized viewpoints within a given World. Worlds are tied closely to languages. We accept a limited application of the Whorfian hypothesis5. Language structure does affect how we see the world. Domains have a technical vocabulary, but Worlds use general language of a culture 6 underwritten by society which is rooted in basic tropes like metaphor, metonymy, as well as analogy. By Worlds Schema we do not mean the Penrose and Popper “Worlds” used by Kenneth Lloyd in Foundations of Systems Science 7 , those are ‘regional ontologies’ or ‘realms of experience’ instead of Worlds or Domains proper as understood in Schemas Theory (http://schematheory.net). Worlds turn out to be singulars 8 . And that is probably the most interest things that the exploration of Schemas Theory has discovered about them. Domains are slices of that Singular that is the World with its embedded language. Domains restrict the viewpoints that are designated as identical, true, present, or real within the World. All experience takes place in a World of some kind. What is beyond the World is the Kosmos and Pluriverse which are conceptual scaffolding for the World. Kosmos means Universe and Pluriverse means Multi-verse or whatever was before the Big Bang in Physics. The Pluriverse is hidden from us as we can only be in one Universe at a time. But the Universe is seen by us as the realm of physical phenomena in the Modern era. Prior to that the Kosmos was Mythic. But we are only in a small corner of the Universe such that what we see of it is really miniscule. Even though it is visible, audible, and tactilely touchable, as well as hearable, and taste-able when close at hand, most of it is out of reach due to the speed of light limit on our movement that limits us mostly to

3 Monad/Facet on one end of the hierarchy and Kosmos/Pluriverse at the other. 4 Rousseau, David, Jennifer Wilby, Julie Billingham, and Stefan Blachfellner. General Systemology: Transdisciplinarity for Discovery, Insight and Innovation. Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2018. 5 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Linguistic_relativity 6 Pagel, Mark D. Wired for Culture: The Natural History of Human Cooperation. London: Allen Lane, 2012. 7 Not published yet. http://wattsystems.com 8 When we apply the Philosophical Principles to the Schemas in order it turns out that the World Schema is characterized by the Singular Philosophical Principle. 2 exploration the Solar System given current technology. So that is why we say it is part of the scaffolding. It encompasses us and we cannot encompass it in its phenomenality, despite how much science has learned about it in terms of generalizations based on experiments conducted close to home or sensors that pick up what is happening beyond our reach such as the Hubble Telescope and other Astronomical instruments.

While Meta-systems have horizons, Worlds really have vistas on the Kosmos. Worlds are tied to the Planet Earth in a very real way because it is our home environment. We may live on other planets someday so that they become worlds for us. But worlds need a community, a tribe, a people, a folk living and working together to support their existence. Worlds are fundamentally social in the widest sense covering all the humanities and the social sciences. Domains are like the boundaries of States or territories projected on the earth. Domains have a compass or purview. Domains look inward at the territory they enclose or warily look beyond their borders while the World looks out on the Kosmos. Worlds contain all possible viewpoints and perspectives while the Domain filters a subset of these into a rigorous discipline which it orders. Technology is one of the preeminent domains. Heidegger focuses on that Domain and shows that it has a different mode of Being for Dasein, which is the ready-to-hand, while Knowledge in Science has the ideal of being present-at-hand. These distinguish two equi-primordial modes of being-in-the-world of Dasein (being there) which are Pure and Process Being. Engineering is the discipline associated with Technology while Mathematics and Science is the discipline that is the ideal of knowledge discovery and elaboration which grounds Technology. There is a Mathematical “World” and a Scientific World concerning Physical phenomena in Kenneth Lloyd’s set of fundamental realms of experience or regional ontologies. To that we must add the Intersubjective realm which is the “World” in which Domains and Worlds as schemas appear. Oddly the Conceptual “World” turns out to be Technological for Kenneth Lloyd because he uses as his example of it the results of neural net classifications. This leaves the Mental “World” which we found was related to the System and Meta-system schemas.

We can think about the Meta-system as a panorama to the horizon from a specific spot on the globe. But the Domain is the boundaries drawn on that globe that are established and enforced by one group against another group of what ever size. Domains are established by Kantian natural law (Mine/Yours) territorialization, and colonization by conquest. Mammals are territorial animals and so they naturally establish territorial boundaries and defend them against incursion, as well as taking over territories of weaker opponents. So, Domains have all the problems associated with the relation of the Map to the Territory. Maps are projected on Territories, but what is happening on the ground is not necessarily what is portrayed in the map. Maps can be Mercator, i.e. distorted, rather than globes. Worlds are associated instead with globes, and spherical geometry. With Worlds there is infinite maneuverability even if the surface area is finite because it is a sphere and you can keep going around it in different great circle routes. So, Worlds have closure that is natural rather than artificial boundaries like the Domain. Also, among the Domains even though each is a 3 restricted economy within its boundaries there is also “international waters” and other regions like failed states that are lawless, in other words there is always somewhere that is uncontrolled that makes the global landscape that is mostly territorialized a General Economy. There also has to be somewhere like Switzerland where money can be exchanged between rival powers that is neutral. Domains are screens for Ideological projection such as that discussed by Zizek 9 . However, Ideological projections are not strong enough to encompass the whole World. Domains are artificial enclaves in which ideological projection can be enforced at least temporarily10. But that means that the tension between ideology and reality is played out in the tension between Domains and Worlds with all its absurdity. Or instead, we can see the relation between Domains and Worlds in relation to Das Mann (Absolute Social Ego11) and Mitsein12 (Ultimate Social Ego). The Domain is the realm of Das Mann while the world is the playground of Mitsein (fused group13, magma14, pack15, socius16, etc.). The reification of the Other is thus a slice of the Planetary Man17, i.e. species wide phenomenological subject, of Desan. It is the Planetary Man (Atman18) that is the Witness and Victim to the catastrophe of Climate Change and also the Perpetrator. The existential crisis we placed ourselves within we created for ourselves through our ignorance and engineering with out foresight. That needs to change so that Systems Engineering becomes EcoSocial Meta-system focused Synergistic Engineering19.

So, the relation of Domains to Worlds becomes a topic because they produce a framework within which System/Meta-system duals can be seen to function. Domains and Worlds are the global ecosphere in which ecosystems as Meta-systems and Systems in their niches appear, thrive, and then change or vanish. It is an even deeper background than the Meta-system is to the System. At the World level the

9 Ž iž ek, Slavoj. The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso, 2009. Ž iž ek, Slavoj. For They Know Not What They Do: Enjoyment As a Political Factor. London: Verso, 2008. Zizek, Slavoj. Less Than Nothing: Hegel and the Shadow of Dialectical Materialism. London, U.K: Verso, 2013. Ž iž ek, Slavoj. The Parallax View. Cambridge (MA: MIT Press, 2009. 10 As demonstrated by the Soviet Union and its fall. 11 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Absolute_(philosophy) Called by Lacan the Big Other. https://nosubject.com/index.php?title=Other 12 Irene McMullin, Time and the Shared World: Heidegger on Social Relations, Northwestern University Press, Evanston, IL, 2013. 13 Sartre, Jean-Paul, and Arlette Elkaïm-Sartre. Critique of Dialectical Reason. London: Verso, 2009. 14 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Cornelius_Castoriadis Castoriadis, Cornelius. The Imaginary Institution of Society. Brantford, Ont: W. Ross MacDonald School Resource Services Library, 2012. Castoriadis, Cornelius, and David A. Curtis. World in Fragments: Writings on Politics, Society, Psychoanalysis, and the Imagination. Stanford, Calif: Stanford Univ. Press, 2009. Castoriadis, Cornelius, Enrique Escobar, Myrto Gondicas, and Pascal Vernay. A Society Adrift: Interviews and Debates, 1974-1997. New York: Fordham University Press, 2010. 15 Canetti, Elias. Crowds and Power. London: Phoenix, 2000. Arnold, Gina. Half a Million Strong: Crowds and Power from Woodstock to Coachella. Iowa City : University of Iowa Press, 2018. Gardner, Colin, and Patricia MacCormack. Deleuze and the Animal. Edinburgh : Edinburgh University Press, 2017. 16 Deleuze, Gilles, and Eugene W. Holland. Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus: Introduction to Schizoanalysis. London: Routledge, 2003. 17 Desan, Wilfrid. The Planetary Man: 1. New York: Macmillan, 1972. Desan, Wilfrid. The Planetary Man: 2. New York: Macmillan, 1972. 18 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/%C4%80tman_(Hinduism) 19 https://www.academia.edu/38509531/The_Future_of_Systems_Engineering_is_to_become_EcoSocial_Meta- system_focused_Synergistic_Engineering

4 planetary territory20, language21 and worldview22 coalesce into a cultural whole23 which is singular based on social institutions24 and communities25. We are in the situation that Sartre describes in Critique of Dialectical Reason26 in which institutions arise from the fused group. We are in the context of the Imaginary Institution of Society27 by Carlos Castoriadis. We are in the locale of The Play of the World28 by John S. Hans. We can see this through the eyes of Closure29 by Hillary Lawson. We can imagine the rudimentary social group as the pack as does Canetti in Crowds and Power30. We can see it in terms of the Socius of Deleuze and Guattari in Capitalism and Schizophrenia31 series. In other words, there is a strong tradition of precursors32 who had delved into this area before upon whose work we can build upon. And we are in that process adding another “World” to Kenneth Lloyd’s definition of the four ‘Worlds’ of Penrose and Popper, the Intersubjective World of the social33 that has

20 Steele, Wendy. Planning Across Borders in a Climate of Change. London ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2014. 21 Nettle, Daniel, and Suzanne Romaine. Vanishing Voices: The Extinction of the World's Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. 22 Underhill, James W. Creating Worldviews - Metaphor, Ideology and Language. Edinburgh University Press, 2013. DeWitt, Richard. Worldviews: An Introduction to the History and Philosophy of Science. Hoboken : Wiley, 2018. Clark, Tom, Emily Finlay, and Philippa Kelly. Worldmaking: Literature, Language, Culture. Amsterdam ; Philadelphia : John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2017. 23 Prost, Mario. The Concept of Unity in Public International Law. Oxford: Hart, 2011. 24 Outhwaite, William. Social Theory. London: Profile Books, 2015. Gibson, William J, and Lehn D. Vom. Institutions, Interaction and Social Theory. London : Macmillan Education : Palgrave, 2018. Hechter, Michael, Karl-Dieter Opp, and Reinhard Wippler. Social Institutions: Their Emergence, Maintenance and Effects. Abingdon, Oxon : Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2017. 25 Etzioni, Amitai. New Communitarian Thinking: Persons, Virtues, Institutions, and Communities. Charlottesville: Univ. Press of Virginia, 1996. Bradford, Gigi, Michael Gary, and Glenn Wallach. The Politics of Culture: Policy Perspectives for Individuals, Institutions, and Communities. New York: New Press, 2000. Pouligny, Bé atrice, Simon Chesterman, and Albrecht Schnabel. After Mass Crime: Rebuilding States and Communities. Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 2007. 26 Sartre, Jean-Paul, and Arlette Elkaïm-Sartre. Critique of Dialectical Reason. London: Verso, 2009. Sartre, Jean-Paul, Arlette Elkaïm-Sartre, and Quintin Hoare. Critique of Dialectical Reason: Vol. 2 (unfinished) / Ed. by Arlette Elkaïm-Sartre ; Transl. [from the French] by Quintin Hoare. London: Verso, 2006. Catalano, Joseph S. A Commentary on Jean-Paul Sartre's Critique of Dialectical Reason, Volume 1, Theory of Practical Ensembles. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2013. 27 Castoriadis, Cornelius. The Imaginary Institution of Society. Brantford, Ont: W. Ross MacDonald School Resource Services Library, 2012. Adams, Suzi. Castoriadis's Ontology: Being and Creation. New York: Fordham University Press, 2011. Tovar- Restrepo, Marcela. Castoriadis, Foucault, and Autonomy: New Approaches to Subjectivity, Society, and Social Change. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2012. Castoriadis, Cornelius. Figures of the Thinkable. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2007. Adams, Suzi. Castoriadis and the Circle of Physis and Nomos: A Critical Interpretation of His Philosophical Trajectory. Ph. D. La Trobe University, 2006. Castoriadis, Corné lius. Crossroads in the Labyrinth. Sussex: The Harvester Press, 1984. 28 Hans, James S. The Play of the World. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1981. 29 Lawson, Hilary. Closure: A Story of Everything. London: Routledge, 2002. Lawson, Hilary. Reflexivity: The Post-Modern Predicament. London: Hutchinson, 1987. 30 Canetti, Elias. Crowds and Power. London: Phoenix, 2000. Brill, Lesley. Crowds, Power, and Transformation in Cinema. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2006. Kuhlman, Martha B. Mass Delusions: Crowds and Power in the Works of Elias Canetti, Jean-Paul Sartre, Milan Kundera, and Don Delillo. Ph. D. New York University, Graduate School of Arts and Science, 2001. Arnason, Johann P, and David Roberts. Elias Canetti's Counter-Image of Society: Crowds, Power, Transformation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Borch, Christian. The Politics of Crowds: An Alternative History of Sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. McClelland, J S. The Crowd and the Mob: From Plato to Canetti. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2011. Schwab, Justin J. The Birth of the Mob: Representations of Crowds in Archaic and Classical Greek Literature. Ph. D. in Classics University of California, Berkeley, CA, 2011. Raunig, Gerald. A Thousand Machines: A Concise Philosophy of the Machine As Social Movement. Los Angeles, CA: Semiotext(e, 2010. 31 Deleuze, Gilles, and Eugene W. Holland. Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus: Introduction to Schizoanalysis. London: Routledge, 2003. Deleuze, Gilles, and Félix Guattari. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. London : Bloomsbury, 2017. Dosse, François. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari: Intersecting Lives. New York, NY: Columbia Univ. Press, 2011. Lundy, Craig, and Daniela Voss. At the Edges of Thought. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2015. Somers-Hall, Henry, Jeffrey A. Bell, and James Williams. A Thousand Plateaus and Philosophy. Edinburgh : Edinburgh University Press, 2018. 32 Sandywell, Barry. Presocratic Reflexivity: The Construction of Philosophical. London: Routledge, 1995. Sandywell, Barry. Reflexivity and the Crisis of Western Reason. New York: Routledge, 1996. Sandywell, Barry. Problems of Reflexivity and Dialectics in Sociological Inquiry: Language Theorizing Difference. London: Routledge, 2015. Sandywell, Barry. Beginnings of European Theorizing: Reflexivity in the Archaic Age. London : Routledge, 2014. 33 O'Malley, John B. Sociology of Meaning. London: Human Context Books, 1973.

5 been forgotten by him and many others. The intersubjective world is broken up into Domains and Worlds from a schematic point of view. These are phenomenological thresholds of experience just like the others we have been studying that are part of the Schemas Theory hierarchy posited by the S-prime hypothesis34.

If we think of Domains as territorializations then they function in relation to Nomadic deterritorialzations35 of the earth considered as common where so called natural law36 in Kant’s sense of mine and yours is discovered to be unnatural37. The local is transformed by the projection of maps onto the territory in relation to the unmapped global resource of the Earth held in common38. Once the Earth has been territorialized then order is imposed on it such as with agriculture. Private property is imposed to the exclusion of all others held in perpetuity even when the owner is not present. We can see in this a kind of projection which is communal based on the idea that Earth is a finite resource because it is a sphere. But territoriality is a very mammalian instinctual pattern which includes marking of territory and the hording of the reproductive resource of females in a harem by the alpha male. But in nomadic deterritorialization this marking is reserved for the burial sites of the dead and sacred places, rather than swallowing up all the land in private property as agricultural settlement is prone to do. Where agriculture treats the land in terms of a restricted economy nomadism treats it in terms of a general economy as held in common by all with only certain sites that do not move such as burial sites of the dead worth fighting for39. Add to this the stasis of the continual war of tribe against tribe and the raids on unnatural settlements and we have a picture of the kind meta-stability that applies to nomadic life in which the tribal patchwork becomes a different type of territoriality for the monad.

Here we can give the example of the plateau in New Guinea 40 where there was intervene warfare for 9000 years on the plateau with the low lands filled with cannibals. They invented agriculture independently and there were nine million people there when this territory was finally opened up by colonialists who took pictures of the amazement 41 of the emergent event of their own arrival by the indigenous population. The plateau was broken up into tribes who were locked in

34 There are ten schemas and a rule that there are two schemas per dimension and two dimensions per schema. See http://schematheory.net 35 Deleuze, Gilles, Fé lix Guattari, and Brian Massumi. Nomadology: War Machine. A.K. Press, 1994. 36 Eterovich, Francis H. Approaches to Natural Law, from Plato to Kant. New York: Exposition Press, 1972. Contreras, Pelá ez F. J. The Threads of Natural Law: Unravelling a Philosophical Tradition. Dordrecht: Springer, 2013. Kainz, Howard P. Natural Law: An Introduction and Re-Examination. Chicago: Open Court, 2005 37 Asma, Stephen T. On Monsters: An Unnatural History of Our Worst Fears. Vancouver, B.C. : Langara College, 2016. 38 Ostrom, Elinor. The Drama of the Commons. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2002. Copeland, Brian R, and Michael S. Taylor. Trade, Tragedy, and the Commons. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2004. Baden, John, and Douglas S. Noonan. Managing the Commons. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1998. 39 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Scythians Cyrus does not understand why they don’t stand and fight. But they said they would if certain sites were attacked, i.e. their burial mounds. 40 Simpson, Colin. Adam with Arrows: Inside Aboriginal New Guinea. New York: Praeger, 1955. Schieffelin, Edward L, and Robert Crittenden. Like People You See in a Dream: First Contact in Six Papuan Societies. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1991 41 Connolly, Bob, and Robin Anderson. First Contact. New York, N.Y., U.S.A: Penguin Books, 1988.

6 stasis for 9000 years, with many different languages and customs. The point is that this shows how this internecine warfare and radical segmentation of the population is a kind of base state of territorialization. Deleuze and Guattari in Nomadology42 call this the War Machine 43 . They see it as a way of resisting territorializing and maintaining the deterritorialization of the nomadic existence but it gets out of hand, leads to Wild Being in the wars between agricultural societies. But New Guinea is an important counter example. It is really just a matter of what is territorialized. For the Nomad it is the burial and sacred sights as singular points on the landscape rather than the marking of large swaths of territory as Domains which is done by agriculturalists. But where nomadism is not possible as in New Guinea, where it is the cannibals in the lowlands that play the nomadic role, we see the war machine play itself out in the radical differentiation of the population into cultural islands locked in internecine warfare for 9000 years and radically different languages being developed that split the population into incommensurable cells that go on to invent agriculture independently.

Part of the key here is the fact that the older languages are more complex rather than less complex44. Language simplification comes from their interaction and exchange. This base state of highly differentiated languages and cultures is highly significant. What it tells us is that the production of Domains and Worlds is endemic to the human condition at a primordial level. There is a fundamental striving to produce Worlds with their own separate language and cultural basis. And the production of Domains within Worlds is a natural extension of that which creates technical and esoteric vocabularies and is the vehicle for territorializing in as much as it sets up specialized Domains through the projection of mappings onto the territory. In a sense we can see the analogy between the Monad and the Facet here replayed. Monads become faceted in a similar way that the World splits up into domains with specialized practices and technical or esoteric language. And the further we go back into time looking at languages the more complex they become, which means that languages start off as being extremely complex and become simpler over time instead of the other way around. The establishment of differences is primary over the homogenization that may come later through a process of conquest through war where some languages prevail due to victories on the battle field and the collapse of the highly differentiated savage patch work into states in which there is sovereignty. Deleuze and Guattari only recognize the savage, the sovereign and then later capitalism as stages in historical development. Capitalism comes out of the rise of money flowing in free markets that

42 Deleuze, Gilles, Fé lix Guattari, and Brian Massumi. Nomadology: War Machine. A.K. Press, 1994. Hale, David. Of Nomadology: Religion and the War Machine. Saarbrü cken, Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Mü ller, 2008. Sibertin-Blanc, Guillaume, and Ames Hodges. State and Politics: Deleuze and Guattari on Marx. South Pasadena: Semiotext(e, 2016. 43 Pick, Daniel. War Machine: The Rationalisation of Slaughter in the Modern Age. New Haven, Conn. : Yale University Press, 1996. Mosier, John. Cross of Iron: The Rise and Fall of the German War Machine, 1918-1945. New York: Holt Paperbacks, 2007. Coker, Christopher. Future War. Cambridge ; Malden, MA : Polity Press, 2015. Morañ a, Mabel, and Andrew Ascherl. The Monster As War Machine. Amherst, New York : Cambria Press, 2018. 44 Andresen, Julie T, and Phillip M. Carter. Languages in the World: How History, Culture, and Politics Shape Language. Chichester, West Sussex, UK : Wiley Blackwell, 2016. McWhorter, John H. The Story of Human Language. Chantilly, Va: Teaching Co, 2004. McWhorter, John H. Language Change and Language Contact in Pidgins and Creoles. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins, 2000.

7 is the reification in the Metaphysical era that supersedes the gift economy45 of the Mythopoetic era46. They see Capitalism as the ever-intensifying crisis47 that is the end state which produces schizophrenia as a side effect48.

We understand this situation in human historical development as an indication why there is no human shared consciousness49. We look at it through the lens of the theory that consciousness in the individual is the broadcast of the results of separate processing within the brain. This broadcast model of consciousness50 explains why the brain segments functional analysis of objects in different parts that seem to have no where that posits the unity of the object. This is in fact adaptive because if there are artifacts that result from poor processing or disparities in perception then they show up as the disunity of the object in broadcast of partial results in consciousness. This is what allows consciousness to align with reality51 because misalignments show up as optical illusions. So, the differentiation of the processing of the brain and its distribution of segments of that processing is exactly what allows us to align with reality through this broadcast process that we experience as consciousness which sees unity in the objects because these partial processing functions overlap in their results in consciousness.

This suggests that perhaps the same thing is occurring on the cultural level between human beings where there is also a differentiation of processing agents. Human

45 Hann, Chris, and Keith Hart. Economic Anthropology: History, Ethnography, Critique. Johanneshov: MTM, 2018. 46 Hatab, Lawrence J. Myth and Philosophy: A Contest of Truths. La Salle, Ill: Open Court, 1992. https://independent.academia.edu/KentPalmer/Heterochronic-Era 47 Baldwin, Andrew, and Giovanni Bettini. Life Adrift: Climate Change, Migration, Critique. London ; Lanham, Maryland : Rowman & Littlefield International, Ltd., 2017. 48 Buchanan, Ian, and Lorna Collins. Deleuze and the Schizoanalysis of Visual Art. New York : Bloomsbury Academic, 2014. Smith, Chris. Bare Architecture: A Schizoanalysis. London, UK : Bloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishiing Plc, 2017. Buchanan, Ian, and Patricia MacCormack. Deleuze and the Schizoanalysis of Cinema. London: Continuum, 2008. Guattari, Fé lix. The Machinic Unconscious: Essays in Schizoanalysis. Los Angeles: Semiotext(e, 2011. Schizoanalysis and Ecosophy: Reading Deleuze and Guattari. S.l.: Bloomsbury Academic, 2019. Powell-Jones, Lindsay, and F L. R. Shults. Deleuze and the Schizoanalysis of Religion. London ; New York : Bloomsbury Academic, 2016. Buchanan, Ian. Deleuze and the Schizoanalysis of Literature. London: Bloomsbury, 2015. Roberts, Phillip, and Richard Rushton. Schizoanalysis and Visual Cultures. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2011. Guattari, Fé lix, and Sylvè re Lotringer. Chaosophy: Texts and Interviews 1972-1977. Los Angeles, CA: Semiotext(e, 2008. Watson, Janell. Guattari's Diagrammatic Thought: Writing between Lacan and Deleuze. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2011. 49 Bolender, John. The Self-Organizing Social Mind. Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press, 2012. Mead, George H, Charles W. Morris, Daniel R. Huebner, and Hans Joas. Mind, Self, and Society: The Definitive Edition. Chicago : The University of Chicago Press, 2015. Lavelle, Jane S. The Social Mind: A Philosophical Introduction. London ; New York : Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2019. Valsiner, Jaan, and René . Veer. The Social Mind: Construction of the Idea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Itakura, Shoji, and Kazuo Fujita. Origins of the Social Mind: Evolutionary and Developmental Views. Tokyo: Springer Japan, 2008. Cheney, Dorothy L, and Robert M. Seyfarth. Baboon Metaphysics: The Evolution of a Social Mind. Chicago University of Chicago Press Ann Arbor, Michigan ProQuest, 2014. Ellis, Bruce J, and David Bjorklund. Origins of the Social Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and Child Development. New York: The Guilford Press, 2005. 50 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Global_workspace_theory Baars, BJ, S Franklin, and TZ Ramsoy. "Global Workspace Dynamics: Cortical "binding and Propagation" Enables Conscious Contents." Frontiers in Psychology. 4 (2013). Baars, Bernard J. (1988), A Cognitive Theory of Consciousness (Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press) Baars, Bernard J.(1997), In the Theater of Consciousness (New York, NY: Oxford University Press) Baars, Bernard J. (2002) The conscious access hypothesis: Origins and recent evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6 (1), 47-52. Grillner, Sten, and A M. Graybiel. Microcircuits: The Interface between Neurons and Global Brain Function. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press in cooperation with Dahlem University Press, 2006. 51 Sider, Theodore. Writing the Book of the World. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2013.

8 groups highly differentiate themselves from each other in culture and language which is like the disparate distribution of processing in the brain. Something they all see like the arrival of the Colonialists which produces such shock is then known to be Real because the different cultures and languages on the New Guiney plateau all saw something new in common despite their different processing of the perceptions and linguistic conceptualizations. The differentiation of human culture is a way for humanity to align with reality. What is present and unified with respect to different cultural groups is what is real, and this Reality52 could not be seen as readily if there were uniform cultures like exist in modern times or if there were shared group consciousness. Just as there is no inherent unifying of the object, so to there is no inherent positing of the Real. The Real is established by the differentiation of Worlds and Domains which are Symbolic but posited on the basis of the Imaginary53. What continues to appear, is present, despite the differentiation of cultures and languages is real and has identity and is true. So, what is Aspectual is what exists, noumenality appearing as an Excession, i.e. Emergent Event, beyond the differentiation of cultures and languages in different Domains and Worlds. And for Science that is the Kosmos, i.e. physical reality of the universe that we find are in many ways incomprehensible because Relativity Theory and Quantum Mechanics when combined produce Paradoxes54. From this point of view, it is the diversity of the production of Domains and Worlds that allow us to see Nature as the Kosmos as something transcending experience, standing as a scaffold outside experience. It is a constant that appears despite the many different cultures and languages that we use to express what we understand and use to formulate knowledge. If there were shared consciousness then we would not be able to see what exists beyond all the Domains and Worlds that we project on our experience. It is the very diversity of Domains and Worlds that gives rise to the possibility of actualizing the transcendental (that we call Objective Reality) beyond those Domains and Worlds that we know as the Kosmos and see as the universe that is the subject of Science. The goal is for Science to produce a reality that goes beyond cultural and linguistic projections. The differentiation of Worlds and Domains is what makes this possible. And I think this is a counterintuitive and surprising result.

52 That Banks calls an Excession, the encounter with the unknown unknown., i.e. an emergent event. Banks, Iain M. Excession. London: Orbit, 2012. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Excession https://entropymag.org/excession- review/ https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Iain_Banks https://www.wikiwand.com/en/The_Culture_(series) https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Literature/Excession https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DidntSeeThatComing 53 Van, Pelt T. The Other Side of Desire: Lacan's Theory of the Registers. Albany, NY: State Univ. of New York Press, 2000. Coats, Karen. Looking Glasses and Neverlands: Lacan, Desire, and Subjectivity in Children's Literature. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 2004. Culture and the Real: Theorizing Cultural Criticism. Taylor & Francis, 2004. Eyers, Tom. Jacques Lacan and the Concept of the 'real. Kingston University, 2012. Julien, Philippe, and Devra B. Simiu. Jacques Lacan's Return to Freud: Real, the Symbolic and the Imaginary. New York University Press, 1996. Ž iž ek, Slavoj, Rex Butler, and Scott Stephens. Interrogating the Real. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013. Zizek, Slavoj. Enjoy Your Symptom!: Jacques Lacan in Hollywood and Out. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis, 2012. Zizek, Slavoj. Enjoy Your Symptom! Hoboken: Taylor and Francis, 2013. Eyers, Tom. Lacan and the Concept of the ‘real’. ondon : Palgrave Macmillan UK : Imprint: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. 54 https://www.askamathematician.com/2009/12/q-howwhy-are-quantum-mechanics-and-relativity-incompatible/ https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Physical_paradox

Shared consciousness would make it impossible for us to see transcendental reality which we can identify and know as ‘true reality’, the real real of Zizek55, when it is made present in our differentiated consciousness. Aspectualization of Phenomena aims at uncovering the Noumena. But the noumena is what is known through the differentiation of the projections of Domains and Worlds. Identity functions as the basis for knowing the object as different from the subject. Truth functions in respect to language56. Presence functions with respect to bodily sensory perception. All these aspects that are implicated in the Formal System producing the properties of consistency, completeness and clarity (well-formedness) of our models then collides with Reality to produce the properties of verifiability, validity, and coherence.

Identity is a First (isolate), Truth is a Second (relata), Presence is a Third (continua) and Reality is a Fourth (synergy). This fourth is associated with the third dimension. In terms of the undefinables, the First is a point, Second is a line, Third is a surface, and Fourth is a solid. But it is also a synthesis of all the lower level aspects. What we see in the third dimension is considered reality. In a sense there are no other dimensions but the third, the others are merely abstractions that we build up through geometry to explain the structure of the third dimension. No wonder Form is the major Schema we use to understand our experience within Spacetime. Form as object has functional behavior (of methods) as its means of representing time in addition to encapsulation (shape), data (content), calls (use) within the System defined in terms of object, relation, boundary and collective behavior. In order to establish the transcendental we identify it, and then we relate it to language via truth, and we indicate its presence by pointing as a prelude to grasping, then bearing and finally encompassing as it is absorbed and becomes immanent. By processing the noumena as an external difference in this fashion we establish its reality as a synthesis and this generates meaning through an Emergent Event in which the Model as a Formal System is reconciled with what is beyond it that actually exists.

55 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/The_Real [footnote continues next page] • “The ‘real Real’: a horrific thing, that which conveys the sense of horror in horror films” • “The ‘symbolic real’: the signifier reduced to a meaningless formula like quantum physics, which cannot be understood in any meaningful way, only grasped through abstract mathematics.” • “The ‘imaginary real’: an unfathomable something that permeates things as a trace of the sublime. This form of the real becomes perceptible in the film The Full Monty, in the fact of disrobing the unemployed protagonists completely; in other words, through this extra gesture of "voluntary" degradation, something else, of the order of the sublime, becomes visible. Žižek also used the film The Sound of Music as an example, where the ‘invaded’ Austrians are depicted more like provincial fascists (blond, beautiful, historic dresses), while the Nazis are managers, bureaucrats, etc., ‘like cosmopolitan decadent corrupted Jews.’ He posits that the movie has a hidden pro- fascist message that is not directly seen but embedded in the texture.”

“The real Real is the hard limit that functions as the horrifying Thing (the Alien, Medusa's head, maelstrom and so on) - a shattering force of negation. The symbolic Real refers to the anonymous symbols and codes (scientific formulae, digitalisation, empty signifiers...) that function in an indifferent manner as the abstract "texture" onto which, or out of which, reality is constituted. In The Matrix, for example, the symbolic Real is given expression at the point where Neo perceives "reality" in terms of the abstract streams of digital output. In the contemporary world, Zizek argues that it is capital itself that provides this essential backdrop to our reality and as such represents the symbolic Real of our age (Zizek, 1999: 222; 276). With the imaginary real we have precisely the (unsustainable) dimension of fantasmatic excess-negation that is explored in Flatliners. This is why cyberspace is such an ambiguous imaginary realm.” Daly, Glyn (2004). "Slavoj Zizek: A Primer". lacan dot com. Retrieved 17 August 2012. 56 Gadamer, Hans-Georg. Truth and Method. New York: Continuum, 1993.

For Heidegger we must take into account the second meta-level of each of the Aspects at the level of Process Being. Identity becomes the Same as Belonging Together. Truth as verification becomes Alethia as Disclosure. Presence becomes Showing and Hiding. And Reality for him at the second meta-level of Process Being becomes the production of the Transcendental as World Horizon. This World viewpoint from which we view the Kosmos as a vista. When the World reflects on itself, rather than being enchanted by the vista of the Objective, becomes a Worldview. And we have developed a model of the Worldview for the West, which we call the W-prime hypothesis, as it was established in Europe that is mathematically based on Meta-dimensions and Fibered Rational Knots as a transcendental context for understanding the Schemas.

All objects are seen on the horizon of the world thus obviating the necessity for Husserl’s bracketing57 which had the side effect of producing solipsism and creating the problem of intersubjectivity for phenomenology58. This solution was discovered by Husserl when he developed his Genetic Phenomenology59. But it is made famous

57 Sokolowski, Robert. Introduction to Phenomenology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Sokolowski, Robert. The Formation of Husserl's Concept of Constitution. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1970. Sokolowski, Robert. Presence and Absence: A Philosophical Investigation of Language and Being. Washington, DC : The Catholic University of America Press, 2017. Sokolowski, Robert. Husserlian Meditations: How Words Present Things. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1989. 58 Carr, David. Phenomenology and the Problem of History: A Study of Husserl's Transcendental Philosophy. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1974. Hermberg, Kevin. Husserl's Phenomenology: Knowledge, Objectivity and Others. London: Continuum, 2006. Dastur, Françoise. Questions of Phenomenology: Language, Alterity, Temporality, Finitude. New York : Fordham University Press, 2017. Donohoe, Janet. Husserl on Ethics and Intersubjectivity: From Static to Genetic Phenomenology. Toronto ; Buffalo ; London : University of Toronto Press, 2016. Donohoe, Janet. Genetic Phenomenology, Intersubjectivity and the Husserlian Account of Ethics. Ph. D. Boston College 1998, 1998. Wagner, Helmut R. Phenomenology of Consciousness and Sociology of the Life- World. Edmonton: University of Alberta Press, 2000. Schutz, Alfred, and Thomas Luckmann. The Structures of the Life-World. Evanston, Ill: Northwestern University Press, 1995. Schutz, Alfred. The Problem of Social Reality. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 1990. Schutz, Alfred. Studies in Phenomenological Philosophy. The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1975. Schutz, Alfred. The Phenomenology of the Social World: Transl. by George Walsh and Frederick Lehnert. with an Introd. by George Walsh. Evanston: Northwestern Univ. Press, 1972. Barber, Michael D. Social Typifications and the Elusive Other: The Place of Sociology of Knowledge in Alfred Schutz's Phenomenology. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 1988. Zahavi, Dan. Husserl and Transcendental Intersubjectivity: A Response to the Linguistic-Pragmatic Critique. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press, 2001. Macann, Christopher E. Presence and Coincidence: The Transformation of Transcendental into Ontological Phenomenology. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991. 59 Husserl, Edmund, and Donn Welton. The Essential Husserl: Basic Writings in Transcendental Phenomenology. Bloomington, IN : Indiana University Press, 1999. Welton, Donn. Other Husserl: The Horizons of Transcendental Phenomenology. Bloomington, Ind: Indiana U.P, 2002. Welton, Donn C. The Temporality of Meaning: A Critical Study of the Structure of Meaning and Temporality in Husserl's Phenomenology. Thesis: Southern Illinois

11 by Heidegger in Being and Time60. Ontic beings are seen on the background of Being through the establishment of Ontological Difference 61 . Being as Metaphysical Principle62 becomes the Transcendental Horizon of the World 63. Thus, the World becomes a fundamental constituent of Phenomenology both for Husserl and Heidegger. Heidegger is merely reinterpreting Husserl’s Genetic Phenomenology in Being and Time attempting to solve some of its problems64. The more we learn about Genetic Phenomenology of Husserl the more we realize the debt of Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty to it. The World Schema really becomes central to the development of Phenomenology as the backdrop for all phenomena and ultimately it becomes the basis for the Transcendental Field 65 of Merleau-Ponty which is taken up and

University, Dept. of Philosophy, Carbondale, Ill, August 1973. Welton, Donn. "Husserl's Genetic Phenomenology of Perception." Research in Phenomenology. 12.1 (1982): 59-83. Larrabee, Mary J. Static and Genetic Phenomenology: A Study of Two Methods in Edmund Husserl's Philosophy. Toronto: publisher not identified, 1974. Bell, Roger V. The Theme of Originary Expression in Genetic Phenomenology. Ph. D. State University of New York at Stony Brook, 1990. Biceaga, Victor. The Concept of Passivity in Husserl's Phenomenology. Dordrecht: Springer, 2010. Welton, D. "Genetic Phenomenology." Contributions to Phenomenology. 18 (1997): 266-269. Tymieniecka, Anna-Teresa. The Turning Points of the New Phenomenological Era: Husserl Research - Drawing Upon the Full Extent of His Development Book 1 Phenomenology in the World Fifty Years After the Death of Edmund Husserl. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1991. 60 Heidegger, Martin, John Macquarrie, and Edward Robinson. Being and Time. Malden: Blackwell, 2013. Braver, Lee. Division Iii of Heidegger's Being and Time: The Unanswered Question of Being. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 2016. 61 Vail, L M. Heidegger and Ontological Difference. London: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1972. May, Todd. Reconsidering Difference: Nancy, Derrida, Levinas, and Deleuze. University Park, Pa: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1997. Bryant, Levi R. Difference and Givenness: Deleuze's Transcendental Empiricism and the Ontology of Immanence. Evanston (IL: Northwestern University Press, 2008. Deleuze, Gilles. Difference and Repetition. London : Bloomsbury, 2014. 62 Perl, Eric D. Thinking Being: Introduction to Metaphysics in the Classical Tradition. , 2014. 63 Ströker, Elisabeth. Husserl's Transcendental Phenomenology. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1993. Geniusas, Saulius. The Origins of the Horizon in Husserl's Phenomenology. Dordrecht : Springer, 2012. Romano, Claude. At the Heart of Reason. Evanston, Illinois : Northwestern University Press, 2015. Puntel, Lorenz B. Structure and Being: A Theoretical Framework for a Systematic Philosophy. University Park, Pa: Pennsylvania State Univ. Press, 2013. 64 Kisiel, Theodore J. The Genesis of Heidegger's Being and Time. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995. 65 Morris, David. Merleau-ponty's Developmental Ontology. Evanston, Illinois Northwestern University Press, 2018. Semonovitch, Kascha, and Neal DeRoo. Merleau-ponty at the Limits of Art, Religion, and Perception. London : Continuum, 2011. Marratto, Scott L. The Intercorporeal Self: Merleau-ponty on Subjectivity. Albany, N.Y: State University of New York Press, 2012. Whitmoyer, Keith. Philosophy of Ontological Lateness: Merleau-ponty and the Tasks of Thinking. Place of publication not identified: Bloomsbury Academic, 2019. Kockelmans, Joseph J. Phenomenology: The Philosophy of Edmund Husserl and Its Interpretation. Garden City, N.Y: Anchor Books, 1986.

12 developed by Deleuze in his Transcendental Empiricism66 which is firmly within the orbit of Genetic Phenomenology. Transcendental Field blends Absence and Presence together. And we may be sure that it also blends Identity and Difference, Truth and Fiction, Reality and Illusion so that it is the precursor to the Aspectual Field 67 . Existence is neither Aspect nor anti-Aspect. Both Aspect and anti-Aspect can appear as fused like a Bose-Einstein Condensate is referred to in Alchemy as Gold or Silver (Metal) made from The Philosophers Stone’s (Cinnabar – sulphur and mercury) interaction with Prime Matter of Existence (Rock with Gold mixed in so it is invisible). Aspect with anti-Aspect at the same time without interfering is Supra-Rational. Mixtures of Aspect and anti-Aspect give us the Aspectual Transcendental Field.

As Husserl says the World is broken up into several regional ontologies68, which are its Domains. They can be seen as realms of specialized or esoteric experience within the whole of experience. So, the Divided Line as the model of the limits and phases of experience in the Western worldview can be seen as defining the basis of our experience of the World. When we place bounds within this realm of experience then we are projecting domains within the overall projection of the world as transcendental horizon 69 that is the basis of the Transcendental Field 70 that encompasses both aspect and anti-aspect. These opposite aspects are not necessarily mixed, but they could be also supra-rationally 71 related, i.e. conjuncted and juxtaposed. However, these are still not the so called ‘Worlds’ of K. Lloyd derived from Popper72 and Penrose73. Those ‘Worlds’ of Lloyd are hierarchically stacked like the schemas and correspond to the ordering of the schemas in pairs. What Lloyd is calling worlds Husserl in Ideas I74 called the various levels of the unfolding of rationality. We are following that order in our consideration of the pairs of adjacent schemas within this series of working papers. But the ‘Worlds’ of Lloyd are closer to ‘regional ontologies’ or ‘realms of experience’ than to the World Schema. The World Schema is what lies behind all the ‘Worlds’ of Penrose and Popper as its ground which encompasses all experience within a given culture and language. But through time all the various worlds that existed primordially became collapsed through a long series

66 Smith, Daniel W. Gilles Deleuze and the Philosophy of Difference: Toward a Transcendental Empiricism. Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, Dept. of Philosophy, March 1997. Willatt, Edward, and Matt Lee. Thinking between Deleuze and Kant: A Strange Encounter. London : Continuum, 2011. Rölli, Marc, and Peter Hertz-Ohmes. Gilles Deleuze's Transcendental Empiricism: From Tradition to Difference. Edinburgh Edinburgh University Press, 2018 67 https://www.academia.edu/9913285/Dreamtime_Structure_of_Inception 68 Poli, Roberto, and Johanna Seibt. Theory and Applications of Ontology: Philosophical Perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2010. 69 Geniusas, Saulius. The Origins of the Horizon in Husserl's Phenomenology. Dordrecht : Springer, 2014. 70 https://www.academia.edu/9913285/Dreamtime_Structure_of_Inception 71 https://independent.academia.edu/KentPalmer/Nondual-Science 72 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Popper%27s_three_worlds Karl Popper. Three Worlds. The Tanner Lecture on Human Values. Delivered at The University of Michigan April 7, 1978. 73 Roger Penrose’s “three worlds and three deep mysteries” theory https://astudentforever.wordpress.com/2015/03/13/roger-penroses-three-worlds-and-three-deep-mysteries-theory/ Penrose, Roger. The Road to Reality. London: Jonathan Cape, 2003. 74 Husserl, Edmund. Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology. London: Routledge, 2012.

13 of wars which established a series of Sovereign hegemonies (empires) throughout history where particular languages dominated. One result of this was the dominance of the Western worldview centered in Europe today but which originally was centered in the Middle East in the confluence of the Egyptian, Sumerian, Semitic and Indo-European empires over millennia. But through Colonialization and now Globalization this worldview has become dominant worldwide, and is responsible for the current global ecoCrisis.

Figure 1. Scopes of Comprehension both Social and Individual

It is because of its dominance and the existential danger we all face due to its blindspots that we single it out for special investigation. Thus, we get the problematic I have been researching for 30 years or so which is: What is the nature and structure of the Western worldview? And one of the responses to that is to point out that the core of the Western worldview is Plato and Aristotle’s Divided Line. The shell of this worldview is the production of Nihilism and the dialectic between the extremes of Nihilism and Emergence. And surprisingly the Kernel of this worldview despite its rampant and rabid dualism is Nonduality (http://nondual.net). But also, another response to this problematic is the definition of the Worldview Theory, what I call Emergent Worlds Theory75 and the W-prime hypothesis that defines it on the basis of Meta-dimensions76 and Fibered Rational knots77. This plays into the definition of the Eras of this worldview as being the transition from the Mythopoietic to the Metaphysical to the Heterochonic Eras 78 which are the highest level emergent transitions that are possible within the Western worldview. There are of course many different scopes at whose levels emergent events occur such as Fact, Theory, Paradigm, Episteme, Ontos, Existence and Absolute79. These are interleaved with the series of levels of comprehension which are given, data, information, knowledge,

75 https://www.academia.edu/3795417/Emergent_Worlds_Theory https://www.academia.edu/38049990/Schemas_Theory_Overview_Part_03_Advances_in_Schemas_Theory https://www.academia.edu/7993349/Naming_the_Meta- isomorphic_Parts_of_Schemas_and_Working_Toward_Understanding_them_Topologically 76 https://www.academia.edu/37675727/On_Naming_Meta-systems 77 https://oeis.org/A051449 78 https://independent.academia.edu/KentPalmer/Heterochronic-Era 79 https://www.academia.edu/3796012/Radical_Knowledge_Discovery_and_Emergence https://www.academia.edu/31086576/Systems_Philosophy_Questions_concerning_Schemas_Theory_Answered

14 wisdom, insight, realization, enlightenment80. Discontinuous Emergent Events may occur at any of the scopes which lead to changes in our comprehension of the World within our Worldview. The worldview itself is a reflexive Worlding of the World that produces transcendental levels, or what Nietzsche calls ‘headlands’ above the World some of which we have to bootstrap into by climbing over our own heads to reach.

Worldvew Theory is the context of Schemas Theory which is the context of Special Systems Theory. In Worldview theory there are a finite series of Meta-dimensions where Schemas exist at meta-dimension zero. The first Meta-dimension is the seven standings of which five are the Meta-levels of Being that then turn into other types of standings called Existence, Manifestation and the Amanifest. The second Meta- dimension are the aspects of Being which are Identity, Truth, Presence and Reality. The third meta-dimension has three regions and then the fourth has a polarity and these together produce the WorldSoul81 as a structure by multiplication. Then there are three levels of the Worldview that are singletons which represents the Trinity. There are seven levels in all and the finite elements at each level are determined by the Fibered Rational Knots82. The selection of the Fibered Rational Knots is analogous to Aristotle’s definition of Humans as ‘rational animals’ in the Metaphysical era. Prior to that in the Mythopoietic Era there was the full table of the knots at play including irrational ones and non-fibered ones. In the Heterochronic era we are returning to this full complement of possible knots from the restriction to the Rational Fibered Knots in the Metaphysical era. This is the W-prime hypothesis in a nutshell. It is a semi-mathematical model of the Western worldview. And the key point is that it defines superstructural and infrastructural (sixteen knots at the negative first meta- dimension and then infinite negative meta-dimensions below that) transcendental or archetypal levels. But at the center of the W-prime model there is the Schemas that apply to Spacetime at the zeroth Meta-dimension and thus the context for the Schemas are then well defined by the W-prime model. The W-prime model is a model of how our European world becomes a Worldview, i.e. a meta-world which is reflexive which gives it an advantage over those cultures that merely have their world but not a worldview. A worldview gives a culture a view of what it is like in relation to other worlds. The Western worldview was acquired long ago but it gave the Western world a special kind of dominance that was exploited during Colonialization of the globe of the Earth by Western powers. By having a speculative semi-mathematical model of it we can explore the nature of the Worldview more deeply that we might otherwise be able to do. And part of that is to set up the basis for understanding Schemas which contain an intersubjective “World” that is articulated as the relation between Domain and World Schemas. In other words, the W-prime hypothesis gives us the presuppositions we need to understand what Schemas Theory under the S-prime hypothesis might be, which then includes the Domain and World schemas among

80 https://www.academia.edu/38535146/Network_MetaSchemas 81 https://www.academia.edu/34594612/Advanced_Chinese_Acupuncture_Theory_04_A_View_of_the_Chinese_Worldview_base d_on_the_WorldSoul https://www.academia.edu/3795423/Holonomic_Theory_of_Consciousness 82 https://lamington.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/4-spheres-from-fibered-knots/

15 others. These are all hypotheses which are erected as models that serves as an observational ‘apparatus’ by which as Barad says we might observe the phenomena of Worlds and Domains phenomenologically as intra-actional observers. As Barad says the Bohrian ‘apparatus’ is phenomena just like what is being observed through our Observer Mechanics83 based on Fisher Information84. Our observation introduces different cuts between subject and object. The setting up of the experiment based on the hypotheses and the observation through these theories of our experience is a form of intra-action. It materializes the matters that are important to us based on differences that make a difference (Bateson85). We sort out ourselves as observers as separable from the phenomena observed through the discursive practices of our set up of the experimental configurations. And part of the lines that are drawn by these different configurations are the differences between the Absolute Institutional and Cultural Ego (Das Mann) and the Ultimate Social Ego (Mitsein, Socius, Magma, Fused Group, Pack) in relation to the Mundane Cartesian Ego and the Transcendental Ego of Apperception of Kant taken from Leibniz. The difference between the Mundane Ego and the Transcendental Ego is Dasein/Hiersein (Rilke)86. The difference between the Absolute Ego and the Ultimate Ego is Spirit. The difference between these two pairs of reifications is Soul87. In other words, the various egos form a image of the Divided Line, and the crossing lines related to the nonduals is Spirit, Soul, and Dasein/Hiersein. In many cultures88 Soul is split into a pair. There is the earth bound part of the soul (Chinese Po) that here is like Dasein/Hiersein and the unbound part of the Soul (Chinese Hun) which is not yet (monotheistic89) Spirit. These subtle and nuanced nondual concepts of the Spirit and the two Souls, heavenly and earthy can only be expressed on the basis of the reification of the social and individual egos and their differentiation. They are nondual concepts that need the dualistic reifications to set them off from each other, just like the crossing lines in the Divided Line of Aristotle and Plato. But we note that the WorldSoul is the Platonic representation of what Hegel calls the Spirit. Hegel’s concept is based on the Holy Spirit of the Trinity as something that moves and changes within the world that is different from the radical transcendence of God the Father over God the Son, i.e. the difference between Transcendence and Immanence. The paradox of God being in the world as an avatar who created the world that if finds itself in is precisely what is captured in the concept of Dasein which projects the world that it finds itself within. But Dasein is specifically designed by Heidegger to lack Wisdom which is captured by the Hiersein of Rilke. So, the earthly soul (God the Son) is again split in two (Dasein/Hiersein) and separated from the Heavenly Soul, i.e. the transcendental projector (God the Father). But that is

83 http://www.socsci.uci.edu/~ddhoff/ompref.pdf Bennett, Bruce M, Donald D. Hoffman, and Chetan Prakash. Observer Mechanics: A Formal Theory of Perception. San Diego, Calif: Academic Press, 1989. 84 Frieden, B R. Science from Fisher Information. Cambridge, GBR: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 85 Bateson, Gregory. Steps to Ecology of Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. 86 lower soul -- Po 87 higher soul -- Hun 88 For instance China: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Hun_and_po 89 Hillman, James, and James Hillman. The Thought of the Heart ; And, the Soul of the World. Putnam, Conn: Spring Publications, 2014.

16 different again from the Spirit (Holy Spirit) as WorldSoul. The WorldSoul is defined by Plato as a moving image of Eternity in Time. And the WorldSoul is given a specific structure (27-9-3-1-2-4-8 based on powers of 2 and 3) that reminds us of the Pascal Tetrahedron and Pascal Triangle. Hegel changes the terms of the problematic by focusing on the Spirit which moves through history as Philosophy and appears as consciousness becoming self-conscious and overcoming itself with higher and higher levels of self-understanding. The key here is that the WorldSoul as Spirit is something that is different from the Reflexivity of the Worldview, and also different from the World but is tied to its historicity and gives an image of the Eternal at each point in its evolution. There is a kind of haunting of the reflexive Worldview and the diffractive interactions of World singulars by the WorldSoul which we know as Geist (Mind/Ghost/Spirit).

Exemplification of principles by schemas World Seventh singular

Domain Sixth poise P

r s

i a

Meta-system Fifth integrity n

m System Fourth synergy

p e Form Third continuity

l h

c Pattern Second relata

s S Monad First isolata Facet Zeroth empty/void Null Neganary imaginary Figure 2. World is Singular

Grounding of schemas by principles World Seventh singular

Domain Sixth poise P

r s

i a

Meta-system Fifth integrity n

m System Fourth synergy

p e Form Third continuity

l h

c Pattern Second relata

s S Monad First isolata Facet Zeroth empty/void Null Neganary imaginary Figure 3. Sixth Poise Grounding the World

A model of all these nonduals Earthly or Heavenly Souls and the WorldSoul might be the Bose-Einstein Condensate which is macro quantum mechanical. The condensate is made of atoms but through being supercooled they have all merged in this phase of

17 matter. But the condensate will lase out whole atoms. Quantum Mechanics gives us material embodiments of nonduality. And within Condensates there are various dimensional singularities. There are the point singularities which are flaws in the fusion of the condensate. There are line singularities that relate to vortices. There are Domain walls that are two dimensional and there are fully three-dimensional singularities that are enclaves or cavities. We can think of the nondual field underlying these separate manifestations of singularity as being like the Condensate. Then the singularity that is a point defect can be seen as the earthly soul (Dasein or Hiersein). The line in the vortex can be seen as the heavily soul that exists between the individual and social egos. The Spirit may be seen as like the Domain Wall. And when there is an enclave within the condensate that may be seen as another condensate nested in the first with an interface between the condensates. The second condensate can be seen as what Barad calls the Bohrian ‘apparatus’. Condensates are fused. Condensates within condensates would be enclaves that are each fully nondual representing levels of intra-action within the condensate of Phenomena. This means that in our analogy the domain wall is like the Spirit or Worldsoul. The Heavenly Soul is like the Vortex within a condensate that is wrapped around a line singularity. The point defect is like Dasein or Hiersein as Earthly Soul. Singularities within condensates are no less fused than they are but they are perturbations or fluctuations in the field of the Condensate which is fully nondual in all its characteristics due to Quantum Mechanical operation but in this case at a macro level. That means that what Barad is calling the apparatus is a level of singularity that is beyond the WorldSoul or Spirit. What this analogy allows us to do is to visualize the relation between these nonduals and put them in the context of agential realism of Barad, and realize more levels of intra-action within a nondual field.

Figure 4. Egos and Interstitial Nonduals of Souls and Spirit.

What is called an internal reflection here is really a diffusion (interference). This was my realization which was that there was a symmetry breaking and there were only three reflections90 in Hegel because the fourth movement was diffusive or an interference of the type that Barad discusses which is the opposite of reflection. The Ultimate Ego, i.e., Mitsein, is mass like. Also, the Transformation or Subjectivization of the Transcendental Ego is missing from the dialectic of Berger and Luckmann in Social Construction of Reality91. The return from Externalization to Objectification might be called ossification. The movement from Objectification to internalization might be called de-realization whose opposite is reification.

Scott Lash in Another Modernity 92 suggests that retrieval should accompany deconstruction. And we agree with that insight. So, we should return to the Ancient Egyptian concept of the Soul93 as a basis for understanding the various articulations of the Ego presented here based on Zizek’s explanation of Hegel’s kinds of reflection.

Figure 5. Interstitial Triangular Array Level 1 • Null Limit –The akh (Ax) ‘effectiveness after death’ – (also Ankh94) Nirguna Brahman • Ka – Vital Fire {Albion, Vishnu, Hun Tun} o Absolute Ego (Das Mann) • Rn – Name {Zoa: Urizen, Urthowna, Luvah, Tharmus} o Ultimate Ego (mitsein) • Ib – Heart {feminine emanation: Ahania, Vala, Enitharmon, Enion } o Transcendental Ego (apperception Kant) • Ba – Person {spectre: satan, los, orc, adam,} o Mundane Ego (cogito Descartes) • Sheut – Shadow {shadow} o Persona (image, avatar) • Boundary: The body ( X.t ) becomes mummy ( saH ) Level 2 ▪ Boundary: Bohr’s ‘Apparatus’ of Complementarity o Absolute Ego (Das Mann) ▪ Spirit (WorldSoul) o Ultimate Ego (Mitsein) ▪ Heavenly Soul (Hun)

90 https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/txt/reflect2.htm Žižek, Slavoj. The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso, 2009. Žižek, Slavoj. For They Know Not What They Do: Enjoyment As a Political Factor. London: Verso, 2008. https://www.academia.edu/35992276/Hegels_Groupoids 91 Berger, Peter L, and Thomas Luckmann. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York, NY : Open Road Integrated Media, 2011. 92 Lash, Scott. Another Modernity, a Different Rationality. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2006. Beck, Ulrich, Anthony Giddens, and Scott Lash. Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994. 93 http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/religion/body_and_soul.htm 94 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Ankh 19

o Transcendental Ego (Apperception) ▪ Earthly Soul (Po) o Mundane Ego (Cogito) ▪ Null Limit: Matter Level 3 • Null Limit: God as Ra, Aten, Amun ▪ Spirit (WorldSoul) nondual Nafs (breath as air, set-like, rational, freed from body at death, like Holy Ghost of trinity) • Yang Polarity ▪ Heavenly Soul (Hun) deeper utterly nondual Qalb heart (whole intellect, like Father of trinity, like Atman) • Yin Polarity ▪ Earthly Soul (Po) nondual – Ruh Dasein/Hiersein (breathing, sea tides, imaginal, mass-like, irrational, stays with body, like Son of trinity) • Boundary: Mediator, Dark Precursor, Great Dark, Ptah, Eternity for Kierkegaard Level 4 o Boundary: Yang Splendor • Yang Polarity o Plotinus One • Yin Polarity o Null Limit: Closed Yin Level 5 ▪ Null Limit: Emptiness o Plotinus ‘One’ Ultra One beyond Being: Existence ▪ Boundary: Void

We note that the Ancient Egyptian concept of the soul95 has five parts96. And it is similar to the structure of the Four Zoas 97 along with Albion 98 . The interstices between these five elements are the different sorts of Ego both social and individual. The interstices between these are the nonduals of Spirit and the Heavenly and Earthly Souls. The interstices between these are the Yin and Yang polarities. The interstice between these is the One of Plotinus99 that is beyond Being, i.e. Existence. And that One is the ultra-one of Badiou which arises out of the Multiple as an Event that gives rise to the content of Sets to produce an ontology as described in Being and Event100. This follows the series of the minimal simplicies from Pentachora, to Tetrahedron, to Triangle, to pair, and finally to the One in a process of de-emanation.

But we notice as we go up this triangular array101 there is an additional element at the boundary at each level outside the triangle and opposite a Null Limit in each case. This extra boundary element switches sides of the triangle at each level. With respect to

95 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Ancient_Egyptian_concept_of_the_soul 96 http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/religion/body_and_soul.htm 97 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Vala,_or_The_Four_Zoas 98 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Albion_(Blake) 99 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Plotinus 100 Badiou, Alain, and Oliver Feltham. Being and Event. London : Bloomsbury Academic, 2015. 101 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Triangular_array 20 the layer of the five elements of the soul this extra element is the Nirguna Brahman that is signified by the unconscious ocean that Vishnu (Albion, Hun Tun) is asleep upon. In relation to the Ancient Egyptian concept of the soul this is Akht or effectiveness after death. It is the opposite of the Mummified Body. At the level of the four egos the extra boundary element is the Persona that appears as images of the self to the Other. At the level of the nonduals the extra element is the Bohrian ‘Apparatus’ of Barad in its intra-action with the Phenomena under observation. The Apparatus of Bohr is opposite the Limit of Matter which Sartre in Critique of Dialectical Reason102 calls practico-inert. At the level of the Level of Yin and Yang it is the mediator which is the Great Dark, or the Dark Precursor, or Eternity that messes with time prior to temporality103 in Kierkegaard. It is the opposite of the implicit Monotheistic God of the Ancient Egyptians with its names Aten, Ra, and Amun which relate to the analogies in the Republic of Plato of the Sun, Divided Line and Cave. At the level of the Polarity it is Yang Splendor which is the dual of Closed Yin. At the level of the One it is the Void where the limit is Emptiness. There are 15 elements here in the Interstitial Triangular Array and they could be seen as being related to the 15 imaginaries of the Sedenion. There are five of these extra elements (floating signifiers) that stick out from the triangular array at its boundary on each side that are the duals of the Null Limits. They break the symmetry of the triangular array. They mark the boundary that is opposite the Null Limit for each level. These boundaries are permeable at each level giving lie to the strict definitions of inside and outside. The Persona is how the self looks to the Other. The Apparatus of Barad is a special case where we seek to know nature and thus, we produce experimental configurations and to our surprise they are exclusive such that different apparatuses exclude each other producing complementarity. It is at the extreme where we want to know Nature that we produce these apparatuses. The complementarity is produced at an extreme at which the World looks out on a vista of the Kosmos that we find surprises us in our Laboratories. The Dark Precursor is what Kierkegaard calls Eternity that messes with time outside temporality as a kind of original trauma. Closed Yin and Yang Splendor at the next level up are nihilistic opposites that produce nihilistic states of unbalance. At the highest level there is the Void whose limit is Emptiness that are the interpretations of Existence. In each case we have these floating signifiers that are at the boundary of the Interstitial Triangular Array that are the opposite of the Null limits in each case.

This structure of the triangle of interstitial concepts is permeable so that extruded elements at the boundary represent symmetry breakings at each level has a surprising configuration but it gives full context to the Four Egos (Absoulte, Ultimate, Transcendental and Mundane) and the nondual interstices (Spirit, Soul, Dasein/Hiersein) between them. And it brings to mind what Deleuze talks about in his Cinema series104 which is that there is a outside beyond the outside and an inside

102 Sartre, Jean-Paul, and Arlette Elkaïm-Sartre. Critique of Dialectical Reason. London: Verso, 2009. 103 Kangas, David J. Kierkegaard's Instant: On Beginnings. Bloomington, Ind: Indiana University Press, 2010. 104 Deleuze, Gilles. Cinema: 1. London: Continuum, 2005. Deleuze, Gilles. Cinema: 2. London: Continuum, 2005.

21 beyond the inside. This is what Zizek describes in Sublime Object of Ideology105. This is also what Derrida finds106 in Husserl with respect to pushing the Subjective to an extreme by bracketing which does not take into account the voice. These are anamorphic objects107 that are outside but also inside at the same time. They are extruded from the interstitial triangular array at the boundary such that the inside appears outside. But this is merely the dual of the continual movement into the interstices where the outside appears inside. We see here a paradoxical inversion of the field. What Victor Frankl108 described which we have in the past called the Openly Closed System109, this is the paradox of the oracle in the midst of the Monad that allows it to see what is happening in the exterior within110. But this also leads to voyeurism and surveillance in which what is outside sees what is happening inside when we lose our privacy.

What we discover through this exercise is that Hegel’s three reflections explained by Zizek in They Know Not What They Do111 are not four because the fourth phase is diffusive (interference). And this is related to internal mass-like diffusion instead of reflection in which the archetype of the representation is the visage in the mirror. This explains why the World is a singular. Domains are slices of that Singular. Which is like the Bose-Einstein condensate112, i.e. macro-Quantum Mechanical113. And this is directly opposite the boundary of the Apparatus described by Barad based on Bohr’s

105 Žižek, Slavoj. The Sublime Object of Ideology. London: Verso, 2009. 106 Kates, Joshua. Essential History: Jacques Derrida and the Development of Deconstruction. Evanston, Ill: Northwestern University Press, 2005. Stamos, Yannis. Speech, Writing and Phenomenology: Derrida's Reading of Husserl. University of Warwick, 2008. Derrida, Jacques. Speech and Phenomena, and Other Essays on Husserl's Theory of Signs. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1996. Baring, Edward. The Young Derrida and French Philosophy, 1945-1968. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. Haaren, Peter E. Phenomenal Speech: A Reading Through Jacques Derrida's Speech and Phenomena. Ph. D. City University of New York, 1994. Derrida, Jacques. Voice and Phenomenon: Introduction to the Problem of the Sign in Husserl's Phenomenology. Evanston, Ill: Northwestern University Press, 2011. Derrida, Jacques, Gayatri C. Spivak, and Judith P. Butler. Of Grammatology. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2016. 107 Žižek, Slavoj. The Parallax View. Cambridge, Mass: MIT, 2009. 108 Frankl, Victor E, and Harold S. Kushner. Man's Search for Meaning. Boston, Mass: Beacon Press, 2006. Frankl, Victor E, and Alexander Batthyány. The Feeling of Meaninglessness: A Challenge to Psychotherapy and Philosophy. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 2010. Frankl, Victor E, Richard Winston, and Clara Winston. The Doctor and the Soul: From Psychotherapy to Logotherapy. London: Souvenir press, 2004. 109 https://www.academia.edu/34948524/FBPBV36_THE_FOUNDATIONS_OF_AUTOPOIETIC_SYSTEMS_THEORY https://www.academia.edu/5945873/Search_for_a_Deeper_Theory_of_Everything_Setting_Off_to_Nowhere The Structure of Theoretical Systems in Relation to Emergence (LSE UL 1982) http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/3174/ 110 Deleuze, Gilles. The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2012. 111 Žižek, Slavoj. For They Know Not What They Do: Enjoyment As a Political Factor. London: Verso, 2008. 112 Mendonça, J T, and Hugo Terças. Physics of Ultra-Cold Matter: Atomic Clouds, Bose Einstein Condensates and Rydberg Plasmas. New York: Springer, 2013. 113 https://physicsworld.com/a/is-photosynthesis-quantum-ish/

22 philosophy. Barad114 seems to forget that we only set up these exclusive experimental apparatuses because we want to know the nature of the Kosmos within which we live by pursuing a knowledge of Physics. So, the Apparatus is at the boundary outside the Interstitial Triangular Array. But as she says the Apparatus taken as ontological can be seen together with the phenomena under observation as part of a higher-level whole that has its own apparatus at a higher level. Basically, Barad is saying that there is Phenomena all the way down and that Apparatus plus Phenomena always equals Phenomena. And all observational action is intra-action between the apparatus as phenomena with the observed phenomena itself. This produces exclusions that help to define physical concepts at that boundary with Nature that we see in our part of the Kosmos. Different experimental setups produce different differentiations of observer and observed. This is a purely Immanent view of nature where we are part of the matter (significance) that serves to materialize matter (as physical stuff)115. Thus, Barad makes the case that Meaning (as Mattering) and Matter are entangled. This viewpoint allows us to appreciate the meaning of Barad’s Agential Realism and how it helps us understand the relation between the World and Domain Schemas. World is the whole that is always a combination of the apparatus for observation that is complementary in its configurations and the observed Domain of Phenomena. The Apparatus and the Domain of Observation, the slice of the World, are both just Phenomena and thus Immanent to that Whole which is a Singular and is thus mass- like but of the nature of a Bose-Einstein condensate which may contain singularities of various dimensions which we many represent at the nonduals at the next level up from the Egos which is the level of Souls and Spirit.

If we go back to the Egyptian and retrieve their concepts of Soul we find they are much more complex that our later interpretations of this concept in our tradition, in the way that early language is more complex than later language. But that view which is more sophisticated gives us a context to understand the relation to the Divided Line.

114 Barad, Karen M. Meeting the Universe Halfway [electronic Resource]. Durham, N.C., Chesham: Duke University Press, 2007. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Karen_Barad 115 We will forgive the sophism of Brand using two different senses of “Matter” as if they were the same. Matter as material being different from “Whatever is the matter with you?”. We like this fallacy ourselves as a turn of phrase. But we need to remember that it is pure rhetoric. And the use of this Rhetoric muddies the waters for Barad’s argument. 23

Figure 6. Divided Line

The Zoas of Blake points to the fact that there are four Divided Lines. The Divided Line of Plato and Aristotle is the differentiation of the Zoa Urizen. But Blake posits that there are three others that are hidden and eclipsed in the Metaphysical Era which has only Reason as a Criteria for judging experience. For Blake there is also Glory (Tharmas 116), Agape Love (Luvah 117), and Nature (Urthona 118) which have been forgotten by Philosophy. We note that the Amanifest (Dhat119) is the barrier between these divided lines as Manifestation (Tajalliat of the Sifat120) is the barrier between Ratio and Doxa within the Divided Line of Urizen. So, we can see the Egyptian Layer (Level 1) as taking us back to a grounding in the core of the Western worldview with its relation to the four divided lines of which one is that of Plato and Aristotle. Out of that core arises the differentiation of the reified ‘Egos’ both social and individual. And out of that arises the nonduals which are the two Souls and the Spirit which is the WorldSoul. In the midst of those phases we find that the Ultimate Ego is diffusive (interference of masses) that Barad is seeking which we might call Intrasubjectivity121 and that is the nature of the Mitsein which socially projects the World through language. And this World then can be understood as a singular, and we can see it as a universal background. It is this World that gets sliced into Domains.

116 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Tharmas 117 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Luvah 118 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Urthona 119 Arabic for the Godhead 120 Arabic for the attributes of God 121 For instance the desiring machines that form a rhizome that is networked across the body-without-organs is intra- subjective in Deleuze and Guattari’s Anti-Oedipus. Deleuze, Gilles, and Eugene W. Holland. Deleuze and Guattari's Anti- Oedipus: Introduction to Schizoanalysis. London: Routledge, 2003. See also Roth WM., Jornet A. (2017) Intrasubjectivity | Intersubjectivity. In: Understanding Educational Psychology. Cultural Psychology of Education, vol 3. Springer, Cham.

And it is this World that is contrasted to the Apparatus that is outside on the boundary beyond the Interstitial Triangular Array. And this is where the Whole that is Phenomena + Apparatus = Phenomena, i.e. Pure Immanence122, appears with respect to the Kosmos which is outside the relativized observational totality World that Barad is pointing out. If we extend the series up filling out the Interstitial Triangular Array all the way to the One of Plotinus beyond Being we see the de-emanation at work. Things are not emanating from the One but de-emanating towards it, because we know that Polytheism proceeds historically Monotheism. This is like when we turn the hierarchy of the Schemas up-side-down and see all the other schemas as the infrastructure supporting the closure of the Monad. The complementarities of Yin and Yang that Traditional Nondual Science123 depends on appears at the level above the nonduals of Spirit and the two Souls. This Interstitial Triangular Array is a way to explain the relation of World to Domain Schemas, and the existence of the WorldSoul as well as the Intra-action of the Apparatus and Phenomena as Matter that Matters (entangled sema and phusis).

Facet Monad Closure

Information

Information Pattern

Formal System In e f r r u a t Meta-system s c t u r r u t (environment) c s t a u r Domain r f e In World Kosmos Pluriverse Figure 7. Schemas Hierarchy up-side-down with Monad at the Pinnacle

We note that the Interstitial Triangular Array of Concepts has 15 elements at this level of differentiation. There is one floating signifier124 which is the boundary that is the dual of the Null Limit in each case at all the levels of the triangle. Thus, there are 16 elements with 15 in the triangle which is the same number as in the progressive bisection of Houses in Ilm al-Raml. And as in Ilm al-Raml with its extra house outside the progressive bisection there is an equivalent to the floating signifier. And so, if this triangular array with five levels has 15 elements plus one with the floating signifier is like Ilm al-Raml125 in its number of elements despite its structural difference then we can related it to the Orthogonal Centering Dialectic126 which has the structure of Ilm

122 Deleuze, Gilles, John Rajchman, and Anne Boyman. Pure Immanence: Essays on a Life. New York: Zone Books, 2012. 123 https://independent.academia.edu/KentPalmer/Discourses-on-Perfect-Ideas https://www.academia.edu/35789569/Perfect_Ideas http://nondual.net 124 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Floating_signifier 125 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Geomancy 126 https://www.academia.edu/36379354/Foundations_of_Systems_Architecture_Design_10_Orthogonal_Centering_Dialectic 25 al-Raml. Deleuze talks about structuralism in terms of two series that intersect with the floating signifier shared between them. But we see the triangular array an improvement on his representation of structuralism in terms of intersecting series because the triangular array can be seen as the interference pattern between the two series that intersect. They intersect at the One of Plotinus, and if we mirror the triangular array then we can see it as having a stalactite and stalagmite format so that the two series intersect then continue. This is like the pascal triangle which can be seen to have a shadow triangle of hypercomplex number in the negative dimensions. The points between the two series that make up the content of the triangular array which is 6 elements are the interference pattern produced by the intersecting series that are the outer 9 elements on the edges next to the Null Limit and the Boundaries. If we add one more layer of six elements then we have a system that is equal to PG(2,4) which has 21 points and 21 lines with five intersections per line and five lines per intersection. This Projective Plane is made up of three Fano Projective Planes PG(2,2). And two PG(2,4) planes together make up a model of the Aspectual Field. We have already noted that the Western worldview is related to the PG(2,3) Projective Plane due to its 13 elements and lines with four intersections per point and four points per line. The Fano Projective Plane PG(2,2) has 7 points and 7 lines with three intersections per line and three lines per intersection points. The Fano Projective Plane is an artifact of the imaginaries of the Octonion and is thus related to the Reflexive Social Special System, and it is also a non-orientable surface as are all the Projective Planes. A symmetry breaking of an Projective Plane subtracting a single line produces an Affine Geometry. One line is considered to be at infinity in the projective plane. If you add a seventh line to the Triangular Array, then you get 28 elements which is the second perfect number. Each level of the Triangular Array can be represented as a simplex in the n-1 dimension. This is the connection between the Triangular Array and the Pascal Triangle. The Pascal triangle is a triangular array of numbers that are added to each other in pairs to generate the next layer. But they produce the simplicies when interpreted in terms of the undefinables (point, line, surface, solid, hunk, etc.). And these increase in numerical order like the triangular array. There is then an interesting duality between the triangular array and the Pascal Triangle. But the difference is that the Pascal Triangle gives us also the Information Infrastructure (2n). When it generates the simplicies it then defines dimension. We interpret the Interstitial Triangular Array as giving us the interstices between the elements in the base. This means that there is a consolidation and fusion as we move toward the One of Plotinus by an action of de-emanation. These interstices mark the differences between the elements of each base in sequence.

In terms of the Orthogonal Centering Dialectic we start with external difference which is the difference between the boundary and the null limit. The boundary element extrudes from the Interstitial Triangular Array and suggests the floating signifier. Limits and Boundaries are duals of each other. We can consider each base as a set of elements or as a mass of instances to be taken together. So, we can see that both Set and Mass interpretations can apply to each line in the triangular array. When we reach the level of six lines in the triangular array we get an equivalent to the PG(2,4) Projective Plane which is our model of Essence. When we get to the level of seven 26 lines we get the Perfect number 28 in which the whole and its divisors are equal. If we interpret the array of triangular numbers in terms of Pascal Triangle, then we note that this number array has the properties of the Special Systems taken together. Also, we see that the simplex and the dual cross/cubic polytopes can be seen as related to the Special Systems as an embodiment of them geometrically. If the triangular array can be considered as a system then the addition of the Special Systems as their implicit geometry gives us an image of the Emergent Meta-system which is opposite the Essence as Projective Geometry. Then, we can see the interstitial differences that appear to consolidate as we move of the levels of de-emanation toward the One. This can be seen as Internal Difference that is the dual of External Differences between Limit and Boundary. For instance, we know that the Sedenion has 15 imaginaries and one real. We can see the imaginaries as the elements of the Interstitial Triangular Array and the real as the floating signifier that is the same in every hypercomplex algebra that are related to the Special Systems. The Sedenions are the ground out of which the Emergent Meta-systems arise over and over again in a cycle. So the level of the Triangular array with five layers is related to the imaginaries of the Sedenion, then if we add a layer that brings us to the 21 monads of PG(2,4). And then if we add another layer that brings us to the 28 elements of the second perfect number. If we start from the basis of 4 elements, then we have the tetractys127 of Pythagoras128. The outer edge of the Tetractys is the WorldSoul of Plato. The first three levels together form six elements which is the first perfect number. The Triangular numbers are also the natural counting numbers in series portrayed as dots and thus it is a fusion of the numerical and geometrical views of number thus uniting time and space.

If we add one more layer which has eight elements, and is the eighth layer, then there are 36 elements in the triangular array. These eight elements can be seen to correspond to the trigrams that signify the interpenetration of Heaven and Earth. The seven layers above the eighth can be seen as the 7 heavens and the eighth layer can be seen as the earth. Thirty-six is the multiplication of the perfect number 6. Thus, the numerology of the Triangular Array of points can be seen as having special properties related to its various layers that connect with specific mathematical categories to give them structure so that each layer has a different meaning based on the mathematical structures to which it is related. Because we can see it as a model of the Orthogonal Centering Dialectic then it has more than merely numerological significance. It represents how we can derive nondual difference from the relation between external difference and internal difference. Internal Differences are hierarchical and seen as the interstices at each level while External Differences are horizontal and are marked out in extension as the differences between Boundaries and Limits. Our model goes against the grain of the tradition and instead of the Great Chain of Being sees instead de-emanation, i.e. monotheism produced out of polytheism, rather than everything as an emanation of the One.

127 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Tetractys 128 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Pythagoras

It has been discovered through experimentation that the brain organizes its mapping129 of space with hexagonal lattices. And other studies130 have shown that these same lattices may be used to organize conceptual space as well as physical space within which the animal moves. Such lattices contain the possibility of representing the Interstitial Triangular Array as a subset. It is hypothesized that similar types of lattices will appear in the representation of higher dimensional spaces131. In effect the Interstitial Triangular Array would represent a homing in on a given point in the hexagonal navigational array from a given baseline. And we suggest that this a process of de-emanation while the opposite of that would be emanation in which one moves from a given point in the array to a base line. Moving from the point to baseline is the nature of perspectives, while convergence on a point at infinity is the nature of perspectival spaces as we look toward the horizon. And we assert that the Interstitial Triangular Array appears when the navigational array is used in a conceptual space emulation using the hexagonal lattice rather than a navigational space. Also, we note that this hexagonal lattice projection is produced by the three facing mirrors of an Autopoietic Special System. The reflections in the three facing mirrors projects a hexagonal mirroring to infinity acting like a Kaleidoscope. Also, in the mapping there are six vectors that produce the hexagonal mapping as a result and so this mapping is scale free, i.e. it is not tied to where the points of the lattice are in actual space but rather the relations of six orientations to each other. Thus, the map of the hexagonal lattice is produced by group symmetry operations rather than being a static scale locked grid. Hexagonal lattices are made up of triangular cells and those triangular cells can be seen as the basis for emulating various patterns one of which might be the Interstitial Triangular array used here as a means of understanding at least one possible organization of Conceptual Spaces132. We note that with regard to the Pascal Triangle which is a filling of the triangular array with binomial coefficients that each cell in the triangle has six coefficients133. In other words, the Pascal Triangle has a six-fold symmetry built into it that surrounds each point in the triangle with a hexagon of other points that have a law like relation to it as a context. So, there is an underlying hexagonal symmetry to the Pascal Triangle which is a way of encoding that hexagonal structure of the field into the triangular array.

We can consider that perhaps fundamental to the relation of Domain to World is the production of global orientation in space for human beings. Domains relate to the

129 Hugo J Spiers and Caswell Barry "Neural systems supporting navigation" Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences Volume 1, February 2015, Pages 47-55. Jacobs, Joshua; Sang Ah Lee "Spatial Cognition: Grid Cells Support Imagined Navigation" Current Biology Volume 26, Issue 7, 4 April 2016, Pages R277-R279 130 Kriegeskort, Nikolaus,Katherine R.Storrs. "Grid Cells for Conceptual Spaces?" Neuron Volume 92, Issue 2, 19 October 2016, Pages 280-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.10.006 131 Mathis, Alexander, Martin B Stemmler, Andreas VM Herz "Probable nature of higher-dimensional symmetries underlying mammalian grid-cell activity patterns" eLife 2015;4:e05979 DOI: 10.7554/eLife.05979 132 Gä rdenfors, Peter. Conceptual Spaces: The Geometry of Thought. Cambridge: Bradford Bks, 2004. Gä rdenfors, Peter. Geometry of Meaning: Semantics Based on Conceptual Spaces. Cambridge, Massachusetts : The MIT Press, 2017. Gä rdenfors, Peter. How Homo Became Sapiens: On the Evolution of Thinking. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2010. Gä rdenfors, Peter. The Dynamics of Thought. Dordrecht: Springer, 2005. Gardenfors, Peter. Knowledge in Flux. London: College Publications, 2008. 133 Hoggatt, Jr., V. E. and Hansell, W. “The Hidden Hexagon Squares.” Fibonacci Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 2 (1971) p 120, p 133. Ando S. (1988) “A Triangular Array with Hexagon Property, Dual to Pascal’s Triangle”. In: Philippou A.N., Horadam A.F., Bergum G.E. (eds) Applications of Fibonacci Numbers. Springer, Dordrecht. Gupta, A. K. "Generalized Hidden Hexagon Squares" THE FIBONACCI QUARTERLY Volume 12 Number 1. p45. 28 imposition of territories onto landscapes and that occurs by producing slices of the World Singular which is social and linguistic encompassing all possible points of view. Domains represent reifications of particular sets of points of view that are maintained in coordination with each other to afford rigor in observation and study of specific phenomena that relates to the production of specific elite groupings of experts and the development of technical vocabularies. These groups of experts maintaining highly coherent sets of points of view that are well regulated with respect to each other excluding other points of view that are related to other phenomena. We can think of this in relation to the various types of geometry discovered in modern times that augment Euclidian Geometry. In effect the Scapes associated with Meta-systems appear to be hyperbolic. This means that entropy appears in the fields of scapes where all points are falling away from each other. In this field the System attempts to maintain itself in the same position by negative feedback on the saddle of the hyperbolic curve of the field of the Meta-system. On the other hand, the World appears to be a Spherical Geometry because it is closed yet infinite, i.e. openly closed as a singularity like SpaceTime but socially based. We can think of the Domain as being related to the Projective Plane in as much as it generates the Perspectives in a Projective Space. The Euclidian Geometry is Affine and thus produced by a symmetry breaking from the Projective Plane. On the other hand, we can imagine the breaking out of this Projective Space into a non-representable space like Abstract Art which is what Delueze contemplates as the future of thought. In other words, Domains are about projecting maps onto territories but what if we get rid of the maps? Then the mapped territories themselves vanish as well and we are thrown into a purely abstract non-representational conceptual space without objects/subjects being differentiated. In other words, the rigidity of the Projective Planes either is transformed into the Affine geometry134 by the subtraction of the transcendent line at infinity and its points, or it is transformed by subtracting out the projective plane itself and leaving the unstructured area outside the projective plane that is not structured. This is the area of extension outside the monad through which which the monad observes other monads in through an oracle (pinhole camera). We can say this space is where extension equals intension and can think of it as a canvas for the mindscape. Breakthrough into this space is like the breakthrough into Abstract Non- representational Art. For Deleuze this is where the Image of Thought breaks down and it appears as the realm of the Expression of Sense135. Deleuze thinks about it as the Problematic or the Idea that is the context for different Solutions or Representations and we can think of it as the next higher dimensional space outside the Projective Geometry that we are defining.

This has been an attempt to find something new to say about the Domain and World Meta-systems. These schemas are fairly mundane, and would not be disputed by many as being important and well defined from a philosophical point of view. But when we connect them to the philosophies of Deleuze and Barad then interesting things happen even with staid136 Schemas such as these. We provide a synthesis of

134 https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Affine_geometry 135 Deleuze, Gilles, Constantin V. Boundas, Mark Lester, and Charles J. Stivale. Logic of Sense. London : Bloomsbury, 2015 136 sedate, respectable, and unadventurous. 29 many thoughts expressed elsewhere in terms of the Interstitial Triangular Array which is related intimately with the binomial Pascal Triangle. We provide this as a model of the relation of extension to intension. And we transform the Peircean formal Extension X Comprehension = Information137 into Extension X Intension = Information with Comprehension factored out because it appears as Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom, etc. There are many forms of comprehension. But the idea that Information is the Cartesian Cross of intension and extension is rather interesting. But if we think of the Interstitial Triangular Array as the interference of two intensional Series in extension, then we see that the points not on the outer lines of the tringle are the points of interference between the two series in extension. And due to the production of the information infrastructure these are valued in a binomial fashion and this produces the Pascal Triangle.

137 http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/Information_%3D_Comprehension_%C3%97_Extension Peirce, Charles S. S, and Max H. Fisch. Writings of Charles S Peirce, a Chronological Edition: V 1. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1982. p. 465.

Figure 8. Neuron Navigation Grid Cells138

138 Kriegeskort, Nikolaus,Katherine R.Storrs. "Grid Cells for Conceptual Spaces?" Neuron Volume 92, Issue 2, 19 October 2016, Pages 280-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.10.006 31

Figure 9. Definition of the Domain Schema

Figure 10. Different Points about the Domain

Figure 11. Domain as Coordination of Perspectives

Figure 12. Kenneth Lloyd’s Synthesis of the Worlds of Popper and Penrose with Intersubjective World of Carnap which is Objective included. 33

Figure 13. Definition of World Schema.

Figure 14. Metaphysical and Mythopoietic transformation of the Western World.

Figure 15. Socrates answer to the Question as to what is a World.

Figure 16. Mathematical Model of the Western Worldview.

Figure 17. Hypothetical Structure of the Western Worldview.

Figure 18. Structure of Transcendental Levels of the W-prime Model of the Worldview.

Figure 19. Shell of the Western Worldview.

Figure 20. Core of the Western Worldview.

Figure 21. Model of the WorldSoul.

Figure 22. Axiomatic Platform in Euclidian Geometry

Figure 23. Differentiation and Articulation of the Western Worldview.

Figure 24. Articulation of the Western Worldview.

Figure 25. Quadralectic in Physus and Logos

Figure 26. Top Tier of the Western Worldview. Kernel

Figure 27. Pleroma as the Field out of which the Worldview Emerges.

Foundational Mathematical Categories - 0 +

One SET MASS

Countable MULTIPLE WHOLE

Uncountable SITE/EVENT HOLON/INTEGRA

Infinite SINGULARITY HOLOIDAL

Unbounded Finite SINGULAR

Figure 28. Foundational Mathematical Categories

Figure 29. Pleroma and Foundational Mathematical Categories.

Figure 30. Domain Groupoid

Figure 31. World Groupoid

Bibliography on Schemas Theory

Palmer, K.D. (1982) The Structure of Theoretical Systems in Relation to Emergence. Dissertation London School of Economics, University of London. Palmer, K.D. (1996a) The Fragmentation of Being and the Path beyond the Void. Fragment 36. “The Foundations of Autopoietic Systems Theory”. Aperion Press, Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (1996b) Wild Software Meta-systems. Apeiron Press, Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (1996c) “Research Note: Autopoietic Reflexive Systems -- A General Theory of Ultra-efficient Special Systems and a new view of the nature of Holonomics”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (1997) Reflexive Autopoietic Systems Theory. Aperion Press, Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2000a) “Defining Life and The Living Ontologically and Holonomically”. ISSS. Palmer, K.D. (2000b) “An Approach to Emergent Meta-systems through Holonomics”. ISSS. Palmer, K.D. (2000c) “Intertwining of Duality and Nonduality”. ISSS. Palmer, K.D. (2000d) “Meta-systems Engineering”. INCOSE. Palmer, K.D. (2000e) “New General Schemas Theory: Systems, Holons, Meta-Systems & Worlds”. ISSS. Palmer, K.D. (2000f) “Reflexive Autopoietic Dissipative Special Systems Theory”. Aperion Press, Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2000g) Reflexive Autopoietic Systems Theory. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2001) Schemas Theory. Series of working papers. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2002a) “Anti-Terror Meta-systems Engineering”. INCOSE. Palmer, K.D. (2002b) “Vajra Logics and Mathematical Meta-models for Meta-systems Engineering”. INCOSE. Palmer, K.D. (2003a) “Reflexive Sociology”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2003b) The Foundations of General Schemas Theory. Series of working papers. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2004a) Nondual Science. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2004b) “The Foundations of General Schemas Theory: As an Extension to Systems Theory to Form a Mathematical and Philosophical Basis for Systems Engineering”. Invited talk. CSER. Palmer, K.D. (2009) Emergent Design. Dissertation, University of South Australia http://emergentdesign.net Palmer, K.D. (2013) “Special Systems Theory” Academia.edu. https://osf.io/tw37d/ Palmer, K.D. (2014a) “Beyond Systems Philosophy: From Systems Philosophy to a Philosophy of Schemas”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2014b) “Kierkegaard’s Synthesis In Relation to the Foundational Mathematical Categories: A Clue to Understanding the Field of Possible Logics in Modern Philosophy". Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2014c) “Meta-Logic: Working out the Logic of the Logics underlying various Modern Philosophies based on Foundational Mathematical Categories". Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2014d) “On the Necessity of a Deep Paradigm Shift in Systems Engineering: Introduction and The Nature of the Schemas Theory Paradigm Shift”. Academia.edu.

Palmer, K.D. (2014f) Systems Science Foundations for Systems Engineering. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2014g) “Overview of the Core of the Western Worldview starting from Cassirer and Heidegger Complementarity”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2015a) “Meta-levels of Being”. Academia.edu. previous version 2013. Palmer, K.D. (2015b) “On the Realms of Experience underlying Architectural Practice and their mediation by Dagger Theory elements that ground Architectural Theory”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2016a) “Advanced Special Systems Theory”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2016b) “General Schemas Theory: The Advance of the Systems Engineering Discipline Through an Extension of Systems Theory”. Academia.edu original version 2003. Palmer, K.D. (2016c) “Schematic Nerves”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2017a) “Conformal Schemas Theory”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2017b) “Essential Schemas Theory: Grounding Schematic Nerves”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2017c) “Essential Schemas Theory: The Supra-rational Dagger”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2017d) “Projective Geometry and Schemas Theory”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2017e) “Systems Philosophy Questions concerning Schemas Theory Answered”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. and Kenneth Lloyd, (2018a) “Practical Application of Schema and Category Theories”. Tutorial ISSS.org Corvallis Conference. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018b) “Category Theory Centric Systems Science and Software Systems Engineering”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018c) “On Naming 'Meta-systems'”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018d) “Schemas Theory Tutorial”. INCOSE.org International Symposium 2014. ISSS.org conference 2014 and 2018. See http://schematheory.net. Also at Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018e) Foundations of Systems Architecture Design. Series of Working papers. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018f) “Schemas Theory Overview Part 01: Origins of the S-prime Hypothesis”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018g) “Schemas Theory Overview Part 02: Overview of the Argument from the Tutorial on Dagger Theory”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018h) “Schemas Theory Overview Part 03: Advances in Schemas Theory”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018i) “Schemas Theory Overview Part 04: An Approach toward Emergent Design”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018j) “On the Definition of a Schemata”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018k) “The Core of Design: N-categories over Groupoid Synthesis”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2019a) “Schemas Theory Overview Part 05: Emergent Meta-schemas”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2019b) “Schemas Theory Overview Part 06: Exploring Faceted Monads”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2019c) “Beyond the Core of Design”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2019d) “The Future of Systems Engineering is to become EcoSocial Meta- system focused Synergistic Engineering”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2019e) “Network MetaSchemas”. Academia.edu Palmer, K.D. (2018f) “Aspectual Flux in the Shell of Design”. Academia.edu.

Palmer, K.D. (2018g) “Schemas Theory Overview Part 7: Exploring Patterned Forms”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018h) “Schemas Theory Overview Part 8: Exploring Systems & Meta-systems and their relation to Special Systems”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018i) “Schemas Theory Overview Part 9: Worldly Domains”. Academia.edu. Palmer, K.D. (2018j) “Schemas Theory Overview Part 10: Kosmic Pluriverse”. Academia.edu.