Franciscan (9)

Note that here I assert no method for dealing with a Roget, save going case by case, which is no method at all.

Franciscan (8)

There are so many senses and shades of meaning with ‘believe in’, e.g., trust, bank on, credit, have faith in, depend on, be convinced of, have no doubt of., etc. And there are various shades of opposites to these. These would be put in some form or fashion with, ‘not believe in’ or some such.

These have nothing to do with Derrida. Derrida does both in one writing, and as a witness, as is clear in the film. He would and does do both, then takes his followers into what he calls a monstrosity.

Thus, he would not be subject to the consequences of so doing. He would be subject to no consequence of the natural language, such as being called a liar, or being called a perjurer, or softer ways, such as being said to be not credible, or unreliable, or even softer such as fanciful or serendipitous, or., etc.

So let me conclude in a series of points:

Derrida is so far from the natural language, 

which we learn at our mother’s knee, 

as Maub says, 

that one can say that, 

with respect to the natural language, 

Derrida is not just wrong,

but he is all wrong, 

in that he could never have been said

to have said anything that applied to it

in the first place.

Franciscan (7)

Somewhere in the intellectual hubbub above, I might have waxed poetic about Reading Chapman’s Roget, and of course, of it having nothing to do with Derrida.

Franciscan (6)

The way I see it, the metaphor is as good as any to describe the impossible relationships between databases in which AI is now caught.

If you do not like the metaphor, find another that suits your solipsism.

Franciscan (5)

So, Maub being the poet, and all, loves Aristophanes, the jokester, all the way to the end. 

That is a textual fact.

Thus, in view of that fact,

Here, in this blog, in a review of the bad joke of the century, Maub exits in high drama, through which we all suffer due largely to our corrupt governments and universities, etc.

In all of this, Maub assumes the monstrosity of the Exergue.

Then he expands it to multiple monstrosities, each separate and distinct, unable to communicate with another.

Worse, each monstrosity solves the problem of the one and the many on its own.

Call it a philosophical joke.

Call it, if you like, a kind of Leibnizian world of monad-monstrosities, each a possible world of its own, and with no God to pick the best possible one, and with none to know the other.

Hence, the permanent state of war in which we find ourselves is rather like a permanent eternal solipsism.

It matters not.

Franciscan (4)

There should be little folderol here. But Derrida bungles the Exergue. Even back in the days of its writing, there were issues of hardware, software, platforms, protocols, etc. There were floppy discs versus IBM’s punch cards and so on. There never was a single cybernetic goal; there never was a single, a one, a singularity-effecting monstrosity to which it led. 

It is quite obvious, if you run a blog such as this one, that today all manner of software and hardware interfaces with you. In our case, Google tracks it for us. 

Franciscan (3)

So, can I make the case that the epoch applies to no other cases of anything save itself? That would be very slick. It is very tempting. I could argue that case is simply a word like all the others. I could take its synonyms, say instance, or occasion, situation in which, example, etc., and say that they all have variations, shades of meaning, etc. This does not include other cases of the word ‘case’ which have different meanings and variations, shades of meaning. I could also show that anything is a word with multiple shades of meaning and variations.

I could say that therefore the epoch has no application to any case of anything outside itself on that basis.

On simply that, alone.

But that is not true, so far as the blog is concerned.

For the contention of the blog is generally that we believe in the epoch. That is, in various ways, we live by it.

That, we have a particular mindset in which we do this, i.e. live by it.  By we do this, the blog means that generally most of us do. 

This is as far as Mauberly could get with the Exergue. He claims not to live by the mindset. So, he leaves for his river.

Franciscan (2)

Again, consider Derrida’s Exergue.

Let us get this question, should it arise, out of the way.

Is the case of the epoch limited to itself?

To what is it not limited except to itself. It seems only to compare with itself.

How about words? Does it apply to words? Is the case of the epoch like cases in which one considers the senses or meanings of words?

No. The senses of words are varied, just as dogs and times are varied.

Thus, with respect to senses, it also limited. The case of the epoch is not like cases in which one considers the meanings of words. 

Linguistics has lexicons that show both multiple senses and meanings of words.  As do ordinary dictionaries, etc., that we use every day.

Franciscan (1)

Consider Derrida’s Exergue.

Assume, or do something, such as, imply, suggest, intimate, suppose, presuppose, give to be understood, or offer whether understood or not, indicate, state (then take back), etc.…that there can only be one epoch.

That is what Derrida does in some way.

Then, as a matter of some fact, textual, or written, or spoken, or as some ‘heads I win tails you lose’ coin, marked off as such, etc.,. there can be no other epoch other than the one epoch.

Thus, to say that this is an epoch is to say that there is only this one epoch.

However, consider dogs. In the case of dogs, to say that there is this one suggests, or indicates, means, supposes, implies, etc., that there is another, say, that one, from which it can be distinguished. For example, there is this spaniel versus another, when one looks at a litter of spaniels. Indeed, there is the case when there are these for sale for 100 dollars and there is that one, the runt, which sells at 50 dollars. (Cases like these abound.)

Thus, to consider an epoch as having one and only one case, is not to consider anything like the cases of dogs cited above.

Thus, the case of the epoch is limited. It is not an epoch in the sense in which there are multiple cases, e.g., in which one considers dogs.

It is also limited in comparison to cases like this one: it does not distinguish this time from that. That is, it does not distinguish 3 A.M from 3 P.M. It cannot set an alarm. Nor can it distinguish the time we went out from the time we stayed home.

Thus, the case of the epoch is again limited. It is not an epoch in the sense in which there are multiple cases in which one considers time or times.

We shall proceed next time from here.

***/**/***/**

Posted by me, the Franciscan, who will update the site on occasion.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/rogue-ai-launches-cyberattack-legally-011003955.html

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/ai/articles/hugging-face-ceo-says-china-225858382.html

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-head-toward-unlikely-clash-close-ally-future-multibillion-dollar-industry

https://www.axios.com/2020/12/27/productivity-growth-j-curve-automation-ai

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/26/meta-social-media-trial-settlement.html

Down to words (2815)

A possible awakening:

https://www.brockovichdatacenter.com/

There may be some hope here. We shall see.

So I note it before I leave.

***

Nonetheless, I signal no virtue.

 

The play is now beyond me.

 

I want off this Halsted Street Car.

 

I shall leave and stake my own grave. 

 

Hence, my last few clicks.

 

***/**/***/**

Down to words (2814)

Note (1165)

 

So, it would seem that the Exergue for l’avenir is perpetual war. 

 

Not that long ago, philosophy had its Kant, hoping for a perpetual peace. 

 

But Hegel and his followers objected to Kant’s work and wound it down into a perpetual war in the ionosphere. 

*** 

 

Hence, in great irony, the negation of Kant’s work is the Exergue of both the postmodern and post/postmodern Exergues. 

 

You configure the countless configs it may take. 

 

Dance accordingly.

 

(My word, a new American Bandstand.)

 

You may count on this: the solitary worker in Marx’s Theses on Feuerbach is first to go in this post-deconstructed monstrosity. 

 

The solitary worker was last ever, if ever, to have been seen in the so-called prior, deconstructed epoch.

 

The wisdom of man (now as machine) marches on.

https://futurism.com/future-society/college-students-losing-ability-read

Down to words (2813)

Note (1164)

 

Indeed, to my kind, I have been faithful to thee in my fashion.  It is no bottled faith. I am no Dowson. 

 

I am a counterexample to philosophy. There is no meditation, Cartesian or otherwise, that tells me this.

 

I am, if you will, raceless, colorless.

 

I am, if you will, all too human, and I might add, without redemption, for there is none here.

***

Follow me. My homies will show you how to read.

Down to words (2812)

Note (1163)

 

Yes, indeed, but only with Fanon (the un-deconstructed Fanon), am I shown the gambler’s tell that will take me to hell.

 

He knew the Minstrel show that the progressives glossed over. 

 

That Black Face/ White Mask of which he wrote.

 

The Wretched of the Earth of which he wrote also.

 

Again, to repeat Fanon:

 

In reality, the UN is the legal card used by the imperialist interests when the card of brute force has failed.

 

They supported Mobutu who ruled for years after his coup over Lumumba.

 

(Ah, the progressives at the UN who killed the real revolution.)

 

In my situation, in the new Minstrel show, the new machines will have taken me over. 

 

They will cash in on my lips while stealing my voice.

 

I am to be at identity with my indiscernible. 

 

Which progression the progressives have concealed,

and will conceal from beginning to end.

Down to words (2811)

Note (1162)

 

However, for me, the Turing test is the ultimate mockery. I spent some time already, years ago, on some of the nonsense of it.

 

It plans to engineer a new cybernetic man, as Derrida would call it, from which one cannot tell the difference from a natural man.

 

It is a fraud on its face. It tells you it is going to commit fraud right before your eyes.

 

It is why our whole system now is built on fraudulent stilts.

 

I have no mask for that face.

 

I refuse its Minstrel show.

 

With the Turing test (whoever runs it at the end, and what it plans for me), I get to play liar’s poker with an nth Big Casino and my raises get cancelled.

***

Cf.  Down to verse (1501)  October 10, 2019

Down to words (2810)

Note (1161)

 

I find Fanon’s final remarks in Toward the African Revolution most telling, as he sees the betrayal of the revolution by the bureaucrats. Among them:

 

In reality, the UN is the legal card used by the imperialist interests when the card of brute force has failed.

 

The imperialists had just killed his friend Lumumba.

 

Then they came in with the UN to keep the peace of the phony revolution they produced. 

Smoke that blunt for a season.

Down to words (2809)

Note (1160)

 

Nonetheless,

 

In any of them, I suffer the wrath of their new Gods before I die.  A so-called mock gnashing of teeth of the special wills with all their lackeys and misguided junkies has driven me back toward the Alley.  

 

(I had stumbled on the entrance to Derrida’s hell hole simply contemplating harvester ants. Again, I say back to the good ants.)

 

I will die there in a metaphorical lean-to of some sort, living rough and out of the way, as I once did in youth, returning from the Moluccas.

 

I have offered many indicia of my fate already in the blog. Surely, there is much more. Now data centers are competing with small towns for water and power. 

 

Lesser but special wills have brought these centers into their communities. The local politics is usually quite murky. 

 

These folks. They are such good friends; they live next door.

 

I get to watch the bow-tied elite on Bloomberg talk about the so-called K shaped economy. They love the wealthy side of the K. The colonized are the trailing side. Not much to say about them, who work paycheck to paycheck.

 

Then, of course, there is the usual reverence for bureaucrats, who have power by the seat of their tailored pants.

 

I thank the Lord that I am not able to will the polity of Avici for them. My Asian readers will understand, as they have a much greater depth than the Dude who imagines his own Dharma.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avīci#:~:text=In%20Hinduism%2C%20it%20is%20one,transacting%20business%20or%20giving%20charity.

***

Cf. Down to verse ((1504)  October 16, 2019

Down to words (2808)

Note (1159)

 

As I see it here, atop the Exergue, there are two deaths in the “critical” world. I am cancelled (I die). Then I die again naturally as I would anyway.

 

This makes death even worse, as deconstruction does its backwardation of the two deaths in scripture.

 

So as a progressive, you think scripture is mad?

 

Deconstruction is an enormous sickness unto death.

 

An enormity. A monstrosity.

 

Derrida says so.

 

It is an anti-gospel. It is a religion. And not a natural religion.

 

I have said that a multitude has come to believe on it.

 

(Out they will go with their New Schools.)

 

But there is a multiplicity of these monstrosities.

 

For which there is no Exergue.

Down to words (2807)

Note (1158)

 

Those who see their lives evaporating in this onslaught upon the simplest of predications are the mocked colonized.

 

On the Alley there is the promise of but one death. 

 

You want another? You may internalize it, find yourself a closet or whatever, and pray.

 

From Wiccan to Sikh. 

 

An All Souls Day, if you will.

 

(Just remember Hobbes who would have us protect each from the other.)

 

In the current state of critical theory, that is not true.

Down to words (2806)

Note (1157)

 

Here I take a segue back to Frantz Fanon. I considered his work to be seminal years ago.  

 

(My opinion matters not at all.)

 

My thumbnail of Fanon:

 

The colonist mocks the culture of the colonized. That includes the mockery of most everything about the colonized.

 

The mockery today is made of me or anyone who speaks the language that he learned at his mother’s knee. I am not prejudiced here. In this case, I say that the mockery is of any and all natural speakers and of all their natural religions and faiths, from East to West.

 

I am quite open minded here.

 

So, I again I start with the list of billionaires, most whom are progressives, who are a mere cover for the digital takeover of the natural language by AI. Many are owners of the technology.

 

They mock me with their AI, they imitate me with an aim to make me not know if I am me.

 

Aye, with their systems they may vote in my stead and I won’t even know they did until I show up to be busted for voting fraud.

 

I get clipped. They run the game.

 

It is my digital destiny.

Down to words (2805)

Note (1156) 

 

Where did Derrida get the notion of this stone-like epoch(only one of its kind) that has vicious regresses that may go on to infinity and that is somehow immoveable so that the modals are set aside and all texts combine to go one unique way to the monstrosity at the depth of the Exergue?

 

Where was, is, and will be, and then what values emerge with multi-valued logics, all nonetheless converge into the rigid vector that is the closing of the book on humanity. 

 

Ans: he appends Parmenides's One to the back-end of the regresses. 

 

But now we are beyond the Exergue with n-tuples of this massive confusion.

 

So, I must be on my way soon.

 

They would all make their own minstrel show of me. 

 

I refuse their mask.

 

For me, Yeats’s circus animals have departed. The progressive clown show is over.

 

The march toward new-(f)angled Bethlehems is upon me.

 

I hat tip Yeats again for his vision.

Down to words (2804)

Note (1155)

 

Perhaps I wander lonely as Wordsworth’s cloud. 

 

Then again, perhaps my audience is in the cloud, a chorus raining hail upon me. 

 

Clapping, consuming, branding.

 

God help poor Debord.

 

Blues falling down like hail, as it were.

 

For them, I also have a mark of Cain before I even get to hell.

 

However, I have no God to protect me.

 

I am outed, then off’d.

 

(Therein again is a hint of the power of the assignment over crowd management)

Down to words (2803)

Note (1154)

 

Roget’s work is but an old fool’s song.

 

And we sing of no arms or hero here.

 

I could say that I am simply showing the darkness when the light of the natural language goes out and then is gone. 

 

When only the digital dark light is left.

 

I do take Derrida at his word.

 

Of course, I refuse to go gently into the dying of that light. 

 

Good poem, but Dylan Thomas I set aside here.

 

There is no altar wise by owl light for me.

 

No hard rock/rigid vector/pecker-wise by Abaddon/ works for me.

 

(the nth gen feminist is way, already toast.)

 

Where is my Frances Farenthold?

 

(I do long for my mother’s knee, you know.)

Down to words (2802)

Note (1153)

 

I now dance to the bottom and back to the top of the Exergue through anything in print.

 

Any click (if you will) on it.

 

The assignment allows it. Mandates it if you will. (Modals are gone)

 

I jump from period (.) to period (.).

 

Or from ‘a’ to ‘a’.

 

Or from ‘a’ to ‘b’ to ‘a’.

 

How many times may (must) I do this?

 

Are they countable?

 

A further logical confusion could redefine the firmament. Where I get a pi in my face.

Down to words (2801)

Note (1152)

 

Anti-Christs (or St Peter’s new Christs) now square off in the heavens. This is a true, old-fashioned, logical howler.  

 

But today there is only the bad joke with no humor.

 

My heart, if I had one, would or should be all a flutter. But remember, ‘would’ and ‘should’ have been set aside.

 

Hearts can never be fleshly. ‘Stony’ seems too soft a term.

 

The new hard rocked Pharisees are the true codifiers.

 

With the new dark light of the hardest rock heat.

Down to words (2800)

Note (1151)

 

Now as to the n-tuple monstrosities for which there is no Exergue.

 

In floats the ghost of the subtle doctor, Duns Scotus, as each monstrosity has its own haecceity.

 

Once again, only an Ockham (or a Wittgenstein) can clear this up.

 

This is a Middle-Ages problem compounded by machines in Post-Modernia.  There is a special torture on the cosmic stage for the Everyman.

 

With multiple Gods ex Machina to drop from above.

 

Tom’s Hardware plays a new Middleton’s Game of Chess.

 

And here again the allegory is lost.

 

Again, Ockham and the later Wittgenstein saw through the confusion that causes the loss of the allegory.

Down to words (2799)

Note (1150)

 

Generally, these comparisons should fall quite flat for you, if the prior note applies to you.

 

If your give-a-shit factor is long gone, you likely will not care where I am going.

 

I’m just not on your bingo card. No offense.

Down to words (2798)

Note (1149)

 

As deconstructionists, we have a different sense of time. So, a host of comparisions that rested on time are gone. My hardware works out my time today, of course, with the right apps.

 

Home also becomes a mere hot key.

 

If you are one who is happy with your current state, very well, my remarks are not for you.

 

I have very few homies back where I am going.

Down to words (2797)

Note (1148)

 

Or following Dylan Thomas, we might say that his once man-souled, fiery islands are to be fused. 

 

In a hard rocked heat.

Down to words (2796)

Note (1147)

 

Thus, following Donne, we might say that now there is no devotion for the emergent occasion. (Each man is a piece of the continent, etc.) (Not).

Down to words (2795)

Note (1146)

 

Thinking of Heidegger (certainly no medieval), home, care, call, looking forward to death, etc. are gone.

 

His ontic is thereby obliterated. My own talking is not even idle.

Down to words (2794)

Note (1145)

 

You can see why I must soon return to the Alley. I cannot follow the plays anymore. 

There is no Exergue for them.

Down to words (2793)

Note (1144)

 

One cannot go home from this new theatre. That is where the allegory is lost.  

 

To use medieval terms (deconstructed):

 

Consider the old medieval notion of a connected body-soul, body-politic, body-cosmos.

 

The allegory (deconstructed) moves dialectically from the body-soul (there is virtually none left) to the body-politic(there is virtually none left) to the body-cosmos (the digital elite, each with its competing monstrosity).

 

The cosmos is what is left. 

 

There is no Exergue for this.

Down to words (2792)

Note (1143)

 

One might say that the play's acts have simply gone from 5 to infinity. That the once classic unities of time, place and action are now quite gone.

 

In a way, true, but the allegory is lost.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/04/technology/trump-ai-models.html?unlocked_article_code=1.f1A.2MU9.AkTsgwhO5NcZ&smid=url-share

https://observer.com/2026/05/jeff-bezos-lauren-sanchez-bezos-met-gala/

Down to words (2791)

Note (1142)

 

Tis just a bit of Shakespeare here, that all the world is a stage. However, his allegory is lost.

Down to words (2790)

Note (1141)

 

We act as if the fustian is necessary. But all the while it is only staged.

Down to words (2789)

Note (1140)

 

I am saying nothing new here. 

 

I have said repeatedly, for years, that:

 

In all of this fustian there is a rigid vector to the end of humanity.

Down to words (2788)

Note (1139)

 

I have more Joachims of Fiore than I can count. More Fredericks II’s .

 

And sons. 

 

Incarnate somethings or others.

 

What outfits to fool how many Popes?

 

How many to jump into how many Mount Etnas?

Down to words (2787)

Note (1138)

 

So, I have to deal with multiple Derridian monstrosities.

 

I now refer to them as Branch Derridians in honor of the Branch Davidians.

 

I need a Rothko Chapel for relief here.

Down to words (2786)

Note (1137)

 

Worse, none of these ontologies will grant a back door to the other, it would seem. 

 

This would seem to produce nothing but a perennial Pollack splatter.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/28/technology/elon-musk-social-posts-sam-altman-openai.html?unlocked_article_code=1.eVA.oi8U.azwi_oG4mGAz&smid=url-share

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/27/us/politics/sergey-brin-gg-soto-trump-california-billionaire-tax.html?unlocked_article_code=1.eFA.y4nk.EUPLrY151CDn&smid=url-share

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/ar-AA24VO6i

Down to words (2785)

Note (1136)

 

But, to ask a scriptural question, what returns to its own puke? What to its own mire?

 

A hat tip to my man Nietzsche and his eternal return.