History vs the World: On Creation, Mathematical Factors, Worldwide figures

“What’s he building in there?”

• Tom Waits

“What did he do?,” asks one of the jury members.

Before we begin, we need to know where we start.

Where is an identity. How did identity come about? How did identity find itself? Or how did we find identity?

“What did he do?” — With the word “do” we have established the location of identity. We have to look within the “do” to find the “he.”

“Well, Ms. Jury Member,” bellowed a self-assured voice, “we found the bicycle without a tire at one end of the alley and across the street on the other side of the alley we found this gentleman.”

The set has been designed, the lights are perfectly reflective and the jury has a front row sit.

The jury member takes in the words and out of this consumption comes an identity of who “he” is. Or, rather than “is,” we identify what “he” do.

Whatever was done is considered objective by the court. The act was done.

“What did he do?” — This becomes a mathematical formula. “He” is taken as a variable. Can we prove this variable fits into this formula? And if so, is he guilty? These are two separate questions but both worth considering. We’ll look at the first.

“He” — From my previous writing before this I’ve been touching on the subject as Logos being a universal stream. The stream is perpetuated by repetition, recursion. The Morse code or the self-spirit that we identify as ego or self or individuality is an emotional reaction that relates ultimately with Logos to become intelligible. The Morse code is ego or Pathos. Ego itself is intellectual and can recognize the one thing (itself) as both Logos and Pathos (emotions, experience). When the ego goes into a search, its horizon is infinite. The ego, however, comes and is born from society. When the “he” loses autonomy and and is defined by the society’s court system, the infinite horizon is no more as the “he” becomes just a figure in a formula for determining action.

We first experience experience through experience. Eventually we learn language. Language, or words, emulsify Logos and Pathos in such a way that the Language structure can learn to “separate” them. When the Language structure learns to “separate” Logos and Pathos, Language enters a creative trance where it uses its experience of Language to understand itself.

This separation is of Logos and Pathos is mythical but we feel it’s true. “True,” possibly being a Pathological construct, reinforces the resolve of the ego. Even tho the conclusion of “true” may not be objective (since “true” requires a subject and the subject is neither true nor false before the judgment), the ego uses the subjective judgment all the same. And this is why the separation is mythical.

Chemical atoms may have Pathos and experience, too. Humans, however, also have history. History as a reference allows humans to escape the undeniable experience and Pathos “in front of them.” History as a structure is build up from Logos and Pathos. As such, history can be molded and melded by Logos and Pathos. There’s this things called historians that try to objectify experience as a set of events that have happened in the “past.” But these are fairy tales we must be careful not to belief.

Logo repeats, pathos is felt. From the repetition comes feelings, from feelings comes creativity.