,...to see in the verb the root of the verb...,

To see in the verb the root of the verb, to see in the things the root of the things is to "force" the veiled to unveil itself and the MemeticMimetic to appear and clarify so that the ignominy does not (pre)vail.

,...vides illam rem (?)...,

...the birth within a Catholic family, with the consequent growth and development, rooted in Christian practices, followed by later negation of the faith, and adhesion to the “schools”/“ideologies”: Marxist; Leninist; Maoist, in the theoretical/practical approaches, actively lived against a right-wing dictatorship, with all its fascist propaganda and repression…, followed by a, later, critical return to the Christian matrix, may give a human animal a good cognitive training in distinguishing the wolves from their disguises...,

"Leaderships" and "New World Orders"...,

A brief comment to:

http://www.amazon.com/Your-Handbook-Global-Leadership-2nd/dp/1450504558

Preparing a "Leader-based New World Order"? How antidemocratic!

Why global leadership? Who's the leader? Why a leader, and not cooperation? Why would a global democracy need a leader, or leadership?

Why not a cooperative participative global governance (co)structure, without a leader, or leaders?

At a national(ist) scale, extreme examples of discourses of "leaders of the people" we had the Nazism, Maoism and Stalinism...

Why open the venue to a "leader-centric globalist discourse" that top-downs the hierarchy down to the lower mindless bots, alienated desiring machines that obey the global leader?

Living systems are self-organizing, autopoietic, they do not need a global leadership, the system knows very well what it needs, and knows how to make emerge the best adaptive responses.

Top-down schemes lose perspective and are strange to the systemic bottom-up self-organization that is natural of every living system.

A top-down leadership scheme invites a zero-sum strategic reasoning in the game between the leader and the populace.

The "invisible hand" of life always rejected illuminated leader-based globalisms. What legitimacy does a leader-based global dictatorship have to think and decide for the rest of the world?

The world does not need a leader, leaders, or leaderships, the world needs adaptive, responsive, structures that regard the needs of everyone, that is, every living entity, not just humans. The world is not just the humans, the humans are just another example of an animal species, and not a very successful one at intelligent responses.

If one still thinks in the leader-based paradigm, one has clearly lost the evolutionary train. But who said that we need to remain here as long as the dinosaurs did?

...Mandelbrot...

http://www.publico.pt/Mundo/morreu-mandelbrot-o-pai-da-geometria-fractal_1461407

It’s a shame that Mandelbrot has died so soon, there remains a lot to be said about fractals...

...beyond the pragmatic operationality of the effects are the causes linked to the identity, projectivity and systemic integrity: zero/potentiality/rugosity: the systemic flux that folds onto itself: “AionFlux” to “Kairon”…,…

I don't know if the word fractal is a good term...; since a system's fractality is just an effect of a system's projectivity, related to its integrity and permanence...

Day of the Portuguese Republic

Day of the Portuguese Republic's celebration?

Blahh... this is all "crap"!

We are all going around in circles, any solution is worst than the previous one. We do not have reasons to celebrate anything.

Planes of transcendence...? "Crap"!

What planes of transcendence may create a species that seems to have origin in an anomaly generated by the garbage of some other reality that probably is still feeding us with that garbage? Our transcendence is from garbage to garbage!

We should have remained SingleCelled organisms, there, at least, we could dance at the rhythm of the garbage, at least there would remain something like a dance and some HopePotency left to actualize, perhaps some sort of hope of being something else than precarious and obtuse foul smelling animals. I confess to feel some envy of the amoebas…

When Ray Kurzweil states that the singularity is near...

The names and the things, of which the names are the names, form a living web in which the "logos mundi" circulates. A thing ("res"), each thing, is an individuated entity that can be signalized by a name that, necessarily, maintains with the thing a relation of "truth". In the cases in which that is not the case, then, the name, that is said of the thing, is not the case that it is.

Singularity is a name for that which is unique and, thus, systemically irrepeatable. A singularity does not make itself announced by someone (not even by a "Sentient Prophet"). A singularity announces itself. A concrete example of a singularity is an event ("eventus") and an event is that which suddenly irrupts in the systems, from a systemic nonlocality that determines the character of irreducibility that the system, in its whole, computes as unique, unconfoundable and irrepeatable.

When Ray Kurzweil states that the singularity is near, of what is he talking about? Has some kaleidoscopic Laplacian "daimon" whispered something in his ear? What does Ray Kurzweil know that we, the populace that sustains and maintains "The World System", do not? Or is it all a matter of market and marketing towards "desiring machines"?

http://vimeo.com/13987091

http://mountainvision.blogspot.com/2010/08/ray-kurzweil-singularity-is-near-pbs.html

...on aleatorial...,

That which introduces a systemic discontinuity is, comfortably, called aleatorial. Aleatorial is that which is not in conformity with the rules of the day-to-day human life big book (a bestseller). An event belongs to the category of the aleatorial.

When our tools fail in capturing the causality behind a complex web, the aleatorial serves well as an excuse to make us feel in control and on top of things, despite the probability being signaling that “there’s something here, you just don’t get it or do not want to”.