rattus rattus’ blog

A friend once tried to provoke with the following wonderful quote about what ends are:

The temporal structure of the end is determined by a twofold negation: The end is standing in the apex of not yet and not anymore. This marks a twofold verge which again is the function of an intentionality articulating itself as a negation. Only this intentionality brings out the otherwise indifferent moment. — Karlheinz Stierle: The return of the end; On the anthropology of perception. (1996, humbly translated by yours truly)

What a gem! Here is the original German quote:

Die Zeitstruktur des Endes bestimmt sich durch eine zweifache Negation: Das Ende steht im Scheitelpunkt von noch nicht und nicht mehr. Die so markierte zweifache Schwelle ist selbst Funktion einer als Negation sich artikulierenden Intentionalität, die erst den für sich indifferenten Moment zum herausgehobenen macht. — Karlheinz Stierle: Die Wiederkehr des Endes. Zur Anthropologie der Anschauungsformen. (1996)

An articulating intentionality qua negation distinguishes the differences of moments … uhm, this is me, isn’t it? Stierle was writing about ratTus rattUs, the twofold negation, the recurring end.

Anyway, let’s put an end to this.

Or maybe not ;-)

Borrowed from Good Winter, see the original work.

[G]

Change an assumption
and save the world.

— Heinz von Foerster, 1970

Quoted after Paul Schröder who 2009-11-14 at the Heinz von Foerster Congress 09 said he found this quote several times in his notes.

[Update 2019-07-20: Game removed since it relied on ancient technology. The YouTube video do not push the big red button shows it in action.]

> > Liars are telling the truth.
> Liar!
See? I told you!

Our only apparently unique invention is written language, and there’s lots of evidence that it’s the least effective form of communication we have, and the form most prone to misunderstanding

writes Dave Pollard in his recent blog post Turning Together Without Words.

The only thing we learn from history is that we do not learn from history.

(This quote and variations of it can be found easily.) Considering the fact that each and everyone seems to stumble over this insight sooner or later it could well be based on a wee bit of eternal truth. However, if it is, it is hiding it very well. Indeed, what it shows is that history of history is unknown. Speaking of learning, it is not taught either.

[w]

Cartoon by Hugh Macleod

under the
surface
is more surface . . .

[T]