Concentric Empathy

I guess this idea of concentric circles of empathy came from Christiane Paul, but it relates to the Genius 2000 logo and NN's circular scale for example.

Karei seems to be saying it is some kind of hypercult of universal genius, which is to say every man his own football, a degrading leveling mouthing about democracy and so.

I don't want to put words into Karei's mouth, or label and simplify him or his intelligence, or his genius. It is one of the abuses of the mimetic faculty, to imitate or rephrase what someone expresses but in an incorrect reductive distorting fashion. So, I may be lying or deluded to try to reiterate what I think Karei is saying or writing/expressing. I could be wrong, unqualified to even seek to reiterate, diseased by my own ego-self, and many other classes of error.

I think I see contradictions in some of the things Karei writes, yet if Christiane is saying about concentric empathy but abhors Genius 2000 then I see contradiction in that also.

Of course I may be in error to think that Christiane hates Genius 2000. The only problem may be that Genius 2000 is a terrible idea, not beautiful, not true, not artistic, parasitic/rapist/vampiric and so.

The error may be that Max Herman is not in mastery of himself or his ego, and thus all he expresses is filth, including Genius 2000.

Expression itself as a concept may be a degraded delusion or ignorant idolatrous genius not wise holy genius. The 2nd Commandment says "you shall not worship graven images; I am a jealous God and you shall have no other gods but Me."

Wittgenstein may be a disgusting filthy monster, but on his deathbed he said "It is not language or the world that must change, but ourselves. The problem is a spiritual one. Tell them I've had a wonderful life."

It is also suspect that Beuys wanted his social sculpture to foster democratic genius, for he said that it did, could or would. He may have been wrong, in error, lying, or corrupt. He may have been totally correct and uncorrupt, or partially so. Any of these still leave in question the possibility or value of social sculpture that nurtures, fosters, or promotes democratic genius. The relative values of fascism versus democracy are also questionable, on spiritual, economic, military, cultural, physical, strategic, and tactical grounds.

Technology itself as a spiritual factor may be relevant to such questions. Nanotech, surveillance, force, compulsion, coercion, artificial intelligence, mass distribution networks, and biological limitations or extinctions are also relevant.

Insanity, addiction, mental illness, and stress-based dysfunction are also relevant.

Termination, extermination, deception, and security of the species are relevant and deserve consideration, as well as genetic engineering, catastrophe, the apocalypse, etc.

The worth, wellness, value, rights, modes of existence, and management of the human species are not subject to guarantees.

The teleological, topographical, cognitive, and economic status of the form of the book per se is not guaranteed or stable either. Nor is the status of any other expressive form, genre, object, or function.

People should know the mathematical concept or notation of the function, i.e. "f of x equals y" or f(x)=y, which is one aspect of mathematics. "f(x)=x+2", for example, is a functional operation which can be performed on any given value for x; it means essentially "function f means to take a value x and add 2 to it," and is a way of processing a value x. f(x)=x+5, f(x)=x/4, f(x)=x*7.5 are also examples of mathematical functions.

Perhaps one disagreement between Karei and me is our respective maps of barbarity, dysfunction, cognition, and authority. Perhaps we do not differ at all on those matters.

He and I may also differ as to mental stability, ego-dysfunction, spiritual strength or fortitude, intelligence, and any number of other energetic capabilities.

Karei and I may differ regarding the character, basis, validity or value of statements such as "expressive agent x is superior/inferior to expressive agent y" and "expressive object x in superior/inferior to expressive object y."

Karei and I may differ regarding the energetic characteristics of genius or spirit, the behavior of said energy, and methods of using said energy.

The hypothesis, premise, axiom, or postulate "Genius 2000" may be horrid, degrading, dangerous, diseased, healthful, healing, restorative, beneficial, or any combination of the above.

Max Herman's individual psychological dysfunctions and defects may or may not be determinative of the worth of Genius 2000. Similarly, flaws or defects in any given expressive-cognitive agent x may or may not be determinative of the value or character of expressive objects or products deriving from the behavior of x.

Information asymmetries can result in market malfunctions and cognitive malfunctions.

System failure can be defined as that state in which the source of relief has become the source of stress.

This definition may be wrong, immoral, flawed, parasitic, vampiric, deluded, etc., or useful and valuable.

Neither energy nor genius are static, nor do they behave identically to matter and history respectively. Perhaps.

Francis Bacon said "it is unreasonable folly to think that new results can come other than from methods that have not been tried before."

Max Herman

++