Generative Anthropology

1st order Attentionality – I see X: Being able to direct your attention toward something.

2nd order Attentionality – I see you see X: Being able to understand that others can/are directing their attention toward something. This is also referred to as ‘sociality’ and encompasses all social animals.

3rd order Attentionality – I see you see me see X: Being able to understand that others know that you are directing your attention toward something, and they know that you know that they are directing their attention toward something. This is also referred to as ‘abstracting’ and it is this triadic relationship between people and object that enables language, which is unique to humans.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/10/mimeticism-and-morality/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_attention#Levels_of_joint_attention
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaze#In_psychoanalysis

Aborted gesture of appropriation – The gesture in the Originary Event that aborted appropriation of the central object of desire: Ostensive Signification will include with it a temporal delay (deferment), where one cannot simultaneously represent and appropriate the central object of desire at once, making representation an effective means to mediate mimetic conflict.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw535/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw537/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diff%C3%A9rance#Temporal_delay

Absolute Imperative – The Imperative to defer violent centralizing: In canonical GA, the most fundamental aspects which drive social interactions either together or apart would be desire and resentment. Within each layer or mode — proximal or distal to the ostensive center — (resentful) mimetic rivalries possibly threaten existent social contexts, and thereby our ability to sustain or guarantee significance, generally. Given that our ability to articulate the intentions of the (sacred) center, other people’s, and our own are wrapped up within these linguistic structures (how significance is communicated and possibly jointly-attended to), it wouldn’t just be narrowly (merely) contradictory to violently centralize, but inappropriate with regards to the scene one necessarily occupies when articulating and performing intentional action (even a “self-concept” requires language).
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/center-and-origin-the-name-of-the-center-and-centered-names/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/beyond-post-sacrificial/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/02/can-networks-crowd-out-markets/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/01/programming-power-and-declarative-culture/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/11/declarative-imaginary/

Abstracting – 3rd order Attentionality: When you are able to realize that others are seeing you direct your intention toward something; they in turn, knowing you are seeing them direct their intention toward something. It makes it possible to share attention at the same object/Center which enables signing it and thus enables (arbitrary) language.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacognition

Abstraction – Any kind of linguistic (moral) reconfiguration that is delegated: A transcending of the social structure that first birthed something. When an individual(/thing) is (being) removed from the communal and ritual embedment of their local community. This can happen through things like enslavement and conscription, but today it is primarily achieved through money and markets.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/market-capillarism/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/01/absolutism-the-axial-age-and-the-laboratory/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterritorialization

Aesthetics – An oscillation between desire and deferral: When something is desired but cannot be appropriated it is perceived as an aesthetic experience. But it’s not just that it can’t be appropriated, it’s the social prohibition within the phenomenon of desire itself, this passing back and forth through experience of desire for the object and its repelling, that is the aesthetic experience.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/the-paradoxical-telos-of-the-aesthetic/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/10/the-aesthetic-as-liminally-scenic/

Agency – One’s ability to modulate an inherited frame [and construct Formal Objects] through Signing: A person’s agency lies in taking an inherited frame and modifying it to both direct people’s attention elsewhere/on another Center, and construct (new) Formal Objects.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agency_(sociology)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_and_agency

American Freedom – A very strong prejudice in favor of an executive culture: Freedom in America is culturally about people in charge of something should be allowed to actually be in charge of it. This is contrasted with most of the rest of theworld where a ‘consensus culture’ exist.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/08/successful-succession/

Art – A practice of deritualization by exposing the preliminary practices of ritualization:
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/10/the-aesthetic-as-liminally-scenic/

Asymmetric Signing – Difference in Agency: Refers to variability in people’s ability to Sign and thus differences in their Agency, which leads to asymmetry in hierarchies and material conditions. This is how assymetric hierarchical and material conditions rise from the Originary Equality of the Sign.

Attentional Space – A space where attention is held jointly on a particular object: Attentional Spaces involve enforced equality in dividing the central object (Morality), the enactment and commemoration of the Originary Scene (Ritual), and a compelled oscillation between sign and the object of appetitive interest (Esthetics); the need to account for the degree to which these modes of attention are their sharpest gives rise to Disciplinary Spaces, which by emic indwelling within a scene inquire into tacit elements of an Attentional Space.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2002/2002katz/
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/04/30/adam-katz-on-disciplinary-spaces/

Attentionality – The sharing and mutual awareness of sharing a common line of attention on some object: When one follows a line of attention one enters a scene, in which appropriation of the object that line of attention is now jointly-directed towards, is deferred so long as this state is maintained, the full attentional loop complete when this line of attention has been shown to have passed through every individual person in the group, all participants mutually informed that any other participant is letting the object be. Attentionality itself is the precursor to ethics.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1901/1901katz/
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/05/24/adam-katz-on-attentionality-a-necessary-precursor-to-ethics/

Authority – The power to modulate a given frame or context people share, redirecting attention by revealing and naming: The capacity to give the orders restores coherence to our relations with one another and the world around us, precisely in those moments when the narrative that brought us here falls into contradiction.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/sovereign-as-onomastician-in-chief/

Awe – A feeling like the co-mingling of dread, veneration, and wonder, when one has an encounter with the originary ostensive, which all ostensives are layered over concentrically: As the force of emotion that underlies the ability to command, it comes from experiencing a reunion with the sacred and its mysteries, and allows one to acknowledge the “other” in oneself and others.
References:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/awakening-awe/201806/the-phenomenology-awe

Axial Age – The conceptual overthrow of divine kingship: Post-sacrificial Imperative Exchange ensued the conceptual overthow of divine kingship, unto modern liberal hyper-ideologies.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/01/absolutism-the-axial-age-and-the-laboratory/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/04/the-big-scene-is-the-anthropological-basis-of-anarchist-ontology/

Big Man – The first person to usurp the Center: Before there was person at the Center, every member was equal before the Center. This over time created resentment from the more productive members, that they were equal to the less productive members. Creating hierarchy and distinction between members of the tribe saved the community from resentment and the destruction that would result, with such distinction beginning as the first person ever occupied the center. The Big Man becomes the first individual, and is the beginning of what will become Sacral Kingship (until the age of Omnicentrism).

Bureaucracy – To make sure something is done [properly] in accordance with a discipline’s own frame/rules/guidelines: Bureaucracy is to make sure the discipline is carried out in accordance with its own rules, so the findings can be intelligible with what is already known. This can have the unfortunate side effect of encouraging dogma and shutting out anything that might go against it (past Declaratives barring/opposing future Declaratives), by policing language in such a manner that there is an inorganic effect.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2002/2002katz/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2016/12/the-sovereign-remembering-of-names/

Calcification – A linguistic mismatch, where a set of Declaratives is banishing dangling Imperatives: Given that declaratives interdict or thematize imperatives that could not be obeyed, to calcify a declarative construct undermines the very ostensive-imperative nexus, feedback-loop, or chain-of-command necessary for that given construct to be represented, and finally obeyed itself.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw574/

Capital – Represents power over the disciplines: Capital is the ability to abstract people/groups/knowledge/media/technologies out of their embedment. When something is viewed as Capital, it starts being viewed as homogenous pieces that can be taken out of its embedment, and transferred from one community to another, replaced without regard for a ‘piece’s’ wider embedment.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/08/money-and-capital-as-media-and-power/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/market-capillarism/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterritorialization#In_the_context_of_cultural_globalization
https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2020/09/04/stocks-are-up-wages-are-down-what-does-it-mean/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/09/power-and-capital/

Center – That which occupies the locus of attention and possesses the significance of the peripheral sign emitters within a scene: A Center as this locus of significance is where resentments focus and collect, and are ultimately deferred. It is both a target and product of Collective Intentionality, which means it kind of possesses its own Intentionality, speaking to us. The transcendental nature of the sign can be revealed in any discourse, which is another way of relocating the Center, all of human sociality past and present being a reiterated series of concentric centers, as each practice or sign is dependent upon a Center at a previous instant.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2402/2402katz/ http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw579/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2006/06/ga-as-the-thinking-of-the-center/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/01/how-does-the-center-speak/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/12/distribution-from-the-center/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/06/on-the-use-of-the-center-margin-model-to-displace-the-left-right-model/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/05/center-and-centrality/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/05/center-alignment/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/05/the-architecture-of-the-center/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/04/the-discourse-of-the-center/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/03/centerism/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/center-and-origin-the-name-of-the-center-and-centered-names/

Centeredness – The quality of being centered: Formally and Informally, the degree to which something commands attention, is the degree to which the thing in question possesses the quality of Centeredness.

Centered Ordinality – An order in which the articulation of power from the center through the ranks it establishes is rendered transparent and consistent: When a Center is identified we position ourselves [around it], except for whoever first identified it, who in his Firstness [positions himself at the Center/becomes the Center]. That is to say, we fall in line behind whoever first identified the Center.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/07/mistakenness-revisited/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/05/the-architecture-of-the-center/

Centering – [Occupying a/the Center, and] attracting the attention of people [in order to direct their attention to another Center]: Centering is about [occupying a/the Center, and] attracting attention toward you so you can direct people’s attention toward the Center you actually want them to focus on. The occupant of the Center is the one who names, locates, and extracts imperatives that are issued from the Center, being a kind of mediator with the divine in that sense, listening then Naming, best deferring anything petty that would limit that ability to fulfill that role. According to Adam Katz, Centering is power, in that you gain the power of the [attentional space] that is producing the Center.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/10/centering/

Centerlessness – Rejecting the existence of a Center: In the act of Scapegoating, a Centerless discourse helps obscure a speakers own tacit desires, resentments, and mimesis in the act of usurping a Center for oneself, but while still being able to name said tacit elements in the discourse of other participants on a Scene.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/07/language-paradoxed/

Central Authority – The starting point for issued commands: The Central Authority is the first one to make commands, of which all other commands are subordinate to/stem from. According to Adam Katz, the distinction between Absolutism and Liberalism can be boiled down to whether you seek out commands from the Central Authority, or make demands upon the Central Authority (not to say Absolutist shouldn’t have demands, but they need to stem from other commands).
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/from-metapolitics-to-politics/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/the-event-of-technology/

Central Imaginary – The Ostensive or “topic” that grounds/justifies the sets of imperatives surrounding it, and further out broader discourse in constative or Declarative form: The Center is “listened to” by a sovereign through a Central Imaginary, which is that part of any discourse which can’t be formally integrated/closed, nor can it be filtered out of reality. Any interrogation of a Center already requires one has a Center to their own discourse, too, resulting in a necessary “illusive” quality in any meaning. “Magical” (that language compels performance) and “Mythical” (narratives which preserve linguistic meaning) elements persist despite increasingly sharper elaborations of the Center and our relation to it. Analogous to an ontology or episteme; commonly gestured at as “a priori”.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/03/the-central-imaginary/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/05/the-architecture-of-the-center/

Charismatic Autocracy – Katz’ model for Interrogative Imperative culture following the Post-Sacrificial: “Charismatic” in a graceful sense, which involves obedience to the Imperative of deferring violent usurpation of the sovereign Center (Graceful Charisma). “Autocratic” as a consequence of the reality that someone must lead, ideally with minimal turnover and dispute (as this disrupts charismatic rule). Sovereign deferral is not demanded from but alternatively already conferred upon the central occupant, in resistance to the tendency of those who scapegoat on the periphery, in an attempt to violently seize centrality for themselves.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/beyond-post-sacrificial/

Chiasmatic Discourse – Where there is mutual transfiguration between language users’ models of reality: It’s a unification/transcendence of (2) separate discourses into a (single) new one, constructing a new shared Center. This is also what language transmission technically is. For example, the Right absorbing the Marxist/Postmodern concepts and critiques of ‘capital’ and creating something new by doing so. It’s ultimately about creating meaningful social orientation, not acquiring some kind of metaphysical truth, which is what one is doing when interpreting another person’s meaning in good faith.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/07/language-paradoxed/

Chunking/de-chunking – The forming and breaking up of information into larger or smaller units: Smaller units may or may not contain in themselves chunks. Through repeated cycles of differentiation and integration, or recursion, the result is hierarchy or structure-dependent representations. In language acquisition this process subconsciously allows for prediction in regards to how likely a chunk is to occur in a given instance, and how often.
References:
Bannard, C., Lieven, E., Tomasello, M. (2009). Modeling children’s early grammatical knowledge.
Thomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosody_(linguistics)#Chunking

Collective Intentionality – The ability to cooperate within and towards a cultural reality: Contrasted with Joint Intentionality, this form is not merely cooperative, but rather cultural rationality. It allows one to draw on community-wide social norms; comprehend and iterate meta-representations; and engage in propositional logic, allowing one to elaborate on “objective reality”, or truth and falsehood. It would be dependent upon declarative speech, itself an outgrowth of prior linguistic forms and fundamentally, joint-intentional capacities.
Refrences:
https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/311/docs/Kern_Moll_2017.pdf
https://www.eva.mpg.de/documents/Springer/Tomasello_Gap_Mind-the-Gap_2010_1552826.pdf
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/collective-intentionality/

Consciousness – Transcendence of the simple plane of imitation: [Consciousness is when you’re not merely a being that is able to mimetically imitate others, but to actually be able construct formal objects and modulate frames. This also constitutes a transcendence of mere appetite to desire.]

Consensus Culture – A Culture that values consensus initiative: A Consensus Culture discourages any one individual from unilaterally issuing Imperatives, and carry the responsibility, where a lot of parties, or rather, “spontaneous elements” typically have to get involved in the decision making process. This subverts clear lines of decision making and the hierarchy of human decision making that was actually involved in making the decision, and easily allows for the evasion of responsibility. Consensus Culture is constrated with “Executive Culture”.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/08/successful-succession/

Construction Grammar – The linguistic theory that contends that meaning resides not in individual words but in formulaic constructions: A contrasting theory to the claims of construction grammar (that grammatical rules governing the meanings of various chunks, iterations, and elements in speech of any size), might be the idea of a “universal grammar”, which alternatively would claim various grammatical structures, rather than being something learned via training and contextual application, are rather evolved and innate. Instead, only the aptness we have to learn language itself can be genetically reinforced itself, because of the (possibly even complete) arbitrariness and immateriality of symbolic representation.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/03/toward-a-generative-logic-of-translation/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construction_grammar
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw540/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_Investigations#Meaning_is_use

Contemplation – Aesthetic oscillation: The subject’s imagination or internal scene of representation oscillates between attending to the sign, which designates the object, and defers it’s appropriation; and the referent, where in contemplation the object-in-itself stirs resentment in the subject, by it’s refusing accessibility despite the imagined possibility to appropriate it.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/gaintro/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/the-paradoxical-telos-of-the-aesthetic/

Cringing – A moment of embarrassement/shame/awkwardness that you represent to yourself (after the fact): Cringing is a social phenomena that, like ‘shame’, ’embarrassement’, or ‘awkwardness’, can only be experienced in relation to a social context. But where as awkwardness, embarrassement, or shame is a social feeling you get from somebody being a fool in the moment, cringing is when you think back and represent it to yourself after the fact.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2401/2401ludwigs/

Cultural Locus – A point that draws focus or attention within a culture: Society as a whole can be modeled as sets of concentric circles, the central locus commanding attention, being divinity.
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/05/the-architecture-of-the-center/

Culture – The deferral of violence through representation: Culture is roughly constituted by the conversion of joint-attentional spaces into ones where the objects attended to are increasingly done so intentionally, which is communicated using representation by and between those on a scene. To put it simply, Culture is shared norms.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw648/

Culture of reading – Omnicentrism de-conflated, why we can’t go back to Divine kingship: We are a full-blown ‘individualist’ people, which could only coherently mean that the scene of representation has expanded so much that we allow relatively great autonomy to people. It’s called ‘a culture of reading’ by David R. Olson, a polity that scatters many high agency individuals to acquire expertise and bring their findings back to the group.

Declarative – Speaking about something, detached from its physical presence: Declaratives are utterances about something that is detached from its physical presence. For example talking ‘about’ fire in the abstract, even though there’s no fire currently present that needs any actions taken.
References:
Gans, E. L., Katz, A. L. (2019). The Origin of Language: A New Edition
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/12/on-the-proper-use-of-the-declarative-sentence/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/01/more-on-the-proper-use-of-declarative-sentences/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/01/the-declarative-order-and-inquiry/

Declarative Culture – The culture where everything has to be explained in propositional (Declarative) statements: As literacy becomes widespread the Declarative mode of language is presumed to be the fundamental mode of language, and everything becomes subject to be explained and justified in propositional (Declarative) statements.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/03/declarative-culture-properly-understood/

Declarative Nexus – A set of Declaratives strung together: Meanings in the Declarative mode are governed by differentiation and deferral from other Declaratives, and absent of verification in the Imperative and Ostensive modes, meaning is suspended within a self-referential nexus of Declarative objects.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/12/on-the-proper-use-of-the-declarative-sentence/

Dedifferentiation – Formal recognition that disciplines scattered through the social body share the quality of social relevance and refer back to a center by virtue of being named, despite their varying objects and procedures: While spheres like the public and private are differentiated through mechanisms such as scapegoating or accusations of tyranny, any distinction nonetheless is bound within the practice of naming and a hierarchy of names (e.g. disciplines that identify, study, and name tyranny).
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/10/dedifferentiation/

Deferral (of violence) – Language’s main function: Language functions as a substitute for conflict, where the Originary Sign (the deferred gesture of appropriation) deferred the pre-humans from trying to appropriate the object at the same time, which would have brought them into a violent conflict had they not been deferred. Deferral can come in different forms, like deferring violence/desire/resentment/etc.

Delegated Task Forces – The purpose of markets is to generate information that can be integrated into the social/command structure: When there’s a need for more information the sovereign will create markets, whose agents act as task forces, by creating information that’ll be integrated into the social/command structure.

Desacralization – The process of substitution of sacrality: The scientific will always seek to break a category down through substitution, which is invariably atomization. The scientific does not like that something could be irreducible.

Desacralized Power Theory – Is concerned with the material aspects of sovereignty, fundamentally constituted by a Jouvenelian historical analysis of power disputes, i.e. HLvM: The term “desacralized” refers to the fact that a merely scientific conception of sovereignty, extracted from historical analysis alone, lacks a shared moral/ linguistic frame between the sovereign center and those below. This essentially conceives of center-periphery power relations as pitted on a state of constant war, subsumes sovereignty within declarative speech/logic, and is not in full truly ontologically reactionary, as a consequence of this lack of a shared frame, and views power as pure vertical determinism.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2302/2302katz/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/the-event-of-technology/

Description – Completed substitution: Description is a way to bring something that is not physically present unto the Scene as an object, so it can be treated as if it is physically present on the Scene.

Desire – An appetite for something generated by social prohibition: Animals only have appetite for something, [they don’t desire something irrespective of their instincts, and their appetite isn’t mimetically influenced by other animals.] Desire is when you have appetite for something but the consumption of it is socially prohibited, which is also called the ‘paradox of desire’. Your desires can be mimetically influenced by your peers’ desires.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1202/frank1/
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/03/31/andrew-bartlett-provides-a-skeleton-of-generative-anthropology/

Disciplinarity – The sharing of attention on some object: Disciplinarity is present within any social scene including the originary, constituted by joint-attention on some object, and is co-extensive with signification itself. Attentional spaces are prerequisites for disciplinary spaces, the latter enabling inquiry into tacit elements within attentional spaces; extending to reality as a whole, ultimately enhancing our capacity for deferral in novel ways, or in other words self-discipline.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2002/2002katz/
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/04/30/adam-katz-on-disciplinary-spaces/

Disciplinary Space – A space of shared attention that turns the object it’s studying into new signs: As the most expanded mode of sharing attention, incorporating prior modes such as the Moral, Ritual, and Aesthetic, it’s job is to be a space of Inquiry, studying the tacit elements of discrepancies that necessarily exist between sign and object on any scene. These spaces collaborate with neighboring disciplines to report information to the social center, and by elaborating on reality in full serve to generate a sharper model for desire and suspension.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2002/2002katz/
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/04/30/adam-katz-on-disciplinary-spaces/

Discipline(s) – Attention/attendance by any multiplicity of subjects on an object of some kind: Observance requires deferral: by, between, and even to the subject(s) that exist within a particular disciplinary space; mediated by the desire to sustain attention and further elaboration on the nature/relevance of their given Ostensive. Increasing effectiveness relies on this as well as collaboration with other disciplines, where even their ability to effectively do so itself becomes its own discipline.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/07/the-disciplines-the-imperative-of-the-center-the-generative-thought-experiment/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/07/prolegomena-to-the-study-of-the-origins-of-the-disciplines/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/06/disciplining-disciplines/

Dogma – Declarative truths set regardless of their possibility to be grounded in Ostensive reference: Claims such as these usually emerge in disciplinary spaces that have slipped into a more bureaucratic form, where information is taken insofar as it fits a preconceived model, indifferent to whether it abides by the original function of that particular disciplinary space.

Double-frame – In Performatism, it’s a prerequisite for metamodern narratives that involves a unity between the two frames of inner scene (ostensive sign) and outer text (declarative) in the aesthetic: By using aesthetic devices postmodern irony is cut off, beauty conceived not as an essence that can be critiqued and undermined, but rather experienced in an oscillatory, closed and inner frame constituted by an undecidability between sign and thing. This is achieved by both cutting the subject off from social interaction, then subsequently the endless exteriority of discourse as well, creating a double-bind for freedom in that one cannot act unless acting upon others, forcing the subject to identify with a narrative.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2401/2401ludwigs/

Double Imperative – An operator of negation issued by the interlocutor(/hearer) of a previously issued imperative: Before the declarative mode’s construction, there had to be a way to both demand of the one seeking the object’s presence (the speaker of the original imperative) to cease, while also demanding that the object itself not be present. What makes this differ from declarative negation is the dependence on continued non-performance of the original imperative that was interdicted; between a physically-present speaker and hearer (the declarative uniquely allows an interdiction to remain abstract. context-free, and non-specific).
References
Katz, A. (2020). Anthropomorphics.
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw546/

Embedment – [Situations/participation/belonging] in a communal and ritual [context/community]: Embedment is a (physical) belonging where you have a (specific) place in a local comminuty, and its communal and ritual context. If someone/something has been abstracted, it’s possible to re-embed it into the same or a new context.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/market-capillarism/

Embodied Paradox

Emic-Etic – Whether something is being analyzed from the “inside” or the “outside”: An ’emic’ account is a description of behavior or a belief in terms meaningful (consciously or unconsciously) to the actor; that is, an emic account comes from a person within the culture. Almost anything from within a culture can provide an emic account.
An ‘etic’ account is a description of a behavior or belief by a social analyst or scientific observer (a student or scholar of anthropology or sociology, for example), in terms that can be applied across cultures; that is, an etic account attempts to be ‘culturally neutral’, limiting any ethnocentric, political, and/or cultural bias or alienation by the observer.
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emic_and_etic

Ethics – Formal practices which are particular to a Disciplinary Space: Ethics involves the exchanging of ostensives, and the conversion of shared attention into collective intentionality.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1901/1901katz/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1601/1601katz/
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/05/24/adam-katz-on-attentionality-a-necessary-precursor-to-ethics/

Esthetic – A form of experience in which a representational Sign is perceived as a necessary constituent of its imaginary referent: An oscillatory movement of the subject’s attention between the sign and the referent.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw260/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw577/

Event – The new inscription that re-inscribes all the existing ones:
References:
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/event-intelligence

Ex-orbital Center – A center that takes the most perfected practices as the means for organizing the rest of them:
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/10/the-aesthetic-as-liminally-scenic/

Executive Culture – A culture that values individual initiative: An Executive Culture allows those who take initiative (and found something) the responsibility of something to be in charge of it, with clear lines of individual leadership and decision making being applauded. Individuals who triumph in their endeavours will stand as revered models for their succesors to look back on, and model themselves on. The opposite of Executive Culture is “Consensus Culture”.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/08/successful-succession/

Exemplary Victim – The victim of violence by the occupant of the Center: The figure of the exemplary victim activates liberal categories such as “justice,” “legality,” “equality,” and so on, producing a position from which to stand in judgment against center. The exemplary victim is rooted deeply in the Axial Age inheritances of the West, in particular and disabling this figure is therefore a moral imperative for centered practices. The intuition that such victimization marks some incoherency in articulating the center, leads to scapegoating of the central occupant. The proper shift in focus then (while not completely ignoring possible instances of victimization) is away from the exemplary status of particular victims and their peripheral relation to the central occupant, and onto how we’re clarifying the ostensive and imperative discourses such victimizations are even possibly cohered and coherently resolved, within.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/06/toward-a-media-moral-synthesis/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/03/dialectics/

Explanation – Making something comprehensible and coherent within a governing paradigm: To explain something is to make it understandable within the paradigm you’re working with.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2502/2502ludwigs/

Familial Economy – Foundational (economic) group dynamics of any (in)group: David Graeber describes a fundamental social dynamic in any group, tribe, and society, which makes the foundation of any economic system built on top of it. When we are able to process moral information, markets become inefficient because money isn’t as liquid as ‘social credit’ and ‘transactions’ (favours) don’t have to happen at parallel at an equal value (which they do in markets), but are ‘recorded’ on a sort of praxeological accounting ledger (money being a substitute). However when moral information is lacking/too difficult to process, markets and competition becomes a low-resolution way of generating that information.
References:
Graeber, D. (2011). Debt: The First 5,000 Years.
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/debts-and-deferences/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/08/money-and-capital-as-media-and-power/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/08/absolutist-economies/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/10/social-market/

Felicity – When a [performative] act is carried out correctly under the appropriate conditions: Felicity is when an act is carried out correctly, in the proper sactioned conditions. For example, if proper emergency medicine was given to a critical patient to stabilize their condition, that act would be felicitous. If the archbishop of Britain declared a new king/queen without the previous king/queen having died/abdicated yet, that act would be infelicitous.

Firstness – The bringing of some new object to the group’s attention / leading of a shared frame, articulated as asymmetry between speaker and listener in a speech situation: Within the context of human language, where spatio-temporal relations can be flattened there will still necessarily be space for innovation; if not minimally perpetual rearticulation of things already made present to the group (as in the case of judges), specifically when naming tacit elements present within some object we’ve been attending to. For firstness in the originary event (though itself lacking salience within the scene), while the originary ostensive gesture was reciprocated equally, the insight or awareness of the originary sign as designating deferral of appropriation, required for the (necessarily) conscious emission of signs, wouldn’t have been spontaneous among all members of the group in the same moment.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw606/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw451/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw496/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw499/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/sovereign-as-onomastician-in-chief/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw662/

Formal Objects – [Linguistically represented concepts (for/within consciousness)]: [Objects are concepts for/within our consciousness, and them being ‘Formal’ means they’re (being) linguistically represented (in a meaningful way)].

Formal Representation – The joint-construction of signs intended to convey meaning: Formality is particular to linguistic representation, inclusive of elements such as intention to communicate meaningful information, grammar, and thinking. The originary formality of the sign was in that it referred to the significant or “sacred” itself, the latter relevant to the institutional.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw576/ http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw577/

Frame – A received/inherited historical configuration: A Frame is a historical configuration that is received/inherited, which is then instantiated and slightly changed on a Scene, adding to the history that informs the configuration of the next Scene.

Frame Mismatching – A way of modeling the phenomenon of a bureaucratized discourse: A Declarative system that banishes ‘dangling Imperatives’ within future given Declaratives. Where language is policed in such a manner that there is an inorganic effect.

Framing – Imposing a Frame on a Scene: Framing is when you impose a certain historical configuration on a Scene. The term is most often used to refer to imposing a different Frame on a Scene, other than the one that had historically been inherited so far

Free will – The ability to receive meaning and continue the linguistic frame through signing: We aren’t free to choose what things shall mean and always inherit frames, but we are free choose whether or not we want to continue the linguistic frame or modulate/manipulate it.

Freedom – [The ability to formally construct objects of shared attention]: Symbols represent agency, and more importantly intention. Awareness of not just the agency and intentions of the sacred (which manifests to represent — implicitly — group agency jointly observing a shared ostensive) but also (later and explicitly) of others, and yourself; this allows you to integrate that information (both attention and inattention on a scene — notably both must always exist in observing ostensives) into your intentional acts, thereby allowing one to transcend resentment, an immanently grounded limitation.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2009/10/the-political-economy-of-freedom-and-sovereignty/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw348/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2007/09/enfolding-the-four-freedoms-a-commentary-on-chronicle-348/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2007/10/ostensive-freedom-all-the-way-down-more-commentary-on-chronicle-348/

Graceful Charisma – Occupation of the sacred center for the unification of disciplinary spaces, deferring violent seizure and abuse: By demonstrating a greater degree of deferral, or grace, a sovereign can come to occupy the sacred center, quelling mimetic rivalry as attention is refocused on the center, extracting imperatives from the sacred center benevolently and impersonally. This also constitutes a GA definition for what it means to be a reactionary.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2016/10/the-two-charismas/

Gradualism – The claim that the development of language occurred gradually solely due to evolutionary processes, and that there were no sudden shifts or singular events that led to its origin: This is exemplified by the phrase Natura non facit saltus (nature does not make jumps) which is an important principal of natural philosophy. This belief results in rejection of the notion of language as a transcendent category. Generative anthropology does not consider this a viable explanation for the origin of language, as Adam Katz explains: “Only human language has signs (words, to keep it simple) that are purely “arbitrary,” or “conventional.” There’s no reason for the word “dog” to refer to that particular four-legged furry mammal and, of course, in other languages it doesn’t. So, somehow, some human community must have “agreed” to use words in shared ways. But to form such an agreement, you would already need to have language. This is a dilemma, and there’s no “natural” way of explaining how it would happen. We draw from this the conclusion that language must have emerged in a singular event, in which a sign was used and repeated (i.e., “understood”) by everyone in a memorable way.
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natura_non_facit_saltus

Grammatical Stack – The articulation of Ostensive-Imperative-Interrogative-Declarative: In speech, the Grammatical Stack is how your Ostensives, Imperatives, Interrogatives, and Declaratives are chained together to create meaningful dialogue. Your speech is good when “your Declaratives answer the most precise questions that emerge from the most urgent Imperatives that were generated by the most anomalous Ostensives”.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/04/conversivity/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/05/deriving-the-sample-to-its-source/

Generative Literacy – Literacy allows for new possible representations related to mental acts: Such new innovations include the possibility someone’s suppositions may fail, or the difference between what one means and the actual meaning of an utterance. Since the notion of a theory includes the chance that one’s beliefs may be incorrect, the various linear/human sciences rely on this innovation brought on by literacy; GA itself, too, is wrapped within and reliant on the innovations of literacy, presented in theoretical language. Everything associated with a speech situation, such as tone and urgency, must be represented in writing, and this generally takes the form of nominalizations of verbs and adjectives. Since these nominalizations in essence create new entities (like “assumptions”), effective participation in the declarative requires that the way they are operationalized within a practice and disciplinary space is made explicit (since they are no longer immediately present and obvious).
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2502/2502katz/

High art – Art that enacts the sacred: ‘Cultures’ us to renounce the whole of our desire (and thus appropriation) for the benefit of participating in human society.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw223/

Identity – Delegation of power from the Central Authority over which part of the social order to govern: Identites are delegations of power to a group based on which part of the social order they are to govern and have responsibility for.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/03/identities/

Ideologue – Someone imposing morally uncompelling bureaucratic standards to an organic setting: An ideologue is someone who (tries to) perpetuate the expectations of a calcified bureaucracy upon a setting/scene; analogous to how a bureaucratic organization differs from a disciplinary space, in that it seeks conformity to its predetermined model, rather than providing truly effective inquiry. The resentments of a particular faction overtake the importance of the social body, or the quality of sociality itself, i.e. a part greater than its sum, but also what makes it possible to begin with.
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1901/1901katz/

Imaginary Presence – The Ostensive that gets deferred in Declarative speech: The thing that sets the Declarative mode of language apart from the others, is that it’s detached from the physical presence of its referent, thus it’s denying presence.

Imperative – A command derived from an Ostensive: An action is often warranted when an Ostensive is issue, for example when someone issues the Ostensive “fire!!!”, it’ll imply the Imperative that you should either seek shelter or help put out the fire. An Imperative can also be more explicit like “Pass the salt”, and like the Ostensive, the Imperative is also derived from something currently present at the Scene.
References:
Gans, E. L., Katz, A. L. (2019). The Origin of Language: A New Edition

Imperative-Ostensive Nexus – In that issuing an Ostensive despite absence of what it refers to, it will be made to appear by other participants: Imperatives have their authority grounded in revealing Ostensives.
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw540/

Imperative Constant – The practice of converting ritual into practice: The ritualistic aspect to language ensures anomalies within the practice and overlapping practices, are accounted for; practices have social history and a metalinguistic or metarepresentational quality to them, which is accounted for representationally through ritual. Ensuring there is an iterable scene surrounding each object we’re attending to corresponds to a (context-bound) infralinguistic-centering, its opposite being the (de-contextualized) victimary-metalinguistic (moral) feedback.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/07/the-imperative-constant/

Imperative Culture – Another word for Imperativity: Look at the ‘Imperativity’ entry.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/05/the-architecture-of-the-center/

Imperative Exchange – Acting in reciprocation with a center: Society and the obligations its members articulate to themselves and one another are dependent upon this bedrock of “imperative exchange”. The movement beyond “sacrificial imperative exchange” began with declarative culture and especially later with liberalism. A further movement ‘beyond’ (very technically speaking, this isn’t literally possible) imperative exchange could mechanistically occur through interrogative imperativity, which secures the central occupant from the manner in which imperative exchanges are interpreted within declarative culture (quite probably abstracted from their center at the ostensive/imperative level[s]; imperative exchanges which occur divorced from their sacrificial relation to a living center).
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/beyond-post-sacrificial/

Imperative Gap – The gap between the command issued and command obeyed: No order can be obeyed without a minimum of discretion being exercised, where the practice of commanding is about minimizing that gap.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/06/the-imperative-of-the-occupant-of-the-center/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/08/the-model-of-data/

Imperative of the Center – To construct an iterable scene around an object: The command issued that one should articulate a practice which differentiates between merely nominal or formal obedience (declarative; metalinguistic), and an obedience that is actual and practically existent (imperative; infralinguistic). The primary interest and investment should lie in obedience to practices (which follow imperatives) that also demonstrate obedience to the center, against symbolic gestures that only signify the desire to be obedient towards a center. The former is generally more probable, determined, and often already-occurring (seeking practical/actual/lived unification between language and practice, but also disciplines and their center, corresponds to graceful charisma); the latter however tends toward signifying-obedience (to a center) which possesses the inverse of those qualities, is often ironically easier (against the not too uncommonly extreme or unlikely difficulty, dangerousness, and extendedness of said scene one imagines oneself on), and is perhaps to the advantage of that priest/’saint’/media figure (transgressive charisma).
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/07/the-disciplines-the-imperative-of-the-center-the-generative-thought-experiment/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/07/the-imperative-constant/

Imperativity – We are always trying to get word from the Center: The framing of any discourse must be aimed towards some center/authority, where even the most disinterested inquiring has nested within it various sets of tacit imperatives, to be fulfilled unavoidably; even declarative speech in its various utterances is intended to convey significant meanings, which are inseparable from the intention of that speech to “do something”; even commands to suspend imperatives is still an attempt to sharpen the imperative order.
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_act
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/05/the-architecture-of-the-center/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2010/03/imperativity/

Imperium of Disciplinary Spaces – Another iteration might be Polyani’s “society of explorers”: A proper Imperium is an “imperative order”, where essentially no discipline exists isolated from the task of providing inquiry — whether that be formal, or moral, ritual, and aesthetic — ultimately back to the center of said imperative order that ever possibly mobilized them in the first place. The ideal order would have increasingly open and overlapping channels of communication — between center and periphery — reciprocating back and forth, with the expectation that whatever is provided is trustworthy.
References:
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/04/30/adam-katz-on-disciplinary-spaces/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/01/absolutist-epistemology/

Individualism – An elaboration of Collectivism: Individuals didn’t spontaneously form collectives, a collective became sophisticated enough to enshrine greater levels of autonomy. This became possible as the Scene of Representation expanded and ensued Omnicentrism.

Infralinguistic (dimension) – The imitative and pedagogical dimension of language that is deferred by metalinguistic representation: This term is useful in how it counters and can be contrasted with metalanguage (which obscures scenic presence). Language must contain content that is intended for another to direct their attention towards, but it also must be actually performed, or ostensively relayed between speakers. The scene of utterance and the representation of that scene (e.g. premeditating how one will signify and how that will be received) remain always-already differentiated within metalanguage. That language has an origin and dimension that is necessarily nonverbal, and immanent.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2502/2502katz/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/05/center-and-centrality/

Inquiry – The direction of attention to something attended from: Inquiry serves the social center by elaborating on discrepancies between sign and referent, thereby creating a sharper model for desire and its suspension.

Institutional Representation – The cultural, social, or participatory side to communication: The institutional encompasses things such as religion, ritual, art, and the esthetic effect generally. Functionally Institutional Representation intentionally diverts attention, and would be found in the capacity to defer the appetitive and direct desires in a transcendent way.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw576/ http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw577/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institution#Informal_institutions

Intellect – That which creates constructs as an attempt to substitute for the originary center: Contrasted with wisdom, intellect is not fit for transcending layers; abstract or philosophical thinking; or rather, grasping why something is meaningful (in other words, revealing and naming ostensives). Intellect instead tends towards sophistication of already known categories, and this is most obvious in reductive, vulgar specialists within declarative culture (e.g. scientism, vulgar materialism/physicalism, and other various, intermediate, not primary categories).
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construal_level_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_and_concrete

Intentional Structure – Symbolic representation of some kind that serves to transmit one’s intention to another: A formal, meaningful structure is required to convey one’s intention/intentional model to an interlocutor. Ostensive, imperative, and declarative language then all intend something in the intentional state of their interlocutor is effected, in the act of signification: ultimately grounded in the expectation of providing sustained significance(/sustaining joint-attention/deferral).
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_and_agency
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw539/, http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw540/, http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw542/, http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw543/, http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw544/, http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw545/, http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw546/, http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw547/, http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw548/

Intentionality – Being able to direct your intention and knowing others have intention: Being able to direct your intention, and being aware that other people also have an intention, means you can intentionally do things like teach them, or command/obey them. For example, baby animals learning from their mother happens through accidental mimesis because animals don’t have intentionality, and thus don’t intentionally teach their children something.

Internal Scene of Representation – A kind of privatized space we can trace back to the sparagmos: [A term used by Eric Gans to refer to our imagination, but rejected by Adam Katz.] “The mind’s eye” — the focal point of one’s attention in an imaginary space — may attend to constructed linguistic objects. Essentially a scene must be constructed, where the imagined representational act is self-inclusive and self-referential; one must treat oneself as a center in this scenic construction, though this is only possible through the existence of prior and especially originary centers, and the lexicon it provides; this private space is only private in a relative or immanent/material sense, where in a meaningful sense nothing is ever truly purely internal or private, in origin or in the inevitable impact effected.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/center-and-origin-the-name-of-the-center-and-centered-names/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw531/

Interrogative – Inquiring into an Imperative: An Interrogative is when you ask into an Imperative, most importantly about what to do if an Imperative cannot be carried out/fulfilled. At this point you’ve almost arrived at the Declarative mode of language.
References:
Gans, E. L., Katz, A. L. (2019). The Origin of Language: A New Edition

Interrogative Imperativity – Inquiry into the Imperatives someone is using: Following Post-Sacrificial culture, Interrogative speech is used instantiate a new Imperative to resist Imperative Exchange. Termed by Katz as a “charismatic aristocracy”, this model pragmatically confers deferral rather than demanding it from the occupant of the sovereign center, and subjects those who seek sacrificial imperative exchanges (and thereby wish to constitute themselves as centers) within the declarative to interrogation. Inquiry into the scope of demands placed on the sovereign should include whatever violent centralizing would constitute this exchange (i.e. unmasking tacit ostensives and imperatives within their speech), and as declarative language is used to equivocate between analogous exchanges, possible and impossible, imbalances within imperative economies at large would be exposed, putting victimary spiraling to rest.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/beyond-post-sacrificial/

Intersubjective – Mutual awareness of either’s awareness, or joint-attention on some object; this requires awareness of one another’s attention and how this mediates a given scene: This term effectively resolves the conflict between claims that experience is either subjective or objective. Rather, both subjective identity and knowledge of objective content always relies and originates in social interaction, which is mediated by symbolic language (redundant, as all language represents agency and intention).
References:
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/05/24/adam-katz-on-attentionality-a-necessary-precursor-to-ethics/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbolic_interactionism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imitation

Iterative Center
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/09/a-single-sample-is-enough-to-hypothesize-the-all/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/09/hypothesis-practice-vs-narrative-the-iterative-center/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/10/the-aesthetic-as-liminally-scenic/
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/scenic-design-practices-the-transfer

Joint Intentionality – The ability to intuit and share intentions towards shared goals: For Tomasello this is what fundamentally constitutes the difference between humans and animals, and minimally is coextensive/ dependent upon language use. Through 3rd order attentionality we can understand where each others intentions are directed at, and what goals they’re trying to achieve, allowing us to join them and help them out. This exists prior to a theory of mind (“mind-reading”) though can gradually expand to imperative culture, allowing the I-Thou distinction, and cooperative rationality.
References:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/15af/2e7c45b0bc0039bdc68e8de227aba2593ade.pdf

Justice – The idea that “everyone gets their due”: The defective treatment of the concept (caused by nominalization) stems from it being de-centered from the very institutions that were necessary to ever create the idea in the first place; and in the extreme, can even be separated from things like precedent. The institutions that created and are necessary to define this concept themselves become slave to the concept, this contradiction is known as imperium in imperio.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/12/distribution-from-the-center/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw665/

Law – Codified Moral History: Law is the codified Moral History of a group and and is thus an inherited frame for new people entering the group.

Legitimacy – The intrinsic relation between Ostensive and Imperative: Legitimacy originates from having or leading a shared attentional space, where legitimacy derives from ones ability to fulfill the Imperative as best as possible in relation to the Ostensive which the Imperative is/has been generated; the extent you’re taken seriously as an occupant of the Center, is to the degree you can successfully maintain a line of attention on the originary Ostensive.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/center-and-origin-the-name-of-the-center-and-centered-names/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/sovereign-as-onomastician-in-chief/

Linguistic Folding – Stagnated Declaratives that leave and overarch new dialogue ‘banishing dangling Imperatives’: Rather than get running discourse, you get a piece of that discourse folding over in a way that attempts to move forward, but doesn’t truly (with all the inorganic destruction that causes). Past Declaratives being pulled forward over new Declaratives, tyrannizing them.

Linguistic Hacking/Jiujitsu – The technique of converting victimary discourse into discourse which supports the central occupant: The exemplary victim relies on horizontal movements within language, which has the effect of dedifferentiation and “leveling” (descension). The central occupant on the other hand is reinforced by vertical movements within language, with the inverse effects of differentiation and stratification (ascension). This conversion occurs by (re)placing at the center the problematic of the scene and the tacit ostensive/imperative foreground it invokes (an especially relevant method is the post-sacrificial resolution of “imperative-interrogativity”).
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/07/the-ve-orticist-app/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/beyond-post-sacrificial/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/from-metapolitics-to-politics/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/01/more-on-the-proper-use-of-declarative-sentences/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/03/the-central-imaginary/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/03/toward-a-generative-logic-of-translation/

Linguistic Presence – The exchange of assurances that we continue to interact on the same Scene: Linguistic Presence concerns how utterances and most importantly Imperatives, said and given in the past, affects us now. For example, when you were little your parents told you to look to the sides before crossing the road, and when you do that now, what they said has Linguistic Presence.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/05/deriving-the-sample-to-its-source/
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/sampling-on-the-data-exchange

Linguistic Turn – Rejection of finding legitimation of what we say in language, in some reality outside of language: Instead of language being representational (providing a picture of what’s outside of language), language is generative (the meanings of signs are to be found in their effects on other signs).
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/gasc-2019-paper/
https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/linguistic-turn/v-1

Literacy – To be able to separate sign and cause: Literacy is not merely about being able to read and write, but is a state of mind where you can separate the cause of something from its signifying/signifier. It’s also a break with the ritual order where appearance becomes separated from ‘reality’.
References:
Olson, D. R. (1994). The world on paper: The conceptual and cognitive implications of writing and reading

Logocentrism – A metaphysics of presence which seeks to organize and ground illocutionary force with logic: The Logos acts as a transcendental signified, i.e. a singular concept standing hierarchically superior to all other concepts, accounting for total reality, truth, and meaning; reified outside and prior to sociality effectively. It favors speech (presence) over writing (absence), as in speech spoken words represent thought (meaning), whereas writing is only a substitution for speech, ungrounded as signifiers are substituted only by other signifiers. In Derridean deconstruction however, it’s revealed that even in the spoken form, there always remains a gap between signified and its signifier, minimally in regards to space and time; a signifier’s meaning always relies on deferral and differentiation from already-present signifiers; still problematically though grounding meaning already deep-set within the middle of existent culture.
References:
https://newderrida.wordpress.com/category/some-key-terms/

Love – The transcendence of Resentment: The protection of the object of your desire from the violence incited by your own desire for it.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/649/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw121/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/02/hunger-artistry-of-the-word/

Markets – Generators of information: Markets are the exchange of knowledge, skills, and actions that are necessary, in order to generate information about something the social order needs more information on, before it can be integrated, or information about things it doesn’t even realize it doesn’t know yet. Also sometimes referred to as ‘Delegated Task Forces’.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/market-capillarism/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/the-event-of-technology/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/10/what-are-we-talking-about-when-we-talk-about-the-market/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/debts-and-deferences/

Meaning – Some interpretation and way of understanding a signifier, which is intended: Linguistic signification is the means by which anything possibly possesses any meaning, relying on the ability to formally jointly-construct objects for attention, whether that’s for oneself or others.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw661/

Media – Whatever enables the constitution of a scene: A medium is whatever opens up the possibility to constitute a scene with the creator of the medium, like a book or a movie becomes a way of sharing a scene with the author. The quality of the medium depends on the extend it’s capable of making us “forget” that we aren’t actually sharing a scene.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/07/media-as-scene/

Metalanguage – Beginning with literacy and declarative speech, it’s language that is autoreferential in that it can take the system of signification it itself exists in, and hold it before description and analysis: Metalanguage rather than being a pragmatic reply to a previous Imperative is instead a negation of imaginary presence; as predication defers the topic within a Declarative sentence, the Imperative order is deferred. Thus Metalanguage is the vehicle of Imperium in Imperio as it obscures centrality, reifying various attributes humans leading disciplines display and thereby being capable of controlling them, shaping them to fit whichever model is desired. As Metalanguage declares these attributes, meanwhile it cannot attend to itself, i.e. it fails to account for the origins of disciplines, taking writing and propositional speech to be “always-already” in existence as a linguistic mode, neglecting the “why” question, and its origin in performativity and infralanguage; rather, meaning is grounded by bureaucratic means, externally suspended posterior to sociality, by perspectival, cross-referential nominalizations asserted to correspond to reality.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/03/the-meaning-of-meaning-and-metalanguage/ http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2402/2402katz/

Metaphysics – The working model for figuring and grounding meaning, particular to Western philosophy, originating in Plato as an instinct for deferring higher culture (distinguished from a less sophisticated appropriation and de-sacralization of it): In Originary Thinking, metaphysical thinking is defined as “the way of thinking founded on the principle that the declarative sentence–the “proposition”–is the fundamental linguistic form.” The tendency and bias to ground the ‘illocutionary force’ of language within metaphysics is directly linked to the general innovations in representation made possible by the declarative mode, as well as the tendency to get lost in it through mismatched framing/hierarchical derivation of meaning; philosophy as a result is always-already, endlessly, figuring through truth-falsehood verification a declarative nexus/chain of signifiers within a propositional structure, to ground the prior propositional content in question (see: transcendental signified), too often banishing the imperative-ostensive ontologies necessarily preceding that (abstracted) meaning-construction as a possibility.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0202/plato/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw660/

Metapolitics – Anticipating a political dialectic/political innovation: Asking the significance of anything is invoking a name. By naming a center, inevitably commands will follow: in this instance applying in the attendance to the metapolitical. Metapolitics then cannot be a purely descriptive space of inquiry, but is really itself politically significant, too. Whatever in this discipline is named will be tied to some kind of political change, even including this effect naming causes, in the imperative order we’re occupied with. Whether one is trying to lower reactivity by invoking a center, or increasing it by stoking resentment, will be the only two questions as to what a given metapolitical discourse is trying to effect; this against the notion of a possibly neutral or inconsequential discourse. One is either positively leading or scapegoating.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/from-metapolitics-to-politics/

Mimesis – Being able to see another social actor and mimic/learn from them: When you possess at least 2nd order Attentionality, and thus able to perceive other social actors, you’re able to watch them and learn from them through mimesis.

Mimetic Crisis – All the memebers of the group participating in a pecking order fight: In the animal kingdom, the animal hierarchy and who gets to eat first is determined by one on one pecking order fights. When intelligence increases enough in the group, mimesis begins to affect this and at a certain point, all members begin to join in. The alpha can’t take all of them on and assert his dominance, so the crisis will consume the entire group unless it can be deferred.

Mimetic Desire – Desiring something because someone else/others desire it: Mimetic Desire is the phenomenon where other people desiring something will increase your desire for it as well due to mimesis.

Mimetic Investment
References:
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/negative-capability?utm_source=url

Mimetic Kingship
References:
https://graymirror.substack.com/p/automate-your-vote

Mimism – A term borrowed from the anthropology of Marcel Jousse that is essentially a figuring of mimesis or imitation: Our mimetic constructions and tendencies precede our realizations of ourselves in increasingly possibly real senses: as self-contained, psychological, and ultimately “real” beings. This minimal set of tendencies is a near-complete enough engine of our meanings that it could carry us effectively from the past until now, by a common thread. A missing constituent part of this model would be a consistent measure to check whether mimisms are cancelling their progenitor or derived mimisms (essentially the tension effected by mimetic rivalry and how it completes the mimetic triangle); this is generally preferable to trying to purify and extend beyond the capacities of our imagination our archaeology in how our particular self-understanding is derived from a past line of mimisms.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/05/aspiration/
https://civilizedfrontier.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/0mimetic-triangle.jpg

Modes of Representation – The different types of language that coexist together: The modes of language are Ostensive, Imperative, Interrogative, Declarative (in the order they emerged).

Money – Represents power over a piece of the Center: Money is a medium through which a piece of the Center can be aqcuired in a desacralized way.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/08/money-and-capital-as-media-and-power/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/market-capillarism/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/debts-and-deferences/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/05/exchanges-withe-center-over-time/

Moral Feedback Loop – Shifts and exchanges in conferred centrality which keeps actors proximal and peripheral to a given center glued in joint-participation within a scene: Despite material asymmetries and inequalities there is an egalitarian intuition language users possess about a given social context they’re inhabiting (Originary Equality), that their engagement with and cooperation in naming a center is universally shared as a possible ability (by virtue of being language users); entailing reciprocated centrality scaled to relatively possible donations of attention/attendance.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/from-metapolitics-to-politics/

Moral History – The history of the group’s internal dynamics: Groups will over time develop their own internal morality through the group members actions, as well as what the group has gone through together. This is often in reflecting in the Naming of the group members.

Moral Model
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw551/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw655/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw665/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw658/

Morality – That which helps direct attention to the social Center: Morality as a mode of sharing attention enforces symmetry between those present in a social scene.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw551/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/10/mimeticism-and-morality/

Myth – The stories and explanations generated around rituals in a sacrificial order: Myths are the stories and explanations we tell for why a ritual came about and is needed. In terms of Originary Thinking, rituals are recurring ceremonies that enables us to continually defer violence.

Naming – Designating within a social order: Naming and names are to designate someone or something a position within a social order. It’s the means by which the sovereign can incorporate, authenticate, and bring to attention institutions, authorities, and social practices; joint-construction of felicitous symbolic representations within an Attentional Space allows one to elaborate on total reality, thereby bettering one’s capacity to present to the group the sharpest model of Desire and Deferral, hence the alternative definition for “Sovereign”; Onomastician-in-Chief.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/sovereign-as-onomastician-in-chief/

Narrative – A spoken or written account of some event: The postmodern skepticism towards narratives utilizes a textual basis, where language, meaning, and culture are described and able to be de-temporalized via a textual basis, those meanings said to be “always-already” present prior to the origin of a narrative, as in textual language spatio-temporal relations can be conceivably flattened. The originary scene as a narrative re-temporalizes, contextualizes, and effectively makes possible meaning as it explains how we derived and can continue to derive transcendence within immanence. Faith in narrative generally rests on whether that mediation will effectively serve to defer communal violence or not.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0302/narrative/ http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw346/

Narrating Forward – To move on: To be able to move on from something, you have to be able to narrate it to transcend it, according to Imperius. That could for example be a traumatic event, where you can only ever really move on from it when you narrate your experience forward.

Negative Capability – One’s capacity to avoid locking into one specific conclusion/possibility: Negative Capability is one’s ability to keep one’s mind open to other possibilities and conclusions that, if locked into, would prevent one from seeing other possibilities and block out information that’d gesture toward something else.
References:
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/negative-capability?utm_source=url

Nihilism – Contradicting Imperatives: When faced with multiple Imperatives that contradict one another it gives rise to the feeling of meaninglessness and nihilism.

Nominalization – Making a noun (name) out of a non-noun: In writing a speech scene must be represented, so nouns and verbs related to characteristics present such as tone, body language, etc., are nominalized. In relation to disciplinary spaces and concepts like “the just”, nominalization would re-inscribe that concept as “justice” which would allow one to now use or imagine the nominal itself freely and not necessarily included alongside the necessary institutions that enforced / made possible that very nominal to begin with.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2402/2402katz/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/04/nominalization-imperativity-and-reading-quick-or-patient/

Objectified Imitation – The imitation of a scene that is lagging the present scene: When you’re inaugurated in a (specific) scene, you’ll be able to recall it and represent it when situation and context demands it. For example, seeing the flag of your country and knowing to stand up when it’s being presented, everyone else who’s also inaugurated in that scene will also know to stand up.

Occupied Center – The Center that orders (other Centers): The Occupied Center is where the current order stems from, where authority resides, and it orders other Centers through its authorization of them. There has been an occupied center since the emergence of the Big Man out of primitive tribal society, and is today still above all the state.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/07/way-way-after-sacral-kingship/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/02/form-and-paradox/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/06/sacral-kingship-and-after-preliminary-reflections/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/02/power-and-paradox/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2016/10/central-power-and-the-originary-configuration/
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/the-bearer-of-sovereignty

Omnicentrism – The ability for anyone to constitute himself as a Center: As the scene of representation expanded more and more people were able to constitute themselves as a Center, until everyone became able to, which gave rise to individualism.

One Big Discipline – The disciplinary space itself devoted to inquiry related to sharpening the attentional capacities of all other disciplinary spaces: Generative Anthropology as One Big Discipline probes the constitutive concepts of all other disciplinary spaces and relates them to a shared origin, grounding their meanings in the most reduced or fundamental of attentional spaces, where ultimately all language users can be related back to a common, shared sign of deferral.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2402/2402katz/

Originary Dialectics – The movement beyond disagreement to the underlying agreement: Crises emerge between the center and periphery; between continuing the intentional structure and the mistakenness that arises on the margins. This tension between the desire for sustained significance in spite of relative asymmetries is the cause for generating new historical forms, which reconstruct the center in a way that resolves said conflict. Every intentional conflict possesses at its heart, still, the shared capacity for joint-intention, which is “always-already” there: this is another way of saying that even where dissent is present a common center is being elicited.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/03/dialectics/

Originary Equality – Everyone’s equal in ability to behold the Center/Sign: Everyone is equal to behold the Center/Sign (share attention), but from there we might materially be in different places in relation to the Center/Sign which is where hierarchies comes from. This fundamental equality is why we’re able to speak and understand each other as language users.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2016/08/frame-symmetry-equality/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/06/equality-and-morality/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/06/immorality-and-inequality/

Originary Event – The event where language and the human emerged: The specific event where the aborted gesture of appropriation finally succeded, which inaugurated language and the human.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1202/frank1/
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/03/31/andrew-bartlett-provides-a-skeleton-of-generative-anthropology/

Originary Feminism – Realization of [cultural] Lateness: Originary Feminism concerns women’s lateness to language and culture, and through this realization of Lateness comes also a realization of Firtsness. Through adopting Representational Culture and language, women go from being an object of appetite, to a subject of Desire.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw419/

Originary Grammar – The reading of signs and semiotic practices as to functionally preserve linguistic presence, involving inquiry into the most easily iterated modes in which to share attention: Constituted by the Ostensive, Imperative, Interrogative, and Declarative modes of language, these forms are more beneficial when trying to point towards, imply, or minimally include a shared social center within one’s discourse, compared to desacralized terms that serve to monopolize, deny, or generally undermine a shared social center in the way they’re constituted, such as “theory, “determinations,”” and “norms”.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2009/03/originary-grammar-and-post-sacrificial-semiotic-agency/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/07/mistakenness-revisited/

Originary Hypothesis – A hypothesis on how human language emerged: The Originary Hypothesis is an empirically unverifiable hypothesis about how human language emerged in an event, making it categorically different than animal’s indexical signalling.
References:
Gans, E. L., Katz, A. L. (2019). The Origin of Language: A New Edition

Originary Leftism – Obedience to the Imperative to expose the products of discipline as stolen centrality:
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2015/06/toward-a-unified-field-theory-of-the-left/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2016/07/originary-leftism-revisited/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2016/07/a-brief-addendum-to-originally-leftism-revisited/

Originary Medium – The medium through which the Originary Event was experienced and mediated: Adam Katz imagines the Originary Scene having a circular structure, maximizing the power of the Originary Sign, as everyone would have been able to behold it, as well as each other, so they could see each other seeing the object. The circular configuration would be the medium, or the condition under which the sign could most effectively be issued.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/07/media-as-scene/

Originary Memory – The first human memory which we all share with one another as beings capable of using the uniquely human sign: It is the unconsciously held memory of the configuration of the scene, the minimal memory of mimetic interactivity.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1202/frank1/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2014/02/originary-memory/

Originary Mistakenness – The disruption of a ritual space through a failure to properly sign: Originally conceived of as defilement, the inability to properly abide by convention draws the attention of participants within the ritual space, who then generate new idioms in response to the disruption. Attention to inattention strengthens the ritual space by anticipating the mistakenness which may arise on the margins, and recuperates that lost attention thereby.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1601/1601katz/

Originary Model – Model events that we use to compare actual events to: Model events are historical configurations that shape the scene of actual events, when we encounter something similar to the model event. Whence we try to fit the various members of the actual event scene into the roles of the model event scene by identifying markers of similarity. Originary Models are always something we can return to and extract more data from.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/08/the-model-of-data/

Originary Satire – The representation of the temptation of transgression within the impossibilization of victimization:
References: [Representing someone/anyone as both/simultaneously as a victim and a threat. Adam writes “Presenting oneself as a threat can be seen as a way of concealing or compensating for vulnerability, while at times there can be nothing more threatening than a vulnerable, “cornered” animal”. This duality is split up in High/Popular art where vulnerability is concentrated in High art, whereas the threatening character is emphasized in Popular art].
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/language-policy/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/11/logocentrism-media-and-originary-satire/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/the-paradoxical-telos-of-the-aesthetic/

Originary Scene – The series of moments whereby the originary event was instantiated, which is coeval with all significance: Constituent elements of this scene include language, desire, the esthetic, the sacred, etc., which all then correspond with the geometry between various social actors. The pragmatic paradox between participants within this scene, effected the birth of representation from the mimetic triangle, following the emission of the aborted gesture of appropriation. The gesture was capable of carrying over one’s intention to defer appropriation of the central object, to other participants within the scene.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/gaintro/

Originary Sign – The central object becomes the first Sign: During the Originary Event, the central object becomes the first Sign, repelling the participants attempt at appropriating it, avoiding a mimetic conflict.

Originary Thinking – Means that language has always been about deferral: From the Originary Sign during the Originary Event that deferred the the appropriation of the central object, thus deferring the imminent violence, up until Declarative speech today, all of language is about deferring something.
References:
Gans, E. L. (1997). Signs of Paradox: Irony, Resentment, and other Mimetic Structures.
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1202/frank1/
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/03/31/andrew-bartlett-provides-a-skeleton-of-generative-anthropology/

Ostensive – A gesture or utterance issued where its signified is present: Examples such as “Fire!”, “Stampede!”, or pointing are Ostensives. Person and tense are not present as grammatical functions within the Ostensive, as everyone stands in equal relation to the present object designated by the sign. It includes the totality of perceptibles, such as nominals and verbals, or things and actions. The Originary Sign was an Ostensive. Ostensives are the first words we teach children.
References:
Gans, E. L., Katz, A. L. (2019). The Origin of Language: A New Edition
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw537/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw539/

Ostensive Culture – A culture which is constituted by the experience of events rather than direct commands or “things”: Warnings about immediately present things which are considered significant to those present, constitutes an overwhelming amount of what occurs in ostensive culture. Thinking is not yet possible in the mode of representation that defines this culture, as intended meanings are immediately present to those in symmetrical fashion both in an institutional and formal sense (the person[s] referenced are implicit rather than explicit). The latter explains the egalitarian intuition widely possessed by language users.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/02/the-grammar-of-technology/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw574/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw537/

Paradox – A property only present in, though makes possible, systems of representation: Self-representation is always paradoxical and thereby so is all language, as representations are included in the universe they represent. On the Originary Scene, the sign designates its referent as already significant, pointing to the object-as-pointed-to-by-the-sign. That the sign inaugurates significance, despite its referent being designated as already significant, is the source of the sacred.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw580/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw390/

Pedagogical Accountability – Teacher-student relation/hierarchy: Hierarchy is a series of pedagogical relationships where the superior is training his inferior, and taking a position in a hierarchy also carries with it a pedagogical responsibility which the inferiors position themselves in relation to. Dysfunction is in terms of someone not teaching or learning within the terms set up.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/10/mimeticism-and-morality/
https://mega.nz/#F!EO4zCSZI!abDzz4G6nwPRMOXll0C7IQ (File 1, 31:00-33:00)

Performativity – The power of language to effect change in the world: A word for the transformative effect of language in creating meaning, and thereby a cultural reality, where none previously existed. So language does not simply describe the world but may instead (or also) function as a form of social action.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw570/
https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199766567/obo-9780199766567-0114.xml

Political Imaginary – The sovereign order one would necessarily need to imagine to fulfill some imperative exchange: The two main Political Imaginaries are the Absolutist Imaginary and the Anarchist Imaginary. The Anarchist Imaginary (paradoxically) interdicts Imperative Rule within the Declarative, while the Absolutist Imaginary seeks to reinforce the Imperative order, conferring the center as sovereign. By employing the interrogative mode, one can inquire as to how the demands of a given imperative exchange can be realized, intending on fulfilling it, this being how one would turn the tables on an Anarchist Imaginary.

Politics – Struggle over language: Every political mobilization requires a shared frame and center regardless of which viewpoints and strategies are being advocated. Conflicts arise related to the severity of disagreement or incongruity on how a frame(s) should be ordered, whether that frame is proximal or distal to naming that center.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/from-metapolitics-to-politics/

Politicize – A calcification/bureaucracy/ideology complicating otherwise morally delegated autonomy: Everything is ultimately sanctioned or not sanctioned by a political order, however the term usually refers to a bureaucracy complicating (what had previously been) morally delegated autonomy.

Popular art – Art that entices consumption: Mobilized/embodied transgressive charisma that entices us to appropriate [the sacred].
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw223/

Post-Sacrificial – The culture following the breakdown of sacrificial culture, or imperative exchange: While technically not beyond the terms of imperative exchange, constitutive of relations between all institutional orders during and after the Axial Age, Post-Sacrificial culture is marked by the tendency to scapegoat or demand imperative exchanges within the declarative. Demands placed on the sovereign center increase as the consequent victimary spiral intensifies; as tacit ostensives and imperatives within declarative speech go unquestioned, this allows for obligations to be placed on the sovereign with a likely impossible set quantity to satisfy or dispute.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/beyond-post-sacrificial/

Post-Sacrificial Imperative Exchange – Imperative Exchange with other people: With the inauguration of the Axial Age, exhanging Imperatives with the Gods/Sacred became less and less common, with Imperative Exchanges between people replacing them. This is best examplified by the marketplace where goods and services are exchanged for money.

Power – [The moving of frames in order to produce greater shared attention]: Power is the ability to direct attention, by leading a linguistic Frame [within an attentional space]. While most understandings of power define it in terms of the capacity to use force to impose one’s will on others, the anthropomorphic strain within GA sees the origin of hierarchies and therefore of power in the capacity to represent the center, or to inherit and sustain such capacity from predecessors.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2016/07/power/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/09/power-2/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/10/centering/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/sovereign-as-onomastician-in-chief/

Practice – Doing something so that something happens as a result of what you have done: A Practice is intentionally engaging in specific actions to obtain specific outcomes.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/07/truth-and-practice/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/07/the-imperative-constant/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/11/languaging-practices/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/10/scenic-design-practices/

Pragmatic Paradox – Wanting something because you can’t have it: Oscillating between the internal cognitive scene, where you can have the real object, and the collective scene where the object is inderdicted because there’s not enough of it to go around.

Presencing – The exchange of signs between participants upon a Scene: Presencing is about shared intention communicated through this exchange of signs by members already within a scene, contrasted with the scene of representation, which involves integrating new participants into a scene.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2010/12/language-inquiry/

Prometheanism – Communion with the Center: Instead of being dragged along by history, you engage with and embody history (through performance).

Rationality – The process of working abstract formal objects into opposing binaries, and evaluating their ordering according to truth-value and logical consistency: Rationality is something only conceivable within the declarative, and despite its innovations in what can possibly be represented, such as “reality”, this treatment of language cannot ground its own meaningfulness or why it possesses significance (seemingly disinterested language is always implicitly performative and tied to an imperative and ostensive “base”).
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1202/frank1/

Re-embedment – The process of restoring attention: To re-embed something that has been abstracted out of its embedment you have to restore attention. You basically need to create new structures compatible with the changed world to embed (the abstracted) people into and give them that sense of historicity and identity and fulfillment.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/market-capillarism/

Reactionary – Recuperating the Center: To be a Reactionary is to recuperate the Center by trying to stabilize the moral-linguistics of a space, which more loosely means ‘keeping the group together’. As a Reactionary you can’t have dogmatic views and ideals, but must always navigate the group’s Resentments in a real-politik sort of way.

Reactivity/non-Reactivity – How well you are able to defer an Imperative Exchange: If you are Reactive to what people do to you, people are able to jerk you around. If you are non-Reactive (able to defer your reaction) you can position the other people around, and you can address their behaviour within the context of the institution generating that activity in the first place (and get everyone’s attention directed towards that).
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/from-metapolitics-to-politics/

Reciprocity – Doing acts that reciprocate what others are doing: When you are treated one way or another, you want to act in kind towards them, where every act is measured against another act. For example, if they shout at you then you want to shout back at them, if they give you a gift you want to give one back.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw451/

Reification – A static metaphysic: Reification happens when something becomes a static metaphysic vs. being fluidly historically amenable, amenable to the given scenic context. Reification subordinates the actually operating Center. For example, constructing a model on what something like ‘truth’ or ‘logic’ or ‘morality’ must be.

Reliability – Social-moral coherence: In governance, [Reliability is about creating social-moral coherence. This stands opposite to ‘predictability’.]

Representation – The Deferral of Desire: [Representation is the externalization of an injunction against our Desire from our Desires themselves.] You are both the one Desiring and the one Desiring to defer your Desire.

Resentment – A refusal to release an other from Imperative you consider them bound by: Resentment is your fulfilling of an Imperative, having the reciprocal Imperative you issue go unfulfilled, while not letting that reciprocal Imperative lapse.
References:
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/resentment?r=sevpr
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/02/praxis/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/02/hunger-artistry-of-the-word/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw650/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw663/

Rights – Privilege and delegated autonomy that is declared prior to the necessary coordination (attention and naming) and mechanisms (material enforcement by real sovereigns) required to have delegated them in the first place: Rights are a quasi-metaphysical phenomenon, despite the historical reality that their derivation lies in principles such as primus inter pares, which were originally aristocratic and involved various initiatory trials. The expansion of this agency to the furthest and most universal margins today via “right’s discourse” lacks performative initiation; stemming from the confusing of our intuition that language use is a near-universal capacity in human, with a uniquely declarative phenomenon in GA referred to as “The Big Scene”, where everyone on this scene is imagined to have already signed appropriately regardless of the immanent reality of whether they really have, or not.
References:
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/05/24/adam-katz-on-attentionality-a-necessary-precursor-to-ethics/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2302/2302katz/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/04/the-big-scene-is-the-anthropological-basis-of-anarchist-ontology/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primus_inter_pares

Ritual – A collective act of fulfilling a command of the Center, while making a request to the Center:
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/11/languaging-practices/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/07/the-imperative-constant/

Sacral Compulsion – The referent, not as an effect of the Originary Sign, but its motivation: On the Originary Scene the sign designates its referent as already significant, despite significance not being present until inaugurated by the sign. Thematization of the sacred within the post-sparagmotic constitutes the Awe of discovery.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw531/

Sacrality – The Thematization of the human Paradox: Sacrality is most present within the Cultural Locus, in the past understood as the religious sphere. Originary Signification defines significance as equivalent to Sacrality. Historically it precedes the paradoxes of logic, and confers its referent as already significant, meaning the object isn’t an effect of the sign, but its motivation, beyond one’s will.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw531/

Sacralized Power Theory – Is concerned with consciousness, language, and their coevality with the Divine, which is foundational and makes possible politics, culture, and power in general: Contrasted with the historical, materialist approach of Desacralized Power Theory, Sacralized Power Theory emphasizes language as the fundamental means by which social relations are mediated, opposed to a constant state of soft-variant civil war, or worse. It opposes complete systematizing of sovereignty within the declarative, and confers the center as occupied by a graceful actor, who expresses and generates a better model for desire and its suspension, ensuring the inviolability of the sacred center.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap0101/gans/

Sacrificial Imperative Exchange – Imperative Exchange with the Gods/Sacred: This type of Imperative Exchange is when something is offered to the Gods/Sacred in return for something else (a “blessing” of some sort). E.g. sacrificing an animal in exhange for rains for the crops.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/02/can-networks-crowd-out-markets/

Satire – Bringing attention to reified bureaucracies: Satire is when you try to apply a reified bureaucracy in a different context/situation than it’d normally be applied.

Scapegoating – Deferring authority to something outside yourself: When you act as an authority/use power, it can be in your interest to depict what you are saying, your authority, as emerging from something outside of yourself (super-sovereign), to distance yourself from culpability/responsibility. For example, “acting on behalf of the people/God/human rights/etc.”. Democracy is a giant scapegoating mechanism.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/05/beyond-post-sacrificial/

Scene – A scene is either an implicit or explicit context mutually defined and understood by a multiplicity of language users: Any scene will have informal or broadly institutional elements, and the degree to which those are diminished shows how secular a discourse is; an explicit or formal scene is pre-configured and predictable. Informal scenes reflect the agency of those on a scene implicitly through aesthetic, ritual, and moral modes of representation (human sacrifice represented group solidarity implicitly, understood not as an explicitly human — rather an implicit supplementation for it — sacred agency), whereas formal scenes explicitly attend directly to the discipline and attention of subjects on that particular scene.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2202/2202matthews/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2302/2302katz/
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/event-intelligence

Scene of Representation – The exchange of signs between a participant upon one scene and another, a “stranger” to the scene to whom one presents the results of the scene: ‘Summarizing’ and presenting the results of an [established] Scene.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2010/12/language-inquiry/

Scenic design – Construction scenes such that whoever is placed at the center is connected with what is an increasingly exclusive and direct imperative relation with all on the periphery: Involving an unceasing flurry of supplementary imperatives filling the imperative gap and displacing recall of the succession of imperatives from the signifying center.
References:
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/originary-grammar-as-model-for-scenic

Scientism – Secularization or the disconnection of a scientific Disciplinary Space, from its own moral history as an Institutional practice: The Formal objects and procedures named within a scientific Discipline, under this effect are Decentered and can be imagined as standalone ontologies — independent of (inter)subjective interests or Desire. Participants within disciplines like this are mistakenly treated/ conceived as complete objects, through the lens of constructs they created.
References:
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/02/18/marina-ludwigs-on-the-narrativity-of-science-a-solution-to-scientism/

Secondness – Participation which focuses on the maintenance of a given scene/institution: Those second on a scene fulfill the bureaucratic function within an institution, which is guaranteeing continuity or reproducibility of that space; morally narrating the actions of those first on a scene is a task those second on a scene must aim to fulfill.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw419/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categories_(Peirce)#The_Categories
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/10/mimetic-theory-and-high-low-v-the-middle/

Semantic Primes – A basic vocabulary shared by all languages in the world: Anna Wierzbicka studied all languages in the world and found that all languages share approximately 200 words that all have the same meaning in all languages.
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_primes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_semantic_metalanguage

Shared Attention – Pre-linguistic attention is typically referred to as shared attention, distinguished from linguistic, and meaningful joint-attention: Structurally this can also be iterated as the difference between pre-human emulative behavior, and imitative — that is meaningfully intentional and social — behavior.
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_attention
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/shared-agency/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulation_(observational_learning)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imitation

Sign – A sound-image affixed or conferred meaning, in reference to an object which may have no correlation to the form of the sound-image, especially in declarative signing: A la Saussure, the sign is split into two parts: the signifier, which is physical, and the sound-image; the signified, which is immaterial, and the intended meaning pointed to by the signifier. Correlation between a sound-image and its meaning relies on the ability to trace the intention of another language user, as well as faith: that they mean what they say, and mutually that you sufficiently understand their intended meaning.
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signified_and_signifier
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw340/

Significance – The quality an object possesses in its meaningfulness or relevancy as Sacred or Desirable: This form of attention is differentiated from appetitive attendance, where instead of by Indexicality and externally conditioned reflexes, appropriation is inhibited by Signification and within Intentionality itself.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw536/

Signification – To represent something using signs: The act of projecting a sound-image or Signifier, where its Signified is deemed worthy of attention by virtue of possessing Significance.
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw536/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw537/

Signifying Center – Is the meaning with which we imbue the Occupied Center and all its branches: The Center is also the source of meaning, coherence, and consistency, which is what makes an order an order.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/06/from-metapolitics-to-politics/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/sovereign-as-onomastician-in-chief/
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/originary-grammar-as-model-for-scenic

Signing – The locus of agency: Your ability to sign is where your agency happens, and your ability to use your Signing to either set the Frame, manipulate the inherited Frame, or just follow along the inherited Frame. Signing can be any form of intentional act, whether it’s speaking, writing, gesturing, or Originary Thinking.

Social/anti-social – A set of Imperatives that authorize acting in a particular manner and then determining whether they fail to cohere with the constellation of Imperatives (explicit or implicit) that make the particular social Scene possible within which such acts are embedded: To be social is to be acting in coherence with the Imperatives (both explicit and implicit) that condition a scene of coordinated social performance. To be antisocial is to be transgressing against these conditions.

Social Buffers – All the mechanisms/rituals of deferral that have been built up over time: All the ways we defer violence build on top of one another, and can be seen as ‘buffering order’. Occassionally buffers that have previously been effective at deferring violence can become detrimental to deferring violence, in which buffers must actually be razed to be able preserve the buffering order as a whole.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/12/on-the-proper-use-of-the-declarative-sentence/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/07/way-way-after-sacral-kingship/

Sociality – Another word for 2nd order Attentionality: The awareness of other social actors allows for ‘group animals’ [as an evolutionary strategy].

Sovereign Imaginary – Old term for ‘Central Imaginary’: When one imagines that something should be one way or another, you’re also imagining a sovereign who can carry it out and make it so.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/03/the-central-imaginary/

Sovereignty – To command attention in a way that increases the extent to which those participating within a scene uptake responsibility, relative to the embeddedness of said participants (within late-culture this would possibly manifest — explicitly at the individual level — as increased deferral relative to the attention one is delegated command or influence over): The ability to gracefully sharpen and unify attention towards the enactment of signs/names, functionally allows for possible mechanisms which communicate one’s intention for deferral/self-regulation, within a necessarily joint-attentional scene:
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/sovereign-as-onomastician-in-chief/
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/the-bearer-of-sovereignty

Sparagmos – Dividing the central object in the Originary Event which serves as the source of defilement, or originary mistakenness: After the aborted gesture of appropriation is enacted, the central object is divided in a relatively orderly fashion between the participants, beginning with a mistaken interpretation that one’s attempt at preventing the other’s appropriative movement was instead an endorsement and recognition of one’s sanction to appropriate the central object; the sign shifts in meaning to finally include the formal closure of the central object for those having signed, allowing said orderly division to occur; finally after participants have sufficiently established the sacredness of demonstrated agency, against this focuses shift resentment finally onto the now visibly superfluous or hollow nature of the object in question.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1601/1601katz/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2002/2002goldman/

Super Sovereignty – A Declarative crystallization of Sacral Compulsion: A moral perspective that pretends itself capable of judging the sovereign by a greater sovereignty. Specialists (priests, scientists, philosophers, academics, etc.) can create moral perspectives that can come to judge the sovereign’s rule, as if the moral perspective itself was the actual ruling sovereign (basically the priestly class undermining the rule of the sovereign).
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap2302/2302katz/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/04/the-big-scene-is-the-anthropological-basis-of-anarchist-ontology/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/07/language-paradoxed/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/03/declarative-culture-properly-understood/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/11/resistance-without-supersovereignty/
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/the-bearer-of-sovereignty

Supplemented Agency – Externalization of Agency: A phenomenon where some concept is treated like its an actual agent. E.g. “the market determines…” or “history shows…” or “science says…”.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/07/language-paradoxed/

Teaching – Seeing an Ostensive in play: Being a teacher is about getting a student to follow along, which essentially means to get them to see an Ostensive, and how it works. To Adam Katz, being a teacher and a leader is one and the same, meaning leadership is pedagogy.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/10/mimeticism-and-morality/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/07/sovereign-as-onomastician-in-chief/

Technics – The scenic design component of the constitution of the human: Technics is about making Imperatives that are attached to a particular model conform to that model without deviation.
References:
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/mimological-impressments
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/originary-grammar-as-model-for-scenic

Technology – The creation of expanded scenes enhancing unidirectional center-periphery communication: The relocation of center-periphery relations to straightforward imperativity is revelatory insofar as that’s all it ever was while being disorienting because reference points external to those relations become increasingly arbitrary.
References:
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/originary-grammar-as-model-for-scenic

Thematization – When we’re consciously aware that we’re doing [something/a category]: Thematization is when a category is inaugurated so we’re consciously aware of it, and know when we’re doing it. For example, being aware that this blog is all in the Declarative mode of language.

The Big Scene – The scene where everyone is imagined to have already signed appropriately regardless of the immanent reality of whether they really have or not: Stemming from our intuition of Originary Equality, that all language users are equal before the Sign, a confusion arises where everyone on the Scene are imagined to having already Signed, which means it lacks performative initiation.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/04/the-big-scene-is-the-anthropological-basis-of-anarchist-ontology/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/07/mistakenness-revisited/
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/scenic-design-practices-the-transfer

The Little Bang – The emergence of language as a new dimension: This is a term Eric Gans uses to signify the relevance of abstract language as a categorically unique innovation. It is simultaneously a small evolution, and simultaneously an enormous game changer.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw589/

The West – Commitment to the Disciplines: What uniquely defines the West is its respect for the Disciplines and unity among technical specialists, whom are ever increasingly specialized. This means that even rulers have to obey the Disciplines, and cannot abuse them without major backlash.

Thinking – The construction and arranging of formal objects within an abstracted mental-space: The capacity to think is related to literacy and the general innovations possible through declarative grammar; it requires the ability to consciously discriminate between the scene of representation one is implicitly constructing, and the possible failure of one’s suppositions involved; bifurcation and truth-falsehood verification are possible but also inevitable within this mode, narrowly. Thinking is always metalinguistic.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/ap1302/1302gans/

Thirdness – Those who gather around an already-active disciplinary space and its initiated first and second members: The vast majority of those on a scene are observers who are to model themselves on those presently leading a scene, and according to established normative distinctions.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/10/mimetic-theory-and-high-low-v-the-middle/

Threshold of Significance – The ‘amount’ of meaning that a Sign possess: Eric Gans argues that when the Originary Sign was issued, it contained all possible meaning in existence. As the utterance of the Sign gradually became more commonplace, with new Signs being issued, the threshold of significance gradually lowered, with each individual sign itself containing less and less meaning.

Transcendental Signifier – An organizing sign that stands atop a metaphysical hierarchy: A Transcendental Signifier is presupposed to e able to explain all of reality, experience, and meaning; transcendental because it’s making a metaphysical assertion outside of experience or verification; a signifier is a term borrowed from Saussurean linguistics designating the sign, it’s meaning conversely is the signified. The Transcendental Signifier used to be ‘God’, now it’s ‘evolution’.
References:
http://www.doxa.ws/Ontological/TS2.html

Transfer Translation
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/11/some-paradoxes/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2019/11/languaging-practices/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/01/design-imitation-and-the-transfer-translation/
https://dennisbouvard.substack.com/p/scenic-design-practices-the-transfer

Transgressive Charisma – Violent seizure of the sacred center, involving the mobilization of disciplines against one another: Functionally, one can usurp the center by focusing the attention of the varying disciplines not on the center, but rather on each other, stirring their resentments and intensifying mimetic rivalry, riding those conflicts to ascension, bypassing accountability in the process. Basically, mobilizing every compatible-enough institution and Imperative to undermine the most pressing deferral. This also constitutes a GA definition for ideology.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2016/10/the-two-charismas/

Truth – Meaningful content by virtue of being communally significant: Truth involves networks of trust and networks of knowledge (or better, networks of meaning), because the meanings we consider certainly in our possession and understanding require making present the past presences those meanings originated in, conferred significance by past language users alive or dead. To operate against the strength of a network of trust is characteristic of ideological epistemology.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2016/07/truth/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2018/01/absolutist-epistemology/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/07/truth-and-practice/

Type I Leader – The classical archetype that absorbs costs and gracefully leads: These types of leaders are typified by leading with Graceful Charisma, and are willing to absorb costs and wounds as the Center.

Type II Leader – The machiavellian archetype that leads by externalizing costs and riding coattails: These types of leaders are typified by leading with Transgressive Charisma, mobilizing a social context from behind and externalizing costs instead of absorbing them as the Center.

Tyranny – Violating the moral history of a group: When a leader violates the moral history of a group, it gives rise to the feeling of tyranny, and the leader being a tyrant.

Universalism – The fantasy that all humans are occupying the same Disciplinary Space: Universalism is functionally a specific Disciplinary Space trying to usurp all other Disciplinary Spaces by ‘exposing’ their unjustified assumptions (but can’t examine its own unjustified assumptions).
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2017/08/formalism-all-the-way-down/

Usurpation of the Center – [Taking over a ritual]: The Center is usurped, when the fundamental significance from which the authority to issue commands derives is ostensively relocated to the intentionality of a now sovereign participant.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw419/

Verticism – Making the center, the center of the problematic with regards to “horizontalist” usurpations of central occupancy: Disciplines which orbit the center can often try and appropriate central occupancy for flat, spatial/horizontal means, which is another way of saying one’s aims are materialistic, de-centered/sacralized, or generally tyrannical when describing what one’s central imaginary is doing. Instead, a better geometric figuring would be dedifferentiating and descending vortexes, and also differentiating and ascending vertexes, where disciplines and discourse-as-lines don’t continue off into oblivion, but re-relate back to the center they originated from and were initially possibly modeled within.
References:
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/07/the-ve-orticist-app/
http://gablog.cdh.ucla.edu/2020/06/toward-a-media-moral-synthesis/

Victimary Thinking – The postmodern tendency to take the moral model of reciprocity, and equality before the Sign as language users, to an extreme that denies Firstness, allowing Usurpation of the Center by the Periphery: As a tendency traceable back to literate priests revolting against sovereigns, it’s a consequence of thinking too deep-set within the Declarative mode of speech, where spatio-temporal relations can be flattened or ignored, masking tacit Imperatives and Ostensives within Imperative Exchanges. Lacking a positive position after the failure of utopianism, a negative identity pitted on Resentment was allowed to flourish, to such a degree that even the authorial subject involved in social codings (such as gender, race, class) themselves is seen to be in unjust occupation of the sacred Center.
References:
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw230/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw538/
http://anthropoetics.ucla.edu/views/vw499/

Violent Centralization

Whig Historiography – Externalization of agency/Supplemented agency through invoked Super Sovereigns: The aim at deferring the implementation of the general imperatives that oppose some obstacle to our freedom in order to allow for the gathering of some irreconcilable imperatives which could only be reconciled in a new and more freely joined reality. In this view naturalized phenomena and imaginary agencies are what’s actually governing society, and not (actual) people.
References:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history
https://resdivinaestpublica.wordpress.com/2018/06/06/adam-katz-on-ostensive-freedom-the-resolving-mechanism-of-political-crisis/

Wisdom – Restoration of attention back to the Center: Contrasted with intellect, wisdom allows recuperation of a given discipline’s moral history, rather than simply having the capacity to map a history, period. The difference between sophistication into oblivion, and true, meaningful insight — or the capacity to make socially relevant the history in question.

Create your website with WordPress.com
Get started
%d bloggers like this: