Celtic English
Customized English Language Training for International Communication
Home
About Us
Teachers
Angus's Blog
Training
Links
Contact Us
(92) 9623-9656
Get Our E-mail

Followers

Friday, January 6, 2012

MATERIALIZING THE IDEA OF LOGOS

In the bible of words are hidden messages to be revealed, and anyone who connects the ideas of words will discover meaning. Mentation is the activity of relating ideas. 

“Plotinus” discovered “One”. “One” is a primary idea. Other primary ideas are: the many ones, and the oneness of opposites. Democritus named his idea “atoms” and Heraclitus “logos”. Without primary ideas there is no philosophy. A primary idea is the inception of a philosophy.

In the word bible the “atoms” are the ideas classified by the first letter. And “logos” is the reason, the motion of relating ideas. Rational is relational, the activity of the mind. “Mentation” is found in “M”, relating with “mind”, “motion”, “meaning” and “message”. By reason messages are found.

~~

It was cold and damp in a land still in the shadow; earth spinning would soon turn to the light. I could feel the spin, aware that all was in motion, and that from One there were many, each relating one to another, continuously relational. I was conscious of the activity of my mind; atoms in relating activity, idea joining with idea as water broken into drops join one to another, completing something qualitatively more. I was experiencing reason, logos.     

~~

Pondering words in the bible of ideas I found two ideas in “P”: Power and Possession.


POWER if possessed absolutely is to posses absolutely. To posses the Whole, not just a part, is the intention of particular beings. The part confuses itself with the Whole. A part sees itself as the Whole. The Whole is undivided, “Integer”. One [1] divided issues the multiplication of ones [1], [1], [1], “integrants”, the fission of one into many ones. But it is not the "One" that is particularized, but the idea being materialized by many integrant acts.

 No one wants to be only one of many ones. Every one intends to be more than every one else, to be the One, or the One of ones. 

To possess the One is to not be denied any one part. To not eat from any one tree is to not possess the Whole. To not possess the Whole is to not possess absolutely, thus power is not absolute. If the One is lacking any one integrant then it is not the Whole. The essence of existence is to be Whole, One, Integer. But at the moment a part seeks to be the Whole, it realizes it is only a part, and its naked particularity is revealed, manifesting its lack of power, and thus is shamed.

The words “can” and “able” divide the concept of “Power”. But in some Latin languages these three are in one (“Poder”). Whoever has the power, can. Whoever can is able. If Eve was able to eat the fruit in the middle of the garden, then she could possess the Whole garden, and to possess the Whole is absolute power.

Adam and Eve were not two, but one, integral. The Essence of Existence is Integer. Existence is materialization. Matter is integrant, particular, particles relating configuring an "integral" materializing Integer Essence. Adam and Eve signify the existential fusion of the fission of Essence materialized. The Universe is essentially holistic, one in continuous materialization by fission and fusion. Integrant Eve accepted the Lie for possessing the power to be Integer. But matter is never Integer in existence, only in essence. Thus, the oneness of Adam-Eve was divided in existence at the moment an integrant sought to be the Integer.

In every Empire there is an integrant seeking to be the Integer One, but a particular can never be the Whole. Thus, every Empire will disintegrate by its integrant emperor who wills to be Integer by dominating the integral.     


POSSESSION realizes and actualizes power. To know, or grasp, is an act of possessing. The Liar so lucid in the story of Adam and Eve by the power of knowledge uses words in attempting and succeeding to confuse Eve who signifies the realization that completes the wholly oneness of earthly creation. Eve is the integrant of completion that will never come to be fulfilled if she does not realize her particularity. No particular is equal to the whole, but without each and every part, the whole can not come to be.

 "Did God really say, 'You must not eat fruits from any tree in the garden'?" Asks Lucifer, a question confusing the general with particulars, said in another way: Does the Law say you must eat not fruits from trees in the garden? The woman replied, "We may eat fruit from any tree in the garden, but God did say, 'However, you must eat not any of the fruits from the tree in the center of the garden…”. The Word itself is being contested, for sincerity is sought in the question, not the answer. The Liar’s question was to confuse the truth, not to verify it, confounding words by confusing particulars with the universal, confusing the knowledge for power over ratiocination to possess the mind and deviate the will.




  

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Shadow Wave

Shadow wave abates with sun
Space clod spins rolling in circular motion
Past and Present turning are one
Future is the will of will’s intention
When beginning begets the begotten have begun
Marking orbits one by one
Who you are you will become
Not to be is becoming done
Light abating, shadow wave again has come 

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

GRAMMAR GESTALT

CONFIGURING 
2084 a figure questioning the intension of “humanist” significancy
With awakening nascent cry come us all into a present passing history
Gerunds bearing continuous spinning, spiraling, spanning perpetuity 
Tense marks motion with sequential sound signs forming illusionary lineality
"Will" the future intentional BECOMING of continuative essence coming to be  
Beyond BEING the simple existential state of completion in circumstantial passivity 
The present conditional to economic pragmatics adjusting to syntactic formality
Each individual’s private interests imperceptive of contextual relativity 
Between the doing and what is being done reciprocally 

Do you perceive the turning of the clay clod whirling thru spatiality
Do you sense the orbiting around a mass of temporary combustibility
Can you discern your life from origin to end at light beam velocity
Or grasp in your particular mind universal ontology?
Comprehend you are a product of intercourse between feminine and masculinity
Alive you would not be if at any moment in consequential reality
The two had not encountered or if either had suffered a fatality
Inception of a singular conception multiplying by fission into plurality
Fusion compounding banal oral patterns into verbal contextual complexity 

Has technology forgotten the Logos of philology?
Even with schooling there is ignorance and incommensurable stupidity
Medium magic utilizing semantics confusingly for political profitability
Deviation of the signifier’s signification sinfully coated in sincerity
With all the legitimized lying there is little hope for probity
Privatistic possessive pronouns of “my”, “me”, and “mine” posited preeminently 
In a world drugged in pharmacological hallucinations there can no longer be lucidity
Can’t a man any longer say he is gay about his philogyny?

Evolution developing toward the coming global corporatized idiotocracy 
Society dividing into divisions of plutocratic caste phylogeny
Genetic schizophrenia interlacing congeniality with animosity
Disfiguring dialectic dialog into dichotomous antagonistic anthropography
Moral sentiments abrogated by apathetic psychopathy
Orbit by orbit intellectual capacity cluttered evermore from gains of triviality

Is there really a need in the ever generating universe for the noun “humanity”?
Should mankind become defunct throughout the cosmos nebulae infinity?
For whoever is was no one once and no one again shall be
Mater nature’s materialistic essence of nascence and mortality
Integer intendment configuring integral forms holistically
Reason’s ratios of integrants relating by rational probability  
To the Poet’s question: To be or not to be?
The answer comes: to be And not to be most certainly

ADBJ 1939 – 2011…

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Why is “will” the future?

 “Will” is defined as “intention”, “determination”, “disposition”, “inclination”; it denotes the intention of motion that intends the actions. The question is what disposition attracts the will to this or that? What is the inclination that activates a tendency? What is the emotion of motion? What determines the will in each individual to tend toward this but not that, since with every affirmation there is negation, with each quality gain there is quality loss.*
Tendency is passion (P): (ρ-emotions): [power, possession, prestige, preeminence, privilege, pleasure].
Passion (P) determines becoming. Passion [ρ-emotions] tends motion.
Is the strongest Passion possession? Is the human inclination, disposition the will to possession (expressed by the words: “desire”, “want”, “my”, “mine”…“lack”)? 

What is meant by “future”? It is defined “time that is to come”. So, it is that which is becoming, or coming to be. But “becoming” is the present continuous. So, the future is the will intending motion, action in this way or that way. And whatever the present intention is so will the action move. And this is why “will” is used for the future tense, because it signifies the action coming to be. Of course, at the moment an action is in motion, it is coming to be; however, whatever is in motion passes, and therefore, what comes to be becomes past.


*Where there is a will there is a way. But where there is a particular way there are other ways, and the way affirmed negates the other ways. The future is present intention. What intends people, the pursuit of happiness? What is happiness: the power of possession to gain prestige and the pleasure of preeminence for privilege? Pursuit is passion tending, and whatever passion wills becomes the future. 

Saturday, October 16, 2010

TENSE

     What is meant by “tense”, the word used in “present tense”, “past tense”, and “future tense”? Tense means time, “tempo” in Portuguese. The signification of “tense” is the concept “stretch”, as in measure. And “measure” signifies mark, delineate. How is continual space, or continuous motion measured? By marks, in sequence one in relation to another, stretching from mark to mark, and that which is in between the marks is the measured. Thus is continuous motion of time measured by “tense”, the stretch from mark to mark.
     All tenses are relative to one another. The “present” is the mark to which the other marks relate. A good example is “walk”. The motion to walk is marked by steps. The foot moving forward marks “future” while the foot that stays in place marks “present”. But at the moment the moving foot marks "future" by a footprint, "future" becomes "present", and "present" becomes “past” if no other step follows. The step or stretch between feet from the one that moves and makes a mark to the one that stays at the same mark is the relativity between tenses.
     Language marks continuous motion. The word “verb” is the name for words that denote a specific action, movement. In English a verb like “walk”, spoken or written, signifies the whole action, but not the particular movements of the action. The continuous motion is marked in language by “walk” [present], by “ed” added: “walked” [past] and “will” added: “will walk” [future].
     The written suffix “+ed” at the end has no meaning. It is a sign that indicates an action is no longer in process, a start and a finish, thus, “past”. “Will” means wish, or the power to decide. So, any wish in the imagination is “future”. Therefore, action in the imagination: “will walk”, while action no longer in process: “walked”. 
     Movement is present because “present” signifies the act actually in motion, not future, not past. But the present can be a whole idea or particular practice. If idea, then “walk”, but if practice then walk + ing: “walking”. The difference is between the general idea of an action, the whole, and the practice of an action divided into particular acts, parts, each relative to the other.  
    The future tense is the most simple because the future is in the imagination becoming complex when put into practice. The compound of present and past is complex because the more motion is divided by marks; the more there is multiplication of relations. Every act past is related to other acts past while present acts become past at the speed of action. The more acts there are the more complicated the relativity between present and past becomes. 
 
      “Have” together with “walk +ed” signifies that an action has not come to an end, step by step by step, but no finish. “I have walked for five hours” signifies that the walk divided into sequential relative steps that mark a continuous whole motion continues until the last step. And if no other step follows, then the action “walk” ends with the last step that becomes the final mark of an action, “past”.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Language Learning

Learning a language is like learning to play football. There are books that tell about the game, rules and stories, but only by practice can the sport be learned. Language is not a classroom subject; it is the training of a specific ability until it becomes skilled. Language has to be practiced to be learned. In Brazil there are no “schools of football”, yet it is known for its excellent football players. This is so because the sport is practiced continuously, everywhere, and so it is with language.

Language is a specific way to communicate by transmitting sounds from one to another. If the two have the same sound system, then a connection is made. And as in football, language is more than individual skill. Necessary is the training in communication, and so it is with language. Instructors don’t teach the language, they train people to use it for proficient communication.

The best trainers for language learning are native speakers who have much experience in their own language, and can also communicate in the language of those learning a second language. Native speakers communicate naturally from within their cultural context. And by knowing the language of the learners, the instructor, like a coach, can detect precisely what the difficulty is and help the learners make their own adjustments. Between the trainer and the trainees, there must be practice for proficient communication, not a teacher teaching students about the language from a book. 

Monday, September 20, 2010

CELTIC

What is C E L T I C? It is not a course. It is training. 

Archive