1 Comment

Thanks for starting a pitch on the epistemological side of the argument against warfare. To me trying to evaluate war on moral grounds is like trying to grab a bunch of sky with your hands.

The statement “Only when facts are integrated into the symbolic order can they become actionable truths.” appears to be based on an a priori belief that ‘facts’ are ‘out there, somewhere, floating in a basket constructed by something we call ‘time’ and ‘space’, neither of which can be perceived or ‘touched’.

I have been alive for a quarter of a century and have never experienced “the same ‘thing’” twice, never had the same ‘one second’ of 24 hour time both yesterday and today, never met another biological version of myself or my family while traveling.

All our experiences of personal change or the otherness of others is only our perceptions of entrapment in a never-ending Now, mediated to our understanding through our learned or self-initiated symbolic or ‘conceptual’ systems.

In our socially built minds, Valuation, the central concept and action of capitalism, suggests one thing can be equal to or ‘better’ than something else, and it is disturbing to see this process applied to warfare anywhere.

terms -

Conceptual space, configuration space,

moment (live in the …)

change, arrow of time,

Ernst Cassirer, Suzanne Langer, Paulo Frierie, James Barbour, Carlo Rovelli, the right to habitability

Expand full comment