1.Perceiving and Interpreting: The Logos of the Anthropological Self

-Opprobrium in the biology of the individual, becomes the group’s imposition over individual physiologically corporeal entity;

-Opprobrium is a force of metabolic alteration in the individual and also impinges heavily on perception, although not completely; the relevance of biological opprobrium is thus in this double sense: in regards to metabolic physiology on one hand, as well as the individual’s sensory physiology.

-Opprobrium and its continuation of originally physical morality, is the foundation of the culturally rational, because social congruence imposed on the individual is also the individual’s possibility of subjectivity according to a cultural paradigm of the correct, socially congruent experiencing of the physiological and its interpretation.

-A physical morality of human groups is bourn of adversarial contexts of physiologically corporeal interaction; human language itself is a more advanced form of physiologically corporeal interaction associated ultimately to a specifically collective, working congruence biological opprobrium makes physiologically relevant for all singularly physical individuals who are physio-corporally subject to the group.

-A physiologically corporeal congruence of linguistic meaning allows the group to posit increasingly complex causalities and conceptualizations on group experience, which biological opprobrium once again makes physiologically relevant and binding for all singularly physical entities of the group; a posting of causality as meaning on natural phenomena that achieves a socially binding congruence, in regards to elements beyond all possibility of contradiction (logical dead ends as anthropological atrezzo), becomes the foundation of living, specifically cultural rationality.

-The availability, then, within the human group of a physiologically relevant and binding, social congruence as a nascent conceptual rationality, becomes the imposition on singularly physio-corporeal entities to effectively assume a group-congruent, paradigm of the cultural self, specifically as a culturally rational, publically congruent individuality.

-Opprobrium then continues to externally energize and invigorate social congruence as the perpetual ever-present reason the culturally rational needs to be socially congruent, naturally because individuals do not necessarily have to conform to the correct experiencing of anything

The physio-corporeal and sensory self is the perceiving self; but the cultural self is the synthesizer of physiologically sensory experience—the interpreter and exerciser of subjectivity very much against our deeper, individually corporeal, physio-sensory nature.

-And thus, it is the cultural self and the at least social congruence it imposes on the physio-sensory self, that saves us—has always saved human groups—from the living, physiological anomie of the only thing we really know for sure we are—that is, simply the permanent impression of just our singular, sensory experience.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.