(you wrote
> But starting with *meaning* or *sense* at
>least shows that devices like *nonsense* or *meaningless* are born as
>negative markings on the grounds of something (world-of-meanings) that may
>sustain our survival in ways that *nonsense* may not.
I think my problem (in understanding generally) is more with the
ground than the figuring of/against it. I would think that re: sustaining
survival, we need both - world-of-meanings and the figuring-of-it (in your
words, not cited above, the "whatever makes.")
You say,
>But long before that (...I tend to beginnings, althogh I am really in the
>dark, there...) the reality of the actual and present is expanded with the
>presence of pasts, futures, elsewheres and otherwises: believable
>could-be:s and have-been:s. THEN would come the real-isation of what is
>neither actually-present or even meant-to-be-believable.
I was unsure about your "THEN" -- Oh, I think I get it at this very moment.
The "THEN" is not the then-that-comes-to-be (no longer "then") and not
"then" in the past but then-projected. [?]
You end,
>-- only trying to sketch a starting point where there is quite a distance
>in the meta- and logical sense to the kinds of not-real that makes Real
>look like a special case. The "little holes" take a long chain of semiosis
>to start appearing in plain sight. (Never mind what goes on behind our
>backs...)
>
I feel like I'm on a long road of little holes...
-Judy
Judy Diamondstone
diamonju who-is-at rci.rutgers.edu
Rutgers University
.................................................