Ir rápido

Eis como vejo as coisas. Álvaro Lapa dizia que “disponível é a juventude”. Antes de nos definirmos e seguirmos a direito por carris cadentes, frios e rígidos. Antes mesmo de sermos comboio, mas um daqueles de carga e mercadorias, diário, à hora prevista, e assinatura na folha de serviço. Antes de começarmos a dizer “não posso, tenho um compromisso”. Tudo coisas horríveis de se dizer. “Não posso” – a assunção de impotência. “Tenho um compromisso” – a assunção de indisponibilidade. Impotência e indisponibilidade – estou cercada por elas, fazem-me cerco, sitiam-me. Acudam! – chamo em vão. Ninguém pode, está tudo em compromissos. Tudo fechado. A cidade deserta. Onde ficam esses compromissos? Ficam no fundo de ovos (ninhos?). É isso: a ovação do mundo. Tudo cumprindo essa com-promessa, encerrando-se, pela sua própria mão, nesses castelos-ovo com compromissos nas prateleiras e impotências varridas para debaixo dos móveis. Cabeças com paredes duras como as nozes, por sua vez, dentro de ovos de casca hirta. Uma dureza dentro de outra. Difícil de flutuar, senão nos interstícios entre casas, entre pessoas, entre notas de papel e papel de notas, que, ao fim e ao cabo, é a mesma coisa. Fugindo, certamente, fugindo, de um dia ficar indisponível e impotente. As mãos tacteando às cegas e tentando assoprar no ar: não, que este ovo não se encoste a mim, se me toca, estou feita, caio dentro dele, nessa lógica presa ao interior, horror, horror! Então, nas ruas, uma multidão de ovos cheios de tentáculos e solicitações, pegando tudo, sugando tudo, uma monstruosidade oval, tal como uma amiba com o seu oco bem delineado por uma membrana absorvente. Estes não são ovos de infância, são ovos retardados, ovos de aranha embrulhando as suas vítimas, ovos podres de Carnaval, ovos de quem se arrependeu de sair da casca e tornou a entrar, de quem não aprendeu a viver lá fora, de fora, fora de si. Se, pelo menos, eu conseguisse não fazer parte do meu próprio côncavo, não cair em mim mesma. Seria então a membrana de uma circulação toda exterior. Um rápido.

Os primeiros blogs em português

Li por acaso um excerto de uma tese de Doutoramento online que dizia:

«Em Portugal, o fenómeno dos Weblogs foi posterior ao dos Estados Unidos, mas em 1999 já havia indícios. Os sites de  jornalismo colaborativo, cujos autores submetiam o seu texto à aprovação do administrador, podiam ser considerados os percursores dos blogs (Barbosa, 2004*). Esta autora* [?], dá como exemplo os sites: “Macacos sem galho”, criado a 30 de Março de 1999; e o “Gildot.org”, criado a 31 de Março. Mas outros sites portugueses criados ainda no século anterior aderiram também ao fenómeno: “Altas doses de cafeína” [Cafeína.org]; o “Nónio.com”; o “Velouria.org”; o “Sonhos virtuais” e o “Hiperboock”. O primeiro blog português foi o “Dee’s life”, criado a 3 de Outubro de 1999.» – José Brazão, “Weblogs, Aprendizagem e Cultura da Escola“, p. 68-69. [*António Granado e Elisabete Barbosa (2004). Weblogs, diário de bordo. Porto: Porto Editora.]

Como a realidade teve mais contornos do que estes historiadores contam e para suprir certas omissões importantes, junto alguns pormenores, para que a verdade prevaleça em futuras teses:

- Fevereiro de 1998 – Viviane Vaz de Menezes (aka Vi) é a primeira brasileira a criar um blog, Delights to Cheer, escrito em inglês.

- 31 de Março de 1998 – Surge o primeiro blog individual escrito em língua portuguesa, o Diário da Megalópole, pelo brasileiro Renato Pedroso Júnior, aka Nemo Nox.

- 30 de Março de 1999 – Arranca o primeiro blog individual escrito em Portugal, por Pedro Couto e Santos, embora inicialmente em inglês: Macacos sem galho, ainda em actividade.

- 31 de Março de 1999 – É lançado o Gildot.org, primeiro fórum de investigação de Portugal (Departamento de Informática da Universidade do Minho), escrito em jeito de blog. Dario Teixeira, “então no 5º ano do curso e prestes a embarcar para a Holanda onde ia fazer o estágio”, criou a primeira versão do Gildot e coube-lhe a primazia de iniciar o fórum [há uma incorrecção no site, declaram comemorar dois anos de existência em 2001, portanto, o lançamento foi em 1999, e não 1998]. A história do Gildot, que é uma súmula experiente sobre a dinâmica de um fórum, regista algo também notório na estreia da blogosfera nacional, em inglês: «Portugal, que é um país extremamente aberto ao exterior e onde as pessoas não atribuem uma veneração religiosa às coisas escritas na sua língua natal.»

- 3 de Outubro de 1999 – É a data do primeiro post de Dee’s Life, um título em inglês para o primeiro blog individual escrito em português e de Portugal, escrito pela companheira do já referido Pedro Couto e Santos.

- 11 de Fevereiro de 2000 - Encontra-se no ar o primeiro blog colectivo escrito em português, o Na-Cama.com (um dos fundadores conta que o domínio foi registado em 1998), no qual participou temporariamente a pioneiríssima Viviane Menezes [descobri, entretanto, que eu e a Viviane tivemos algo mais em comum do que participar neste blog, private joke].

- 2 de março de 2000 – Começa o Zamorim, segundo blog individual escrito em português (do Brasil) por Marcus Amorim.

- 19 de Agosto de 2000 – Cafeína.org, segundo blog colectivo de Portugal (por E. Morais, M. J. Ruiz, R. Duque, P. Leitão, J. Morgado, etc.).

Ao listar as várias datas acima indicadas, constato que o aproximar da Primavera (Fevereiro e Março) predispõe os seres humanos especialmente jovens a novos começos.

Navego na Net, pelo menos, desde o início de 1996 – data de fácil confirmação porque acedia através do browser Netscape Navigator 1.2, lançado em Julho de 1995, e usava os motores de pesquisa Infoseek e Altavista, ambos lançados em Dezembro de 1995, a partir de um computador nas antigas instalações de uma biblioteca que se mudou em Abril de 1996.

Assisti em grande parte aos primeiros passos da Internet em Portugal e da maioria destes blogs, portanto, espero que o meu testemunho valha de alguma coisa.

Nostalgia

Já havia lido transversalmente aquando do lançamento, mas só agora aconteceu a leitura integral da tese de Mestrado de Helena Freitas, “O DN Jovem Entre o Papel e a Net”.

Caso não transpareça dos meus testemunhos no livro, sempre fui optimista em relação à Net (então mais do que sou hoje, em virtude dos recuos do open source) e, enquanto grata beneficiária das suas vantagens, nunca subscrevi a opinião generalizada de que tenha sido a mera mudança de meio que matou o DNJ, já que tal permitia chegar (não logo em 1996, mas na década seguinte), não só a Bragança, como ao Brasil, a Timor, a Moçambique… Aliás, por volta da mesma altura, outros projectos na blogsfera demonstravam que o pioneirismo tecnológico compensa, se devidamente apoiado.

Acontece que essa mudança coincidiu com um desinvestimento ao nível dos centros de decisão do jornal e, consequentemente, dos recursos alocados – Pessoal, Marketing e Informática – e isso sim é que matou o DNJ. Não se fazem omoletes sem ovos.

Ir para a Net com uma Direcção autista em relação ao suplemento, com um apoio informático incipiente, com um Marketing ausente, e substituindo um coordenador a full-time e respectiva equipa de apoio por duas colaboradoras em part-time semanal e outros dois em part-time quinzenal, foi destruir-lhe o potencial. Apesar disso, o DNJ resistiu e cumpriu o seu papel durante mais onze anos.

O prenúncio da conjuntura crítica de 2008-2009 (período em que o número de sociedades dissolvidas ultrapassou largamente as constituídas, encerrado cerca de 71.400 empresas portuguesas) ditou a machadada final. O DNJ acabou, na prática, em Março de 2007 (oficialmente, não sei ao certo quando acabou, foi um fecho envergonhado).

Em 1996, quando o DNJ foi, por assim dizer, “colocado na prateleira”, a Direcção alegou que o suplemento não fazia vender mais jornais (uma conclusão desajustada da realidade, já que cada colaborador que lá publicava, recomendaria a família e amigos comprarem o jornal para verem o seu trabalho). Agora esse director talvez percebesse que nem o DNJ, nem todas as secções do caderno principal e todos os suplementos do jornal juntos faziam vender mais exemplares, como se viria a assistir. Uma tecnologia começara a substituir outra. Tal como as editoras actuais estão a sofrer com a proliferação dos e-books (infinitas possibilidades para o estudo, a investigação, a análise de conteúdo) e, caso não se reinventem, vão sofrer ainda mais. Se ficarem agarrados à matéria (papel), é, de facto, mais custoso dar asas ao espírito… E gastar papel é tão pouco ecológico.

Hoje em dia, montar um projecto da natureza do DNJ, em formato digital, é possível quase sem verbas, apenas com o trabalho e boa vontade de alguns filantropos, prova disso foi a aparição de iniciativas como as e-zines A sul de nenhum norte, Agio, entre outras. É, portanto, possível relançar um projecto deste tipo sem cariz institucional (sem uma marca conhecida por detrás, entenda-se) – um lugar já ocupado pela Revista Bíblia, pela 365, e fanzines em geral. Com um carácter mais institucional, existe o 15/25 (projecto da Revista Ler) que assume a sua inspiração no extinto DNJ.

 

Mas, lendo os vários testemunhos dos colaboradores, fica-se com a impressão de que parte do fascínio de publicar no DNJ tinha a ver com o reconhecimento e seriedade atribuídos à marca centenária DN, a qual, por tradição e aparato, era mais fascinante em papel do que online.

O que fazia a diferença do DNJ (e, antes, do suplemento juvenil do Diário de Lisboa) não era afinal o ser parte integrante dum mass media (mesmo quando a imprensa em geral vendia cada vez menos massivamente)? Aos jovens que criam – minoria ou nicho de mercado face a uma população envelhecida e mais consumidora do que criativa – foi dada visibilidade num palco do mainstream, ao invés de serem votados a uma cave underground. Mas a realidade encarregar-se-ia de corrigir esse favor momentâneo, repondo o critério do consumo de massas, que é aquilo que o fascismo e a democracia têm em comum.

Foi, é certo, um dos períodos de maior realização da minha vida.

Da catrefa de empregos em áreas diferentes que já tive (alguns com condições de trabalho mais abonadas), a função que desempenhei no DNJ foi, apesar de tudo e até ver, a que mais gostei de levar a cabo, a que considero mais genuinamente produtiva.

Primeira satisfação: ser o invisível que torna visível, não ter que aparecer, e em vez disso, apresentar, trazer à luz, publicar, colocar na berlinda, dar voz e notoriedade a outrem. Subscrevo as palavras de Evelyn Waugh, “o ideal é que me ignorem”. Timidez genética.

Segunda satisfação: estar ali na crista da autêntica vanguarda, a receber a voz e o gesto de novidade que brota da alma dos justamente chamados de novos (jovens) contra o bafiento pré-concebido (o pré-conceito), a estrear inéditos, a dar continuidade aos fluxos criativos que preparam as mutações deste mundo, imprevista improvisação, arte em bruto, espontaneidade dourada, Boa Nova. O prejuízo para a invenção humana causado pela desaparição deste tipo de espaços é incalculável.

Terceira satisfação: contribuir para a composição de uma comunidade orientada, ainda que sem saber, pela filosofia de Nietzsche, segundo a qual, “unicamente como fenómeno estético são a existência e o mundo justificados”.

Mas, tal como versa o ditado, “não há mal que nunca acabe, nem bem que sempre dure”, e o DNJ, enquanto motor de mutações, deveria ele próprio mudar, primeiro como a serpente trocando de pele (do papel ao digital), depois, como a fénix, morrendo, para talvez um dia ressuscitar de novo, sob um outro nome, sob um outro rosto. Aliás, quantos novos DNJ não estão já aí fora?

The mud volcano must return everything that was swallowed

But that is just possible if nothing is desired anymore, nothing but desire of no thing, no face, or if you can’t possibly get what you desire (a blockage) – or both, at the same time.

Then, No-Face won’t be an indoors swallowing persecutor globe any longer, No-Face will become an outdoors sober follower column again.

Let’s go outside.

.

Kao-nashi (kao means “face, features, expression”, nashi means “there isn’t”), from Sen to Chihiro no Kamikakushi (2001)

.

What does the Japanese title mean?

The Japanese title is “Sen to Chihiro no Kamikakushi”:

“Sen （千）” and “Chihiro （千尋）” are the names, which, respectively and literally, mean “one thousand” and “one thousand depths”. “To （と）” is a particle which connects nouns. It translates into “and.” “Kami （神）” means “spirit” and “kakushi （隠し）” is the noun form of the verb “kakusu (to hide).” “Kamikakushi （神隠し）” means “spiritual disappearance”.

How the name “Chihiro” is turned into “Sen”?

When Chihiro is forced to work at the bathhouse which Yubaba rules, she writes down her name Ogino Chihiro （荻野千尋）in the contract (in Japanese the family name comes first):

Yubaba steals three characters from her name. The one character left (the third one) becomes her new name. The reading of this kanji character is “sen （千）” as well as “chi.” 

Radical: juu

A radical (bushu) is a common sub-element found in different kanji characters. Every kanji has a radical or a radical itself can be a kanji. Radicals express the general nature of the kanji characters. A radical is the part of the kanji character that gives you a clue to its origin, group, meaning or pronunciation. Many kanji dictionaries organize characters by their radicals. There are 214 radicals.

On-reading	sen
Kun-reading	chi
Meanings	thousand

On-reading (On-yomi) is the Chinese reading of a kanji character. It is based on the sound of the kanji character as pronounced by the Chinese at the time the character was introduced, and also from the area it was imported. That is why the On-reading might be quite different from Standard Mandarin today. The Kun-reading (Kun-yomi) is the native Japanese reading associated with the meaning of a kanji.

Almost all kanji have On-readings except for most of the kanji that were developed in Japan (e.g. 込 has only Kun-readings). Some dozen kanji don’t have Kun-readings, but most kanji have both readings.

On-reading is usually used when the kanji is a part of a compound (two or more kanji characters are placed side by site). Kun-reading is used when the kanji is used on its own, either as a complete noun or as adjective stems and verb stems. This is not a hard rule, though.

Anedota do dia

No caderno de um aluno, reparei que o último sumário de Filosofia havia sido “Educação Sexual”.
- Isto agora faz parte do programa? – perguntei.
- É. Parece que todas as disciplinas são obrigadas a dedicar-lhe uma aula.
- Então, e falaram sobre o quê?
- Falámos sobre o Papa…

(Risos)

Notas impressionistas sobre uma Feira

Meninas promotoras a distribuir amostras de corn flakes e de molho de entrecosto. Insufláveis e roulottes de comida por todo o lado. Nas zonas mais circenses (por onde efectivamente andavam palhaços), mal se podia passar. Um comerciante diz a outro: “Isto está a 60% do ano passado. O tempo não ajuda”. Um potencial comprador diz a outro, segurando um livro intitulado “Diálogos” a 5€ na bancada das promoções: “Este é capaz de interessar, tem uns escritos sobre arte e cinema”. Ao mesmo preço e na mesma bancada, “Intencionalidade” de Searle. No entanto, e apesar de tudo, parecia ser a única bancada em dezenas onde se pressentia critério. Nas restantes, apenas caras, muitas caras, como num desfilar de revista, quando os actores vêm ao palco receber os aplausos. Livros comprados: dois, um novo (a tese de Mestrado de uma amiga em sessão de autógrafos) e outro no alfarrabista (uma colectânea de cartas entre Miller e Nin). E a vaga sensação de não voltar lá tão cedo, a menos que seja para comprar livros remotos de autores portugueses, ou livros de línguas tão remotas que não estejam senão traduzidos em português. Quanto ao resto: e-books, e-shopping e a biblioteca municipal aqui do lado. Feira por feira, a do Relógio fica mais perto, acontece todos os Domingos, tem vitualhas mais baratas, e também vende romances de cordel e manuais de auto-ajuda (um catálogo assessorado pelos hipermercados das proximidades). Enfim, a massificação e a perda de diversidade (“niche marketing” what?) das editoras locais só contribuem para a desnacionalização do meu espírito (o que não é necessariamente negativo). O meu corpo está cá, enquanto que o pensamento navega pelo estrangeiro.

Perpetuum mobile

Perpetuum Mobile of Villard de Honnecourt, c. 1230

«Is it and must it remain the perpetual object of a riddle, the perpetuum mobile! This would be a way of recalling the objective consistency that the category of the problematic takes on at the heart of structures.»

– Deleuze, “A quoi reconnaît-on le structuralisme?”, in François Châtelet (dir.), Histoire de la philosophie VIII. Le XXe siècle, Hachette, 1973, republished in Desert Islands….

.

«In vain would we seek the caresses and fondlings of our intimate selves (…), since everything is finally outside, everything, even ourselves: outside, in the world, among others. It is not in some hiding-place that we will discover ourselves; it is on the road, in the town, in the midst of the crowd, a thing among things, a man among men.” Is there for some people a new notion? (…) There was once a union of Nature and Spirit, and this union formed an outside world.»

- Deleuze, “Du Christ à la bourgeoisie”, 1946.

.

«Everything is a machine. Celestial machines, the stars or rainbows in the sky, alpine machines – all of them connected to those of his body. The continual whirr of machines.

“He thought that it must be a feeling of endless bliss to be in contact with the profound life of every form, to have a soul for rocks, metals, water, and plants, to take into himself, as in a dream, every element of nature, like flowers that breathe with the waxing and waning of the moon.” [Lenz]

To be a chlorophyll – or a photosynthesis – machine, or at least slip his body into such machines as one part among the others. Lenz has projected himself back to a time before the man-nature dichotomy, before all the co-ordinates based on this fundamental dichotomy have been laid down. He does not live nature as nature, but as a process of production. There is no such thing as either man or nature now, only a process that produces the one within the other and couples the machines together. Producing-machines, desiring-machines everywhere, schizophrenic machines, all of species life: the self and the non-self, outside and inside, no longer have any meaning whatsoever.»

- Deleuze & Guattari, “Anti-Oedipus”.

Liberdade, pois…

Hoje, em Portugal, comemora-se o 25 de Abril.

Esta celebração costuma ser publicitada como sinónimo de “liberdade”. Como se no Antigo Regime não houvesse liberdade alguma e, no Novo Regime, subitamente, passasse a haver toda a liberdade…

O que é fundamental nesta data e é por isso que ela constitui um marco na História, é que se trocou um regime por outro regime. Note-se que ambos são regimes e que ambos arregimentam. A liberdade passa ao lado.

Tenho diversas razões para encarar com reserva a euforia dos hipnotizados com a palavra-coqueluche deste dia, mil vezes repetida nos media: “Liberdade”. Chavões que a tradição repete e já nem sabe bem porquê.

É, pois, caricato que, neste dia de sobeja liberdade, dita pelo menos de garganta, me tenham vedado uma das suas componentes mais básicas: a liberdade de expressão.

Vivem-se tempos difíceis. Actualmente, existem muitos mais dispositivos de controlo do que alguma vez existiram nas sociedades do passado.

O que são os olhos falíveis dos antigos censores, de lápis azul em riste, comparados com os Syops munidos de “bots” para vigiar e bloquear os IPs e a participação de todos aqueles que divirjam das suas opiniões?

Os agentes do sistema aí estão ao virar da esquina de cada site da Internet: subreptícios, invisíveis, prontos a silenciar os oponentes sem lhes dar sequer direito a resposta, numa clara atitude de abuso de poder, sem darem a cara, confortavelmente escondidos atrás dos seus respectivos avatares e empunhando como arma os seus privilégios especiais de operação.

Chegámos hoje ao ponto de sermos censurados, bloqueados, não por qualquer ofensa moral ou reacção contra um regime político, mas simplesmente porque defendemos a inclusão de algumas citações relevantes na Wikipedia e, com isso, desagradámos aos editores-legisladores daquilo que, ao invés de ser uma página de informação, é antes uma página de culto (no mesmo sentido em que a Igreja de Cientologia é) dedicada ao seu ídolo: John Searle.

Se todos os que diferem das crenças dos editores da Wikipedia são assim escorraçados, então, aquilo que seria suposto ser uma enciclopédia baseada no colaboracionismo, tornou-se uma cartilha de dogmas e onanismo pessoais, gerida por egos que se julgam donos da verdade e que apenas pedem aos recém-chegados que os corroborem, num interminável exercício de anuência à doxa. Sofistas…

Caso os visitantes deste blog se importem minimamente com garantir certas liberdades ou se subscrevem a ideia de que a história da filosofia deve ser o mais isenta e o menos distorcida possível por preferências subjectivas, peço-vos coisa pouca: que visitem a página de discussão da Wikipedia e participem neste tópico (para o que nem precisam de abrir conta, basta fazerem Edit), protestando contra o facto de se estar a abusar de mecanismos de saneamento para omitir ocorrências e referências.

Longe de ser uma mera luta pela justa apresentação dos factos relativos ao debate Searle-Derrida, é mais do que isso: é uma luta pela liberdade de expressão.

Com que descaramento podem depois vir estes hipócritas condenar propostas de lei como a PIPA… quando eles já a implementaram antes mesmo de ser aprovada.

«E é preciso muita inocência, ou safadeza, a uma filosofia da comunicação que pretende restaurar a sociedade de amigos ou mesmo de sábios, formando uma opinião universal  como  “consenso”  capaz de moralizar  as nações, os Estados e o mercado. (…)

A doxa é um  tipo de proposição que se apresenta da seguinte maneira:  sendo dada uma situação vivida perceptiva-afetiva (por exemplo, traz-se queijo à mesa do banquete), alguém extrai dele uma qualidade pura (por exemplo, mau cheiro); mas ao mesmo tempo que abstrai a qualidade, ele mesmo se identifica com um sujeito genérico, experimentando uma afecção comum (a sociedade daqueles que detestam o queijo — rivalizando assim com aqueles que o adoram,  o mais das vezes em  função de uma outra qualidade).  A “discussão”  versa,  pois,  sobre a escolha da qualidade perceptiva abstrata,  e sobre a potência do sujeito genérico afetado. (…)

A opinião é um pensamento que se molda estreitamente sobre a forma da recognição: recognição de uma qualidade na percepção (contemplação), recognição de um grupo na afecção (reflexão), recognição de um  rival  na possibilidade de outros grupos e outras qualidades  (comunicação).  Ela dá à  recognição do verdadeiro uma extensão e critérios que são,  por  natureza,  os de uma  “ortodoxia”:  será verdadeira uma opinião que  coincida com a do grupo ao qual  se pertencerá ao enunciá-la.  Vê-se bem  isso em certos concursos: você deve dizer sua opinião, mas você “ganha” (você disse a verdade) se você disse a mesma coisa que a maioria dos que participam desse concurso. A opinião, em sua essência, é vontade de maioria, e já fala em nome de uma maioria. (…)

Em  toda conversa, é sempre do destino da filosofia que se trata, e muitas discussões filosóficas, enquanto tais, não vão mais longe do que aquela sobre o queijo, com suas injúrias e confrontos de concepções do mundo. A filosofia da comunicação se esgota na procura de uma opinião universal liberal como consenso, sob o qual encontramos as percepções e afecções cínicas do capitalista em pessoa.»

- Deleuze & Guattari, “O que é a Filosofia?”, p. 139, 188, 190.

Sociedade do envelhecimento

«O homem precisa de dormir.»

«Writing that springs from the surface of existence — when there is no other way and the deeper wells have dried up — is nothing, and collapses the moment a truer emotion makes that surface shake. That is why one can never be alone enough when one writes, why there can never be enough silence around one when one writes, why even night is not night enough.»

- Kafka

“Men thrive by sleep, not long but deep”

- Provérbio galês

“A good laugh and a long sleep are the best cures in the doctor’s book”

- Provérbio irlandês

.

A chamada “sociedade do conhecimento” que subordina os corpos (não só os humanos) à exposição permanente ao electromagnetismo das máquinas tecnológicas é, na realidade, uma sociedade do envelhecimento.

Por que razão? A luz brilhante dos écrans (mas também a poluição magnética invisível, porém, sensível, que os aparelhos electrónicos emitem) inibem a libertação de melatonina pela glândula pineal, desregulando, quer o ritmo circadiano de vigília e sono (cuja actuação regular nos dá a sensação de repouso), quer os processos naturais anti-envelhecimento e anti-degeneração celular e neuronal, uma vez que a melatonina é um poderoso anti-oxidante (agente anti-envelhecimento e anti-cancro) que, por preferir a escuridão para actuar, ganhou o cognome de “hormona das trevas”.

Quando é que a noite é mais intensa? Do meio-dia à meia-noite, o Sol investe em declinar (ou, melhor dizendo, a Terra investe em subir) e escurecer a atmosfera; da meia-noite em diante, o Sol empenha-se em subir (e a Terra em descer) e o céu vai gradualmente aclarando, mesmo antes do nascer do Sol ser visível.

Assim, a noite é mais intensa entre o pôr-do-sol e a meia-noite. Era a este período que os antigos apelidavam de “sono de beleza”, ainda hoje recomendado a futebolistas e modelos, por razões de desempenho, saúde e formosura.

Supõe-se, desconhecendo se existem ou não investigações que o hajam concluído, que a produção de melatonina atinge máximos durante esta fase do dia.

Produzem-se consequências nefastas sobre o corpo das crianças, em fase de enraizamento de hábitos, quando estas desregulam o seu ritmo circadiano natural para ficarem até mais tarde a ver televisão, ligadas ao computador, a jogar vídeo-jogos ou simplesmente acordadas, a fazer seja o que for. Nos adultos, também se fazem notar os efeitos, sob a forma de insónia, stress, acumulação de cansaço (sem sensação de repouso), falhas de memória, distúrbios alimentares, disfunções sexuais, depressão, desordens do sistema imunológico, debilidade e degeneração de diversos órgãos vitais, anemia energética.

Os horários tardios são fomentados por diversos factores: o agenda setting dos programas de televisão; o artifício de trocar a hora sideral pelo atraso de 1 hora da hora de Inverno; e cada vez mais, pelos serões de trabalho prolongados (actualmente, promovidos pela propaganda governativa). Está longe de ser bom para a produtividade de um país forçar os organismos a ritmos contra-natura e pró-envelhecimento, à custa do consumo desmesurado de estimulantes (“um café para acordar”, nicotina, etc.).

Acresce ainda a poluição luminosa nocturna, que, em vez de ser objecto de jurisdição mais apertada, é promovida como postal turístico (Las Vegas, vistas-satélite nocturnas no Google Earth, etc.). Por todo o lado, holofotes, esse signo de campo de concentração, que dá continuidade ao fascismo em nome da segurança, da vigilância, do reality-show… em detrimento da saúde e beleza (a “justificação estética da existência”).

Na História, abundam os casos de governantes/legisladores/sacerdotes (Júlio, Gregório…) que alteraram os calendários e os horários de toda uma civilização. Independentemente de o terem feito para o bem ou para o mal dos que governavam, certo é que a gestão do tempo sempre foi assunto de vital interesse para os poderes. Como se, de algum modo, intuíssem que, quem for mestre na adequação do corpo vivo ao tempo cósmico é também mestre da sua própria energia.

Não pretendemos, contudo, instituir um dogma horário. É possível que certas pessoas sejam mais matutinas e outras mais vespertinas, consoante a hora do seu nascimento e os seus hábitos arreigados. Cada qual deverá encontrar o horário que mais maximiza a sua energia.

No que à minha experimentação corporal diz respeito, comprovo a eficácia dos costumes da sabedoria popular, salvaguardando as variações horárias da luz natural ao longo das estações:

- “Deitar cedo e cedo erguer, dá saúde e faz crescer”;

- “Levanta-te às seis, almoça-te às dez, jantarás às seis, deita-te às dez: viverás dez vezes dez”;

- “Uma hora de sono antes da meia-noite vale por três depois” (provérbio inglês);

- “Fica até às nove e és meu amigo; até às dez, não tem mal; mas se ficas até às onze, és meu inimigo.” (provérbio dinamarquês);

- “Às nove: ceia o rico e deita-se o pobre”;

- “O sono é uma medicina” (provérbio inglês).

Por isso, considero uma contrariedade que me obriguem a falhar o meu recolher obrigatório. É como se me tirassem alimento da boca.

Os Antigos Egípcios acreditavam que o nome de uma criança devia ser escolhido com extremo cuidado, pois aquele iria ditar o seu destino. Pela minha parte, quer isso se deva ao meu nome ou não, o facto é que tenho uma relação muito especial (medicinal) com o sono, e, de algum modo, sinto-me destinada a devolver-lhe algum do prestígio que a civilização entendeu retirar-lhe.

Para esse menosprezo, contribuíram ideologias religiosas cujos discursos dão relevância ao despertar (por exemplo, Buda quer dizer “Desperto”) e que abominam o sono como um estado inferior à vigília, assim como também o século do culto às “Luzes” e a euforia da electrificação pós-Edison.

Na realidade, o sono toma parte no despertar. Quando não se deixam os homens repousar, quando não cuidam do equilíbrio subtil entre movimento e repouso, eles vivem permanentemente “zombies”, nem dormindo profundamente, nem profundamente despertos, somente dormentes, letárgicos. E, a menos que os deixem dormir (“dormir como um cão num moinho”, diz um provérbio irlandês), não vão realmente acordar.

A física moderna (incluindo a medicina e a biologia) deveria tomar em elevada consideração que é nas trevas do vácuo que viaja a luz. Primeiro yin, depois yang.

The sign of Spinoza’s system

«Adeoque, tam eius essentiae, quam existentiae, Deus ex necessitate suae naturae est causa efficiens (per prop. 25. et 16.); quod erat primum.»

- Spinoza, Ethica, Pars Prima, Prop. XXVI.

Spinoza’s ring signet (in a letter to Leibniz):
“CAUTE” + rose with thorns (“Spinoza” means “with thorns”), two opposite leafs and four extremities + a double floor B (2 in 1, conjunction), “pli à l’ infini” as in Baroque + a serpentine S, which is also a symmetric 2 (separed, division) + D, “Deus sive Natura”.

καυτός (kautos) = very hot;
καῦσος (kausos) = burning heat, fever, to burn with great heat.

Walada

“Afastados um do outro, o meu corpo está vencido de paixão por ti, e não cessam as minhas lágrimas… Dir-se-ia que não passámos a noite juntos, envolvidos apenas na nossa união, enquanto a nossa boa estrela fazia baixar os olhos daqueles que nos censuravam… Éramos dois segredos no coração das trevas, até que a voz da aurora se aprontasse a denunciar-nos”.

- Ibn Zaydun (1003-1071, Córdova), referindo-se à princesa Walada.

 

É apreciável que a poesia islâmica da época áurea seja tão consistente, por poder ser sempre lida em dois planos, no empírico determinado (Córdova, 1003-1071) e no intemporal indeterminado.

Walada (a verificar a sua forma escrita em árabe) significa “dar à luz”. Duplo sentido também.

From the pace of a turtle up to lightning speed

«Energy is eternal delight.»

- William Blake (1757-1827), The Marriage of Heaven and Hell, 1790-93.

.

«The advocates of an energy crisis believe in and continue to propagate a peculiar vision of man. According to this notion, man is born into perpetual dependence on slaves which he must painfully learn to master. If he does not employ prisoners, then he needs machines to do most of his work. According to this doctrine, the well-being of a society can be measured by the number of years its members have gone to school and by the number of energy slaves they have thereby learned to command. This belief is common to the conflicting economic ideologies now in vogue. It is threatened by the obvious inequity, harriedness, and impotence that appear everywhere once the voracious hordes of energy slaves outnumber people by a certain proportion. The energy crisis focuses concern on the scarcity of fodder for these slaves. I prefer to ask whether free men need them. (…) A low-energy policy allows for a wide choice of life-styles and cultures. If, on the other hand, a society opts for high energy consumption, its social relations must be dictated by technocracy and will be equally degrading whether labeled capitalist or socialist. (…) Even if nonpolluting power were feasible and abundant, the use of energy on a massive scale acts on society like a drug that is physically harmless but psychically enslaving. (…)»

- Ivan Illich (1926-2002), “Energy and Equity”, Le Monde, 1973.

.

«Tu és a prova. Não um aluno.»

[You are the demonstration. Not a pupil.]

- Kafka, Meditações.

.

«Et n’est-ce pas par l’anus que l’enfant tient aux loups, à la périphérie?»

[Does not the child, on the periphery, hold onto the wolves by his anus? /

E não é pelo ânus que a criança se liga aos lobos, à periferia?]

- Deleuze, Mille Plateaux.

.

«Je dis, en tout cas, concevez le crible comme une véritable machine, au sens où Leibniz nous disait: c’est la Machine de la Nature. Au sens où Leibniz nous disait: la Nature est tout entière machine, mais simplement c’est un type de machine dont nous n’avons aucune idée, nous, hommes, qui ne faisons que des machines artificielles, car la vraie machine, celle de la nature, c’est la vraie Nature qui est machine. Nous, nous ne savons pas faire des machines. La vraie machine c’est celle dont toutes les parties sont des machines, c’est à dire: c’est la machine infinie.»

- Deleuze, cours avec Stengers sur Whitehead.

.

«Conceive, for the sake of illustration, [a cylindrical] enclosure T, as illustrated in diagram b, such that energy could not be transferred across it except through a channel or path O, and that, by some means or other, in this enclosure a medium were maintained which would have little energy, and that on the outer side of the same there would be the ordinary ambient medium with much energy.  Under these assumptions the energy would flow through the path O, as indicated by the arrow, and might then be converted on its passage into some other form of energy.  The question was, Could such a condition be attained?  Could we produce artificially such a “sink” for the energy of the ambient medium to flow in?  Suppose that an extremely low temperature could be maintained by some process in a given space; the surrounding medium would then be compelled to give off heat, which could be converted into mechanical or other form of energy, and utilized.  By realizing such a plan, we should be enabled to get at any point of the globe a continuous supply of energy, day and night.  More than this, reasoning in the abstract, it would seem possible to cause a quick circulation of the medium, and thus draw the energy at a very rapid rate. Here, then, was an idea which, if realizable, afforded a happy solution of the problem of getting energy from the medium.  But was it realizable?  I convinced myself that it was so in a number of ways, of which one is the following.  As regards heat, we are at a high level, which may be represented by the surface of a mountain lake considerably above the sea, the level of which may mark the absolute zero of temperature existing in the interstellar space.  Heat, like water, flows from high to low level, and, consequently, just as we can let the water of the lake run down to the sea, so we are able to let heat from the earth’s surface travel up into the cold region above.  Heat, like water, can perform work in flowing down, and if we had any doubt as to whether we could derive energy from the medium by means of a thermopile, as before described, it would be dispelled by this analogue.  But can we produce cold in a given portion of the space and cause the heat to flow in continually?  To create such a “sink,” or “cold hole,” as we might say, in the medium, would be equivalent to producing in the lake a space either empty or filled with something much lighter than water.  This we could do by placing in the lake a tank, and pumping all the water out of the latter.  We know, then, that the water, if allowed to flow back into the tank, would, theoretically, be able to perform exactly the same amount of work which was used in pumping it out, but not a bit more.  Consequently nothing could be gained in this double operation of first raising the water and then letting it fall down.  This would mean that it is impossible to create such a sink in the medium.  But let us reflect a moment.  Heat, though following certain general laws of mechanics, like a fluid, is not such; it is energy which may be converted into other forms of energy as it passes from a high to a low level.  To make our mechanical analogy complete and true, we must, therefore, assume that the water, in its passage into the tank, is converted into something else, which may be taken out of it without using any, or by using very little, power.  For example, if heat be represented in this analogue by the water of the lake, the oxygen and hydrogen composing the water may illustrate other forms of energy into which the heat is transformed in passing from hot to cold.  If the process of heat transformation were absolutely perfect, no heat at all would arrive at the low level, since all of it would be converted into other forms of energy.  Corresponding to this ideal case, all the water flowing into the tank would be decomposed into oxygen and hydrogen before reaching the bottom, and the result would be that water would continually flow in, and yet the tank would remain entirely empty, the gases formed escaping.  We would thus produce, by expending initially a certain amount of work to create a sink for the heat or, respectively, the water to flow in, a condition enabling us to get any amount of energy without further effort.  This would be an ideal way of obtaining motive power.  We do not know of any such absolutely perfect process of heat-conversion, and consequently some heat will generally reach the low level, which means to say, in our mechanical analogue, that some water will arrive at the bottom of the tank, and a gradual and slow filling of the latter will take place, necessitating continuous pumping out.  But evidently there will be less to pump out than flows in, or, in other words, less energy will be needed to maintain the initial condition than is developed by the fall, and this is to say that some energy will be gained from the medium.  What is not converted in flowing down can just be raised up with its own energy, and what is converted is clear gain. Thus the virtue of the principle I have discovered resides wholly in the conversion of the energy on the downward flow. (…) In the process, as I had primarily conceived it, for the utilization of the energy of the ambient medium, there were five essential elements in combination, and each of these had to be newly designed and perfected, as no such machines existed. The mechanical oscillator was the first element of this combination, and having perfected this, I turned to the next, which was an air-compressor of a design in certain respects resembling that of the mechanical oscillator. (…) I was just beginning work on the third element, which together with the first two would give a refrigerating machine of exceptional efficiency and simplicity, when a misfortune befell me in the burning of my laboratory, which crippled my labors and delayed me. Shortly afterward Dr. Carl Linde announced the liquefaction of air by a self-cooling process, demonstrating that it was practicable to proceed with the cooling until liquefaction of the air took place. This was the only experimental proof which I was still wanting that energy was obtainable from the medium in the manner contemplated by me. (…) I observed that under certain conditions the atmosphere, which is normally a high insulator, assumes conducting properties, and so becomes capable of conveying any amount of electrical energy. But the difficulties in the way of a practical utilization of this discovery for the purpose of transmitting electrical energy without wires were seemingly insuperable. (…) All this could not be done in a few weeks or months, or even years. The work required patience and constant application, but the improvements came, though slowly. Other valuable results were, however, arrived at in the course of this long-continued work, of which I shall endeavor to give a brief account, enumerating the chief advances as they were successively effected. The discovery of the conducting properties of the air, though unexpected, was only a natural result of experiments in a special field which I had carried on for some years before. It was, I believe, during 1889 that certain possibilities offered by extremely rapid electrical oscillations determined me to design a number of special machines adapted for their investigation. Owing to the peculiar requirements, the construction of these machines was very difficult, and consumed much time and effort; but my work on them was generously rewarded, for I reached by their means several novel and important results. One of the earliest observations I made with these new machines was that electrical oscillations of an extremely high rate act in an extraordinary manner upon the human organism. Thus, for instance, I demonstrated that powerful electrical discharges of several hundred thousand volts, which at that time were considered absolutely deadly, could be passed through the body without inconvenience or hurtful consequences. These oscillations produced other specific physiological effects, which, upon my announcement, were eagerly taken up by skilled physicians and further investigated. This new field has proved itself fruitful beyond expectation, and in the few years which have passed since, it has been developed to such an extent that it now forms a legitimate and important department of medical science. Many results, thought impossible at that time, are now readily obtainable with these oscillations, and many experiments undreamed of then can now be readily performed by their means. I still remember with pleasure how, nine years ago, I passed the discharge of a powerful induction-coil through my body to demonstrate before a scientific society the comparative harmlessness of very rapidly vibrating electric currents, and I can still recall the astonishment of my audience. I would now undertake, with much less apprehension that I had in that experiment, to transmit through my body with such currents the entire electrical energy of the dynamos now working at Niagara—forty or fifty thousand horse-power. I have produced electrical oscillations which were of such intensity that when circulating through my arms and chest they have melted wires which joined my hands, and still I felt no inconvenience. I have energized with such oscillations a loop of heavy copper wire so powerfully that masses of metal, and even objects of an electrical resistance specifically greater than that of human tissue brought close to or placed within the loop, were heated to a high temperature and melted, often with the violence of an explosion, and yet into this very space in which this terribly-destructive turmoil was going on I have repeatedly thrust my head without feeling anything or experiencing injurious after-effects. Another observation was that by means of such oscillations light could be produced in a novel and more economical manner, which promised to lead to an ideal system of electric illumination by vacuum-tubes, dispensing with the necessity of renewal of lamps or incandescent filaments, and possibly also with the use of wires in the interior of buildings. The efficiency of this light increases in proportion to the rate of the oscillations, and its commercial success is, therefore, dependent on the economical production of electrical vibrations of transcending rates. In this direction I have met with gratifying success of late, and the practical introduction of this new system of illumination is not far off. The investigations led to many other valuable observations and results, one of the more important of which was the demonstration of the practicability of supplying electrical energy through one wire without return. At first I was able to transmit in this novel manner only very small amounts of electrical energy, but in this line also my efforts have been rewarded with similar success. After demonstrating the practicability of this method of transmission, the thought naturally occurred to me to use the earth as a conductor, thus dispensing with all wires. Whatever electricity may be, it is a fact that it behaves like an incompressible fluid, and the earth may be looked upon as an immense reservoir of electricity, which, I thought, could be disturbed effectively by a properly designed electrical machine. Accordingly, my next efforts were directed toward perfecting a special apparatus which would be highly effective in creating a disturbance of electricity in the earth. The progress in this new direction was necessarily very slow and the work discouraging, until I finally succeeded in perfecting a novel kind of transformer or induction-coil, particularly suited for this special purpose. That it is practicable, in this manner, not only to transmit minute amounts of electrical energy for operating delicate electrical devices, as I contemplated at first, but also electrical energy in appreciable quantities, will appear from an inspection of Fig. 4, which illustrates an actual experiment of this kind performed with the same apparatus. The result obtained was all the more remarkable as the top end of the coil was not connected to a wire or plate for magnifying the effect.The exact attunement of the two circuits secures great advantages, and, in fact, it is essential in the practical use of the system. In this respect many popular errors exist, and, as a rule, in the technical reports on this subject circuits and appliances are described as affording these advantages when from their very nature it is evident that this is impossible. In order to attain the best results it is essential that the length of each wire or circuit, from the ground connection to the top, should be equal to one quarter of the wave-length of the electrical vibration in the wire, or else equal to that length multiplied by an odd number. Without the observation of this rule it is virtually impossible to prevent the interference and insure the privacy of messages. Therein lies the secret of tuning. To obtain the most satisfactory results it is, however, necessary to resort to electrical vibrations of low pitch. The Hertzian spark apparatus, used generally by experimenters, which produces oscillations of a very high rate, permits no effective tuning, and slight disturbances are sufficient to render an exchange of messages impracticable. But scientifically designed, efficient appliances allow nearly perfect adjustment. An experiment performed with the improved apparatus repeatedly referred to, and intended to convey an idea of this feature, is illustrated in Fig. 5, which is sufficiently explained by its note. Since I described these simple principles of telegraphy without wires I have had frequent occasion to note that the identical features and elements have been used, in the evident belief that the signals are being transmitted to considerable distance by “Hertzian” radiations. This is only one of many misapprehensions to which the investigations of the lamented physicist have given rise. About thirty-three years ago, Maxwell, following up a suggestive experiment made by Faraday in 1845, evolved an ideally simple theory which intimately connected light, radiant heat, and electrical phenomena, interpreting them as being all due to vibrations of a hypothetical fluid of inconceivable tenuity, called the ether. No experimental verification was arrived at until Hertz, at the suggestion of Helmholtz, undertook a series of experiments to this effect. Hertz proceeded with extraordinary ingenuity and insight, but devoted little energy to the perfection of his old-fashioned apparatus. The consequence was that he failed to observe the important function which the air played in his experiments, and which I subsequently discovered. Repeating his experiments and reaching different results, I ventured to point out this oversight. The strength of the proofs brought forward by Hertz in support of Maxwell’s theory resided in the correct estimate of the rates of vibration of the circuits he used. But I ascertained that he could not have obtained the rates he thought he was getting. The vibrations with identical apparatus he employed are, as a rule, much slower, this being due to the presence of air, which produces a dampening effect upon a rapidly vibrating electric circuit of high pressure, as a fluid does upon a vibrating tuning-fork. I have, however, discovered since that time other causes of error, and I have long ago ceased to look upon his results as being an experimental verification of the poetical conceptions of Maxwell. The work of the great German physicist has acted as an immense stimulus to contemporary electrical research, but it has likewise, in a measure, by its fascination, paralyzed the scientific mind, and thus hampered independent inquiry. Every new phenomenon which was discovered was made to fit the theory, and so very often the truth has been unconsciously distorted. When I advanced this system of telegraphy, my mind was dominated by the idea of effecting communication to any distance through the earth or environing medium, the practical consummation of which I considered of transcendent importance, chiefly on account of the moral effect which it could not fail to produce universally. As the first effort to this end I proposed at that time, to employ relay-stations with tuned circuits, in the hope of making thus practicable signaling over vast distances, even with apparatus of very moderate power then at my command. I was confident, however, that with properly designed machinery signals could be transmitted to any point of the globe, no matter what the distance, without the necessity of using such intermediate stations. I gained this conviction through the discovery of a singular electrical phenomenon, which I described early in 1892, in lectures I delivered before some scientific societies abroad, and which I have called a “rotating brush.” This is a bundle of light which is formed, under certain conditions, in a vacuum-bulb, and which is of a sensitiveness to magnetic and electric influences bordering, so to speak, on the supernatural. This light-bundle is rapidly rotated by the earth’s magnetism as many as twenty thousand times per second, the rotation in these parts being opposite to what it would be in the southern hemisphere, while in the region of the magnetic equator it should not rotate at all. In its most sensitive state, which is difficult to obtain, it is responsive to electric or magnetic influences to an incredible degree. The mere stiffening of the muscles of the arm and consequent slight electrical change in the body of an observer standing at some distance from it, will perceptibly affect it. When in this highly sensitive state it is capable of indicating the slightest magnetic and electric changes taking place in the earth. The observation of this wonderful phenomenon impressed me strongly that communication at any distance could be easily effected by its means, provided that apparatus could be perfected capable of producing an electric or magnetic change of state, however small, in the terrestrial globe or environing medium.

DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW PRINCIPLE—THE ELECTRICAL OSCILLATOR—PRODUCTION OF IMMENSE ELECTRICAL MOVEMENTS—THE EARTH RESPONDS TO MAN—INTERPLANETARY COMMUNICATION NOW PROBABLE.

I resolved to concentrate my efforts upon this venturesome task, though it involved great sacrifice, for the difficulties to be mastered were such that I could hope to consummate it only after years of labor. It meant delay of other work to which I would have preferred to devote myself, but I gained the conviction that my energies could not be more usefully employed; for I recognized that an efficient apparatus for the production of powerful electrical oscillations, as was needed for that specific purpose, was the key to the solution of other most important electrical and, in fact, human problems. Not only was communication, to any distance, without wires possible by its means, but, likewise, the transmission of energy in great amounts, the burning of the atmospheric nitrogen, the production of an efficient illuminant, and many other results of inestimable scientific and industrial value. Finally, however, I had the satisfaction of accomplishing the task undertaken by the use of a new principle, the virtue of which is based on the marvelous properties of the electrical condenser. One of these is that it can discharge or explode its stored energy in an inconceivably short time. Owing to this it is unequaled in explosive violence. The explosion of dynamite is only the breath of a consumptive compared with its discharge. It is the means of producing the strongest current, the highest electrical pressure, the greatest commotion in the medium. Another of its properties, equally valuable, is that its discharge may vibrate at any rate desired up to many millions per second.

[See Nikola Tesla: Colorado Springs Notes, page 324, Photograph III.]

FIG. 6. PHOTOGRAPHIC VIEW OF THE ESSENTIAL PARTS OF THE ELECTRICAL OSCILLATOR USED IN THE EXPERIMENTS DESCRIBED

I had arrived at the limit of rates obtainable in other ways when the happy idea presented itself to me to resort to the condenser. I arranged such an instrument so as to be charged and discharged alternately in rapid succession through a coil with a few turns of stout wire, forming the primary of a transformer or induction-coil. Each time the condenser was discharged the current would quiver in the primary wire and induce corresponding oscillations in the secondary. Thus a transformer or induction-coil on new principles was evolved, which I have called “the electrical oscillator,” partaking of those unique qualities which characterize the condenser, and enabling results to be attained impossible by other means. Electrical effects of any desired character and of intensities undreamed of before are now easily producible by perfected apparatus of this kind, to which frequent reference has been made, and the essential parts of which are shown in Fig. 6. For certain purposes a strong inductive effect is required; for others the greatest possible suddenness; for others again, an exceptionally high rate of vibration or extreme pressure; while for certain other objects immense electrical movements are necessary. The photographs in Figs. 7, 8, 9, and 10, of experiments performed with such an oscillator, may serve to illustrate some of these features and convey an idea of the magnitude of the effects actually produced. The completeness of the titles of the figures referred to makes a further description of them unnecessary. (…) However extraordinary the results shown may appear, they are but trifling compared with those which are attainable by apparatus designed on these same principles. I have produced electrical discharges the actual path of which, from end to end, was probably more than one hundred feet long; but it would not be difficult to reach lengths one hundred times as great. I have produced electrical movements occurring at the rate of approximately one hundred thousand horse-power, but rates of one, five, or ten million horse-power are easily practicable. In these experiments effects were developed incomparably greater than any ever produced by human agencies, and yet these results are but an embryo of what is to be. That communication without wires to any point of the globe is practicable with such apparatus would need no demonstration, but through a discovery which I made I obtained absolute certitude. Popularly explained, it is exactly this: When we raise the voice and hear an echo in reply, we know that the sound of the voice must have reached a distant wall, or boundary, and must have been reflected from the same. Exactly as the sound, so an electrical wave is reflected, and the same evidence which is afforded by an echo is offered by an electrical phenomenon known as a “stationary” wave—that is, a wave with fixed nodal and ventral regions. Instead of sending sound-vibrations toward a distant wall, I have sent electrical vibrations toward the remote boundaries of the earth, and instead of the wall the earth has replied. In place of an echo I have obtained a stationary electrical wave, a wave reflected from afar. Stationary waves in the earth mean something more than mere telegraphy without wires to any distance. They will enable us to attain many important specific results impossible otherwise. For instance, by their use we may produce at will, from a sending-station, an electrical effect in any particular region of the globe; we may determine the relative position or course of a moving object, such as a vessel at sea, the distance traversed by the same, or its speed; or we may send over the earth a wave of electricity traveling at any rate we desire, from the pace of a turtle up to lightning speed. With these developments we have every reason to anticipate that in a time not very distant most telegraphic messages across the oceans will be transmitted without cables. For short distances we need a “wireless” telephone, which requires no expert operators. The greater the spaces to be bridged, the more rational becomes communication without wires. The cable is not only an easily damaged and costly instrument, but it limits us in the speed of transmission by reason of a certain electrical property inseparable from its construction. A properly designed plant for effecting communication without wires ought to have many times the working capacity of a cable, while it will involve incomparably less expense. Not a long time will pass, I believe, before communication by cable will become obsolete, for not only will signaling by this new method be quicker and cheaper, but also much safer. By using some new means for isolating the messages which I have contrived, an almost perfect privacy can be secured. I have observed the above effects so far only up to a limited distance of about six hundred miles, but inasmuch as there is virtually no limit to the power of the vibrations producible with such an oscillator, I feel quite confident of the success of such a plant for effecting transoceanic communication. Nor is this all. My measurements and calculations have shown that it is perfectly practicable to produce on our globe, by the use of these principles, an electrical movement of such magnitude that, without the slightest doubt, its effect will be perceptible on some of our nearer planets, as Venus and Mars. Thus from mere possibility interplanetary communication has entered the stage of probability. In fact, that we can produce a distinct effect on one of these planets in this novel manner, namely, by disturbing the electrical condition of the earth, is beyond any doubt. This way of effecting such communication is, however, essentially different from all others which have so far been proposed by scientific men. In all the previous instances only a minute fraction of the total energy reaching the planet—as much as it would be possible to concentrate in a reflector—could be utilized by the supposed observer in his instrument. But by the means I have developed he would be enabled to concentrate the larger portion of the entire energy transmitted to the planet in his instrument, and the chances of affecting the latter are thereby increased many millionfold. Besides machinery for producing vibrations of the required power, we must have delicate means capable of revealing the effects of feeble influences exerted upon the earth. For such purposes, too, I have perfected new methods. By their use we shall likewise be able, among other things, to detect at considerable distance the presence of an iceberg or other object at sea. By their use, also, I have discovered some terrestrial phenomena still unexplained. That we can send a message to a planet is certain, that we can get an answer is probable: man is not the only being in the Infinite gifted with a mind.

TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICAL ENERGY TO ANY DISTANCE WITHOUT WIRES—NOW PRACTICABLE—THE BEST MEANS OF INCREASING THE FORCE ACCELERATING THE HUMAN MASS.

The most valuable observation made in the course of these investigations was the extraordinary behavior of the atmosphere toward electric impulses of excessive electromotive force. The experiments showed that the air at the ordinary pressure became distinctly conducting, and this opened up the wonderful prospect of transmitting large amounts of electrical energy for industrial purposes to great distances without wires, a possibility which, up to that time, was thought of only as a scientific dream. Further investigation revealed the important fact that the conductivity imparted to the air by these electrical impulses of many millions of volts increased very rapidly with the degree of rarefaction, so that air strata at very moderate altitudes, which are easily accessible, offer, to all experimental evidence, a perfect conducting path, better than a copper wire, for currents of this character. Thus the discovery of these new properties of the atmosphere not only opened up the possibility of transmitting, without wires, energy in large amounts, but, what was still more significant, it afforded the certitude that energy could be transmitted in this manner economically. In this new system it matters little—in fact, almost nothing—whether the transmission is effected at a distance of a few miles or of a few thousand miles. While I have not, as yet, actually effected a transmission of a considerable amount of energy, such as would be of industrial importance, to a great distance by this new method, I have operated several model plants under exactly the same conditions which will exist in a large plant of this kind, and the practicability of the system is thoroughly demonstrated. The experiments have shown conclusively that, with two terminals maintained at an elevation of not more than thirty thousand to thirty-five thousand feet above sea-level, and with an electrical pressure of fifteen to twenty million volts, the energy of thousands of horse-power can be transmitted over distances which may be hundreds and, if necessary, thousands of miles. I am hopeful, however, that I may be able to reduce very considerably the elevation of the terminals now required, and with this object I am following up an idea which promises such a realization. There is, of course, a popular prejudice against using an electrical pressure of millions of volts, which may cause sparks to fly at distances of hundreds of feet, but, paradoxical as it may seem, the system, as I have described it in a technical publication, offers greater personal safety than most of the ordinary distribution circuits now used in the cities. This is, in a measure, borne out by the fact that, although I have carried on such experiments for a number of years, no injury has been sustained either by me or any of my assistants. But to enable a practical introduction of the system, a number of essential requirements are still to be fulfilled. It is not enough to develop appliances by means of which such a transmission can be effected. The machinery must be such as to allow the transformation and transmission, of electrical energy under highly economic and practical conditions. Furthermore, an inducement must be offered to those who are engaged in the industrial exploitation of natural sources of power, as waterfalls, by guaranteeing greater returns on the capital invested than they can secure by local development of the property. From that moment when it was observed that, contrary to the established opinion, low and easily accessible strata of the atmosphere are capable of conducting electricity, the transmission of electrical energy without wires has become a rational task of the engineer, and one surpassing all others in importance. Its practical consummation would mean that energy would be available for the uses of man at any point of the globe, not in small amounts such as might be derived from the ambient medium by suitable machinery, but in quantities virtually unlimited, from waterfalls. Export of power would then become the chief source of income for many happily situated countries, as the United States, Canada, Central and South America, Switzerland, and Sweden. Men could settle down everywhere, fertilize and irrigate the soil with little effort, and convert barren deserts into gardens, and thus the entire globe could be transformed and made a fitter abode for mankind. It is highly probable that if there are intelligent beings on Mars they have long ago realized this very idea, which would explain the changes on its surface noted by astronomers. The atmosphere on that planet, being of considerably smaller density than that of the earth, would make the task much more easy. It is probable that we shall soon have a self-acting heat-engine capable of deriving moderate amounts of energy from the ambient medium. There is also a possibility—though a small one—that we may obtain electrical energy direct from the sun. This might be the case if the Maxwellian theory is true, according to which electrical vibrations of all rates should emanate from the sun. I am still investigating this subject. Sir William Crookes has shown in his beautiful invention known as the “radiometer” that rays may produce by impact a mechanical effect, and this may lead to some important revelation as to the utilization of the sun’s rays in novel ways. Other sources of energy may be opened up, and new methods of deriving energy from the sun discovered, but none of these or similar achievements would equal in importance the transmission of power to any distance through the medium. I can conceive of no technical advance which would tend to unite the various elements of humanity more effectively than this one, or of one which would more add to and more economize human energy. It would be the best means of increasing the force accelerating the human mass. The mere moral influence of such a radical departure would be incalculable. On the other hand if at any point of the globe energy can be obtained in limited quantities from the ambient medium by means of a self-acting heat-engine or otherwise, the conditions will remain the same as before. Human performance will be increased, but men will remain strangers as they were. I anticipate that any, unprepared for these results, which, through long familiarity, appear to me simple and obvious, will consider them still far from practical application. Such reserve, and even opposition, of some is as useful a quality and as necessary an element in human progress as the quick receptivity and enthusiasm of others. Thus, a mass which resists the force at first, once set in movement, adds to the energy. The scientific man does not aim at an immediate result. He does not expect that his advanced ideas will be readily taken up. His work is like that of the planter—for the future. His duty is to lay the foundation for those who are to come, and point the way. He lives and labors and hopes with the poet who says:

Schaff’ das Tagwerk meiner Hände,
Hohes Glück, dass ich’s vollende!
Lass, o lass mich nicht ermatten!
Nein, es sind nicht leere Träume:
Jetzt nur Stangen, diese Bäume
Geben einst noch Frucht und Schatten.
……………………………………………….
Daily work—my hands’ employment,
To complete is pure enjoyment!
Let, oh, let me never falter!
No! there is no empty dreaming:
Lo! these trees, but bare poles seeming,
Yet will yield both food and shelter!

- Goethe’s “Hope”, translated by William Gibson, Com. U. S. N.»

- Nikola Tesla, “THE PROBLEM OF INCREASING HUMAN ENERGY – WITH SPECIAL REFERENCES TO THE HARNESSING OF THE SUN’S ENERGY”, article in Century illustrated magazine, June 1900.

Ideias conectadas

«Mas se uma pessoa empreender o estudo de qualquer coisa de sensível,

quer esteja de boca aberta, a olhar para cima,

quer de boca fechada, a olhar para baixo,

jamais direi que ela tenha conhecimento – pois a ciência não tem nada a ver com tais processos (…)»

- Platão, “República”, 529 b-c.

- Deleuze, “Kafka…”, p. 10.

 

Conecto estes dois excertos da História, porque, quando olhas para cima, tens a cabeça erguida, e quando olhas para baixo, inclinas a cabeça.

E jamais, se falas, estás disponível para ouvir.

Lembra-te, pois, de ouvir com a cabeça erguida, e de friccionares de trovoada a morte à vista em todos os retratos (a aparição do génio implica a fricção da lâmpada).

Só assim alcançarás, senão o conhecimento, a arte do ser vivo.

The importance of being contextualized

Recently, I grab a William Blake’s verse in the Internet:

«Think in the morning. Act in the noon. Eat in the evening. Sleep in the night».

The guy who paste it considered this a good advice.

I read the sentence and I thought that it didn’t make sense. So, I decided to investigate.

You know what? It is included in a passage entitled “Proverbs of Hell”, following ”The voice of the devil”.

So, they are evil advices.

If you want to make them divine, you have to invert them:

“Eat in the morning. Sleep in the noon. Think in the evening. Act in the night.”

This would be the voice of God, from Blake’s point of view.

Patterns

Na minha cabeça, estas três frases estão relacionadas. Enfim, coisas da minha cabeça… que eu própria não estaria confortável em explicar.

«Que los átomos no tienen ninguna cualidad, excepto la figura, la magnitud y la gravedad.»

- Carta de Epicuro (341-270 a.C.) a Heródoto.

§

«Omnia in mensura, et numero, et pondere disposuisti (Sap. xi, 21).»

- Augustine (354-430), De Genesi ad litteram.

§

«Surrounding Iran, this Islamic movement constituted an intense and complex reality as a result of its strategic position, the economic keys held by the Muslim countries and its expansive force on two continents.»

- Foucault (1926-1984), “Is it useless to revolt?”.

Jerusalem

In Hebrew, ירושלים, “Jerusalem” is formed by:

a derivation of the verb “yara”, to throw or shoot (an arrow)

+

“shalom” for well-being, peace, vigor, liveliness.

Therefore, it can be translated as “Arrow of Life”, impetus of energy, vigorous impulse, clinamen, élan vital…

So, you see how mistaken are those who think about Jerusalem as a geographical territory… stolen from other nation and people, impelled by death (Holocaust) and impulsionating more deaths (Israeli-Palestinian Conflict).

They should read more Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura and Bergson’s L’Évolution Créatrice.

Then, who knows, they would really become Jews… If Jews are those living in Jerusalem.

“Minus ordinata, inquieta sunt; ordinantur et quiescunt. Pondus meum amor meus; eo feror quocumque feror. Dono tuo accendimur, et sursum ferimur. Inardescimus et imus. Ascendimus ascensiones in corde, et cantamus canticum graduum. Igne tuo, igne tuo bono inardescimus et imus; quoniam sursum imus ad pacem Jerusalem, quoniam jucundatus sum in his qui dixerunt mihi: In donum Domini ibimus. Ibi nos collocavit voluntas bona, ut nihil velimus aliud quam permanere illic in aeternum.”

//

Enquanto não ordenados, inquietos são; ordenai-os e aquietar-se-ão. Peso meu, amor meu; onde for, és tu que me transferes. O Dom teu acende-nos e transporta-nos ao cimo. Ardemos e impelimo-nos. Ascendemos ascensões no coração, e cantamos cânticos graduados. Pelo fogo teu, o bom fogo teu, ardemos e impelimo-nos; porque vamos subindo à paz de Jerusalém, porque jucundo sou em dizerem-me: Ao domínio de Deus vamos. Aí nos colocará uma vontade boa, e nenhuma outra veleidade senão permanecer ali para sempre.

//

They are not at rest as long as they are disordered, but once brought to order they find their rest. Now, my weight is my love, and wherever I am carried, it is this weight that carries me: (pondus meum amor meus; eo feror quocumque feror). Your Gift sets us afire and we are borne upward: we catch his flame and up we go. In our hearts we climb those upward paths, singing the songs of ascent. By your fire, your beneficent fire, are we enflamed, because we are making our way up to the peace of Jerusalem. For I rejoiced when I was told, “We are going to the Lord’s house.” There shall a good will find us a place, that we may have no other desire but to abide there forever.

.

- Augustine, Confessiones.

The fascinating Mutunus Titunus

Tutunus, cuius immanibus pudendis horrentique fascino vestras inequitare matronas et auspicabile ducitis et optatis.

["Tutunus, cujas imanes e horrendas partes pudendas são montadas pelas vossas matronas, conduzidas auspiciosamente por vossa opção."]

- Arnobius, Adversus nationes, 1, IV, 4.7 (see also 4.11).

.

Et mutunus in cujus sinu pudendo nubentes præsident; ut illarum puditiam prior deus delibasse videatur.

["E mutunus, a cujo colo pudendo as nubentes presidem, parecendo ser o deus o primeiro a saborear o seu pudor."]

- Lactantius, De falsa Religione, 1, I.

.

Etenim nisi Dionyso pompam celebrarent canerentque carmen in pudentia conditum, impudentissimi in factis essent, inquit Heraclitus. Idem vero Orcus ac Dionysus cujus amore furunt et bacchantur.

["A menos que seja a Dioniso que celebram com pompa e cantam um hino com as vergonhas à mostra, impudentíssimo de facto seria, diz Heráclito. Na verdade, o mesmo são Orcus e Dioniso em cujo amor enfurecem e banqueteiam."]

- Heraclitus, cit. in Clemente of Alexandria, Protreptic, 34, 5.

.

Man fighting against his own sex, portrayed as a raging beast – a tintinnabulum (from Latin “tintinnare”, ring a bell; in Portuguese, tintins are a slang word for “testicles” and an onomatopoeia for the sound of bells), about 1st century B.C., which was placed in front of house entrances to prevent harm/bad luck. It was found in antique Herculaneum, Southern Italy, and is to show in the Secret Cabinet in the Museo Archeologico (Naples).

.

Mutunus Tutunus

Mutunus Tutunus (or Mutinus Titinus) was worshipped in a shrine located on the Velian Hill, supposedly since the founding of Rome, until the 1st century BC.

During preliminary marriage rites, Roman brides were supposed to ride (inequitare) Mutunus to prepare themselves for intercourse.

Both parts of the name Mūtūnus Tūtūnus are reduplicative, derived from two recorded slang words for “penis” [*] in Latin:

- Mūtō (or muttō, mūtōnium) was used as a cognomen, the third of the three elements of a Roman man’s name. Probably, it gave origin to the English “mutton”, the male sheep. Mūtōnium appears among the inscriptions of Pompeii. Horace has a dialogue with his personified muttō: “What do you want? Surely you’re not demanding a grand consul’s granddaughter as a cunt?” (Sermones, 1.2.68). Mūtūniātus describes a “well-endowed” male, as mentioned by Martial (Epigrams, 3.73.1 and 11.63.2) and Corpus Priapeorum (52.10). Muttō is etymologically close to the Latin words: 1) muttum (murmur, low sound), the etymon of the English “mutter” (to utter) and of the German “mutter” (mother); 2) mutus (silent, mute), the etymon of the Anglo-French “muet”; 3) motu (motion) which originated motto (a recurring musical movement or a moving maxim) and the French “mot” (word) [**].

- Tītus - a titus with wings was a common motif in Roman decorative arts and a visual pun, since the word also referred to a type of bird (Scholiast on Persius, Satire, 1.20). It was also common as a masculine first name, used by several Roman officials.

Titus with wings, “fig and phallus” and fascinum found at Reims. Musée Saint-Remi, Reims.

.

The fascinum

In ancient Roman traditions, the fascinum was a phallus-shaped amulet worn around the neck or a magic enchantment used to invoke the divine protection of the phallic deity Fascinus.

The fascinus was thought particularly to ward off evil from children, mainly boys, and from conquering generals. Pliny notes the custom of hanging a phallic charm on a baby’s neck, and examples have been found of phallus-bearing rings too small to be worn except by children. Pliny, in Natural History (28.4.7), called it a medicus invidiae, a “doctor” or medicine for envy (invidia) or the evil eye.

The “fig and phallus” (one is feminine, the other masculine) pendant was prevalent amongst soldiers. Several examples show the fist making the manus fica or “figa”, a protective sign against bad luck.

The Vestal virgins tended the cult of the fascinus populi Romani, the sacred image of the phallus that was one of the tokens of the safety of the state (sacra Romana). It was thus associated with the Palladium. Roman myths, such as the begetting of Servius Tullius, suggest that this phallus was an embodiment of a masculine generative power located within the hearth, regarded as divine. When a general celebrated a triumph, the Vestals hung an effigy of the fascinus on the underside of his chariot to protect him from invidia.

From fascinum derives the verb fascinare, “to use the magic power of the fascinus“. Catullus uses the verb at the end of Carmen 7, a hendecasyllabic poem addressing his lover Lesbia; he expresses his infinite desire for kisses that cannot be counted by voyeurs nor “fascinated” (put under a spell) by a malicious tongue; such bliss, as also in Carmen 5, potentially attracts invidia.

If an object, regarded as being the embodiment or habitation of the magical potency of the fascinus, is treated with devotion, it turns into a fetish (“feitiço” in Portuguese), and his devotee, with more or less fixation, is a fetishist and a fascist.

Bas-relief of a huge legged phallus over an “evil eye” on which a scorpion sits. From Leptis Magna, Libya.

.

NOTES:

[*] Penis is between speech marks (” “) because, in fact, we’re in the domain of the phallus:

«Is it and must it remain the perpetual object of a riddle, the perpetuum mobile! This would be a way of recalling the objective consistency that the category of the problematic takes on at the heart of structures. And in the long run, it is good that the question “How do we recognize structuralism?” leads to positing something that is not recognizable or identifiable. Let us consider Lacan’s psychoanalytic response: the object = x is determined as phallus. But this phallus is neither the real organ, nor the series of associable or associated images: it is the symbolic phallus. However, it is indeed sexuality that is in question, a question of nothing else here, contrary to the pious and ever-renewed attempts in psychoanalysis to renounce or minimize sexual references. But the phallus appears not as a sexual given or as the empirical determination of one of the sexes. It appears rather as the symbolic organ that founds sexuality in its entirety as system or structure, and in relation to which the places occupied variously by men and women are distributed, as also the series of images and realities. In designating the object = x as phallus, it is thus not a question of identifying this object, of conferring to it an identity, which is repellent to its nature. Quite the contrary, for the symbolic phallus is precisely that which does not coincide with its own identity, always found there where it is not since it is not where one looks for it, always displaced in relation to itself, from the side of the mother.» – Deleuze, “A quoi reconnaît-on le structuralisme?”, in François Châtelet (dir.), Histoire de la philosophie VIII. Le XXe siècle, Hachette, 1973, republished in “Desert Islands…”).

[**] In Galician-Portuguese folklore, this three semantic fields (sexuality, sound and movement) appear interrelated in the tales about moiras encantadas (“enchanted Moor maids”), where magnetically beautiful or serpent-like maids who remained silent and captive, «compelled by an occult sobrenatural power to live stuck in a certain state or place, as if they were numb or asleep, as long as a determinate circumstance does not break their enchantment» (José Leite de Vasconcelos, Opusculos, Volume V, Etnologia, Parte I, Lisboa, Imprensa Nacional, 1938, p. 496). These moiras frequently were guardians of a treasure lot and, in fact, they embodied the qualities of a perfect guardian: silent, attending (in position of attention) and not easy to seduce. When not totally silent, they only murmured, moaned or resounded like an echo. The moiras are entities of the inside, dwelling inside a well, fountain of virtuous waters (that if one drank would fell in love by the moira), stone, grotto or fig-tree whose fruits dried outside (in the sun or in the moonlight) turned into gold… In this fashion, a Moorish saying affirms that maids are kept at home because they are like jewels. The disenchanting of the moiras could be produced, on one side, by the action of giving them what they lacked – a spoken word formula, the accomplishment of some task (which could involve resisting one’s evil eye), or offering them food (bread and milk are their favourites) or sympathy -, on the other side, by quietly surprising them in the day of Saint John (Summer solstice), when moiras appear outside with their treasures. A disenchanted moira would turn into a normal human or disappear. The Portuguese word moira comes from the Greek moira for “lot, portion” (Moirae were the three deities which gave humanity their portions of birth, maturity and death). Other related etymons are: 1) the Latin morari (to dwell), which originated morada (dwelling place) and mora (delay, wait, dilation of a duration, endurance); 2)  the Latin maurus (dark), since moira might have dark skin but they also preferred to reside in obscure places; 3) the Celtic words mrw (dead) and mori (water), insofar moira played dead and are linked to stone monuments to the dead, and frequently they are found near water (the Celtic composed word mori-morwen, water-dead, designates mer-maids). In Scandinavian mithology, Mara ou Mare is the spirit that leaves women bodies during sleep, to wander around at night. In Polish mithology, that spirit is called Mora. In Latvian mithology, Māra is the supreme goddess. In a certain way, the moira played an equivalent role to the Greek serpent-like Agathodaemon (“good daemon“) , and to the protective deities called Lares, taken into care by the Vestals in the Roman temples and by women in each home.

Gatos electrificados

«He claimed that the flickering of the cinema screen had robbed the electricity from their brains. He began wandering the streets at night, rearranging furniture within the house, and spent long periods locked in his room writing incoherently.»

- about Louis Wain

 

 

Um gato electrificado e alimentado a choques eléctricos, torna-se um histérico involuntário ao mínimo toque.

Louis Wain viu bem o filme. Ele sabia como um sistema nervoso era electricamente sensível, mas chamaram-no de louco.

Domingo é dia de “Domini”

«It is much better to do all things as God intended by capturing the magnetic frequencies from the sun with the paramagnetic soil or round tower antenna. In one sentence, make your soil susceptible (resonate) to the sun, do not, with magnets, try to bring the sun to earth.»

- Philip S. Callahan

 

“A união faz a força”

To come a point by sympathizing with Hitler

Dedicated to Lars von Trier (LVT)

.

«J’habite ma propre maison, je n’ai jamais imité personne en rien et je me ris de tout maître qui n’a su rire de soi-même. Inscription au-dessus de ma porte.»

- Nietzsche

.

«O Germany – Hearing the speeches that ring from your house, one laughs. But whoever sees you, reaches for his knife.»

- Bertolt Brecht, epigraph to Hannah Arendt’s “Eichmann in Jerusalem”.

.

«…wise enough to understand that the horrible can be not only ludicrous but outright funny.»

- Hannah Arendt, “Eichmann in Jerusalem”.

.

From my point of view, Lars Von Trier’s recent statements, at Cannes Festival, were funny, and, structurally, very Jewish.

The next day, the Festival directors held an extraordinary meeting, deciding his remarks were:

«unacceptable, intolerable and contrary to the ideals of humanity and generosity that preside over the very existence of the festival. (…) The board of directors condemns these comments and declares Lars von Trier persona non grata at the Festival de Cannes, with effect immediately.»

It is getting too easy to be banned from some cultural institutions and catch the media attention worldwide. You just have to say something inconvenient about the Jews. “Beware” – as the cautious Jewish philosopher Spinoza (excomungated by Jewish community at 23) advised us.

Should we conclude that Zionist fundamentalists and pro-Israel moralistic censors are intending to exterminate the widely known Jewish sense of humour – Woody Allen, Larry David, Roberto Benigni, Todd Solondz, just to name some remarkable humorists? It really would be a pity, because “la vita è bella”, not the constant remembrance of an Holocaust.

There is no Holocaust (with capital letter). There is no such thing as “the worst holocaust in History”. There are just holocausts, all evil. Unfortunately, the History of mankind is full of them. Other State genocides and massacres have occurred in the 20th century, not only the Jewish holocaust, which is not even the leading one in terms of number of deaths: Stalinist regime (20 to 60 million were killed, 1924-1953),  Asian Holocaust (6 to 10 million of victims, 1937-1945), etc. All quite perverse and with their own Mengele. Armenian victims were also  gassed and subjected to medical mistreatments (beware of doctors!). I think that common people, citizens, should really reconsider their idea that a State is to secure them and take care of the common wealth. Statistical and real facts show the opposite: States are the worst enemies of their own civilians. States may become dangerous slaughtering machines. It was already known by Pao Ching-yen, in 4 A.D.:

«Disputes among ordinary people are merely trivial matters, for what scope of consequences can a contest strength between ordinary fellows generate? They have no spreading lands to arouse avarice… they wield no authority through which they can advance their struggle. Their power is not such that they can assemble mass followings, and they command no awe that might quell [such gatherings] by their opponents. How can they compare with a display of the royal anger, which they can deploy armies and move battalions, making people who hold no enemies attack states that have done no wrong.»

This ability of the State to congregate the mass comes from the Law, in first place. The Law tends to universalize, homogeneize, the naturally diverse individuals.

It is a deplorable mistake to say that “States are us”, an homogeneous collective. No, a State is operated by some diverse individuals who legislate over other diverse individuals who obbey or are punished, since state institutions and positions are fulfilled and ruled by individuals. To depersonalize States is a propaganda technique, in order to deresponsabilize and allienate the individuals, and, ultimately, to forge an administrative killing machine “without head”. It is unbelievable how the real number of deaths is never known and stat(e)-isticals (by name, “State numbers”) are said  to be doubtful or uncertain. A total sum is indifferent and depersonalized. The individual matters so little.

Returning to the point. Lars von Trier at Cannes Festival.

After all, Trier was speaking about some autobiographical facts, since he was educated by a Jewish father (Ulf Trier), and only discovered later that his biological father was another man, a German (Fritz Hartmann). So, by education (-1), Trier is certainly better doing Jewish jokes than German ones.

If you don’t think that Trier’s jokes were funny, I think that you, Jews, are becoming Catholic, or worse, Protestant, definitely Christian – and this is a Nietzschean joke (0), for those who are able to get it.

Von Trier is not Galliano.

The fashion designer declared something that it is not worth to mention - ”I love Hitler” (sentence that, by itself, could be expression of some sort of Christian love…) – but, then, followed hate comments typical from an inconsequent drunk man.

On the contrary, Von Trier was “sober” (1) when saying:

“I understand Hitler (…). I sympathise with him, yes, a little bit” [In a later conference, Lars adds he doesn't sympathize for one second: his sympathy is a micro-singularity].

After a visibly uncomfortable Kirsten Dunst, sitting to his left, uttered a brief reproach to the film director’s ear, he added something quite important:

“They will come a point at the end of this”.

I would say that this is the whole point of Lars Von Trier’s speech and recent movie (about a “pointless” life, a “pointless” world).

He is, conscient and deliberately, provoking the audience to pursue an end: think, think about what I am saying, but think out of your usual frame of mind, think outside the box imposed on you by sujecting ideologies, think what is forbidden, tabu, and, perhaps, you will come a point.

The Holocaust is not the point, it is just a pre-text, something that Jewish people are sensitive to. Lars von Trier knows what he is doing, it is exactly what he wants: to provoke the sensitiveness of everyone in the room, but in a totally different manner from Galliano or Mel Gibson’s “Christ”. In a Nietzschean manner (2):

«Qui de vous peut en même temps rire et être élevé?!» (Nietzsche, “Also sprach Zarathustra”)

Do I have to explain to you what is the difference between love, understanding, and a little bit of sympathy? I may feel a little bit of sympathy for a corrupt politician, but don’t love him or understand him, for example.

The Jewish philosopher Hannah Arendt had been also accused by critics of sympathising with the Nazis, paticularly, the burocrat Adolf Eichmann, in her book about his trial, “a report on the banality of evil” (3). Primo Levi shares with her such sympathetic attitude toward criminals:

«How a normal man can be distorted by a regime into becoming a murderer of millions. Hess had in fact a difficult youth . . . put to fighting the fedayeen in Iraq during the First World War. Anyway, he was not made out of other stuff than you and me. The human stuff he had. He was not born a criminal. He was not a freak. He was of standard human matter. But entering into this channel of nationalism and after that of Nazi education, his training made him into a Jasager—the one who always says Yes. Law-abiding.» – interview, Paris Review.

Do you want to keep on going that way? Forever morally judging our best souls in name of an obnoxious historical past that is gone and should not be repeated? So, why do you keep on repeating it, reproducing it?

Well, if you want to know the difference between love and sympathy, D. H. Lawrence explains it very well, while writing about the mistakes of Walt Whitman (4). Some of these mistakes make also part of Jewish ideologies of State and religion.

If you don’t try to reach a platform of understanding with the Nazis, you are contributing to keep Hitler in their altar, without actively exposing them to new points of view and stimulating them to evolute. I mean: if you put aside a piece of cloth for being a too heavy colour, instead of doing something to make it lighter, it won’t change by itself, it will keep on being heavy.

Laughter has that power of making people lighter. «Rire fortifie le coeur» (Chinese saying).

Diversifying human contacts temperates obsessive egologies. The phanatical, the terrorist, the inconscient, the tyrant, the sad – there is too much egology in all of them. That was also one of the traces of Eichmann’s character, as reported by Arendt:

«The longer one listened to him, the more obvious it became that his inability to speak was closely connected with an inability to think, namely, to think from the standpoint of somebody else. No communication was possible with him, not because he lied but because he was surrounded by the most reliable of all safeguards against the words and the presence of others, and hence against reality as such.»

Temperate the waters, instead of promoting ostracism. Go by the middle and don’t let an abyss of ice to crystallize in-between.

Don’t put aside, don’t imitate Hitler’s methods of tearing apart, or – which come to the same thing - the Zionist ideological programs for ghetto-ing, separating his own people from the others. With Israel, the Zionists got their final solution of divorce from the other people. I think this was what Arendt (5) and Deleuze (6) meant.  And that is not only a problem of Zionists and Nazis, but of every nationalism that spread around Earth. Those narcissistic crystallized minds which judge the world by their image and resemblance (a feature linked to Judeo-Christian religion).

While we are reduced to chose exclusively between the opposite terms of a dichotomy – Jews OR Germans, Zionists OR Nazis – people are, in fact, supporting the maintenance of this manicheism, this recurring war of shock fronts. The cut feeds the dialectical division.

Especially, dont’ fall in the alternative between love and hate. Don’t fall, in love. “Love will tear us apart”, indeed, as Joy Division put it.

For Nazis: don’t fall in love with Hitler or Germany. For Zionists: don’t fall in love with Israel. Love and hate are forms of fanatism.

Sym-pathize! (from Greek sym, “conjoined”, + pathos, “passion, pathology”). Fill the gap. We’re together in affections (please understand this as a Spinozist concept).

This world wouldn’t go round without sympathy. Without sympathy, this world would suffer a total splitting-apart and would lose the capacity to become a symbol (sym + Greek for “ball”). The point is a symbol, even though, symbolism or symbolic thought is a mis-representation of the point.

In fact, those who are banning Lars von Trier from Cannes should be the ones to apologize for behaving in such a stupid way: apartheid-like (7). And boring to death.

Of course, this polemic – and a little bit of Jewish marketing - will boost the hype around Trier’s next movie.

The Iranian director Abbas Kiarostami also rejects dichotomic divisions in this way:

«If both of us were illiterate, life would be impossible! (…) I think that if the proprietors married the proprietors, the rich married the rich, and the illiterates married their equals, nothing would work. It is much better that people who can read marry illiterates, that the rich marry the poor, that the homeless marry the landowners. And thus, we could all help ourselves. I think that this is the best».

- “Through the Olive Trees” (1372 d. H./1993 d.C.).

Giving further developments to Kiarostami’s quote, I would add: “… that the Nazis marry the Jews” (or vice-versa).

Heidegger and Arendt almost did it, at least, philosophically speaking.

Who knows, maybe someday I will see Lars working with Larry (8) -  two of the most brilliant satyrs in cinema today – and, finally, people will come a point.

But, only, if they don’t rely on the “grander scales” fostered by journalists, who make tempests in a glass of water.

Normally, journalists are not very sympathetic, and do not understand a thing.

Post-Scriptum:

Even if any of these things didn’t come to Trier’s mind, well, they came to mine.

.

NOTES:

(-1) LVT to Time Out magazine, September 2011:

“During the war, my mother went to Sweden because she was a resistance fighter and my adopted father went there because he was Jewish. My real father went to Sweden too as a freedom fighter. But they were German, that was what I meant. (…) This Jewishness is my upbringing… My decision is that I’m as good a Jew as anyone. That’s where I come from. I don’t give a shit where the sperm comes from. I’m a cultural Jew. (…) If I say to you now, I’m a Nazi, you’ll say: “What do you mean?”. And some sense might come out of it. (…) The real Nazis were the French. It’s this feeling I have that the whole anti-Semitic thing was something Hitler stole from the French. (…) I know it sounds unpleasant, but I believe we can learn things from what has happened, and if we make a lot of taboos about it, it will slow this process down or stop it completely – which would be so unfair to the people who died in Auschwitz, for instance.”

(0) Georges Bataille, “Extrait d’un enregistrement radiophonique”, 1959:

«[Nietzsche] proteste contre l’assignation d’un but aux choses, l’assignation d’un but au monde. Pour lui le monde n’a pas de but et par conséquent ce qu’il nous reste possible c’est de rire de ce qu’il est, mais non pas de rire comme il est banal de rire en s’apercevant d’une supériorité que l’on a sur celui dont on rit, mais de rire d’un rire définitif, de rire — on ne peut pas rire du monde comme d’une réalité par rapport à laquelle on se sent supérieur mais d’une réalité devant laquelle au contraire on sent sa petitesse — et par conséquent le rire dans les conditions nietzschéennes est un rire tragique. Il n’y a aucune possibilité de rire à partir de la connaissance de Nietzsche sans aller jusqu’au bout des possibilités du rire, c’est-à-dire de rire tragiquement, de rire comme on rirait devant un crucifix.»

(1) Conference in Mougins, France, after LVT have been declared “persona non grata” at Cannes Festival, May 2011:

“I had actually been drinking quite a lot, but now I’m sober,” he said. “I would suggest to everybody, don’t stop drinking. If I had been, I would be almost asleep at the press conference and would not have said those stupid things. (…) They are usually more intelligent than this.”

“I feel this obligation, which is completely stupid and very unprofessional, to kind of entertain the crowd a little bit.”

«Before the Hitler jokes, Mr. von Trier’s most provocative statements at the news conference concerned his ambivalence toward “Melancholia.” “I think I would like this film very much if I had not made it,” he said on Friday. “It was very easy to do a film that looks this way, that’s beautiful. Maybe it gave me too much pleasure to do it.”

He worried that some moments in “Melancholia” have ended up “in the area of kitsch,” which both attracts and disgusts him. Referring to a tableau in the film in which Ms. Dunst’s character lies naked on a riverbank under a glowing blue orb in the sky, Mr. von Trier said, “Hitler would have thought this is really art, and that’s also a little shameful that you are now suddenly into this art of the Third Reich.”

This brought him back to the question that started it all. “The vulgarity of the fascistic art has a naïveté and a power that is quite interesting,” he said. He called the architect Albert Speer and the filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl “wonderful artists,” and emphasized that he was expressing admiration for aesthetics and not ideology. “The ideology, since it’s so clear, since it’s one-sided, makes it easier to make a design that has some power to it,” he added.

As for his next project, titled “The Nymphomaniac,” Mr. von Trier said, “I’m going into complete amorality.” The film shows “the erotic development of a woman” from birth to age 50, he said, adding that there would be both “hard-core and soft-core versions, and lots and lots of philosophy.”

“I’m very inspired, and I really long to do this,” he said, “so I hope that all this nonsense hasn’t made it impossible.”»

See also Time Out magazine, September 2011:

“I’m sober, and that press conference in Cannes was the first one I ever did sober.”

(2) According to Trier’s ever-dubious statements:

«I don’t know enough about Nietzsche; my problem was I have this “Anti-Christ” book laying on my table by the bed now for forty years and I haven’t opened it yet… so it’s just the title I know. I don’t want to say anything about Nietzsche other than to say that he, in the film, he suddenly embraces a horse over Wagner’s music, a scene which I liked.»

Trier has explicitly stated that, with his film “Antichrist” (2009), he has made what he always hated most: a symbolic film. The fact is that this movie was preceded by another,  ”De unge år: Erik Nietzsche sagaen del 1″ / “The Early Years: Erik Nietzsche – Part 1″ (2007), written (and narrated, but not directed) by Lars Von Trier, under the self-mocking pseudonym of Erik Nietzsche, considered a semi-autobiographical exercise.

(3) The book Eichmann in Jerusalem – A Report on the Banality of Evil by Hannah Arendt caused a stir among Jewish community and intellectuals, such as, for instance, Gershom Scholem, who send her a letter:

«In the Jewish tradition there is a concept, hard to define and yet concrete enough, which we know as Ahabath Israel: “Love of the Jewish people….” In you, dear Hannah… I find little trace of this. Since the subject was the destruction of a third of the Jewish people, ‘I have little sympathy with that tone – well expressed by the English word “flippancy” – which you employed so often in the course of your book.»

Arendt replied to his letter, underlining the difference between the love of an undifferentiated collective (“people”) and the love of diverse individuals (“persons”):

«You are quite right – I am not moved by any ‘love’ of this sort, and for two reasons: I have never in my life ‘loved’ any people or collective – neither the German people, nor the French, nor the American, nor the working class or anything of that sort. I indeed ‘love’ only my friends and the only kind of love I know of and believe in is the love of persons. Secondly, this ‘love of the Jews’ would appear to me, since I am myself Jewish, as something rather suspect… I do not ‘love’ the Jews, nor do I ‘believe’ in them; I merely belong to them as a matter of course, beyond dispute or argument.»

Franz Kafka expressed a similar point of view in his “Diaries” – though, he doesn’t only rejects the love of the Jewish collective, but also the love for one’s “self” as a subject (someone who is subjected), characteristic of  many tyrants:

“What do I have in common with the Jews? I don’t even have anything in common with myself.” - January 8, 1914.

(4) D. H. Lawrence, “Whitman” in “Studies in classic American literature”, 1923:

«Death is not the goal. And Love, and merging, are now only part of the death process. (…) The great home of the Soul is the open road. (…) The journey itself, down the open road. Exposed to full contact. On two slow feet. Meeting whatever comes down the open road. In company with those that drift in the same measure along the same way. Towards no goal. Always the open road. Having no known direction even. Only the soul remaining true to herself in her going. Meeting all the other wayfarers along the road. And how? How meet them, and how pass ? With sympathy, says Whitman. Sympathy. He does not say love. He says sympathy. Feeling with. Feel with them as they feel with themselves. Catching the vibration of their soul and flesh as we pass. It is a new great doctrine. A doctrine of life. A new great morality. A morality of actual living, not of salvation. Europe has never got beyond the morality of salvation. America to this day is deathly sick with saviourism. (…) The high-road of Love is no Open Road. It is a narrow, tight way, where the soul walks hemmed in between compulsions. (…) Love and Charity have degenerated now into habit: a bad habit. (…) Sympathy means feeling with, not feeling for. (…) Love, and Merging, brought Whitman to the Edge of Death! Death! Death!».

(5) Hannah Arendt, “Eichmann in Jerusalem - A Report on the Banality of Evil“:

«Wherever Jews lived, there were recognized Jewish leaders, and this leadership, almost without exception, cooperated in one way or another, for one reason or another, with the Nazis. The whole truth was that if the Jewish people had been really unorganized and leaderless, there would have been chaos and plenty of misery but the total number of victims would hardly have been between four and half and six million people.»

(6) Gilles Deleuze, “The Grandeur of Yasser Arafat“, Revue d’ Etudes Palestiniennes, nº 18, 1984:

«The conquerors were those who had themselves suffered the greatest genocide in history. Of this genocide the Zionists have made an absolute evil [italics in original]. But transforming the greatest genocide in history into an absolute evil is a religious and mystical vision, not a historical vision. It doesn’t stop the evil; on the contrary, it spreads the evil, makes it fall once again on other innocents, demands reparation that makes these others suffer part of what the Jews suffered (expulsion, restriction to ghettos, disappearance as a people). With “colder” means than genocide, one ends up with the same result.»

(7) It has been noted that Israel has its own apartheid system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analogy.

(8) The Jewish humorist Larry David.

————————————————————————————————

TRANSCRIPTION

[because none of the journalists I've read offered a rigorous one]

 - Press conference for “Melancholia”, Cannes, May 2011, video here

«It is said in the film that this is a pointless life, and a pointless world. Since you are the writer and director, is this some of your own opinion?

LVT: Oh yes.

Your films are very melancholic, but you are very funny in person, why aren’t you making comedies?

LVT: Because when I make comedies, they become melancholic also. This was actually a comedy, so you don’t want to see a tragedy!

Can you talk about your German roots, the Gothic aspects of this film, and the fact that you have mentioned in a Danish film magazine your interest in the Nazi aesthetic?

LVT – But, anyway, I know I really wanted to be a Jew and then I found out that I was really a Nazi, you know, because my family was German – Hartmann – which also gave me some pleasure [laughs], so, I am kind of, ya, I… What can I say?  I understand Hitler. But, I think he did some wrong things, absolutely, but I can see him sitting in his bunker at the end… [Kirsten Dunst interrupts] What?… They will come a point at the end of this. They will come… No, I’m just saying that I think I understand the man. He’s not what you would call a good guy but, ya, I understand much about him and I sympathise with him a little bit, yes, but, come on, I am not for the Second World War, and I am not against Jews… Susanne Bier (1)… No, not even Susanne Bier. That was also a joke. I am, of course, very much for Jews. No, not too much, because Israel is a pain in the ass… But still, how can I get out of this sentence?

Someone at the table – By another question. Easy salvation.

LVT – No, I just want to say about the arts of… I am very much for Speer… Speer I liked. Albert Speer I liked (2). He was also, maybe, one of God‘s best children and he had some talents that was kind of possible to him to use joining… [sighs] OK, I’m a Nazi.»

Is this your answer to the Hollywood blockbuster, or could you see yourself doing something on a grander scale than this?

LVT: Yes that’s what we Nazis… we have a tendency to try and do things on a grander scale. Maybe you could persuade me into the Final Solution… with journalists.»

NOTES:

(1) Susanne Bier is a Danish Jewish film director, best known for her movie ”In a Better World” (2010), which won the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film.

(2) Albert Speer was the leading architect of the Third Reich, later known as “the Nazi who said sorry”.

————————————————————

After being banned, Von Trier held a news conference of his own in Danish. His first remark to the Danish journalists was:

“If any of you journalists will beat me, so just do it. I will enjoy it.”

He went on to say that:

“The Holocaust is the worst crime that ever happened. I have nothing against Jews. I have a Jewish name, and all my children have Jewish names.”

“It was really stupidly done and it was in the wrong forum. At the press conference with Danish journalists, there were no problems, but I do not think the international journalists understand my Danish humor.”

“I am proud to have been declared ‘persona non grata’. It is perhaps the first time, in cinematic history, it has happened.”

“… I think one reason is that French people treated the Jews badly during World War II. Therefore, it is a sensitive topic for them. I respect the Cannes festival very highly, but I also understand that they are very angry at me right now.”

Speaking to other news outlets he said that his comments were:

“very sarcastic and very rude, but that’s very Danish.”

“I don’t sympathize with Hitler for one second.”

“It’s a pity because (Jewish festival head) Gilles Jacob is a close personal friend of mine”

“What I said was completely stupid but I am absolutely no Mel Gibson … What I meant was I could imagine what it was like for Hitler in the bunker, making plans. Not that I would do what Hitler did. But it’s a pity if it means I will lose contact with Cannes.”

Von Trier pointed to his own background – his stepfather is Jewish and he grew up thinking he had Jewish roots – to indicate how ridiculous it would be to call him an anti-Semite.

“I have to say I’m a little proud of being named a persona non grata. I think my family would be proud”

“I have a French order. Now they will likely tear it off my chest.”

The director said he would not be allowed “within 100 meters” of the Festival Palais and red carpet, meaning he will not attend the Cannes awards ceremony on Sunday, but was not certain if his films would also be banned.

“I hope not. Because even if I was Hitler – and I must now state for the record I am not Hitler – but even if I was Hitler and I made a great film, Cannes should select it.”

The Festival has kept Melancholia in Competition even as it has banned the controversial Danish director.

But his comments, and the reaction to them, are certain to have long-lasting effects, both on the reception of Melancholia and Von Trier’s career. Already the Argentine distributor of the film, citing Von Trier’s comments, said it would not release Melancholia.

The director himself admitted he may now have trouble in:

“raising money or getting certain actors to work with me”.

The actresses Kirsten Dunst and Charlotte Gainsbourg, who were sitting to either side of him at the press conference, seemed shocked by what he was saying.

“I think Kirsten sees me as very European and crazy”

“But I don’t think Charlotte was shocked. Her father (singer/songwriter Serge Gainsbourg) was known for being provocative. She said to me ‘My father would have been proud of you.’”

Von Trier said he has not yet talked to Martin Scorsese, with whom he is planning a collaborative documentary: The Five Obstructions: Scorsese vs Trier. Von Trier said he is confident the project, which Magnolia pre-bought for North America just hours before the controversial Melancholia press conference, will go ahead.

“I haven’t spoken to him yet but Martin is very open minded”

Trying to explain his press conference comments, Von Trier admitted that, in part, he was playing his old role as Cannes’ agent provocateur.

“It sounds strange but I don’t like conflict. When I went into the press conference I felt like I should entertain people there”

“Everyone comes to see what crazy thing Lars is going to say. And then I started a sentence which I couldn’t get out of. At the time I didn’t think much about it. Everyone seemed to understand and there was laughter. It’s only afterwards, when you read it: ‘I sympathize with Hitler’ that I thought ‘oh boy.’”

From several sources, including this

A cigarra cantou-se toda

«Casca oca
a cigarra
cantou-se toda.»

- Matsuo Bashô

 

“Return of the 17 Year Cicadas” – Most cicadas go through a life cycle that lasts from two to five years. Some species have much longer life cycles, such as the North American genus, Magicicada, which has a number of distinct “broods” that go through either a 17-year or, in some parts of the world , a 13-year life cycle. Perhaps, there is some relation with the lenght of the Metonic cycle.

———————————————————————————–

The Metonic cycle

In astronomy and calendar studies, the Metonic cycle or Enneadecaeteris (from Greek words for nineteen years) is a period of very close to 19 years which is remarkable for being very nearly a common multiple of the tropical year and the synodic (lunar) month. The Greek astronomer Meton of Athens observed that a period of 19 tropical years is almost exactly equal to 235 synodic months, and rounded to full days counts 6940 days. The difference between the two periods (of 19 tropical years and 235 synodic months) is only 2 hours.

Traditionally (in the ancient Attic and Babylonian lunisolar calendars, as well as in the Hebrew calendar), the years 3, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, and 19 are the long (13-month) years of the Metonic cycle. This cycle can be used to predict eclipses, forms the basis of the Greek and Hebrew calendars, and is used in the computation of the date of Easter each year.

The Chaldean astronomer Kidinnu (4th century BC) knew of the 19-year cycle, but the Babylonians may have learned of it earlier. They measured the moon’s motion against the stars, so the 235:19 relation may originally have referred to sidereal years, instead of tropical years as it has been used in various calendars.

The Runic calendar is a perpetual calendar based on the 19-year-long Metonic cycle. Also known as a Rune staff or Runic Almanac.

The Bahá’í calendar, established in the middle of the 19th century, is also based on cycles of 19 years.

Estrelas e devires-animais

«I am the Mistress of the Wolf-Dog of Death, chained to the hub of the heavens, the North Celestial Pole, marked by Polaris».

- Rachel Rosenthal

 

«Spinoza dit ceci, une formule très très curieuse très belle: “Si Dieu avait un entendement et une volonté, les mots entendement et volonté devraient être compris à peu près comme le mot chien qui désigne à la fois l’animal aboyant et une constellation céleste“. La constellation du chien, quoi! Qu’est-ce qu’il est en train de nous dire?»

- Deleuze, “Cours sur Spinoza”.

 

«A vida dos filósofos, e o mais exterior de sua obra, obedece a leis de sucessão ordinária; mas seus nomes próprios coexistem e brilham, seja como pontos luminosos que nos fazem repassar pelos componentes de um conceito, seja como os pontos cardeais de uma camada ou de uma folha que não deixam de visitar-nos, como estrelas mortas cuja luz é mais viva que nunca. A filosofia é devir, não história; ela é coexistência de planos, não sucessão de sistemas.»

- Deleuze e Guattari, O Que é a Filosofia?

 

«How can we extract ourselves, at the same time, from a structuralist vision that seeks correspondences, analogies, and homologies, and from a Marxist vision that seeks determinants? I indeed see one possible hypothesis, but it’s so confused… It’s perfect. It would consist in saying: at a given moment, for reasons that, of course, must still be determined, it is as if a social space were covered by what we would have to call an abstract machine. We would have to give a name to this non-qualified abstract machine, a name that would mark its absence of qualification, so that everything will be clear. We could call it – at the same time, this abstract machine, at a given moment, will break with the abstract machine of the preceding epochs – in other words, it will always be at the cutting edge [à la pointe], thus it would receive the name machinic point [pointe machinique]. It would be the machinic point of a group or a given collectivity; it would indicate, within a group and at a given moment, the maximum of deterritorialization as well as, and at the same time, its power of innovation. This is somewhat abstract at the moment, it’s like algebra. (…) This machinic point would indicate a kind of speed of deterritorialization. (…) Here, it would be necessary to show how a body without organs is formed on this organism, how there appears on it a probe head, a machinic point, and this machinic point is this instance of movement that will be found later in this or that assemblage. (…) It would be necessary to know what machinic point marks the maximum of deterritorialization on this body without organs; this history of the machinic point that will mark the currents of deterritorialization on the BwO seems to me to be very complicated. It is also necessary to see the machinic assemblages that flow from it, and then the becomings animal, or, what amounts to the same thing, the intensities. The deterritorialized intensities that crisscross [quadrillent] the body without organs. And in all this, the subject is, à la lettre, a nomadic particle which traverses all that, the lines of deterritorialization, the intensities. (…) Next time, we’ll have to look at Carlos Casteneda’s book. It recounts, broadly speaking, not an initiation, but truly an experimentation. The guy would indeed like to be initiated, because he’s a poor guy, and the Indian tells him no problem. Carlos says to him: teach me, I want to know, i.e., he treats the old Indian like one treats one’s psychoanalyst, and the Indian tells him: begin by finding your body without organs. Carlos’s search for his BwO is pathetic, he is looking in a restrained space, in a kind of desert, that’s the joyous experimentation; and in a certain way, this search is to find the place where one is at ease [la place où on est bien]. From a schizoanalytic perspective, the guy has to find where he is at ease, and in what position, if he wants to hang from the ceiling… There’s no reason for him to lie down. And Carlos looks for his place by rolling around in the grass, he seeks until he finds. Once he’s found his place, he no longer lives as a subject, but as a tiny thing [truc], a tiny particle, and then there is a more brilliant particle, the Indian. Then, a machinic assemblage begins. In what form? In the form that it is necessary to have an ally. On the one hand, it is necessary to have a teacher, an experimenter, but it is also necessary to have a powerful ally. All this begins to make a little machine where something is going to happen; a certain distribution of intensities is already being drawn on this body without organs. And then he sees a dog, he plays at being dog [il fait le chien], but it’s not that either, he doesn’t play dog; he is in the process of undoing the organisation of the body in favor of something else. One feels that the problem is not that of becoming animal; the dog is not a dog. The Indian says: that’s not a dog, it’s anything at all, whatever you like. What is this type of becoming inhuman, which is expressed badly in saying “he’s playing dog”? He has traversed certain intensities, which one can represent by: dog, as in Kafka. Kafka also plays dog, but he doesn’t need drugs to do so; he invented another machine for himself in order to do it. At the end, Carlos annoys the Indian so much that the Indian says to him, “But this dog, what, you take yourself for what? It’s not your whore of a mother.” That’s anti-psychoanalysis. This dog here is the outcome [sortie] of the Oedipal apparatus. He followed his body without organs, lines of deterritorialization following deterritorialized intensities. Why these intensities rather than others? He’ll then become a lizard; then he’ll progress, he’ll become a crow. To play the crow [faire le corbeau] truly consists in making the legs and wings of the crow grow from his face, to be populated with crows. It was not to play dog, it was to be populated with dogs. To play dog, it is not enough to go “woof, woof, woof,” one has to pass through other experimentations. This changes everything in the problem of totemism. When structuralists speak of totemism, it’s rather poor, dry. Totemism has always had certain relations with the history of drugs, but it is not that at all, for in the second book, where the experimentation continues even more strongly, we witness the passage from becoming inhuman, from becoming intense to something yet again which is a kind of becoming molecular, as if the disorganisation of the organism in favor of a body living in another mode, again implying something more. And that’s clairvoyance. What does it mean to see inside? That consists above all in seeing water, and Carlos, through an entire series of stages, sees the water that is modified, hardened, immobilised, and which, above all, is dissociated. At the end, it is molecularized and he grasps the water through its constitutive bubbles; but he can’t grasp and see the water through the constitutive molecular bubbles except in connection [liaison] with what is produced by experimentation…»

- Deleuze, 26/03/1973
[transcrição inglesa mais completa que a francesa].

 

Totem memorial pelos mortos Tlingit -
Pennock Island, perto de Ketchikan, Alaska, ca. 1903.

 

 

“Book of Dead”

 

O que os Egípcios representaram na horizontal, os Índios representaram na vertical: os devires-animais.

A ordem dos animais é estranhamente coincidente: o grau de intensidade mais baixa corresponde a um canídeo (cão, chacal Anúbis, lobo ou raposa), segue-se um monstro compósito (crocodilo-hipopótamo, animal indistinto no totem), reaparece a figura humana e o percurso culmina na ave (corvo índio, falcão Hórus e íbis Thoth egípcios). Vertical índia ou horizontal egípcia? Dois povos que construíram pirâmides.

Na prática, não é justo optar por um deles, senão compô-los, porque o que é vertical no eixo eto-político (o totem é um pólo), é horizontal no plano eco-lógico (no Antigo Egipto, “akhet” designava o horizonte).

O hieróglifo de “Akhet” é um foco púrpura de luz num vale entre duas montanhas ou entre dois leões, os Akher.

A palavra “Akhet” designava também a primeira estação do ano, caracterizada pelas cheias do Nilo, e que começava por altura do solstício de Verão, na madrugada em que ocorria a ascensão heliacal da estrela Sopdet/Sepdet (spdt, “Sharp”), em grego Sothis, identificada a Sirius ou Canicula*(Estrela do Cão, em inglês, Dog Star), a estrela mais brilhante do firmamento nocturno a olho nu e que trazia a canícula do Verão.

O termo “Akh” denotava ‘luz, luminária’, e, simultaneamente, a ave íbis que surgia após o “Ba” unir-se ao “Ka” do defunto.

A Grande Pirâmide era chamada de “Akhet”, seguindo-se o nome do faraó fundador.

[* About Sirius:

By the 4th millennium BC, a solar calendar was established in Egypt which was calibrated on the conjunction of the heliacal (dawn) rising of the star Sirius and the summer solstice sunrise. This event marked the annual flooding of the Nile, Egypt's mighty river and on whose waters all life in Egypt depends.

Observing the Sothic cycle, it has been noticed that Sirius does not move retrograde across the sky like other stars, a phenomenon widely known as the precession of the equinox. This gives Sirius the unusual characteristic of appearing to stay stable relative to the equinox and solstices, and for the same reason, the helical rising (or zenith) of Sirius does not slip through the calendar (at the precession rate of about one day per 71.6 years), as other stars do. Sirius remains about the same distance from the equinoxes—and so from the solstices—throughout these many centuries, despite precession. Sirius/Sothis creates an axis of rotation with Earth relative to the stellar background. Because of this, of all the stars in the sky, only the annual heliacal rising of Sirius exactly matches the length of our solar year, 365.25 days. This remarkable stability within the solar year may be one reason that the Egyptians used it as a basis for their calendar whereas no other star would have sufficed. The Ancient Egyptians were somehow aware of this unique relationship between our Solas system and Sirius and marked the heliacal rising of Sirius as the first day of their calendar year.

The News Year's Eve celebration recovers an ancient ritual honoring the return of Sirius to the midheaven position at midnight. Through the ages, around January 1st, this midnight alignment marks the moment when the energies of the double star Sirius, directly overhead, are especially intense.

Sirius B traces a 50-year elliptical orbit around Sirius A, and their common center of gravity face onto the Earth like the dial of a clock, during the period of their closest connection, called the periastron, when the radiated energies of these two great stars is at a maximum. Sirius B spins on its axis 23 times a minute (23 rpm), generating an enormous magnetic field. As it approaches periastron, it begins to pull huge amounts of gas and material away from its less dense companion. The gravitational attraction of these stars for each other and the energies they release, including vast amounts of electromagnetic radiation, visible light, ultraviolet, X-rays, gamma rays and beyond, are thrown into space. The extra gas and material Sirius A provides for her companion re-ignite fusion reactions within Sirius B. As Sirius B moves past periastron, the light generated by their shared energies begins to diminish.]

We have to make a table

«…the entire series of Cartesian dualisms (soul-body, thought-extension, statement-enunciation) (…)

Now all the dualisms of Descartes, even passion and action, depend strictly on this operation of the cogito, which consists of relating statements to a subject of enunciation, which will consequently split the subject in two: the subject of the statement, and the subject of enunciation. (…)

… in a certain manner, psychoanalysis is the final inheritor of Cartesianism (…)

Dualism is what prevents thought. Dualism always wants to deny the essence of thought, namely, that thought is a process. (…)

The only enemy is two. Monism and pluralism: it’s the same thing, because, in a certain manner, it seems to me that every opposition, even all possibilities of oppositions between the one and the multiple…This is because the source of dualism is precisely the opposition between something that can be affirmed as one, and something that can be affirmed as multiple, and more precisely, what signals it as one is precisely the subject of enunciation, and what signals it as multiple is always the subject of the statement… (…)

What I have been saying since the beginning amounts to saying that thinking and desiring are the same thing. The best way to avoid seeing or to refuse to see that desire is thought, that the position of desire in thought is a veritable process, is obviously to link desire to lack. Once desire is linked to lack, one is immediately in the domain, one has already assumed the basis of dualism. But today I would like to say that there are more underhanded ways of reintroducing lack into desire, either through the Other, or through dualism. Here, so-called Western thought is constructed from the relation between desire and pleasure, a completely rotten (pourrie) conception. (…)

I’m thinking of this book on sexual life in ancient China. It recounts a strange story, in the end we are all Chinese: in Taoism, it varies throughout the ages (…) What’s different is the way desire is experienced in a totally different manner: it’s not related to any transcendence, it’s not related to any lack, it’s not measured by any pleasure, and it’s not transcended by any jouissance, under the form or myth of the impossible. Desire is posited as a pure process. Concretely, this means that it is not at all the orgasm; their problem is not at all the Western problem, which is: How to extract sexuality from genitality? Their problem is: How to extract sexuality from the orgasm? (…)

All this is interesting for us, to the degree that, in this thought, desire simultaneously loses any link with lack, with pleasure or orgasm, or with jouissance. It is conceived as the production of a flow, it defines a field of immanence, and a field of immanence—that means a multiplicity in which, effectively, any splitting of the subject into a subject of enunciation and a subject of the statement becomes strictly impossible, since in our revolving machine it was very simple: the subject of enunciation was the subject of impossible jouissance, the subject of the statement was the subject of pleasure and of the search for pleasure, and desire-lack was the splitting of the two. That should tell you to what degree, from Descartes to Lacan, this repugnant thought of the cogito is not only a metaphysical thought. (…)

It is because this history of the splitting of the subject always consists in saying: it is you who command, i.e., you will accede to the commandment to the degree that you submit yourself to a order, which you are not subject to without also being its legislator. This is the famous order of democracy. You are a legislator insofar as you are a subject; and it is not by chance that the person who pushed this doctrine the farthest, the formalism of this doctrine, is the inheritor of Descartes from the viewpoint of the cogito, namely, Kant, and that the submission to reason is presented to us as the manner in which we become legislators. This always refers us to the division of the subject into a subject of the statement and a subject of enunciation: you will obey as the subject of the statement, but because it is you who command as the subject of enunciation, and we are led to grasp this great split identity—as a barred identity, whatever you like—between the legislator and the subject. It’s the same thing; it’s the same mechanism, which thereby claims to engender statements in relation to a subject; which posits the duality of a subject of enunciation and a subject of the statement as the source of all the other dualisms, which thus suppresses thought as a process; and which, thirdly, destroys any position of desire, because by relating desire to lack, pleasure, and jouissance, it in effect leaps in favour of the appearance of thought, i.e., in favour of an image of thought. (…)

… statements would be produced by a subject thus split. How was this thing here able to produce that thing there? And this is the problem: How to say “me” (moi)? How to dare to say “me”? As soon as I say “me,” I situate myself both as a subject of the statement and a subject of enunciation. And whenever there is this cleavage, there’s all this rubbish (saloperie) that comes along with it. I mean, for example: “Me as a human being.” All social functions are constructed on that, all repressive functions are constructed on this cleavage: me as human being, you understand, but as a father, I must act! Me as human being, I’m on you side; but as a cop, I have to apply the law! As a cop, I have to apply the law, which means that I’m the subject of the statement. As a man, I understand you: that means I’m the subject of enunciation. I will be a legislator all the more insofar as I am a subject, you will be a subject all the more insofar as you are legislators, we all understand each other…This is a way of saying: OK, we are all castrated, it works.

What we were saying last week was: there are no individual statements, no statement can be produced by an individual. Our hypothesis was that what produces statements were machinic assemblages, or what amounts to the same thing, collective agents of enunciation—on the condition that we understand that collective does not mean peoples, but that it means, in whatever sense the term is taken: what must be called collective agents of enunciation are all multiplicities, whatever their nature. (…)

We have to pose the problem practically! We have to pose a series of oppositions, we have to make a table: how is a body without organs produced, the first production of the statement. (…)

A body without organs is the surface of inscription for every statement or for every desire. (…)

A body without organs does not pre-exist. Last time, I took the desert as a model, but on the condition that certain things take place on it. The desert is indeed a place or a surface for the production of statements. (…)

In the bad column, that of the false conception of desire, we’ll put the organism. Here, it would be necessary to show how a body without organs is formed on this organism, how there appears on it a probe head, a machinic point, and this machinic point is this instance of movement that will be found later in this or that assemblage.

The body without organs, the desert, is fundamentally populated. The problem of the unconscious is not really that of generations, it is a problem of population, it is a matter of know how one populates. (…)

In the other column, as opposed to assemblages of multiplicities, there is the theme of the subject of enunciation, the split subject as the source of dualisms. To the anti-Oedipal apparatus is opposed the Oedipal apparatus, or to the becoming inhuman, the becoming animal, is opposed the becoming human of the other column. To monism-pluralism is opposed the dualities that follow from the false conception of the statement. To desire or the thought-process is opposed the conception of desire-lack-pleasure-jouissance; just as the two statuses of the sign we looked at last time are opposed, namely, the sign gathered together in a network that subordinates it to the signifier, and on the contrary, the sign that sets to work on its own account, that frees itself from the hypothesis of the signifier and which is coupled with a particle or a system of particles, i.e., the sign-particle as opposed to the sign-signifier.

It would be necessary to know what machinic point marks the maximum of deterritorialization on this body without organs; this history of the machinic point that will mark the currents of deterritorialization on the BwO seems to me to be very complicated. It is also necessary to see the machinic assemblages that flow from it, and then the becomings animal, or, what amounts to the same thing, the intensities. The deterritorialized intensities that crisscross (quadrillent) the body without organs. And in all this, the subject is, à la lettre, a nomadic particle which traverses all that, the lines of deterritorialization, the intensities. The problem of the genesis of the illusion is: What is going to fix the subject? At the same time, it will be turned into an organism, it will be submitted to the cogito, it will be fixed, its submission will be assured, by telling it: it’s you who produces statements. (…)

…the disorganization of the organism in favour of a body living in another mode, again implying something more. And that’s clairvoyance. What does it mean to see inside? That consists above all in seeing water (…)»

- Gilles Deleuze, “Dualism, Monism and Multiplicities (Desire-Pleasure-Jouissance)”, Seminar of 26 March, 1973.

Immanence	Transcendence
Body without organs, body living in another mode	Organism
Becoming inhuman, becomings animal, intensities, becoming molecular	Becoming human
Populations	Generations
Anti-Oedipal apparatus (anti-psychoanalysis, schizoanalysis)	Oedipal apparatus (psychoanalysis)
Machinic assemblages as collective agents of enunciation	“Me”, the split subject (subject of enunciation-subject of statement), as false source of statements
Multiplicities (monism=pluralism)	Dualisms (monism/ pluralism, soul/body, thought/extension, level of thought/object of thought, statement/enunciation, signified/signifier)
Non-qualified abstract machine named “machinic point”, “truc”, nomadic particle	Structuralist vision (that seeks correspondences, analogies, and homologies)————– opposed to —————-Marxist vision (that seeks determinants)
Instance of movement, speed of deterritorialization	Fixation
Thought as process and flows	Cogito, non-thought, image of thought, appearance of thought, genesis of a illusion
Desire as thought-process	Desire as lack-pleasure-jouissance
Chinese / Indian, Totemic / Nietzschean anti-Christian thought	Western / European / Christian thought (from Plato and Sophocles to Descartes, Kant, Hegel, Lacan, Barthes…)
Problem: “How to extract sexuality from the orgasm?”	Problem: “How to extract sexuality from genitality?”

How fast do you want to go?

«… isto é apenas o cerne ainda visível, claro, saudável, da desenvoltura, que progressivamente dissolve e perde as suas fronteiras, que impele a pessoa para o interior do círculo, quando afinal se devia correr ao longo do círculo.»

- Kafka, “Diário”, 15 de Agosto de 1911. 

 

Homopolar motor with 5-speed shifter: it is only needed a neodymium magnet, a battery, a conductive wire and 5 coins of different diameters.

It works similar to the 150-year old electric homopolar motor invented by Michael Faraday, and works by the principle of the Lorentz force, discovered after Faraday died. The Lorenz force law states that a charge moving in a uniform magnetic field experiences a force at right angles to both the field and the direction of the current flow.

This engineeering model offers a conceptual insight.

By principle, if you depend on money to eat and you only have 1 cent, you will do something faster to earn more money than if you have 2 euros or more. Hence, there is a kind of relation between the amount of your fuel (if you’re running short on money) and your driving speed…

Zona ártica interior

«A superconductor is a substance that has zero electrical resistance. Usually this occurs at extremely low temperatures».

———————–

«Tanto los pobres como los ricos deberán superar la ilusión de que más energía es mejor.»

- Ivan Illich

———————–

«- Ai de mim! – disse o homem. – Quanto mais quente está, mais frio eu tenho. Para mim, o Sol é geada cortante que me gela os ossos e, por outro lado, quando os outros têm aquilo a que chamam frio, eu começo a ter muito calor. Não suporto n…em o gelo por ser tão quente, nem o lume por ser tão frio».

- Irmãos Grimm, “Os Cinco Criados”.

———————–

«As linhas de força do campo magnético da Terra (magnetosfera) estão mais contraídas do lado do planeta que está iluminado pelo Sol.»

———————–

«When the Black Stone came down from Jannah [Paradise], it was whiter than milk, but the sins of the sons of Adam made it black. (…) Touching them both [the Black Stone and Ar-Rukn Al-Yamani*, "The South/Right Corner" of Kaaba] is an expiation for one’s sins. (…) The Black Stone is the right hand of Allah Most High.»

- At-Tirmidhi, Sunan, several hadith (“sayings of the Prophet”).

* It derives from the Arabic root y-m-n meaning simultaneously “south, right hand, dexterity”. Yemen (the country) is located to the south of Mecca (housing the Black Stone in the eastern corner of Kaaba). The South corner is exactly on the right of the Hajr Al-Aswad [Black Stone], which faces sunrise ["alba", "alvorecer", "alvorada" are Portuguese words of Arabic origin]. Another word deriving from the same root is yumn meaning “felicity, prosperity, blessing, good fortune”; indeed the Romans called it Arabia Felix. When the Arabs swore an oath they put their right hand (yameen) on the right hand of the other person.

———————–

«Chlorophyll is damaged when leaves are cooked. The molecules denature, and the central magnesium atom is replaced by hydrogen ions. This affects the energy levels within the molecule, causing its absorbance spectrum to alter».

———————–

«…quando Kant marcar que o pensamento está ameaçado, não tanto pelo erro, mas por ilusões inevitáveis que vêm de dentro da razão, como de uma zona ártica interior, onde a agulha de qualquer bússola enlouquece, é uma reorientação de todo o pensamento que se torna necessária, ao mesmo tempo que nele se insinua um certo delírio de direito»

- Deleuze, “O Que é a Filosofia?”

Micro-ficções em árabe

Três das minhas micro-ficções (publicadas aqui) passam a estar disponíveis para leitores das terras do pôr-do-sol (“Magreb”), traduzidas para árabe por Saïd Benabdelouahed:

ثقوب

طبعا، الثقوب أحجام. من الصعب تحديد أصغرها أو أكبرها. ولتبسيط ذلك تم تقسيمها إلى عدة أنواع، حسب من يرصدها. فإن كان من يرصدها محاسبا كانت “ثقبا في الميزانية”، وإن عالما “ثقبا أسود”، وإن مهندسا “ثقبا في السد”، وإن تقنيا إعلاميا “ثقبا في النظام”. ولا شيء أمتع من الحصول على ثقب يحشر فيه المرء نفسه.
الثقوب الكبيرة، لأنها بادية للعيان، ذات طبيعة عابرة. ذلك أن عددا كبيرا من الناس يتطوعون لسدها أو هم مجبرون على القيام بذلك. أما الثقوب الصغيرة، فيمكن أن لا ينتبه إليها أحد لآلاف السنين، فتستمر في الكبر شيئا فشيئا، دون أن تظهر، بينما الجميع منشغل بملاحظة الثقوب الكبرى. لهذا السبب، يجب عدم استبعاد فرضية أن العالم يعج بها؛ إنها، بالتأكيد أكثر عددا من الثقوب الكبيرة. وعددها يعادل قدر ما في الإسفنج من ثقوب.
لذلك، عندما يتم اكتشاف ثقب صغير، يجب الإمساك به في الحال، قبل أن يراه شخص آخر، ويأخذ في نبشه ببطء إلى أن يصير كبيرا بما يكفي ليمر عبره. فقط بهذه الطريقة تُقطع العلاقة مع العالم، الكثير الثقوب أصلا، قبل أن يمتصنا انطلاقا من كل واحد من مسامِّه ومسامِّنا.

حامل الإرساليات

بدأت عملي كحامل إرساليات. أقضي يومي في أخذ الأظرفة، والطرود البريدية أو أحجام أخرى، ونقلها عبر الممرات والأزقة إلى أن أسلمها إلى وجهتها.
يوما بعد يوم، اكتسبت خبرة في هذه المهنة، فأصبحت متفوقا لدرجة أنني حصلت على العديد من الجوائز. كنت أشهر حامل إرساليات في المقاولة، التي كانت تتوفر على عدد كبير منهم. والمقاولات، كالعادة، تكاد تتشكل بالكامل من حاملي إرساليات.
كان الزملاء يراقبونني ويتجسسون علي، محاولين الكشف عن السر أو تقليد التقنية، لكني أظن أنهم لم ينتبهوا أبدا لعامل النجاح الحاسم. إذا كنت أتحسن أكثر من أي واحد منهم، فإن ذلك يُعزى لكوني أتصرف مثل بهلوان أو راقص لا يتحركان تماما. بعد أن آخذ الشيء الذي سأسلمه، أكتفي باستقبال الثقل الجديد وضبط توازني معه، ثم أنساق عبر الممرات والشوارع، دون مقاومة، إلى أن أبلغ وجهتي. لا توجد طريقة أسرع من هذه للوصول إلى أي مكان. عندما أصل، وأسلم السلعة، أصبح فجأة أقل وزنا، أستعيد توازني ثم أعود يحملني الجزر البحري.
هكذا تعلمت أن لا أحد يذهب في الحقيقة إلى أي وجهة.

مرآة امرأة

عرفتُ امرأة كانت، عندما تنظر إلى وجهها في المرآة لتعتني بشكلها، تقول مخاطبة نفسها، بدل أن تتساءل إن كانت أجمل، إن الانعكاس يشوه صورتها. كانت تعاني من حساسية المرايا.
قررتْ أن تتخلص من كل المرايا التي تصادفها. سحبتها من غرفة النوم، والحمام، والحقيبة، وأبواب الدولاب، والبهو، والسيارة. لم تعد تستعمل المصعد الذي يتوفر على مرآة، وغيرت زجاج النوافذ العاكسة … كم كان ذلك مضنيا! لم تنتبه قط لكل هذا العدد من المرايا، إنها كانت تعيش في عالم مرآوي.
مرت أيام تحت نظام بصري صارم، كانت خلالها النظرات الخاطفة للمرايا شيئا ممنوعا.
ذات مرة، بما أنها لم تستطع أن تكتم فضولها، سألتني، ولم أكن أعرف بعد حكايتها مع المرايا، كيف أجدها، وهو ما أجبت عليه قائلا:
ـ إنني أراك شعثاء بعض الشيء وشاحبة، يا عزيزتي.
دخلت في نوبة من البكاء، تتأسف لأنها لا تجد حلا، نظرا لحساسيتها المرآوية. إنها بحاجة لرؤية صورتها المنعكسة لترتب هيئتها، دون الحديث عما يتسبب فيه لها ذلك من مشاكل في التنقل … فأجبتها، محاولا أن أواسيها:
ـ إنك تعجبينني بطريقة لا تراها المرايا.
أوقفت شكواها. تزوجنا شهرا بعد ذلك. إنني مدين بزواجي للميتافيزيقا.

سونْيا دْوارْتي
(البرتغال،)

إعداد وترجمة: سعيد بنعبد الواحد

10 biliões de “pestes”

Fonte

Será que na Pré-História haviam Censos para recensear a população…?

Parece estatisticamente antropocêntrico que não se analisem os fenómenos de substituição/predominância de umas espécies por outras – e portanto talvez não se reconheça que a sobre-população sempre existiu (?):
- 10 biliões de estrelas
- 10 biliões de sismos
- 10 biliões de dinossauros
- 10 biliões de humanos
- 10 biliões de máquinas
- 10 biliões de ratos
- 10 biliões de insectos
- 10 biliões de vírus
- 10 biliões de átomos
- 10 biliões de quarks

Por exemplo, na fase de “Peste Negra”: a contracção da espécie humana não terá sido motivada pela sobre-população dos micro-organismos que originam essa doença?

Aliás, somos o equivalente à peste negra para algumas espécies que já existiram ou estão a extinguir-se neste planeta.

Sem geometria, nenhum entra

«Ageômetrètos mèdeis eisitô» / «Sem geometria, nenhum entra».

- Inscrição no frontispício da Academia de Platão*.

«A filosofia está escrita nesse grandíssimo livro que temos aberto ante os olhos, isto é, o universo, mas não pode entender-se se antes não se aprender a entender a sua língua, a conhecer os caracteres em que está escrito. Está escrito em língua matemática e os seus caracteres são triângulos, círculos e outras figuras geométricas, sem as quais é impossível entender sequer uma palavra; sem eles é como andar às voltas, em vão, num obscuro labirinto.»

- Galileu, ”Il Saggiatore” [O Ensaiador], 1623. 

 

* A referência é datada posteriormente, nos escritos dos neoplatónicos João Filopono e Olympiodoro, que viveram no século VI d. C., e por João Tzetzes, autor bizantino do século XII (Chiliades, 8, 972).

Uma forma mais completa dessa frase é citada por R. Baccou (nota 492 sobre Rép., VII, 526e6-7, GF Flammarion n° 90, Paris, 1966):

«mèdeis ageômetrètos eisitô mou tèn stegèn» [«ninguém sem geometria entra sob o meu tecto»].

A fórmula não usa a palavra “geómetra”, que se diz em grego “geômetrès”, mas qualifica os excluídos, recorrendo a “ageômetrètos”, formado pelo a- privativo e por “geômetrètos”, que corresponde ao adjectivo verbal “-tos” do verbo “geômetrein”, cujo significado é «medir (metrein) a terra (gè)» e, logo, «praticar a geometria».

Os adjectivos verbais servem em grego para exprimir o possível, e “geômetrètos” pode significar, tanto o sentido activo de “geometrizador”, quanto o sentido passsivo de “geometrizável”.

Aristóteles, nas Segundas Analíticas (I, xii, 77b8-34), menciona uma vez “ageômetrètos” no masculino plural (77b13), referindo que não se deve falar de geometria entre os “ageômetrètois”, termo que opõe a “geômetrikos”, aquele que resolve problemas geométricos, mas jamais utiliza “geômetrètos”.

Platão, na “República”, refere-se desta forma aos geómetras:

«Suponho que sabes que aqueles que se ocupam da geometria (geometrias), da aritmética (logismoùs) e de coisas deste tipo (pragmateuómenoi) supõem (hypotémenoi) o par e o ímpar, as figuras, três espécies (eíde) de ângulos, e outras irmãs destas, segundo o método (méthodon) de cada uma. Essas coisas dão-nas por sabidas (eidótes) e fazendo-as como hipóteses (hypothéseis), nenhuma palavra (lógon), nem a si nem aos outros consideram mais necessário prestar conta, como se fossem evidentes (phanerôn) a todos; e partindo destas e passando ao que resta, caminhando coerentemente atingem ao que tinham se proposto a alçancar» - 510 c2-d2.

«Servem-se de figuras visíveis (oroménois eidesi) e fazem raciocínios (lógous) sobre elas, pensando (dianooúmenoi) não nelas, mas naquilo com que se parecem (éoike), raciocinam com respeito ao quadrado mesmo e à diagonal mesma, mas não ao quadrado, à diagonal, ou aquela que desenham, e semelhantemente quanto às outra figuras. Estas mesmas que estão fazendo ou desenhando, das quais há sombras e imagens na água, eles usam agora como imagens, buscando ver aquilo mesmo que alguém não pode ver excepto pelo pensamento (diánoia)» – 510d4-511a1.

Na Antiguidade grega, a geometria fazia parte das  “Hé mathematiké” (República 525a-531d), ciências matemáticas fundamentais na formação do filósofo, um corpo de 4 disciplinas constituído por aritmética, geometria, astrologia (que abarcava conhecimentos astronómicos) e a harmonia dos sons, as quais foram integradas nos currículos das universades europeias medievais sob o nome de “quadrivium” (as 4 vias).

A palavra “matemática” vem do verbo “mantháno”, que significa aprender, adquirir saberes (“máthemata”).  Aristóteles também usará o termo “mathematikai” (Metafísica, 981B24).

Podemos encontrar, num comentário de Aulo Gélio (Noites áticas, I, 9), uma divisão dos discípulos da escola pitagórica em três graus:
- Acusmáticos – fase em que escutavam;
- Matemáticos – fase em que perguntavam e exprimiam o que haviam sentido;
- Físicos - a última fase, quando consideravam os princípios da natureza.
(Cf. ZHMUD, Lonid. Mathematici and akousmatici in the pythagorean school. In: BOUDOURIS, K. I. Pythagorean philosophy. Athens: Ionia, 1992).

A matemática, epistemologicamente, era entendida como um nível intermédio,«metade do caminho entre opinião e intelecto” (“hós metaxú tes doxés te kaì nou tén diánoian” – República 511d):

“Sobretudo por hábito (éthos) as chamamos com frequência de ciências (epistéme), mas é necessária outra denominação, mais clara que opinião e mais obscura que ciência: nesse sentido antes a definimos como entendimento (diánoia)” (República 533 d1).

Indícios para uma ‘música menor’

«Stop! You’re making me tired! Experiment, don’t signify and interpret! Find your own places, territorialities, deterritorializations, regime, lines of flight! Semiotize yourself instead of rooting around in your prefab childhood and Western semiology».

- Deleuze, “A Thousand Plateaus”

 

«It isn’t a question of liberty as against submission, but only a question of a line of escape or, rather, of a simple way out, “right, left or in any direction,” as long as it is as little signifying as possible.»

- Deleuze, “Kafka…”

 

 «”Please turn out the light, I can only play in the dark. I straightened myself”.
We could well believe that these are two NEW forms:
- the straightened head is a form of content,
- and the musical sound is a form of expression.
Shall we represent all this by the following equations? (…)
But that’s not really right.»

- Deleuze, “Kafka…”

 

«We define the abstract machine as the aspect or moment at which nothing but functions and matters remain. A diagram has neither substance nor form, neither content nor expression.»

- Deleuze e Guattari, “Mille Plateaux”

Fui hoje assistir a uma palestra que levantou problemas interessantes, contudo, creio que a forma como buscou resolvê-los não faz jus ao seu tempo (pós-contemporaneidade).

Tentarei fazer uma crítica construtiva para que o meu amigo musicólogo possa explorar mais e melhor o tema. Sei que, normalmente, tudo isto escapa à audiência e, contanto que se faça uma boa apresentação (como foi o caso), toda a gente fica contente. Na academia, predomina a “pasmaceira”.

Primeira chamada de atenção: o divórcio entre a música e a representação gráfica não é achado da modernidade ou da contemporaneidade. Está já presente, por exemplo, num antigo “koan” do budismo zen: “Qual é o som da palma de uma mão?”. Este “koan” questiona a representação de senso comum, segundo a qual, apenas duas palmas batendo uma na outra produzem som.

Segunda chamada de atenção: quem quer que insista na divisão “nível semântico/nível sintáctico” para explicar seja o que for, está ainda prisioneiro de uma abordagem estruturalista clássica.

Um dos autores citados nada mais fez que renomear a famosa divisão do estruturalista Saussure: significado/significante.

É preciso ir até à crítica que Hjelmslev faz a Saussure, e até ao aproveitamento que os pós-estruturalistas fazem de Hjelmslev.

Deleuze retoma Hjelmslev em vários momentos da sua obra.

No “Anti-Édipo” (1972) refere a oposição de Hjelmslev a Saussure:

«We believe that, from all points of view and despite certain appearances, Louis Hjelmslev’s linguistics stands in profound opposition to the Saussurian and post-Saussurian undertaking. Because it abandons all privileged reference. Because it describes a pure field of algebraic immanence that no longer allows any surveillance on the part of a transcendent instance, even one that has withdrawn. Because within this field it sets in motion its flows of form and substance, content and expression. Because it substitutes the relationship of reciprocal precondition between expression and content for the relationship of subordination between signifier and signified. Because there no longer occurs a double articulation between two hierarchized levels of language, but between two convertible deterritorialized planes, constituted by the relation between the form of content and the form of expression. Because in this relation one reaches figures that are no longer effects of a signifier, but schizzes, points-signs, or flows-breaks that collapse the wall of the signifier, pass through, and continue on beyond. Because these signs have crossed a new threshold of deterritorialization. Because these figures have definitively lost the minimum conditions of identity that defined the elements of the signifier itself. Because in Hjelmslev’s linguistics the order of the elements is secondary in relation to the axiomatic of flows and figures. (…) Far from being an overdetermination of structuralism and of its fondness for the signifier, Hjelmslev’s linguistics implies the concerted destruction of the signifier, and constitutes a decoded theory of language about which one can also say—an ambiguous tribute—that it is the only linguistics adapted to the nature of both the capitalist and the schizophrenic flows: until now, the only modern—and not archaic—theory of language.»

No livro “Kafka – Para uma Literatura Menor” (1975), aplica o sistema hjelmsleviano à música, que surge na obra de Kafka enquanto ‘música menor’:

«”Please turn out the light, I can only play in the dark. (…) It is certainly not a systematized music, a musical form, that interests Kafka (in his letters and in his diary, one finds nothing more than insignificant anecdotes about a few musicians). It isn’t a composed and semiotically shaped music that interests Kafka, but rather a pure sonorous material. (…) What interests Kafka is a pure and intense sonorous material that is always connected to its own abolition—a deterritorialized musical sound, a cry that escapes signification, composition, song, words—a sonority that ruptures in order to break away from a chain that is still all too signifying. In sound, intensity alone matters, and such sound is generally monotone and always nonsignifying (…). As long as there is form, there is still reterritorialization, even in music. (…) In short, sound doesn’t show up here as a form of expression, but rather as an unformed material of expression, that will act on the other terms. On the one hand, it serves to express contents that will reveal themselves to be relatively less and less formalized (…). We aren’t even trying to interpret, to say that this means that.5 And we are looking least of all for a structure with formal oppositions and a fully constructed Signifier; one can always come up with binary oppositions (…). But that’s stupid as long as one doesn’t see where the system is coming from and going to, how it becomes, and what element is going to play the role of heterogeneity, a saturating body that makes the whole assembly flow away and that breaks the symbolic structure, no less than it breaks hermeneutic interpretation, the ordinary association of ideas, and the imaginary archetype. (…) We believe only in a Kafka that is neither imaginary nor symbolic. We believe only in one or more Kafka machines that are neither structure nor phantasm. We believe only in a Kafka experimentation that is without interpretation or significance and rests only on tests of experience (…). A Kafka-machine is thus constituted by contents and expressions that have been formalized to diverse degrees by unformed materials that enter into it, and leave by passing through all possible states. (…) Desire evidently passes through these positions and states or, rather, through all these lines. Desire is not form, but a procedure, a process. (…) Since articulated sound was a deterritorialized noise but one that will be reterritorialized in sense, it is now sound itself that will be deterritorialized irrevocably, absolutely. The sound or the word that traverses this new deterritorialization no longer belongs to a language of sense, even though it derives from it, nor is it an organized music or song, even though it might appear to be. (…) Everywhere, organized music is traversed by a line of abolition—just as a language of sense is traversed by a line of escape-in order to liberate a living and expressive material that speaks for itself and has no need of being put into a form.9 This language torn from sense, conquering sense, bringing about an active neutralization of sense, no longer finds its value in anything but an accenting of the word, an inflection: “I live only here or there in a small word in whose vowel. . . I lose my useless head for a moment. The first and last letters are the beginning and end of my fishlike emotion.”10 (…) Kafka, too, is a minor music, a different one, but always made up of deterritorialized sounds, a language that moves head over heels and away. These are the true minor authors. An escape for language, for music, for writing. What we call pop — pop music, pop philosophy, pop writing — Worterflucht. (…) The sound of maids is neither signifying nor musical; it is that sound born of silence, which Kafka looked for everywhere, where the utterance is already part of a collective assemblage, a collective complaint, without a subject of enunciation that hides itself or deforms. A pure, moving material of expression.»

Em “Mil Planaltos” (1980), desdobra o sistema de Hjelmslev para o ultrapassar em direcção a uma máquina abstracta:

«…the Danish Spinozist geologist, Hjelmslev, that dark prince descended from Hamlet who also made language his concern, precisely in order to analyze its “stratification.” Hjelmslev was able to weave a net out of the notions of matter, content and expression, form and substance. These were the strata, said Hjelmslev. Now this net had the advantage of breaking with the form-content duality, since there was a form of content no less than a form of expression. Hjelmslev’s enemies saw this merely as a way of rebaptizing the discredited notions of the signified and signifier, but something quite different was actually going on. (…) He used the term matter for the plane of consistency or Body without Organs, in other words, the unformed, unorganized, nonstratified, or destratified body and all its flows: subatomic and submolecular particles, pure intensities, prevital and prephysical free singularities. He used the term content for formed matters, which would now have to be considered from two points of view: substance, insofar as these matters are “chosen,” and form, insofar as they are chosen in a certain order (substance and form of content). He used the term expression for functional structures, which would also have to be considered from two points of view: the organization of their own specific form, and substances insofar as they form compounds (form and content of expression). (…) Through all of this, Hjelmslev’s warning should not be forgotten: “The terms expression plane and content plane . . . are chosen in conformity with established notions and are quite arbitrary. Their functional definition provides no justification for calling one, and not the other, of these entities expression, or one, and not the other, content. They are defined only by their mutual solidarity, and neither of them can be identified otherwise. They are defined only oppositively and relatively, as mutually opposed functives of one and the same function.”6 We must combine all the resources of real distinction, reciprocal presupposition, and general relativism. (…) Articulation, which is constitutive of a stratum, is always a double articulation (double pincer). What is articulated is a content and an expression. Whereas form and substance are not really distinct, content and expression are. Hjelmslev’s net is applicable to the strata: articulation of content and articulation of expression, with content and expression each possessing its own form and substance. Between them, between content and expression, there is neither a correspondence nor a cause-effect relation nor a signified-signifier relation: there is real distinction, reciprocal presupposition, and only isomorphy. (…) We define the abstract machine as the aspect or moment at which nothing but functions and matters remain. A diagram has neither substance nor form, neither content nor expression.40»

[Note:] «28. That is why we consider Hjelmslev, despite his own reservations and vacillations, to be the only linguist to have actually broken with the signifier and the signified. Many other linguists seem to make this break deliberately and without reservations, but retain the implicit presuppositions of the signifier».

[Note:] «40. Louis Hjelmslev proposed a very important conception of “matter” or “purport” (sens) as unformed, amorphous, or formless: Prolegomena to a Theory of Language, trans. Francis J. Whitfield (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969), sec. 13, pp. 47-60, and Essais linguistiques (Paris: Minuit, 1971), pp. 58ff. (see also the preface by Francois Rastier, p. 9)».

Saussure:

Hjelmslev:

Deleuze, “A Thousand Plateaus”:

A segregação monoteísta das mulheres

Este é um dos pontos em que os três grandes monoteísmos – judaísmo, cristianismo, islamismo – concordam: todos excluem o género feminino da espécie humana e sofrem de um fanatismo absurdo, tacanho, desumano… Até já li o poeta Barahona (islamizado) a defender um disparate destes… :-(

Enquanto isso, outros ganham-lhes aos pontos na revisão do que é a distribuição dos géneros, activando um outro eixo bem mais real:

«Todos somos mulheres, não há homens neste mundo» – Swami Vivekananda.

«Quanto ao espírito do Yoga tântrico, poderá ser caracterizado da melhor forma por esta expressão [por parte de um homem] contida num texto: “Que necessidade tenho eu de uma mulher exterior? Tenho uma mulher em mim.”» – EVOLA (Julius). A Metafísica do Sexo.

«Há uma trans-sexualidade microscópica presente por todo o lado, que faz que a mulher tenha em si tantos homens como o homem, e o homem mulheres, capazes de entrar, uns com os outros, umas com as outras, em relações de produção de desejo que subvertem a ordem estatística dos sexos. Fazer amor não é ser-se um só, nem mesmo dois, mas cem mil. As máquinas desejantes e o sexo não-humano, são precisamente isto: nem um, nem mesmo dois, mas n… sexos. A esquizo-análise e a análise variável dos n… sexos num sujeito, para lá da representação antropomórfica que a sociedade lhe impõe e que ele próprio atribui à sua sexualidade.» – DELEUZE e GUATTARI, “O Anti-Édipo”.

São três posições distintas, mas todas colocam em causa a validade da segregação monoteísta das mulheres.

Food is the worst slavery

«The reason people do not attain Tao is because their minds are confused and deluded, and the reason their minds are confused and deluded is because external things disturb them. The three greatest disturbing factors are ambition, sex, and food. Although ambition may occupy the mind daily, the essential thing is to avoid a moment-by-moment enslavement to it. Sex is of course a relatively more serious matter. But food is the worst slavery of them all. (…) But these three are precisely the things about which human feelings are most deluded, and hence they are extremely difficult to dismiss by mere conscious thought. (…) [Eating before midday] might be called the “fish-trap and rabbit-snare” for getting rid of enslavement to food, the “direct path” to Tao. There are of course some who think there is nothing more to it than just not eating [after midday]. But this is simply a failure to understand where the path leads…»

- Shen Yueh, fifth-century.

————————

«Consumimos os alimentos ou somos consumidos pelos alimentos (bhutani atti adyatê cha)».

- Taittiriya Upanishad, sobre a alimentação (annam) como cura (aushadhih).

————————

«Interessa-me de modo bem diferente um problema do qual, muito mais do que qualquer curiosidade de teólogos, depende a saúde da humanidade: o problema da nutrição. Em forma corrente, pode cada homem pôr-se tal problema nestes termos: “Como hás-de alimentar-te para chegar a possuir o mais alto grau de “virtude””, segundo o estilo do Renascimento, de virtude liberta de todo o elemento moral?”. (…)»

- Nietzsche, “Ecce Homo”

————————

«Digestion means making the body function. So let it sleep – almost dead, no function».

- Osho (about his prison).

————————

«A thousand other evils might be mentioned, but all put together, in their bearing upon the problem under discussion, they could not equal a single one, the want of food, brought on by poverty, destitution, and famine. Millions of individuals die yearly for want of food, thus keeping down the mass. Even in our enlightened communities, and not withstanding the many charitable efforts, this is still, in all probability, the chief evil. I do not mean here absolute want of food, but want of healthful nutriment. How to provide good and plentiful food is, therefore, a most important question of the day. On the general principles the raising of cattle as a means of providing food is objectionable, because, in the sense interpreted above, it must undoubtedly tend to the addition of mass of a “smaller velocity.” It is certainly preferable to raise vegetables, and I think, therefore, that vegetarianism is a commendable departure from the established barbarious habit. That we can subsist on plant food and perform our work even to advantage is not a theory, but a well-demonstrated fact. Many races living almost exclusively on vegetables are of superior physique and strength. There is no doubt that some plant food, such as oatmeal, is more economical than meat, and superior to it in regard to both mechanical and mental performance. Such food, moreover, taxes our digestive organs decidedly less, and, in making us more contented and sociable, produces an amount of good difficult to estimate. In view of these facts every effort should be made to stop the wanton and cruel slaughter of animals, which must be destructive to our morals. To free ourselves from animal instincts and appetites, which keep us down, we should begin at the very root from which we spring: we should effect a radical reform in the character of the food. There seems to be no philosophical necessity for food. We can conceive of organized beings living without nourishment, and deriving all the energy they need for the performance of their lifefunctions from the ambient medium. In a crystal we have the clear evidence of the existence of a formative life-principle, and though we cannot understand the life of a crystal, it is none the less a living being.»

- “THE PROBLEM OF INCREASING HUMAN ENERGY WITH SPECIAL REFERENCES TO THE HARNESSING OF THE SUN’S ENERGY” by Nikola Tesla, Century Illustrated Magazine, June 1900.

Escaravelho vs. rato: modos opostos de usar um T

A política segundo Spinoza

Era daqui que seria necessário partir… em direcção a uma autêntica soberania política.

Os regimes governativos, com que, até agora, temos sido coniventes, Spinoza sugere que são como o «reinado de um castrado»: monarquias no erro (tiranias), aristocracias camufladas, democracias da servidão.

Spinoza vai defender, segundo a minha leitura, um regime não pessoal (portanto, nem de pessoa privada nem de pessoa pública), hibridamente composto pelas três formas de governo canónicas (monarquia, aristocracia, democracia), portanto, uma espécie de monarco-aristo-democracia, em que ao monarca caberia a direcção da razão (a força ou virtude da alma da Cidade), o conselho de aristocratas seriam como os sentidos corporais (corpo da Cidade) e TODA a massa da população partilharia democraticamente o mesmo direito de usufruto sobre a Cidade e seria instruída na combativa «arte da concórdia» em defesa do bem-estar comum, isto é, concorda em esforçar-se por viver de acordo com os ditames da razão:

———————————————————————————————–

«Quer seja conduzido pela razão ou apenas pelo desejo, o homem, efectivamente, nada faz que não esteja conforme com as leis e as regras da natureza» (p18)

«A natureza de modo algum está submetida às leis da razão humana que tendem unicamente à utilidade e conservação dos homens» (p21)

«Tudo o que na natureza nos parece ridículo, absurdo ou mau, não tem essa aparência senão porque nós conhecemos as coisas somente em parte, e ignoramos na maior parte a ordem da natureza inteira e as ligações que há entre as coisas, de modo que queremos que tudo seja dirigido de uma forma conforme a nossa razão, e contudo o que a razão afirma ser mau nõ o é, se considerarmos a ordem e as leis do universo, mas unicamente se atendermos somente às leis da nossa natureza.» (p22)

«Os homens cedem mais aos seus apetites do que à razão, e, apesar de tudo, tal não perturba a ordem da natureza, pois que se lhe submetem necessariamente» (p27)

«O homem pode agir contrariamente aos decretos de Deus impressos como leis na nossa alma ou na dos profetas, mas não contra o eterno decreto de Deus que está gravado em todo o universo e que respeita à ordem de toda a natureza» (p29)

«Se a Cidade concede a alguém o direito e por conseguinte o poder de viver conforme a sua constituição, abdica do seu próprio direito e transfere-o para aquele a quem dá esse poder. Se dá esse poder a duas pessoas ou a várias, divide por isso o Estado, pois que, cada um daqueles a quem foi dado o poder, vive segundo seu próprio arbítrio. Se, enfim, dá esse poder a cada um dos cidadãos, destrói-se a si mesma; a Cidade deixa de existir e retorna-se ao estado natural. Tudo isto é bastante manifesto através do que precede e, por conseguinte, não se pode de maneira alguma conceber que a regra da Cidade permita a cada cidadão viver segundo o seu próprio arbítrio, o direito natural pelo qual cada um é juiz de si mesmo desaparece, portanto, necessariamente, no estado civil. O homem, com efeito, quer no estado natural quer no civil, age segundo as leis da sua natureza e procura satisfazer os seus interesses, (…) e a principal diferença entre os dois estados é que, no estado civil, todos têm os mesmos temores e a regra de vida é comum (…).» (p31)

«Não podemos conceber que seja permitido a cada um interpretar os decretos da Cidade, isto é, as suas leis. Se houvesse tal permissão, ser-se-ia, com efeito, seu próprio juiz; não haveria actos cometidos por si que não pudessem tornar-se desculpáveis ou louváveis com uma aparência de direito, e, consequentemente, regular-se-ia a vida segundo o próprio arbítrio, o que é absurdo» (p32)

«Duas Cidades são naturalmente inimigas porque os homens no estado natural são inimigos. Aqueles que fora da Cidade conservem o direito natural permanecem inimigos.» (p38)

«Só o soberano sabe estabelecer leis» (p41)

«Só o soberano tem o direito de estabelecer um juízo sobre os actos de cada um» (p42)

«É, sobretudo, quando se conforma aos ditames da razão que a Cidade é senhora de si mesma.» (p43)

«Àquele ou àqueles que detêm o poder público, é, portanto, igualmente impossível mostrar-se em estado de embriaguês ou acompanhados de prostitutas, fazer de bobos, violar ou desprezar abertamente as leis estabelecidas por eles mesmos e, apesar disto, conservar a sua majestade. (…) Condenar à morte os súbditos, confiscar os seus bens, violentar as virgens e coisas semelhantes, é transformar o temor em indignação, e consequentemente o estado civil em estado de guerra.» (p44)

«A Cidade não admite para o seu poder outro limite, senão o que o homem observa no estado natural para permanecer senhor de si próprio, ou não agir como inimigo de si mesmo, para se não destruir. A observação deste limite não é de modo algum obediência, é pelo contrário a liberdade da natureza humana.» (p45)

«Não há dúvida de que os contratos, as leis, pelos quais o conjunto dos cidadãos transfere o seu direito para um conselho, ou para um homem, devem ser violados quando essa violação importa ao interesse comum. Mas a nenhum particular compete julgar, isto é, decidir se é do interesse comum violar as leis estabelecidas ou não. (…) Nenhum particular tem o direito de agir como defensor das leis (…).» (p45)

«O melhor que faz, seja um homem, seja uma Cidade, é o que fizer enquanto for completamente senhor de si próprio. Não é, com efeito, tudo o que dizemos que há o direito de fazer que afirmaremos ser o melhor: uma coisa é cultivar um campo em virtude de um direito, outra coisa é cultivar esse campo o melhor possível; uma coisa, digo, é defender-se, conservar-se, julgar em virtude do direito próprio, outra coisa defender-se, conservar-se e julgar o melhor possível» (p46).

«É certo, com efeito, que as sedições, as guerras e a violação ou o desprezo pelas leis são imputáveis, não tanto à malícia dos súbditos, quanto a um vício do regime instituído. (…) Com efeito, um estado civil que não suprimiu as causas de sedição e onde a guerra é constantemente de recear, onde as leis são frequentemente violadas, não difere muito do estado natural em que cada um, com maior perigo para a sua vida, age segundo a própria constituição.» (p47)

«A paz, com efeito, não é a simples ausência de guerra, é uma virtude que tem a sua origem na força da alma, pois que a obediência é uma vontade constante de fazer o que, segundo o direito comum da Cidade, deve ser feito. Uma Cidade, é preciso dizê-lo, em que a paz é efeito da inércia dos súbditos conduzidos como um rebanho e formados unicamente na servidão, merece mais o nome de solidão que o de Cidade. Quando dizemos que o melhor Estado é aquele em que os homens vivem na concórdia, entendo que vivem uma vida propriamente humana, uma vida que não se define pela circulação do sangue e realização das outras funções comuns a todos os animais, mas principalmente pela razão, a virtude da alma e a vida verdadeira. É preciso notá-lo ainda, o Estado que refiro como instituído com o fim de fazer reinar a concórdia, deve ser entendido como instituído por uma população livre, e não como estabelecido por direito de conquista sobre uma população vencida.» (p48-49)

«O Estado deve ser dirigido de tal maneira que todos, tanto os que governam como os que são governados façam, de boa ou de má vontade, o que importa ao bem-estar de todos, isto é, que todos, por vontade própria, ou por força ou por necessidade, sejam obrigados a viver segundo os preceitos da razão.» (p51)

«Nenhumas cidades foram menos estáveis do que as cidades populares ou democráticas, nem onde se tenham dado tantas sedições. (…) A paz não consiste na ausência da guerra, mas na união das almas, isto é, na concórdia.» (p52)

«O governante é tanto menos senhor de si próprio e a condição do súbdito é tanto mais digna de piedade, quanto mais o poder sobre a Cidade lhe for transferido sem reserva. (…) É preciso fundar uma cidade (…) de que todos os cidadãos tenham o mesmo direito ao seu usufruto». (p54)

«É preciso, portanto, que todos tenham obrigatoriamente armas e que nenhum seja recebido no número dos cidadãos senão após ter sido instruído no manejo das armas e se ter comprometido a nelas se exercitar, durante certos períodos do ano». (p55)

«O rei deverá olhar-se como a alma da Cidade, mas o conselho terá o lugar que ocupam no homem os órgãos dos sentidos. Será, de certo modo, o corpo da Cidade pelo qual a alma concebe a situação do Estado e age, após ter decidido, o que é o melhor.» (p59)

- Benedictus de Spinoza, “Tratado Político”

Humbaba vs. Yubaba

«Humbaba whose roar is a flood, whose mouth is fire, and whose breath is death» – Epic of Gilgamesh.

 

 

Yubaba, from Hayao Miyazaki’s “Sen to Chihiro no kamikakushi” (2001)

‘Mezza’

«Os santos monges da antiguidade cristã (…) designavam Maria como “a mesa intelectual da fé”»

- João Paulo II, “Fides et Ratio“.

 

«”Os prazeres da mesa” estão longe de me desagradar – pelo contrário, nutro um certo respeito, ou mais ainda, por “a mesa“. Quer seja redonda ou quadrada, conecto-a com o “ofício sagrado” e impressiona-me como um grande altar (ou um grande hotel – um “Terminus” ou um “Continental”, arrisco dizer). Sim. Para mim, comer é como fazer o trabalho de casa – um traballho de casa aprazível (…)»

- Erik Satie, fundador e único fiel da “Église Métropolitaine d’Art de Jésus Conducteur”

 

«”Ó céu puro e excelso! A tua pureza para mim consiste agora em que não haja nenhuma aranha, nem teia de aranha eterna da razão: em seres um salão de baile para os azares divinos, uma mesa divina para os divinos dados e jogadores de dados. No entanto, sorriste? Disse coisas indizíveis? Maldisse-te querendo abençoar-te? O que te faz sorrir é a vergonha de ser dois. Mandas-me retirar e calar, porque chega agora o dia? O mundo é profundo, e tanto mais profundo que jamais pensou o dia. Nem tudo pode falar diante do dia. Mas já chega o dia. Separemo-nos então! Ó, céu desenrolado sobre mim, céu pudico e incendido! Ó, felicidade antecedente à saída do sol! Chega o dia. Separemo-nos!”. Assim falou Zaratustra.»

- Nietzsche, “Assim falou Zaratustra”

 

«… porque a Terra é uma mesa divina que treme com novas palavras criadoras e com um ruído de dados divinos…»

- Nietzsche, “Assim falou Zaratustra”

 

«Aquele que duvida só encontra contradição e falta em tudo o que pensa porque conhece a harmonia da beleza absoluta, que nunca se deixa pensar. Ele só desdenha o pão seco que a razão humana lhe oferece para opinar porque desfruta, secretamente, da mesa dos deuses».

- Hölderlin, “Hyperion ou O Eremita na Grécia”.

Resposta ao crente na representação de Roma

«Não creria nos Evangelhos se não me levasse a isso a autoridade da Igreja Católica».

- Santo Agostinho, “Contra epistulam Manichaei quam vocant fundamenti”, 5,6: PL 42, 176.

Todo o crente se pretende detentor da verdade.

Qualquer leitura que não vá ao encontro das crenças do fiel, será a do infiel, naturalmente do lado  “mau e errado”.

Esse lado pode, por vezes, ser a ciência ou a razão humana: «Não queira ver Deus pela Física ou pela ciência, o caminho para Deus é pela Fé, e essa não é um objecto, ou uma sensibilidade especial, é um Dom…»

A EQUIVOCIDADE do discurso é então usada para legitimar a função do detentor da verdade que “revela” e faz comércio de um ÚNICO significado como verdadeiro.

Outras vezes, idolatra-se a letra morta.

Alega-se então que se adulterou uma “tipificação veterotestamentária”, e tenta-se prová-lo, tecendo considerações históricas subjectivas, isto é, aquele tipo de historicidade que tudo submete à razão auto-suficiente do Sujeito, elevado a divindade.

Jesus histórico

Usar a historicidade para legitimar a fé em Jesus Cristo é dos argumentos mais refutáveis e refutados – não há registos que constituam prova irrefutável de que Jesus tenha existido historicamente:

«Most Biblical scholars, historians, archeologist and even the clergy are knowledgeable about one fact of Christianity that the Christian worshipper is not, there is limited historical facts to establish finite historical evidence that Jesus Christ existed. The vast majority of what Christians believe today is based purely on the New Testament, a collection of writings and testimony of those who knew Jesus and from those who never saw him. The origin of the New Testament was not the “bible” of the Christians until after 150 A.D. The actual “bible” of the early Christians was the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament. For more than a century after the death of Christ, the early Christians relied on the Old Testament» – fonte.

Josefo

Flávio Josefo (37-100 d. C.) foi um fariseu (judeu ortodoxo) que escreveu em grego “Antiguidades Judaicas” (c. 93-94 d. C.), onde consta o trecho conhecido por “Testimonium Flavianum” (XVIII, parágrafos 63-64):

«Por esse tempo apareceu Jesus, um homem sábio, se é lícito chamá-lo de homem, porque realizou milagres e foi mestre daqueles homens que recebem a verdade com prazer. Atraiu a muitos judeus e gentios. Era o Cristo. Denunciado pelos principais judeus, Pilatos condenou-o a morrer na cruz. Aqueles que antes o amaram não o esqueceram, porque ele lhes apareceu vivo ao terceiro dia; como os profetas tinham prenunciado este e outros feitos maravilhosos a respeito dele. Desde então até hoje, existe a congregação dos cristãos, assim chamados por causa dele».

A obra original não nos chegou. A cópia conhecida mais antiga é do bispo Eusebius (séc. IV d.C.) e já contém o referido trecho onde se toma Jesus por Cristo, o que entra em contradição com um texto anterior do cristão Orígenes (séc. III d.C.), o qual, conhecendo a obra de Josefo, não a cita quando procura legitimar historicamente o cristianismo, e assevera que jamais Josefo teria reconhecido Jesus como Cristo. Tais factos levam os estudiosos a concluir que os copistas de fé cristã teriam interpolado o texto original com adições de sua lavra.

Voltaire já havia intuído a “falsificação” de Eusébio, na entrada ‘Cristianismo’ do “Dicionário Filosófico”: «Como teria esse judeu obstinado afirmado que Jesus era o Cristo? Que absurdo colocar na boca de Josefo palavras de um cristão!».

Suetónio

Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus (c. 69–140 d.C.) redigiu “De Vita Caesarum” (também conhecido como “Os doze Césares”) algum tempo depois da morte de Domiciano em 96 d.C. e publicou-a por volta de 119 – 120 d. C. Nela, relata o que se passou durante o reinado do imperador Cláudio (41-54 d. C.), anterior ao nascimento do próprio Suetónio:

«Iudaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantis Roma expulit» ["aos Judeus, impulsionados por Chresto, expulsou-os de Roma, por causa de seus assíduos tumultos"] (“Divus Claudius”, XXV).

“Chrestos” vs. “Christos”

“Chresto” deriva do grego “Chrestos”, que significa “bom”, “sábio”, “inspirado” [por Deus], e era usado como título para designar um (a)divinho (dos mistérios pagãos, que se sentava no lugar próprio para oráculos chamado “chresterion”, onde lhe calhava profetizar, “chreo/chrao/chraomai”, o destino/fado, “to chreon”), profeta, mestre ou guia de uma comunidade – tanto o deus Osíris, como o rei da Judeia, Herodes Agrippa I, eram apelidados de “Chrestos”.

Outro termo era ”Christus”, derivado do grego “Christos”, com o significado de ”o Ungido”, análogo ao hebraico “Messias”. “Chrio” ou “chriso” era o óleo com que os pastores ungiam a cabeça das ovelhas para afastar certos parasitas que lhes entravam para os ouvidos e as matavam.

O primeiro termo é o mais antigo, mais lato e de uso comum, enquanto o segundo possui um significado mais recente, restrito e distintivo.

Polus (nome grego de S. Paulo) nunca usou “Christian” nos seus escritos, tanto quanto é possível aferir pelas traduções gregas que nos chegaram (séc. II d. C.), pois estas usam “Chrestian” e uma série de palavras da mesma família etimológica: chrestotes, chrestos, chrestologia, chresteuomai, chresis, chresimos, chrematismos, chrematizo, chrezo, chreia, chraomai… Não é, pois, de admirar que os Gregos de Antióquia tenham apelidado Polus de “Chrestian”. Há, inclusive, um certo truque de linguagem que joga com o nome de Polus (que, em aramaico, quer dizer “trabalhador”, e que é também um dos significados de “Chrestian”).

A mais antiga inscrição cristã datada (1 de Outubro de 318 d.C.), encontrada na igreja dos Marcionitas (gnósticos cristãos), na Síria, menciona “Isu Chrestos”, logo, “Jesus, o Bom”.

Os mais antigos manuscritos do Novo Testamento conhecidos são o Sinaiticus (c. 325-360 d. C.) e o Vaticanus (séc. IV). Ambos contêm o termo original grego XPHCTIAN (“Chrestian”), que, em cópias posteriores (a primeira sendo o “Codex Alexandrinus”, séc. V d.C.), será substituído por XPICTIAN (“Christian”).

O Chi-Rho, as duas consoantes que foram a insígnia primitiva da cristandade, tanto podiam ler-se “Chrestos”, como “Christos”.

Durante um certo período, ambos os termos foram usados, como atesta Clemente (150-211 d. C.):

«Now those who have believed in Christ both are and are called Chrestians, as those who are cared for by the true king are kingly. For as the wise are wise by their wisdom, and those observant of law are so by the law; so also those who belong to Christ the King are kings, and those that are Christ’s Christians.» - ”Stromata”, IV.

No entanto, o termo mais moderno começou a ser privilegiado em relação ao anterior por alguns autores.

Tertuliano (160-220 d.C.), Ad nat. 1.3, 8-9:

«Even when by a faulty pronunciation you call us ‘Chrestians’ (for you are not certain about even the sound of this noted name), you in fact lisp out the sense of pleasantness and goodness».

Inácio de Antióquia (c. 40-117 d. C.) usou-o para destacar uma determinada linhagem (a dos crentes não judeus em detrimento dos judeus Nazarenos), demonstrando a luta que travavam as diversas seitas que constituíam o cristianismo primitivo para tomar o poder, e cuja consequência mais imediata era proclamar heréticos ou infiéis os vencidos:

«Let us therefore prove ourselves worthy of that name which we have received. For whosoever is called by any other name besides this, he is not of God; for he has not received the prophecy which speaks thus concerning us: The people shall be called by a new name, which the Lord shall name them, and shall be a holy people. This was first fulfilled in Syria; for the disciples were called Christians at Antioch, when Paul and Peter were laying the foundations of the Church. …Abide in Christ, that the stranger may not have dominion over you. It is absurd to speak of Jesus Christ with the tongue, and to cherish in the mind a Judaism which has now come to an end» - ”Magnesians”, ch. 10b.

Por seu lado, o cristão Lactâncio (c. 240-320 d.C.) sublinha a diferença entre “Chrestos” e “Christos”, relatando que este último epíteto era o preferido pelas seitas heréticas:

«For Christ is not a proper name, but a title of power and dominion; for by this the Jews were accustomed to call their kings. But the meaning of this name must be set forth, on account of the error of the ignorant, who by the change of a letter are accustomed to call Him Chrestos. The Jews had before been directed to compose a sacred oil, with which those who were called to the priesthood or to the kingdom might be anointed. And as now the robe of purple is a sign of the assumption of royal dignity among the Romans, so with them the anointing with the holy oil conferred the title and power of king. But since the ancient Greeks used the word “Chrestos” to express the art of anointing, which they now express by “Christos”, as the verse of Homer shows,

“But the attendants washed, and anointed ["chriso"] them with oil;”

on this account we call Him Christ, that is, the Anointed, who in Hebrew is called the Messias. Hence in some Greek writings, which are badly translated from the Hebrew, the word “eleimmenos” is found written, from the word “aleiphesthai”, anointing. But, however, by either name a king is signified” – Divine Institutes, Book IV Ch. VII.

(…)


”…all the separate assemblies of heretics call themselves Christians in preference to others” – Divine Institutes, Book IV, ch. XXX

Epifânio (315-403 d. C.), ”Panarion”, 29, relata como o termo “Cristãos” se vem a constituir por oposição aos Nazarenos (judeus), embora Jesus fosse nazareno:

«1:2 For this group did not name themselves after Christ or with Jesus’ own name, but “Natzraya.” 1:3 However, at that time all Chrestians were called Natzraya in the same way. They also came to be called “Jessaeans” for a short while, before the disciples began to be called “Christians” at Antioch. 6:5 And no wonder the apostle admitted to being a Natzar! In those days everyone called Christians, this because of the city of Natzrat, there was no other usage of the name then. People thus gave the name of Natzraya to believers in Christ, of whom it is written, “He shall be called a Natzar.” 7:1 But these sectarians whom I am now sketching ,disregarded the name of Jesus, and did not call themselves Jessaeans, keep the name of Jews, or term themselves Christians but [rather] Natzraya’ from the place-name, Natzrat, if you please! However they are simply completed Jews».

Plínio, o Novo

Uma outra fonte tardia – mais de um século depois da suposta existência de Jesus – é Plínio, o Novo (c. 61-112 d. C.), governador das províncias romanas de Pontus e Bitínia, que escreveu uma carta ao imperador Trajano (“Epistulae”, X, 96), por volta de 112 d.C., perguntando sobre como lidar com os “Christiani” que adoravam a “Christo”. Esta carta fornece algumas das primeiras descrições por um observador não cristão sobre o estilo de vida dos cristãos primitivos (recolhidos em caves):

«They stated that the sum of their guilt or error amounted to this, that they used to gather on a stated day before dawn and sing to Christ as if he were a god, and that they took an oath not to involve themselves in villainy, but rather to commit no theft, no fraud, no adultery; not to break faith, nor to deny money placed with them in trust. Once these things were done, it was their custom to part and return later to eat a meal together, innocently, although they stopped this after my edict, in which I, following your mandate, forbade all secret societies. All the more I believed it necessary to find out what was the truth from two servant maids, which were called deaconesses, by means of torture. Nothing more did I find than a disgusting, fanatical superstition. Therefore I stopped the examination, and hastened to consult you. For it appears to me a proper matter for counsel, most greatly on account of the number of people endangered. For many of all ages, all classes, and both sexes already are brought into danger, and shall be [in future]. And not only the cities; the contagion of this superstition is spread throughout the villages and the countryside; but it appears to me possible to stop it and put it right. Certainly the temples which were once deserted are beginning to be crowded, and the long interrupted sacred rites are being revived, while food from the sacrifices is selling, for which up to now a buyer was hardly to be found».

 

Tácito

Tácito (c. 56-117 d. C.) descreve a perseguição de Nero aos cristãos logo após o grande fogo de Roma (c. 64 d.C., teria Tácito cerca de oito anos), passagem cuja menção mais antiga conhecida nos surge em textos do séc. XV (“Codex Mediceus II”, de Johannes de Spire, Veneza, 1468), o que justifica a incongruência etimológica de derivar “Chrestians” de “Christus”:

«Portanto, abolindo os rumores, Nero subjugou aos réus e os submeteu a penas e investigações, por suas ofensas, o povo os odiava e chamava-os de “Chrestians”, nome que tomam de ”Christus”, que no tempo de Tibério tinha sido entregue ao suplício pelo procurador Pôncio Pilatos; reprimida na altura, a fatal superstição irrompeu de novo, não só na Judeia, donde provém o mal, senão também na metrópole [Roma], onde todas as atrocidades e vergonhas do mundo confluem e se celebram» – “Anais”, XV, 44:2-3, c. 116 d. C.

Imperador Adriano

Há também uma carta do imperador Adriano ao cunhado Servianus, escrita em 134 d.C. (citada por Flavius Vopiscus, Vita Saturnini, séc. IV d.C.) que faz coincidir o culto de Cristo com o de Serápis:

[Two different translations:]

«Egypt, which you commended to me, my dearest Servianus, I have found to be wholly fickle and inconsistent, and continually wafted about by every breath of fame. The worshipers of Serapis are called Christians, and those who are devoted to the god Serapis call themselves Bishops of Christ. The truth is, there is no one, whether Ruler of a synagogue, or Samaritan, or Presbyter of the Christians, or mathematician, or astrologer, or magician, that does not do homage to Serapis.  The Patriarch himself, when he comes to Egypt, is by some compelled to worship Serapis, and by others, Christ.  It is a race of men, of all the most seditious, vain and mischievous.  The state is powerful, rich, and abounding, and of so active a disposition, that no one is allowed to live without occupation.  Some are glass-blowers, some paper-makers, some weavers of thread.  All are professors of some one art or other.  The blind, and those who have the gout in their feet or hands, find something to do.  There is one God whom all worship (Serapis) both Christians, Jews, and Gentiles. I wish this place maintained a better character, worthy of its rank as the first city in Egypt. I have made great and liberal grants to it. I have restored to it its ancient privileges; I have laid it under much obligation by immediate benefits; and after all, as soon as I had left this people, they began to calumniate my son Verus, and I reckon you heard what they have said concerning Antinous. I wish them no further harm, than that they may live upon their own chickens, hatched on their own dunghills, according to that disgusting practice of theirs, which it is disagreeable even to allude to.»

«8 From Hadrian Augustus to Servianus 22 the consul, greeting. The land of Egypt, the praises of which you have been recounting to me, my dear Servianus, I have found to be wholly light-minded, unstable, and blown about by every breath of rumour. 2 There those who worship Serapis are, in fact, Christians, and those who call themselves bishops of Christ are, in fact, devotees of Serapis. 3 There is no chief of the Jewish synagogue, no Samaritan, no Christian presbyter, who is not an astrologer, a soothsayer, or an anointer. 4 Even the Patriarch himself, when he comes to Egypt, is forced by some to worship Serapis, by others to worship Christ. 5 They are a folk most seditious, most deceitful, most given to injury; but their city is prosperous, rich, and fruitful, and in it no one is idle. 6 Some are blowers of glass, others makers of paper, all are at least weavers of linen23 or seem to belong to one craft or another; the lame have their occupations, the eunuchs have theirs, the blind have theirs, and not even those whose hands are crippled are idle. 7 Their only god is money, and this the Christians, the Jews, and, in fact, all nations adore. And would that this city had a better character, for indeed it is worthy by reason of its richness and by reason of its size to hold the chief place in the whole of Egypt. 8 I granted it every favour, I restored to it all its ancient rights and bestowed on it new ones besides, so that the people gave thanks to me while I was present among them. Then, no sooner had I departed thence than they said many things against my son Verus,24 and what they said about Antinous25 I believe you have learned. 9 I can only wish for them that they may live on their own chickens, which they breed in a fashion I am ashamed to describe.26 10 I am sending you over some cups, changing colour27 and variegated, presented to me by the priest of a temple and now dedicated particularly to you and my sister. I should like you to use them at banquets on feast-days. Take good care, however, that our dear Africanus28 does not use them too freely.»

Dionysius Exiguus

O calendário romano (de dez meses por ano) foi instituído em 753 a.C.  e foi sendo actualizado: por Numa Pompílio (que o transformou para luni-solar) e depois por Júlio César em 46 a.C. (calendário juliano, predominantemente solar). Passou a contemplar doze meses por ano.

Com a ascensão do Cristianismo, os monges das diversas seitas encetaram disputas intelectuais para implementar um novo calendário, cristão.

Um monge ortodoxo da Cítia, actual Roménia, Dionysius Exiguus, “O Exíguo”, c. 470-544 d. C., adaptou umas tábuas pascais bizantinas provenientes de Alexandria, as quais obedeciam a ciclos lunares de dezanove anos, e acrescentou-lhes o “nihil“, o Ano Zero (marcando o nascimento de Jesus), numeral de que é o precursor no Ocidente, pois não existia nos numerais romanos. Esse calendário adoptado por Dionysius tinha como principal propósito calcular o período pascal em cada ano, estritamente definido de acordo com  um fenómeno astrológico/astronómico (ambas as disciplinas ainda não estavam dissociadas à época). O dia da ressurreição de Cristo, assim como vários acontecimentos da vida de Cristo e de S. João Baptista estavam intimamente relacionados com momentos determinados do curso dos astros ao longo do tempo:

«Argumentum 9. On the Easter moon in the month of March.
If you want to learn which moon it is on which the feast of Easter occurs; if Easter is celebrated in the month of March, compute the months from September to February, yielding 6. To this always add the correction 2, yielding 8; add the epacts, that is, the lunar increments of the year you want, say 12 for the third indiction, yielding 20; and the day of the month on which Easter is celebrated, that is March 30, yielding together 50. Deduct 30, 20 are left over; the twentieth [moon] is on the day of the resurrection of the Lord. (…)

Argumentum 15. On the day of the equinox and the solstice.
The day on which the Lord Jesus Christ was born into flesh from the Virgin Mary in Bethlehem is the one on which the day begins to increase. The first equinox is on March 25, when day is equal with night. On this very day Gabriel annunciates to Holy Mary, saying:   The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall  overshadow thee. Therefore also that which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. [Luke 1.35, courtesy King James] Also on this day Christ has suffered in the flesh. The second solstice is on June 24, from which the day starts to decrease, and also when Saint John the Baptist was born. The second equinox is on September 24, on which day John the Baptist was conceived. And right from then on until the birth of the Lord and Saviour, the day becomes shorter than the night. From March 25 and until December 25, the days number 271. And that number of days after our Lord Christ was conceived on Sunday March 25, our Lord Christ was born on Tuesday December 20. On the day on which he has suffered death, 133 [? 33] years and 3 months have elapsed, which are 12 [thousand] 414 days. And that number of days after his birth took place on a Tuesday, he suffered death on a Friday: he was born on December 25 and suffered death on March 25. From when our Lord Jesus Christ was baptized, there were 2 years and the days numbered 90, yielding 820, with its leap days, and so he was baptized on the day January 06, a Thursday, and suffered death, as I said above, on March 25, a Friday. With its leap days this yields 12 [thousand] 415 days altogether, and 90 days (from) January 06 to March 25.

Argumentum 16. On the rationale of the leap day.
One must not believe what some people maintain, that the leap day has arisen from that day on which Joshua commanded the sun to stand still: that day has been and is long gone. But it is called leap day because it gains one punctus in each month. The punctus is indeed the fourth part of an hour. And 4 puncti make one hour; and 12 puncti explain 3 hours. Hence in 4 years three hours each, which are 12, making 1 day which is added to February, so that when it is February 24, it is the same the next day. For instance, if today is February 24 and that day is added if 4 years are complete; then it will nevertheless be February 24 tomorrow. And it is called bisextile because February has two times the 6th of the calends of March.»

- Dionysius Exiguus, “The Pascal Cycle“.

 

No século XVI, o Papa Gregório XIII faria novas adaptações ao calendário cristão (calendário gregoriano, promulgado a 24 de Fevereiro de 1582).

Padre António Vieira

Leia-se como o Pde. António Vieira abre a sua obra, consciente de que qualquer representação é NECESSARIAMENTE má, e, por extensão, toda a representatividade, todo aquele que se arrogue a representante de uma verdade “superior” é um mau representante:

«”Representação” chamo também a este papel, como ao primeiro. E necessariamente será muito MAL representada, porque me faltam e lhe faltam as principais figuras com que se havia de animar».

E acrescenta:

«Espero que se veja deste papel mais do que nele se lê: e que dos fundamentos toscos e rudes (que é somente o que poderei apontar) ou se julgue a firmeza do edifício, que só estava delineada no pensamento, ou quanto menos que teve bastante ocasião o mesmo pensamento para se enganar consigo, e cuidar que não ia mal fundado. A segunda parte desta disjuntiva é o que só pretendo mostrar, com a graça divina, em tanto desamparo de meios humanos».

Nas páginas seguintes, ele vai referir-se à falibilidade dos “meios humanos”, desdobrando-a nos quatro vícios dos Doutores da Lei (p. 6):
- os que se ficam pelos floreados do texto sem encetarem uma experimentação;
- os que tomam por verdade a letra morta do texto (sentido literal);
- o seguidismo dos meros papagueadores da tradição que não a adaptam aos tempos (a “jurisdição temporal” é entendida por Vieira como uma das “duas coroas de Cristo”);
- os que destacam excertos dos textos destruindo as relações e a coerência do todo.

E caso não haja sido suficientemente explícito, vem a sublinhar que o entendimento do mistério da fé é obra do tempo e não do saber doutrinário dos profetas e Doutores da Lei (p. 10):

«E este mesmo mistério que Daniel então não entendeu, porque não era chegado o tempo, depois que chegou o tempo, que foi o da paixão de Cristo, até os mininos de mama o entenderam. Assi que os mesmos mistérios que foram ocultos aos mais sábios e doutores, podem ser manifestos aos que sabem muito menos; porque isto não é prerrogativa do saber, senão ventura do tempo».

Para Vieira, «os príncipes e potestades deste Mundo são os demónios» (p. 43) a quem Deus «há-de sacudir essas cabeças e lançar fora o penacho da soberania» (p. 104) e, quanto às religiões acidentais, que são todas as religiões de comércio humano sem excepção, ele advoga que: «todas as seitas de sorte, que não haja em parte alguma do Mundo pública profissão delas, como hoje há» (p. 82).

O que António Vieira andava a fazer? – razão pela qual foi preso durante quatro anos pela Inquisição portuguesa – andava a colocar em causa a representatividade do pseudo-profeta e do conto “do Vigário” (que, ele, sendo padre, conhecia melhor do que ninguém) – p. 20 e sg.:

«O Sumo Pontífice sucedeu no Império Romano como Vigário de Cristo (…). O Império Romano é significado no ferro e barro da estátua, e o Império de Cristo na pedra, que a derrubou e desfez, que são figuras e cousas muito distintas [cf. profecia de Daniel]. (…) O Império Romano se descreve nas ditas visões, como corruptível, e o de Cristo como eterno; o Império Romano, como particular, o de Cristo, como universal; o Império Romano como violento e tirânico, o de Cristo como justo, legítimo e santo; o Império Romano como adquirido por ferro e força de armas, o de Cristo, como dado por Deus. (…) Quem haverá que diga que o Império de Cristo foi significado no ferro e pés de barro da estátua? Ou que foi significado na quarta besta, feríssima, cruelíssima, monstruosíssima? (…) O Império Romano enquanto romano, em qualquer parte ou pessoa, que se ache (seja só a do Imperador, ou só a do Pontífice, ou de ambos) sempre é o quarto Império. (…) O Império Romano tinha dez cornos, os quais significam o mesmo que os dez dedos da estátua, isto é, que aquele Império se dividiria em dez Reinos ou dez coroas (…): Portugal, Espanha, França, Inglaterra, Alemanha…»

Está visto o que o Pde. António Vieira entendia pelo Papa de Roma e como entenderia a Comunidade Europeia…

António Vieira fazia diferença entre as “vozes vivas” de Deus e as “vozes mortas” dos “verdadeiros pregadores” (p. 91 e sg.):

«Ainda que todas as vozes e palavras dos verdadeiros pregadores são vozes e palavras de Deus, umas vão informadas com a virtude de Deus, e outras não, a qual virtude é a alma das ditas palavras, e com ela são vozes vivas e sem ela vozes mortas, e nesta alma e nesta vida consiste a eficácia delas. (…) Porque a eficácia e virtude desta espada da palavra e voz de Deus, que penetra as almas e fere os corações, é a que há-de render a Cristo todas as coroas e a que o há-de fazer universal Rei e Senhor do Mundo (…). Porque o efeito da eficácia da voz e palavra divina, será o Bautismo [comparado a um Dilúvio espiritual]. (…) Falando (como é de fé) da futura Lei Evangélica, que Deus prometeu escrever nos corações dos homens, com diferença da Lei Velha escrita em tábuas de pedra: [cita Jeremias e continua:] De maneira que sem doutrina nem magistério de homens alcançarão os homens o verdadeiro e perfeito conhecimento de Deus: o qual por si mesmo os ensinará e alumiará. E para que não nos pareça incrível este novo modo de Luz universal, acrescenta imediatamente o Profeta: “Se a Providência divina proveu de tantas luzes universais assi de dia como de noite aos olhos corporais dando-lhe Sol, Lua, e Estrelas: esse mesmo Deus que tanto mais estima as almas, que os corpos, porque não proverá também em algum tempo os olhos espirituais de todo o género humano com uma Luz tão universal, que não só se estenda aos que estão no dia da fé, senão também aos que jazem na noite da infidelidade? Esta Luz universal é aquela de que estará vestida toda a natureza humana, como há pouco dezíamos, quando se cumprir o texto: “mulier amicta sole”. E este o meio-dia da Igreja: “ubi pascas ubi cubes in meridie”. E este o tempo em que ela verdadeiramente será: “electa ut sol”».

Uma adenda mais sobre as “vozes vivas” de Deus (p. 42):

«Se toda a Terra há-de cantar, porque Deus há-de Reinar em toda a Terra; segue-se que este Reino e este Reinar há-se ser juntamente e ao mesmo tempo e não em diversos. Porque se as vozes da Terra se não unirem ao mesmo tempo, nunca se pode verificar que toda a Terra canta, nem que toda a Terra diz louvores a Deus: como se vê claramente no tempo presente».

Será necessário metaforizar uma descrição como esta? – p. 31:

«O Império de Cristo (sendo diverso só na grandeza mas na substância o mesmo), nos princípios foi pequeno, nos progressos é maior, e no auge da sua perfeição será grandíssimo. A Lua Nova, a Lua crescente, e a Lua Cheia é a mesma Lua; o rio que no estio é regato, no Outono ribeiro, e no inverno mar, é o mesmo rio; o edifício que nos alicerces se esconde, nas paredes se levanta, e nas torres se remata e aperfeiçoa, é o mesmo edifício. Tal foi, tal é, e tal será o Império de Cristo, a quem Salomão compara à Lua, David ao rio, e ao edifício S. Paulo».

Ou como esta? – p. 102:

«A mesma Igreja, que é o Reino de Cristo, é também, como tantas vezes lhe chama no Evangelho, a sua seara, a sua vinha, e o seu jardim; e para que destas se colha a seu tempo o suave e proveitoso das flores e frutos, é necessário que procedam as geadas, os frios, as chuvas e os outros rigores do Inverno, em que as plantas tomam forças e fundam raízes. Passará de todo o tempo destas tempestades, como já tem passado o maior rigor delas, e então dirá Cristo a sua Igreja, e o Supremo Agricultor a sua Esposa: “Surge, propera amica mea et veni…”»

Não é notório que se substituiu o carpinteiro judeu histórico pelo Cristo Agricultor a-histórico?

E a forma como a Igreja é descrita, parece a corporação eclesiástica sediada na cidade-Estado do Vaticano?

Há que ser mais explícito?

«A figura da Mulher do Apocalipse no Cap. XII significa a natureza humana, e a Igreja, como dizem comummente os intérpretes: porque naqueles últimos tempos, de que fala esta visão, toda a natureza humana há-de ser Igreja, e a Igreja tão grande como toda a natureza humana; porque toda a dita natureza humana há-de estar vestida do Sol, que é Cristo, do qual se vestem todos os que se fazem cristãos por meio do Bautismo. (…). E este vestido não só é de Cristo, senão de Cristo com nome de Sol, pelas trevas da ignorância e infidelidade que se despem, e pela Luz da fé que se veste no mesmo Bautismo.» (p. 87).

Relembro que o “Bautismo” foi acima descrito como «o efeito da eficácia da voz e palavra divina», o que só com muita imaginação coincide com o desagradável banho de água fria que se dão aos bebés cujos ingénuos pais aderem a tolas superstições.

Quanto à Virgem Maria, o Pde. Vieira chama-lhe «tálamo virginal» e «madre» de onde sai a inundação de um rio que alaga tudo (mãe d’água).

Por curiosidade – o que é que «tálamo» tipificará, veterotestamentariamente?

Cristo com a samaritana junto ao poço (João 4:6-16). Mural da catacumba romana da Via Latina, séc. IV A.D. Fonte

Inscrição em mármore da pedra tumular da criança Asellus, com o Chi-Rho entre as figuras de Pedro e Paulo, Museu Pio Cristiano, Vaticano. À direita: ”A SELLV BENEMBERE / NTI QVI VICXIT ANNV / SEX MESIS OCTO DIES / XXIII” ["For Asellus, well deserving, who lived 6 years, 8 months and 23 days"].

Pedra tumular de Seberus ["servidor de vinho"] retirada das catacumbas, séc. IV d.C., Museu Pio Cristiano, Vaticano. As letras gregas Omega e Alpha estão invertidas (a última letra vem primeiro) em relação à ordem expressa pelo Evangelho: «I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End» (Apocalipse de S. João, 22:13). O Chi-Rho encontra-se incluso numa coroa de louros, símbolo de vitória e usada pelos Césares e pelos laureados nos Jogos Olímpicos, alusão ao mito da ninfa Dafne que se transmudou em loureiro para fugir a Apolo e este fez uma coroa com as suas folhas.

“Christos” com o Chi-Rho na cabeça e ladeado por duas romãs, mosaico datado do séc. IV a.D., encontrado no pavimento de uma casa em Hinton St. Mary, Dorset, Grã-Bretanha (British Museum). Só muito mais tarde é que os governantes proibiriam que imagens de Cristo fossem postas no chão, onde eram pisadas.

Sarcófago de Domatilla, séc. IV d.C.

Mosaico da Basílica de San Vitale, em Ravenna, Itália, séc. VI d.C., retratando a corte do imperador Justiniano (à direita) com o arcebispo Maximiano (à esquerda). O Chi-Rho surge num escudo militar.

Parateísmo: esboço de uma crítica simultânea ao teísmo e ao ateísmo

Tomo como ponto de partida a prelecção de um humorista declaradamente ateu (Ricardo Araújo Pereira), produzida a convite de um padre cristão (José Tolentino Mendonça).

O teísmo e o ateísmo têm em comum:
- a barreira que os organiza dicotomicamente um em oposição ao outro;
- a crença na “pureza” de cada uma das facções, sem “pacto” ou “mácula” pelo outro lado da barricada.

No entanto, algum ateu poderá garantir que rejeita os valores de todo e qualquer teísmo, de modo a ser absolutamente ateu? Se um ateu «tem valores», então, nem que seja por coincidência, partilhará um ou vários valores com uma religião, outros valores com outra, de modo que ele, afinal, crê num compósito de várias religiões, sendo uma espécie de seleccionador. E terá inclusive crenças e valores que não pertencem a nenhuma religião. O ateísmo pode tornar-se uma espécie de religião oficial, professando os dogmas da Igreja da Razão e colocando o sujeito humano no lugar de Deus.

E que crente poderá afirmar que não está “conspurcado” por algum ateísmo (por exemplo, a febre de consumo durante as festividades, ou o não ser lá muito praticante)? Um crente subscreve todas verdades subjacentes à doutrina da sua fé (seja ela qual for)? Um padre cristão aceita tudo de Santo Agostinho a São Tomás de Aquina, passando por Ivan Illich, Duns Scoto, Alberto Magno, António Vieira, Bernardo de Clarval, Bergson, etc. – tudo, indiferenciadamente? Ou apenas alguns mandamentos principais, alguns de entre os dogmas ditos basilares, um mínimo denominador comum? Não será que, ao invés de ser crente a 100%, é antes, mais ou menos, crente, meio crente, um poucochinho crente? E crente em quê, afinal? Em Deus? Basta isso? Dizer que se acredita em Deus? Mas qual Deus? O Deus de Santo Agostinho não se parece com o do Apocalipse de São João… Acredita nos dois autores, porque pertencem os dois à mesma Igreja? Basta esse facto – a pertença a uma mesma instituição eclesiástica – para igualar essas duas descrições de Deus, tão diferentes?

Certamente não é na palavra “Deus”, vazia de qualquer significado, que o crente acredita, já que outras religiões também a usam, e quando alguém se diz “crente” normalmente refere-se a uma única religião (seja monoteísta, seja politeísta). O que acontece é que, às vezes, o aparato das imagens e dos rituais trata de ofuscar diferenças abismais, reduzindo a nada a dinâmica das controvérsias e problemáticas diversas existentes no seio de uma mesma religião.

Para dar dois exemplos peninsulares:

- ainda hoje se presta pouca atenção ao facto de o padre António Vieira ter sido preso pela Santa Inquisição, por questões ideológicas, por pôr em causa dogmas teológicos estabelecidos em favor de um sistema de pensamento original;

- açambarcam-se pensadores singulares enquanto seguidores de uma religião oficial, quando, na verdade, eles disseram com todas as letras que não se filiavam em nenhuma religião em particular, mas compunham-se com o de melhor todas tinham para oferecer para formar uma outra concepção – é o caso do ibérico Ibn Al-Arabí, vulgarmente entendido como muçulmano ou sufi, tendo declarado: 

«O meu coração capaz de todas as formas:/ é pasto para gazelas e claustro para monges cristãos,/ um  templo de ídolos e a Caaba do peregrino,/ as tábuas da Tora e o livro do Alcorão./ Sigo a religião do Amor;/ qualquer que seja o sentido que as caravanas tomem,/ esse será  o meu credo e a minha fé».

Em suma, há filtros e mesclas. Não há crentes puros. Não há ateus puros. Não na ordem da representação e do “status quo”.

Derrida (“Epoché and Faith”, conference, Toronto, 2002, published in “Other Testaments“), quando lhe perguntaram porque escreveu em “Circonfession” que “passava por ser ateu”, em vez de declarar ”Eu sou ateu”, ele respondeu que não se reduzia àquele que diz “Eu” e que duvidava da distinção entre teísmo e ateísmo. E acrescentou:

“If the belief in God doesn’t go through atheistic steps, there is no critique of idolatry of all sort of images in prayers (…) against the reappropriation of God in Methaphysics. (…) So, if one doesn’t go as far as possible in the direction of atheism, one doesn’t believe in God. The true believers know they have to run the risk of being radical atheists. (…) If we don’t go as far as possible in the direction of this atheism, the belief in God is naïve and totally inauthentic. (…) In order to be authentic, the belief in God must be exposed to the absolute doubt and i know the great mystics are experiencing this: the death of God, or the disappearance of God, or non-existence of God, or God as being called as non-existent. I pray to someone who does not exist, in the strict metaphysical meaning of existence, that is to be present as an essence or substance (…). If I believe in what is beyond being, then I believe as an atheist, in a certain way. Believing implies some atheism, however paradoxical it may sound. And I am sure that the true believers know this better than others, they experience atheism all the time and this is part of their belief. In this epoché, in this suspension of belief – the suspension of the position of the existence of God – it is in this epoché that faith appears. The only possibility is faith. (…) Nevertheless, although I confirm myself it is right to say that “I am an atheist”, I can’t say myself ”I am an atheist” as a position. “I am, I know what I am, I am this and nothing else, and I am identical with myself, I am an atheist” - I would never say this. This would sound obscene. I am. I wouldn’t say “I am an atheist”. I wouldn’t say “I am a believer” either. This statement which I find absolutely ridiculous: “Ia am, I know that I am a believer”. Who knows that? Who can affirm and confirm “I am a believer”? And who can say “I am an atheist”? We… I just write substances [?] - that’s the only thing I can say».

O parateísmo passa-se entre os dois, numa zona de indecidibilidade: deve, pois, ler-se simultaneamente par-ateísmo e para-teísmo.

Poverty

«I would like to thank my parents (…). They gave the biggest gift: the poverty. And I want to thank them for the rest of my life» - Roberto Benigni

«It is providential that the youth or man of inventive mind is not ‘blessed’ with a million dollars (…). Many of the earthly miracles have had their genesis in humble surroundings» – Nikola Tesla, New York Times, April 8, 1934, Section X, p. 9.

«Food-spassing in The Idiots is a figure of the exceeding of the principium individuationis, a luxurious bypassing of guided, individual alimentation – the gratuitous spilling-out of the sacrificial offering. Six thousand kroners’ worth of real Iranian caviar, smeared and dribbled and flung across the table by the spassers, is transformed into the object of spass, and the neatly packaged and precious commodity is torn and thrown apart like the object of a Dionysian orgy. And Karen’s objection to the food-spass – that the cost was so great, and that people are starving – is met only with Stoffer’s perverse denial, his finger to his temple: “No – there aren’t. That’s the trick.”» – about a scene of Lars von Trier’s “The Idiots”

O erro de Foucault

«…this little corner of the earth whose land, both above and below the surface, has strategic importance at a global level. For the people who inhabit this land, what is the point of searching, even at the cost of their own lives, for this thing whose possibility we have forgotten since the …Renaissance and the great crisis of Christianity, a political spirituality. I can already hear the French laughing, but I know that they are wrong».

- Michel Foucault, What Are the Iranians Dreaming About?

«Le mouvement iranien n’a pas subi cette ‘loi’ des révoltions qui ferait, paraît-il, ressortir sous l’enthousiasme aveugle la tyrannie qui les habitait déjà en secret. Ce qui constituait la part la plus intérieure et la plus intensément vécue du soulèvement touchait sans intermédiaire à un échiquier politique surchargé. Mais ce contact n’est pas identité. La spiritualité à laquelle se référaient ceux qui allaient mourir est sans commune mesure avec le gouvernement sanglant d’un clergé intégriste. Les religieux veulent authentifier leur régime par les significations qu’avait le soulèvement. On ne fait pas autre chose qu’eux en disqualifiant le fait du soulèvement parce qu’il y a aujourd’hui un gouvernement de mollahs. Dans un cas comme dans l’autre, il y a « peur » . Peur de ce qui vient de se passer l’automne dernier en Iran, et donc le monde depuis longtemps n’avait pas donné d’exemple.»

- Michel Foucault, “Inutile de se soulever“, Le Monde, nº 10661, 11-12 mai 1979, p. 1-2.

——————————————————————————————————————————–

A leitura de Foucault do Irão e a de Khomeini não se equivalem. Não subestimo Foucault ao ponto de achar que ele não percebeu a diferença logo de início, mas tentou elevar o debate de ambos os lados (França, Irão), sem sucesso. Por vezes esquecemo-nos que, numa relação, as determinações são recíprocas. Os media europeus querem reduzir tudo o que pareça árabe ou islâmico (nem fazem a diferença entre estes dois) a um “taliban”, fazem “terrorismo” mediático. Quem não é visado, nem se apercebe das dificuldades de integração social que decorrem das frivolidades que os media dizem, manipulando a opinião pública. E não querem reacções? Os dois fascismos merecem-se mutuamente. As generalizações são apanágio de ambos os discursos, que se ocupam de destruir vidas em nome de ideologias demagógicas. Venha o diabo e escolha…

Levitation and seismography

 

«Tanto los pobres como los ricos deberán superar la ilusión de que más energía es mejor.»

- Ivan Illich

 

«- Ai de mim! – disse o homem. – Quanto mais quente está, mais frio eu tenho. Para mim, o Sol é geada cortante que me gela os ossos e, por outro lado, quando os outros têm aquilo a que chamam frio, eu começo a ter muito calor. Não suporto nem o gelo por ser tão quente, nem o lume por ser tão frio».

 - Irmãos Grimm, “Os Cinco Criados”.

 

Superconductivity is a very interesting property, and a current flowing in a superconductive object will continue to flow with no outside power source.

A superconductor is a substance that has zero electrical resistance. Usually this occurs at extremely low temperatures, but there is class of objects called high-temperature superconductors which achieve zero electrical resistance at easily achievable temperatures.

The substance used in the video below, Yttrium barium copper oxide, acts as a superconductor (drops below its critical temperature) at temperatures below 95 K (-178°C), and was the first material that was found to be a superconductor at temperatures above the boiling point of nitrogen (77 K, -196°C). This is significant because instead of wasting large amounts of electricity to cool it down, it can be submerged in widely available liquid nitrogen to achieve superconductivity.

The following is an experiment done by Professor Tom H. Johansen in the Superconductor Laboratory at the University of Oslo, Norway, in which a superconductor is immersed in liquid nitrogen which causes a magnet to float on top of it.

What actually causes the magnet to levitate is a phenomenon known as the Meissner-Ochsenfeld effect. When a magnet is brought near a superconductor a current is induced which repels the magnetic force due to its diamagnetic properties. (…) Because the repulsive force is created because of the magnet on top, pushing it slightly to the side will cause it to be pulled back into place, but pushing it hard will cause it to move slightly and then reestablish equilibrium at a different point. As the superconductor heats up above its critical temperature, the magnet is gradually lowered and finally comes to rest on top of the object.

Diamagnetism is a fundamental property of all matter, although it is usually very weak. It is due to the non-cooperative behavior of orbiting electrons when exposed to an applied magnetic field. Diamagnetic substances are composed of atoms which have no net magnetic moments (ie., all the orbital shells are filled and there are no unpaired electrons). However, when exposed to a field, a negative magnetization is produced and thus the susceptibility is negative. Some well known diamagnetic substances, in units of 10^-8 m³/kg, include: 
- Quartz (SiO2), -0.62;
- Calcite (CaCO3), -0.48;
- Water (H2O), -0.90.

Magnetic levitation can be produced in many ways, and every object creates some diamagnetic resistance in a magnetic field, but for most objects the force is very small. With a strong enough electric field nearly any object can be levitated.

Below is a video of a frog being levitated at the High Field Magnet Laboratory in Nijmegen, Netherlands, with a magnetic field of 16 Teslas, 320,000 times the magnetic field of the earth.

Another interesting use of magnetic levitation is the Maglev Train, a transport system where a train is levitated on a track using electromagnets in order to reduce friction. Currently the technology is being improved, and it is estimated that a Maglev train has the potential to travel at 4000 mph (6.437 km/h) in an evacuated tunnel. Currently the fastest recorded speed of one of these trains is 361 mph (581 km/h), which was achieved in Japan in 2003. Here is a picture of the JR-Maglev tested at the Yamanashi test track in Japan:

In addition to magnetic levitation, there are two techniques that achieve similar effects known as optical levitation and acoustic levitation.

Optical levitation was developed by a scientist named Arthur Ashkin, and causes objects to float by shooting photons at them.

Auditory levitation uses sound waves to keep objects in the air, and at the Otsuka lab in Japan, scientists were able to levitate objects with sound frequencies above the human auditory range. Below is a video of an acoustic levitation chamber that uses three speakers to control the x,y, and z coordinates of the objects inside by adjusting the wavelength of a constant, resonating, 600 Hz sound.

Below there is an acoustic levitation chamber designed and built in 1987 as a micro-gravity experiment for NASA related subject matter. The 12 inch cubed plexiglas Helmholtz Resonant Cavity has 3 speakers attached to the cube by aluminium acoustic waveguides. By applying a continuous resonant (600 Hertz) sound wave, and by adjusting the amplitude and phase relationship amongst the 3 speakers, it is possible to control levitation and movement in all 3 (x,y,z) axis of the ambient space. This research was used to show the effects of micro-gravity conditions that exist in the space shuttle environment in orbit, but done here on Earth in a lab. This is not “anti-gravity”.

Humans have a diamagnetic material – calcite - in otoconia, microcrystals found in the inner-ear otolith. These crystals have a structure similar to that of the pineal microcrystals. The calcite microcrystals have piezoelectric properties with excitability in the frequency range of mobile communications. These crystals are sensitive to the Radio Frequency-Electromagnetic Fields in the range of 500 MHz to 2.5 GHz, depending on there size. This range contains portable wireless frequencies, GSM (872-960 MHz), DCS (1710-1875 MHz), UMTS (1900-1920 MHz, 2010-2025 MHz), or BlueTooth (2400-2483,5 MHz). By that very fact the piezoelectric property of the crystals would allow them to interact with the electrical component of electromagnetic fields and with infrasonic waves. Animals have been known to perceive the infrasonic waves carried through the earth by natural disasters and can use these as an early warning. A recent example of this is the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami. Animals were reported to flee the area long before the actual tsunami hit the shores of Asia.

Man, as animals, should be able to sense the same signs, but, perhaps, culture keeps him too distracted… from what really matters.

Adapted from several sources

The Earth is flat

«These people are like the Chinese who, because they knew no one else, considered their country the square of the world and who painted the corners of this square with hideous grimaces and monsters, which were supposed to portray us, the pitiful inhabitants of the rest of the world. We laugh at the Chinese, and yet how often does it seem like one were [living] in China when one hears the opinions of persons who know the world only by the corner in which they are stuck and by the Hamburg Correspondent».

Johann Gottfried Herder, “Of the Changes in the Tastes of the Nations Through the Ages“, 1766.

***

«In olden days, even in Europe, the world was thought to be flat. And when some intelligent people claimed the opposite, they were exposed to various difficulties, such as being burnt alive. Today, even in Buddhist countries everybody knows, that the world is round. However, in Tibet, we still stubbornly state that the world is flat».

Gendun Choephel, newspaper article, “Tibet Mirror”, Kalimpong, 1938.

***

«In planetary being, the earth has become flat again. However, this leveling of dimensions previously filled by such powers, this flattening that reduces things and beings to the unidimensional—in a word, this nihilism, has the most bizarre effect: it revitalizes the elementary forces in the raw play of all their dimensions; it liberates the unthought nothing in a counter-power which is multidimensional play».

Gilles Deleuze, “Desert Islands…”

A crown of plants with an hollow center

East and West agree on the form which celebrates prosperity and joy:
 

Enso by Deiryu (1895–1954)

 

 

A similar form would be given to you when you marry…

… when you live gloriously…

 

… or when you die.

So, there is no possible way of missing that auspicious gift, even if you don’t marry and don’t have a glorious life, you will surely die. And if there is no one to throw a crown at your funeral, who cares? It’s you who are going to turn green.

Medice, cura te ipsum

O nome “Quíron” deriva da palavra χείρ, “mão”, e relaciona-se com a destreza do cirurgião — note-se que a palavra χειρουργία, “trabalho manual, cirurgia” deriva do mesmo radical. Os “cheironidae”, uma família de médicos da Magnésia, afirmavam descender de Quíron (Plu. Quest. conv. 647a, cf. Smith, 1867, s.v. Cheiron).

O centauro Quíron (gr. Χείρων) era filho do titã Cronos e de Philyra, uma das oceânides. Apesar de ser imortal e meio-irmão dos deuses Zeus, Poseídon e Hades, vivia entre os mortais, numa gruta do monte Pélion, na Tessália.

Quíron não tinha a natureza selvagem dos outros centauros, filhos de Íxion e da nuvem. Ele era sábio, exímio caçador, conhecedor de música, de plantas medicinais, de cirurgia e de outros conhecimentos práticos prezados pelos antigos. Os conhecimentos médicos foram transmitidos aos mortais por seu intermédio.

Quíron foi mestre de vários heróis, entre eles, Herácles, Peleu, Áquiles, Asclépio, Jasão (o futuro líder dos argonautas).

Durante uma peleja, Quíron foi atingido acidentalmente por uma flecha de Héracles, embebida no veneno da Hidra de Lerna, produzindo uma ferimento incurável. O centauro sofria de dores horríveis, que nem os seus conhecimentos médicos eram capazes de mitigar. Desesperado, o imortal Quíron preferiu morrer. Zeus concedeu-lhe esse desejo e colocou-o entre as constelações (Sagitário).

As menções mais antigas a Quíron estão na Ilíada (4.219, 11.832, 16.140-4 e 19.387-91). As principais fontes do seu mito, no entanto, são Píndaro (P. 3.1-7, 4.101-15 e 9.26-65), Apolónio Ródio (2.506-15), o Pseudo-Apolodoro (1.2.4, 2.5.4, 3.4.4 e 3.13.5), Plutarco (Quest. conv. 647a) e Eratóstenes (Cat. 1.18).

Quíron e as suas actividades são mencionadas (nem sempre positivamente) em muitas obras literárias, notadamente na “Aquileida” de Estácio (séc. I), numa das Imagens de Filóstrato, o Jovem (865.12, séc. III), no “Polycraticus” de John of Salisbury (1159), no “Emblematum Liber” de Andreas Alciato (1546), na “Divina Comédia” de Dante (Inferno, canto 12, 1308-1321), em “O Príncipe”, de Maquiavel (1532, cap. 18) e no “Fausto”, de Goethe (parte 2, ato 2, cena 5, 1832). O mito inspirou uma novela de John Updike, “The Centaur” (1963).

O tema do médico doente, incapaz de se curar a si próprio, está presente em Ésquilo (Pr. 473-4) e consta também do Evangelho de Lucas (4.23): ἰατρέ, θεράπευσον σεαυτόν, “médico, cura a ti mesmo”. Na forma latina da Vulgata, traduziu-se por “medice, cura te ipsum”.

Na cerâmica do início do século VI em diante, Quíron é representado como meio-homem, com pernas humanas, e a parte traseira do corpo semelhante à de um cavalo. Posteriormente, tinha aspecto humano apenas do umbigo para cima. Frequentemente, para enfatizar a sua natureza civilizada, o artista colocava-lhe roupas e, para destacar a sua competência de caçador, ocasionalmente trazia no ombro uma vara com diversos animais pendurados.

O pacto ("dexiosis"): Peleu (pai) entrega Áquiles (filho) ao mestre Quíron, centauro. Ânfora com figuras negras, ca. 520 a. C., Boulogne-sur-Mer.

About Lars von Trier’s Antichrist

 

Some people use the movie “Antichrist” to allegedly proclaim that Lars von Trier must be misogynistic. They can’t have seen the same movie I did, or they totally missed the point.

Nowhere “antichrist” is identified with women. Though, the word “antichrist”, as it appears in the movie carries a feminine symbol: the astrological symbol of the planet Venus, named after the Roman goddess of love. Please note that it is in the final letter of Christ. And Christ, according to the church, is love, isn’t it? And he always was represented with a kind of feminine hair and temper, didn’t he?

All the movie is anti- Christ’s love. The child, typically the son of God, dies at beggining. During the movie, there are various scenes and statements blocking the sexual act: “Never screw [fuck] your therapist”, “This is no good for us”, “This won’t do, this is the stupidest thing I could do with you” , “No! Stop it!”.

And if there is someone to blame, the movie is very clear about it: it is not the woman alone that is guilty, because he “was there, too” (says the psycotherapist, her husband). Both are involved.

There is a closed circle working in the movie: the child (Christ) was born because of love and because of love the child falls and dies. We could remember the words of the Gospel of the Egyptians (Nag Hammadi): «Salome asked, “How long will men die?” The Lord replied, “As long as you women bring forth”».

The main characters of the movie don’t carry names. He is a “he” and she is a “she”.

He has solar characteristics: optimistic, constant, rational, blond. She has lunar characteristics: depressive, anxious, irrational, pale, dark.

I don’t think that anyone who didn’t get through Greek-Roman astrology/paganism or authors that have studied it (like Nietzsche, for example, the author of “Antichrist”) will understand what the movie is about. Remember that there is even a scene refering to constellations.

The Venus’ astrological symbol is formed by the cross (Christian symbol, but also the astrological symbol for the Earth) and by the circle which has been long ago associated with the Sun. Venus’ love is the “conjuctio” of Earth and Sun.

But there is another “main character” in the movie: it is the hood (called “Eden”) and its residents.

The real formula of the “Antichrist”, when anxiety and fear are solved and peace (not chaos) reigns, is expressed in the middle of the movie: “turn green”. This is not Christian love, venal love (Earth and Sun conjuction), but other kind of conjuction: between she (Moon) and the green (Earth). And it is the happiest scene of the movie.

The Antichrist on religion

«As a matter of fact no man can be a philologian or a physician without being also Antichrist. That is to say, as a philologian a man sees behind the “holy books,” and as a physician he sees behind the physiological degeneration of the typical Christian. The physician says “incurable”; the philologian says “fraud”.»

- Nietzsche, “The Antichrist”, #47.

 

Nietzsche was son of Protestant Lutheran pastor and studied Theology.

Many things are said about Nietzsche’s religious sympathies – even Fernando Pessoa didn’t understand his positions (perhaps due to equivocal translations from German to Portuguese?).

Though, Nietzsche’s “Antichrist” (and other writings about religion) clarifies that the author is, above all, against what he called «the general priestly type», but that doesn’t prevent him of conceiving a genealogy of religions, from the noblest (life-oriented) to the most decadent (death-oriented), as follows:

PAGANISM
ISLAMISM
HINDUISM (MANU)
BUDDHISM
JUDAISM
CHRISTIANITY (PROTESTANTISM at the bottom)

THE GENERAL PRIESTLY TYPE

PAGANISM

«… a large admixture of Greek vitality and nerve-force»

«…epicureanism, the theory of salvation of paganism. Epicurus was a typical decadent: I was the first to recognize him.»

«God gave his son as a sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins. At once there was an end of the gospels! Sacrifice for sin, and in its most obnoxious and barbarous form: sacrifice of the innocent for the sins of the guilty! What appalling paganism!»

«Pagans are all those who say yes to life, and to whom “God” is a word signifying acquiescence in all things»

«…the Greek spirit had need of a superabundance of health»
« The whole labour of the ancient world gone for naught: I have no word to describe the feelings that such an enormity arouses in me.–And, considering the fact that its labour was merely preparatory, that with adamantine self-consciousness it laid only the foundations for a work to go on for thousands of years, the whole meaning of antiquity disappears! . . To what end the Greeks? to what end the Romans?–All the prerequisites to a learned culture, all the methods of science, were already there; man had already perfected the great and incomparable art of reading profitably–that first necessity to the tradition of culture, the unity of the sciences; the natural sciences, in alliance with mathematics and mechanics, were on the right road,–the sense of fact, the last and more valuable of all the senses, had its schools, and its traditions were already centuries old! Is all this properly understood? Every essential to the beginning of the work was ready;–and the most essential, it cannot be said too often, are methods, and also the most difficult to develop, and the longest opposed by habit and laziness. What we have today reconquered, with unspeakable self-discipline, for ourselves – for certain bad instincts, certain Christian instincts, still lurk in our bodies – that is to say, the keen eye for reality, the cautious hand, patience and seriousness in the smallest things, the whole integrity of knowledge – all these things were already there, and had been there for two thousand years! More, there was also a refined and excellent tact and taste! Not as mere brain-drilling! Not as “German” culture, with its loutish manners! But as body, as bearing, as instinct – in short, as reality… All gone for naught! Overnight it became merely a memory! The Greeks! The Romans! Instinctive nobility, taste, methodical inquiry, genius for organization and administration, faith in and the will to secure the future of man, a great yes to everything entering into the imperium Romanum and palpable to all the senses, a grand style that was beyond mere art, but had become reality, truth, life… All overwhelmed in a night, but not by a convulsion of nature! Not trampled to death by Teutons and others of heavy hoof! But brought to shame by crafty, sneaking, invisible, anemic vampires! Not conquered, only sucked dry!.. Hidden vengefulness, petty envy, became master! Everything wretched, intrinsically ailing, and invaded by bad feelings, the whole ghetto-world of the soul, was at once on top! One needs but read any of the Christian agitators, for example, St. Augustine, in order to realize, in order to smell, what filthy fellows came to the top. It would be an error, however, to assume that there was any lack of understanding in the leaders of the Christian movement: ah, but they were clever, clever to the point of holiness, these fathers of the church! What they lacked was something quite different. Nature neglected – perhaps forgot – to give them even the most modest endowment of respectable, of upright, of cleanly instincts… Between ourselves, they are not even men…»

ISLAMISM

«Christianity destroyed for us the whole harvest of ancient civilization, and later it also destroyed for us the whole harvest of Mohammedan civilization. The wonderful culture of the Moors in Spain, which was fundamentally nearer to us and appealed more to our senses and tastes than that of Rome and Greece, was trampled down (I do not say by what sort of feet) Why? Because it had to thank noble and manly instincts for its origin–because it said yes to life, even to the rare and refined luxuriousness of Moorish life!… The crusaders later made war on something before which it would have been more fitting for them to have grovelled in the dust–a civilization beside which even that of our nineteenth century seems very poor and very “senile.” What they wanted, of course, was booty: the orient was rich… Let us put aside our prejudices! The crusades were a higher form of piracy, nothing more!»

«If Islam despises Christianity, it has a thousandfold right to do so: Islam at least assumes that it is dealing with men…»

«Christianity, alcohol – the two great means of corruption… Intrinsically there should be no more choice between Islam and Christianity than there is between an Arab and a Jew. The decision is already reached; nobody remains at liberty to choose here. Either a man is a Chandala or he is not… “War to the knife with Rome! Peace and friendship with Islam!”: this was the feeling, this was the act, of that great free spirit, that genius among German emperors, Frederick II. What! Must a German first be a genius, a free spirit, before he can feel decently? I can’t make out how a German could ever feel Christian…»

HINDUISM (MANU)

«…the Code of Manu, an incomparably more intellectual and superior work, which it would be a sin against the intelligence to so much as name in the same breath with the Bible. It is easy to see why: there is a genuine philosophy behind it, in it, not merely an evil-smelling mess of Jewish rabbinism and superstition, – it gives even the most fastidious psychologist something to sink his teeth into. And, not to forget what is most important, it differs fundamentally from every kind of Bible: by means of it the nobles, the philosophers and the warriors keep the whip-hand over the majority; it is full of noble valuations, it shows a feeling of perfection, an acceptance of life, and triumphant feeling toward self and life – the sun shines upon the whole book. All the things on which Christianity vents its fathomless vulgarity – for example, procreation, women and marriage – are here handled earnestly, with reverence and with love and confidence. (…) I know of no book in which so many delicate and kindly things are said of women as in the Code of Manu; these old grey-beards and saints have a way of being gallant to women that it would be impossible, perhaps, to surpass. “The mouth of a woman,” it says in one place, “the breasts of a maiden, the prayer of a child and the smoke of sacrifice are always pure.” In another place: “there is nothing purer than the light of the sun, the shadow cast by a cow, air, water, fire and the breath of a maiden.”Finally, in still another place – perhaps this is also a holy lie -: “all the orifices of the body above the navel are pure, and all below are impure. Only in the maiden is the whole body pure.” One catches the unholiness of Christian means in flagranti by the simple process of putting the ends sought by Christianity beside the ends sought by the Code of Manu – by putting these enormously antithetical ends under a strong light. (…)»

«The order of castes, the highest, the dominating law, is merely the ratification of an order of nature, of a natural law of the first rank, over which no arbitrary fiat, no “modern idea,” can exert any influence. In every healthy society there are three physiological types, gravitating toward differentiation but mutually conditioning one another, and each of these has its own hygiene, its own sphere of work, its own special mastery and feeling of perfection. It is not Manu but nature that sets off in one class those who are chiefly intellectual, in another those who are marked by muscular strength and temperament, and in a third those who are distinguished in neither one way or the other, but show only mediocrity – the last-named represents the great majority, and the first two the select. The superior caste – I call it the fewest – has, as the most perfect, the privileges of the few: it stands for happiness, for beauty, for everything good upon earth. Only the most intellectual of men have any right to beauty, to the beautiful; only in them can goodness escape being weakness. Pulchrum est paucorum hominum: goodness is a privilege. Nothing could be more unbecoming to them than uncouth manners or a pessimistic look, or an eye that sees ugliness – or indignation against the general aspect of things. Indignation is the privilege of the Chandala; so is pessimism. “The world is perfect”- so prompts the instinct of the intellectual, the instinct of the man who says yes to life. “Imperfection, what ever is inferior to us, distance, the pathos of distance, even the Chandala themselves are parts of this perfection. “The most intelligent men, like the strongest, find their happiness where others would find only disaster: in the labyrinth, in being hard with themselves and with others, in effort; their delight is in self-mastery; in them asceticism becomes second nature, a necessity, an instinct. They regard a difficult task as a privilege; it is to them a recreation to play with burdens that would crush all others… Knowledge – a form of asceticism. They are the most honourable kind of men: but that does not prevent them being the most cheerful and most amiable. They rule, not because they want to, but because they are; they are not at liberty to play second. The second caste: to this belong the guardians of the law, the keepers of order and security, the more noble warriors, above all, the king as the highest form of warrior, judge and preserver of the law. The second in rank constitute the executive arm of the intellectuals, the next to them in rank, taking from them all that is rough in the business of ruling their followers, their right hand, their most apt disciples. In all this, I repeat, there is nothing arbitrary, nothing “made up”; whatever is to the contrary is made up–by it nature is brought to shame. . . The order of castes, the order of rank, simply formulates the supreme law of life itself; the separation of the three types is necessary to the maintenance of society, and to the evolution of higher types, and the highest types – the inequality of rights is essential to the existence of any rights at all. A right is a privilege. Every one enjoys the privileges that accord with his state of existence. Let us not underestimate the privileges of the mediocre. Life is always harder as one mounts the heights – the cold increases, responsibility increases. A high civilization is a pyramid: it can stand only on a broad base; its primary prerequisite is a strong and soundly consolidated mediocrity. The handicrafts, commerce, agriculture, science, the greater part of art, in brief, the whole range of occupational activities, are compatible only with mediocre ability and aspiration; such callings would be out of place for exceptional men; the instincts which belong to them stand as much opposed to aristocracy as to anarchism. The fact that a man is publicly useful, that he is a wheel, a function, is evidence of a natural predisposition; it is not society, but the only sort of happiness that the majority are capable of, that makes them intelligent machines. To the mediocre mediocrity is a form of happiness; they have a natural instinct for mastering one thing, for specialization. It would be altogether unworthy of a profound intellect to see anything objectionable in mediocrity in itself. It is, in fact, the first prerequisite to the appearance of the exceptional: it is a necessary condition to a high degree of civilization. When the exceptional man handles the mediocre man with more delicate fingers than he applies to himself or to his equals, this is not merely kindness of heart – it is simply his duty…»

BUDDHISM

«In my condemnation of Christianity I surely hope I do no injustice to a related religion with an even larger number of believers: I allude to Buddhism. Both are to be reckoned among the nihilistic religions–they are both decadence religions–but they are separated from each other in a very remarkable way. For the fact that he is able to compare them at all the critic of Christianity is indebted to the scholars of India. Buddhism is a hundred times as realistic as Christianity – it is part of its living heritage that it is able to face problems objectively and coolly; it is the product of long centuries of philosophical speculation. The concept, “god,” was already disposed of before it appeared. Buddhism is the only genuinely positive religion to be encountered in history, and this applies even to its epistemology (which is a strict phenomenalism). It does not speak of a “struggle with sin,” but, yielding to reality, of the “struggle with suffering.” Sharply differentiating itself from Christianity, it puts the self-deception that lies in moral concepts behind it; it is, in my phrase, beyond good and evil. The two physiological facts upon which it grounds itself and upon which it bestows its chief attention are: first, an excessive sensitiveness to sensation, which manifests itself as a refined susceptibility to pain, and secondly, an extraordinary spirituality, a too protracted concern with concepts and logical procedures, under the influence of which the instinct of personality has yielded to a notion of the “impersonal.” (…) These physiological states produced a depression, and Buddha tried to combat it by hygienic measures. Against it he prescribed a life in the open, a life of travel; moderation in eating and a careful selection of foods; caution in the use of intoxicants; the same caution in arousing any of the passions that foster a bilious habit and heat the blood; finally, no worry, either on one’s own account or on account of others. He encourages ideas that make for either quiet contentment or good cheer – he finds means to combat ideas of other sorts. He understands good, the state of goodness, as something which promotes health. Prayer is not included, and neither is asceticism. There is no categorical imperative nor any disciplines, even within the walls of a monastery (it is always possible to leave). These things would have been simply means of increasing the excessive sensitiveness above mentioned. For the same reason he does not advocate any conflict with unbelievers; his teaching is antagonistic to nothing so much as to revenge, aversion, ressentiment (“enmity never brings an end to enmity”: the moving refrain of all Buddhism…) And in all this he was right, for it is precisely these passions which, in view of his main regiminal purpose, are unhealthful. The mental fatigue that he observes, already plainly displayed in too much “objectivity” (that is, in the individual’s loss of interest in himself, in loss of balance and of “egoism”), he combats by strong efforts to lead even the spiritual interests back to the ego. In Buddha’s teaching egoism is a duty. The “one thing needful,” the question “how can you be delivered from suffering,” regulates and determines the whole spiritual diet. (–Perhaps one will here recall that Athenian who also declared war upon pure “scientificality,” to wit, Socrates, who also elevated egoism to the estate of a morality).»

«The things necessary to Buddhism are a very mild climate, customs of great gentleness and liberality, and no militarism; moreover, it must get its start among the higher and better educated classes. Cheerfulness, quiet and the absence of desire are the chief desiderata, and they are attained. Buddhism is not a religion in which perfection is merely an object of aspiration: perfection is actually normal.»

«Buddhism is a religion for peoples in a further state of development, for races that have become kind, gentle and over-spiritualized (Europe is not yet ripe for it): it is a summons ‘that takes them back to peace and cheerfulness, to a careful rationing of the spirit, to a certain hardening of the body. (…) Buddhism is a religion for the closing, over-wearied stages of civilization.»

«Buddhism, I repeat, is a hundred times more austere, more honest, more objective [than Christianity]. It no longer has to justify its pains, its susceptibility to suffering, by interpreting these things in terms of sin–it simply says, as it simply thinks, “I suffer.”»

«Buddhism is in too late a stage of development, too full of positivism, to be shrewd in any such way».

«One now begins to see just what it was that came to an end with the death on the cross: a new and thoroughly original effort to found a Buddhistic peace movement, and so establish happiness on earth–real, not merely promised. For this remains–as I have already pointed out–the essential difference between the two religions of decadence: Buddhism promises nothing, but actually fulfills; Christianity promises everything, but fulfills nothing».

JUDAISM

«Formerly he [God] had only his own people, his “chosen” people. But since then he has gone wandering, like his people themselves, into foreign parts; he has given up settling down quietly anywhere; finally he has come to feel at home everywhere, and is the great cosmopolitan–until now he has the “great majority” on his side, and half the earth. But this god of the “great majority,” this democrat among gods, has not become a proud heathen god: on the contrary, he remains a Jew, he remains a god in a corner, a god of all the dark nooks and crevices, of all the noisesome quarters of the world! . . His earthly kingdom, now as always, is a kingdom of the underworld, a souterrain kingdom, a ghetto kingdom. . . And he himself is so pale, so weak, so decadent . . . Even the palest of the pale are able to master him–messieurs the metaphysicians, those albinos of the intellect. They spun their webs around him for so long that finally he was hypnotized, and began to spin himself, and became another metaphysician. Thereafter he resumed once more his old business of spinning the world out of his inmost being sub specie Spinozae; thereafter he be came ever thinner and paler–became the “ideal,” became “pure spirit,” became “the absolute,” became “the thing-in-itself.” . . . The collapse of a god: he became a “thing-in-itself.”»

«…in primitive Christianity one finds only concepts of a Judaeo–Semitic character (–that of eating and drinking at the last supper belongs to this category–an idea which, like everything else Jewish, has been badly mauled by the church).»

«It is not a “belief” that marks off the Christian; he is distinguished by a different mode of action; he acts differently. He offers no resistance, either by word or in his heart, to those who stand against him. He draws no distinction between strangers and countrymen, Jews and Gentiles (“neighbour,” of course, means fellow-believer, Jew)».

«What the Gospels abolished was the Judaism in the concepts of “sin,” “forgiveness of sin,” “faith,” “salvation through faith”–the whole ecclesiastical dogma of the Jews was denied by the “glad tidings.”»

«…in earlier times, the Jews, to revenge themselves upon their enemies, separated themselves from their God, and placed him on a great height. The One God and the Only Son of God: both were products of resentment…»

«Once more the priestly instinct of the Jew perpetrated the same old master crime against history…»

«Here we are among Jews: this is the first thing to be borne in mind if we are not to lose the thread of the matter. This positive genius for conjuring up a delusion of personal “holiness” unmatched anywhere else, either in books or by men; this elevation of fraud in word and attitude to the level of an art – all this is not an accident due to the chance talents of an individual, or to any violation of nature. The thing responsible is race. The whole of Judaism appears in Christianity as the art of concocting holy lies, and there, after many centuries of earnest Jewish training and hard practice of Jewish technic, the business comes to the stage of mastery. The Christian, that ultima ratio of lying, is the Jew all over again – he is threefold the Jew… The underlying will to make use only of such concepts, symbols and attitudes as fit into priestly practice, the instinctive repudiation of every other mode of thought, and every other method of estimating values and utilities–this is not only tradition, it is inheritance: only as an inheritance is it able to operate with the force of nature.»

«The fact is that the conscious conceit of the chosen here disguises itself as modesty: it is in this way that they, the “community,” the “good and just,” range themselves, once and for always, on one side, the side of “the truth”–and the rest of mankind, “the world,” on the other… In that we observe the most fatal sort of megalomania that the earth has ever seen: little abortions of bigots and liars began to claim exclusive rights in the concepts of “God,” “the truth,” “the light,” “the spirit,” “love,” “wisdom” and “life,” as if these things were synonyms of themselves and thereby they sought to fence themselves off from the “world”; little super-Jews, ripe for some sort of madhouse, turned values upside down in order to meet their notions, just as if the Christian were the meaning, the salt, the standard and even thelast judgment of all the rest… The whole disaster was only made possible by the fact that there already existed in the world a similar megalomania, allied to this one in race, to wit, the Jewish: once a chasm began to yawn between Jews and Judaeo-Christians, the latter had no choice but to employ the self-preservative measures that the Jewish instinct had devised, even against the Jews themselves, whereas the Jews had employed them only against non-Jews. The Christian is simply a Jew of the “reformed” confession.»

«The God that Paul invented for himself, a God who “reduced to absurdity” “the wisdom of this world” (especially the two great enemies of superstition, philology and medicine), is in truth only an indication of Paul’s resolute determination to accomplish that very thing himself: to give one’s own will the name of God, thora – that is essentially Jewish. Paul wants to dispose of the “wisdom of this world”: his enemies are the good philologians and physicians of the Alexandrine school – on them he makes his war.»

«The priests, who have more finesse in such matters, and who well understand the objection that lies against the notion of a conviction, which is to say, of a falsehood that becomes a matter of principle because it serves a purpose, have borrowed from the Jews the shrewd device of sneaking in the concepts, “God,” “the will of God” and “the revelation of God” at this place.»

«Bible (…) merely an evil-smelling mess of Jewish rabbinism and superstition»

«Paul, the Chandala hatred of Rome, of “the world,” in the flesh and inspired by genius–the Jew, the eternal Jew par excellence. . . . What he saw was how, with the aid of the small sectarian Christian movement that stood apart from Judaism, a “world conflagration” might be kindled; how, with the symbol of “God on the cross,” all secret seditions, all the fruits of anarchistic intrigues in the empire, might be amalgamated into one immense power. “Salvation is of the Jews”.»

CHRISTIANITY (PARTICULARLY, PROTESTANTISM)

«What is more harmful than any vice? Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak: Christianity… »

«…the domestic animal, the herd animal, the sick brute-man – the Christian…»

«Nothing is more unhealthy, amid all our unhealthy modernism, than Christian pity.»

«Definition of Protestantism: hemiplegic paralysis of Christianity – and of reason. One need only utter the words “Tubingen School” to get an understanding of what German philosophy is at bottom: a very artful form of theology. (…) The success of Kant is merely a theological success; he was, like Luther and Leibnitz, but one more impediment to German integrity, already far from steady».

«Under Christianity neither morality nor religion has any point of contact with actuality. It offers purely imaginary causes (“God” “soul,” “ego,” “spirit,” “free will” – or even “unfree”), and purely imaginary effects (“sin” “salvation” “grace,” “punishment,” “forgiveness of sins”). Intercourse between imaginary beings (“God,” “spirits,” “souls”); an imaginary natural history (anthropocentric; a total denial of the concept of natural causes); an imaginary psychology (misunderstandings of self, misinterpretations of agreeable or disagreeable general feelings – for example, of the states of the nervus sympathicus with the help of the sign-language of religio-ethical balderdash -, “repentance,” “pangs of conscience,” “temptation by the devil,” “the presence of God”); an imaginary teleology (the “kingdom of God,” “the last judgment,” “eternal life”). This purely fictitious world, greatly to its disadvantage, is to be differentiated from the world of dreams; the later at least reflects reality, whereas the former falsifies it, cheapens it and denies it».

«How can we be so tolerant of the naïveté of Christian theologians as to join in their doctrine that the evolution of the concept of god from “the god of Israel,” the god of a people, to the Christian god, the essence of all goodness, is to be described as progress? (…) The contrary actually stares one in the face.»

«The Christian concept of a god–the god as the patron of the sick, the god as a spinner of cobwebs, the god as a spirit–is one of the most corrupt concepts that has ever been set up in the world: it probably touches low-water mark in the ebbing evolution of the god-type. God degenerated into the contradiction of life.»

«…this pitiful god of Christian monotono-theism!»

«Under Christianity the instincts of the subjugated and the oppressed come to the fore: it is only those who are at the bottom who seek their salvation in it. Here the prevailing pastime, the favourite remedy for boredom is the discussion of sin, self-criticism, the inquisition of conscience; here the emotion produced by power (called “God”) is pumped up (by prayer); here the highest good is regarded as unattainable, as a gift, as “grace.” Here, too, open dealing is lacking; concealment and the darkened room are Christian. Here body is despised and hygiene is denounced as sensual; the church even ranges itself against cleanliness (the first Christian order after the banishment of the Moors closed the public baths, of which there were 270 in Cordova alone) . Christian, too; is a certain cruelty toward one’s self and toward others; hatred of unbelievers; the will to persecute. Sombre and disquieting ideas are in the foreground; the most esteemed states of mind, bearing the most respectable names are epileptoid; the diet is so regulated as to engender morbid symptoms and over-stimulate the nerves. Christian, again, is all deadly enmity to the rulers of the earth, to the “aristocratic” – along with a sort of secret rivalry with them (one resigns one’s “body” to them – one wants only one’s “soul”…). And Christian is all hatred of the intellect, of pride, of courage of freedom, of intellectual libertinage; Christian is all hatred of the senses, of joy in the senses, of joy in general…»

«Christianity aims at mastering beasts of prey; its modus operandi is to make them ill–to make feeble is the Christian recipe for taming, for “civilizing”.»

«Christianity is the formula for exceeding and summing up the subterranean cults of all varieties, that of Osiris, that of the Great Mother, that of Mithras, for instance: in his discernment of this fact the genius of Paul showed itself. His instinct was here so sure that, with reckless violence to the truth, he put the ideas which lent fascination to every sort of Chandala religion into the mouth of the “Saviour” as his own inventions, and not only into the mouth–he made out of him something that even a priest of Mithras could understand… This was his revelation at Damascus: he grasped the fact that he needed the belief in immortality in order to rob “the world” of its value, that the concept of “hell” would master Rome–that the notion of a “beyond” is the death of life. Nihilist and Christian: they rhyme in German, and they do more than rhyme.»

Et cetera: it is the main target of the book.

 

THE GENERAL PRIESTLY TYPE

«Such a priestly syllogism is by no means merely Jewish and Christian; the right to lie and the shrewd dodge of “revelation” belong to the general priestly type – to the priest of the decadence as well as to the priest of pagan times (Pagans are all those who say yes to life, and to whom “God” is a word signifying acquiescence in all things). The “law,” the “will of God,” the “holy book,” and “inspiration” – all these things are merely words for the conditions under which the priest comes to power and with which he maintains his power, – these concepts are to be found at the bottom of all priestly organizations, and of all priestly or priestly-philosophical schemes of governments. The “holy lie” – common alike to Confucius, to the Code of Manu, to Mohammed and to the Christian church – is not even wanting in Plato. “Truth is here”: this means, no matter where it is heard, the priest lies…»

«A book of laws such as the Code of Manu has the same origin as every other good law-book: it epitomizes the experience, the sagacity and the ethical experimentation of long centuries; it brings things to a conclusion; it no longer creates. The prerequisite to a codification of this sort is recognition of the fact that the means which establish the authority of a slowly and painfully attained truth are fundamentally different from those which one would make use of to prove it. A law-book never recites the utility, the grounds, the casuistical antecedents of a law: for if it did so it would lose the imperative tone, the “thou shalt,” on which obedience is based. The problem lies exactly here. At a certain point in the evolution of a people, the class within it of the greatest insight, which is to say, the greatest hindsight and foresight, declares that the series of experiences determining how all shall live–or can live–has come to an end. The object now is to reap as rich and as complete a harvest as possible from the days of experiment and hard experience. In consequence, the thing that is to be avoided above everything is further experimentation – the continuation of the state in which values are fluent, and are tested, chosen and criticized ad infnitum. Against this a double wall is set up: on the one hand, revelation, which is the assumption that the reasons lying behind the laws are not of human origin, that they were not sought out and found by a slow process and after many errors, but that they are of divine ancestry, and came into being complete, perfect, without a history, as a free gift, a miracle…; and on the other hand, tradition, which is the assumption that the law has stood unchanged from time immemorial, and that it is impious and a crime against one’s forefathers to bring it into question. The authority of the law is thus grounded on the thesis: God gave it, and the fathers lived it. The higher motive of such procedure lies in the design to distract consciousness, step by step, from its concern with notions of right living (that is to say, those that have been proved to be right by wide and carefully considered experience), so that instinct attains to a perfect automatism – a primary necessity to every sort of mastery, to every sort of perfection in the art of life. To draw up such a law-book as Manu’s means to lay before a people the possibility of future mastery, of attainable perfection – it permits them to aspire to the highest reaches of the art of life. To that end the thing must be made unconscious: that is the aim of every holy lie».

«At the opening of the Bible there is the whole psychology of the priest.–The priest knows of only one great danger: that is science–the sound comprehension of cause and effect. But science flourishes, on the whole, only under favourable conditions–a man must have time, he must have an overflowing intellect, in order to “know.” . . .”Therefore, man must be made unhappy,”–this has been, in all ages, the logic of the priest.–It is easy to see just what, by this logic, was the first thing to come into the world :–”sin.” . . . The concept of guilt and punishment, the whole “moral order of the world,” was set up against science–against the deliverance of man from priests. . . . Man must not look outward; he must look inward. He must not look at things shrewdly and cautiously, to learn about them; he must not look at all; he must suffer . . . And he must suffer so much that he is always in need of the priest.–Away with physicians! What is needed is a Saviour.–The concept of guilt and punishment, including the doctrines of “grace,” of “salvation,” of “forgiveness”–lies through and through, and absolutely without psychological reality–were devised to destroy man’s sense of causality: they are an attack upon the concept of cause and effect !–And not an attack with the fist, with the knife, with honesty in hate and love! On the contrary, one inspired by the most cowardly, the most crafty, the most ignoble of instincts! An attack of priests! An attack of parasites! The vampirism of pale, subterranean leeches! . . . When the natural consequences of an act are no longer “natural,” but are regarded as produced by the ghostly creations of superstition–by “God,” by “spirits,” by “souls”–and reckoned as merely “moral” consequences, as rewards, as punishments, as hints, as lessons, then the whole ground-work of knowledge is destroyed–then the greatest of crimes against humanity has been perpetrated.–I repeat that sin, man’s self-desecration par excellence, was invented in order to make science, culture, and every elevation and ennobling of man impossible; the priest rules through the invention of sin».

The 4th way

«No “faith” is required on the fourth way; on the contrary, faith of any kind is opposed to the fourth way.» – Gurdjieff

 

Surpassing the way of the Fakir (Sufi tradition), the way of the Yogi (Sikh and Hindu tradition) and the way of the Monk (Christian and Buddhist traditions), Gurdjieff conceived the Fourth Way.

According to Gurdjieff:
- “fakir” denotes a physical path of development;
- “yogi” is a path of mental development;
- “monk” follows a path of emotional development.

The fakir undergoes extreme physical torture and reconditioning to suppress his body to his will, but has no outlet for the emotional and intellectual.

The yogi studies and ponders the mysteries of life, but has no emotional or physical expression.

The monk possesses great faith and gives himself to his emotional commitment to God, but suffers pains of the body and intellectual starvation.

Names for the Gurdjieffian system were the Fourth Way or the Way of the Sly or Cunning Man.

In the Fourth Way, people do not need to suffer physical, emotional or intellectual tortures, but merely start their own life experiences. They work on themselves as they are, trying to harmonize all paths and using every cunning trick they know to keep themselves “awake.”

Though, Gurjjieff might have been unfair to Yoga and have not seen that, originally, Yogi path was already the fourth, as stated in the Bhagavad Gita, chapter 6 verse 46:

«Greater is the Yogi than body disciplining ascetics, greater even than the followers of wisdom’s path. Greater than the path of action. Be thou Arjuna a Yogi!»

Comparative Aesthetics of War

Tesla's Tower (Wardenclyffe), related to the "Death Ray"

«… twelve stations: eight of them, each of the same construction like at Wardenclyffe (…)»

«A dozen such plants, located at strategic points along the coast, according to Mr. Tesla, would be enough to defend the country against all aerial attack».

«For this death-beam, he explained, could be generated only from large, stationary and immovable power plants, stationed in the manner of old-time forts at various strategic distances from each country’s border. They could not be moved for the purposes of attack. “An exception, however, he added, must be made in the case of battleships, which, he said, would be able to equip themselves with smaller plants for generating the death-beam, with enough power to destroy any airplane approaching for attack from the air.”»

«“The beam of force itself, as Dr. Tesla described it, is a concentrated current—it need be no thicker than a pencil—of microscopic particles moving at several hundred times the speed of artillery projectiles. The machine into which Dr. Tesla combines his four devices is, in reality, a sort of an electrical gun. “As Dr. Tesla explained it, the tremendous speed of the particles will give them their destruction-dealing qualities. All but the thickest armored surfaces confronting them would be melted through in an instant (…)».

«My invention requires a large plant, but once it is established it will be possible to destroy anything, men or machines, approaching within a radius of 200 miles. It will, so to speak, provide a wall of power offering an insuperable obstacle against any effective aggression».

Source

 

Medusa

An adult jellyfish is a medusa (plural: medusae). The Japanese call them echizen kurage. There are thousands of different species of medusae, with more species discovered all of the time. Medusae have been around for more than 650 million years, due to its resistance in inhospitable ambiental conditions (polluted waters, very cold or deep waters, up to 11.000 metres) and because they are equipped with a powerful toxin. 

Jellyfish belong to the phylum Cnidaria, (from the Greek word for “stinging nettle”) and the class Scyphozoa (from the Greek word for “cup”, referring to the jellyfish’s body shape). The jellyfish’s cnidarian relatives include corals, sea anemones and the Portuguese man-o’-war. All cnidarians have a mouth in the center of their bodies, surrounded by tentacles.

These plants and animals either swim and float in the water (box jellyfish) or let themselves to be carried by currents and winds which propel their horizontal movements. Although they live mainly in the ocean, they aren’t actually fish: they’re plankton. Some plankton are microscopic, single-celled organisms, while others are several feet long. These organisms are about 98 percent water. If a jellyfish washes up on the beach, it will mostly disappear as the water evaporates.

Jellyfish can range in size from less than an inch to nearly 7 feet long, with tentacles up to 100 feet long. Most are transparent and bell-shaped. Their bodies have radial symmetry, which means that the body parts extend from a central point like the spokes on a wheel. If you cut a jellyfish in half at any point, you’ll always get equal halves.

Jellyfish don’t have bones, a brain or a heart, though, they are very sensitive: they detect colours, vibrations, smells, and orient themselves through the multiple sensory nerves which cover their tentacles.

The jellyfish’s body generally comprises these basic parts:
•The membrane formed by three layers: the epidermis, which protects the inner organs; the mesoglea, or middle jelly, between the epidermis and gastrodermis; the gastrodermis, which is the inner layer;
•The gastrovascular cavity, which functions as a gullet, stomach, and intestine all in one;
•An orifice that functions as mouth, reproductive organ, and anus;
•Tentacles that line the edge of the body.

Besides this formidable array of genetic equipment to help surviving, the species named box jellyfish also has a total of 24 eyes with moveable pupils giving them 360-degree visibility. Probably, this feature, being known by the Greeks, inspired the mythological legend of Medusa, a creature with snakes for hair who could turn humans to stone with a glance.  

The box jellyfish relies on four systems operating competitively in the search for food: eyes, tentacles, sensory nerves, and about 4.000.000.000 very dangerous venomous fibres. They have cells called cnidocytes, which contain nematocysts, and located on their tentacles, mainly. Whenever a prey comes in contact with cnidocilia (structures of the cnidocytes), hundreds to thousands of cnidae (filaments of the nematocysts) are ejected into the prey ‘s direction; nematocysts’ cnidae inoculate a poisonous or allergenic mixture into the prey ‘s body; the prey, if alive, die by osmotic shock, paralysis or anaphylactic shock and is then brought to the mouth with tentacles or with oral arms. The box jellyfish is so packed with venom that the briefest of touches – even after it is dead – can bring agonising death within 180 seconds. There is no creature on earth that can dispatch a human being so easily or so quickly. Despite decades of study, scientists have been unable to unravel the mysteries of its complex venom but it is known to contain 20 different proteins.

They swim towards land because it is easier to kill their main prey – fish – in shallow water off the coast which puts them on a dangerous and potentially fatal collision course with unwary swimmers.

Scientists say their populations are exploding. Trying to kill them had unleashed a breeding explosion because they are genetically programmed to ensure their survival by producing more offspring than normal when under attack. If they feel threatened or in the eminence of dying, they launch in the water their millions of eggs. After the male releases its sperm through its orifice into the water, the sperm swim into the female’s orifice and fertilize the eggs.

In an experiment off the north Australia coast small netted pools were created and kept the large box jellyfish out, but people were still being stung. They eventually discovered the tiny transparent Irukandji – almost invisible in daylight – was slipping through the holes in the nets. They were even responsible for temporarily shutting a nuclear power plant after they lodged in its cooling system.

The only deterrents so far found are a colour – red – and a predator that is immunized against the venom, the giant turtle (threatened by the man). The jellyfish plough through white-coloured poles in the water, swim round black poles, but they stayed as far away as they could from red poles.

Free energy by perpetual motion

«…quando Kant marcar que o pensamento está ameaçado, não tanto pelo erro, mas por ilusões inevitáveis que vêm de dentro da razão, como de uma zona ártica interior, onde a agulha de qualquer bússola enlouquece, é uma reorientação de todo o pensamento que se torna necessária, ao mesmo tempo que nele se insinua um certo delírio de direito»

- Deleuze & Guattari, “O que é a Filosofia?”.

«…I will write in a simple style about things entirely unknown to the ordinary individual. Nevertheless I will speak only of the manifest properties of the lodestone, because this tract will form part of a work on the construction of philosophical instruments. The disclosing of the hidden properties of this stone is like the art of the sculptor by which he brings figures and seals into existence».

- Petrus Peregrinus, “Epistola de Magnete”, 1269.

 

FUELESS GENERATORS OF COSMIC ENERGY

The earliest designs of a perpetual motion machine dates back to 1150, by an Indian mathematician-astronomer, Bhaskara II. He described a wheel that he claimed would run forever.

A French scholar, Petrus Peregrinus, created one of the earliest magnetic perpetual motion machines in 1269 A.D.

Perpetual motion machine. From a 14th century handcopy of Petrus Peregrinus de Maricourt's "Epistola de magnete" (1269)

Perpetual motion is when a device or mechanism continually moves without stopping and without any third party assistance. The magnets cause this never ending motion with the natural charge they hold.

There are two types of perpetuum mobile:

• Perpetua mobilia of the first kind are those devices that violate the first law of thermodynamics, the principle of conservation of energy, creating energy out of nothing. Most attempts fall into this category.
• Perpetua mobilia of the second kind are devices that violate the second law of thermodynamics. Even though they obey the principle of conservation of energy, they attempt extraction of work from a single heat reservoir, violating the principle of no entropy decrease in an isolated macroscopic thermodynamic system.

Many say that devices which violate the first and second laws of thermodynamics won’t work. They’re lying and inventors like Nikola Tesla have proven it.

After returning from Colorado Springs where he had carried out an intensive series of experiments from June 1899 until January of 1900, Nikola Tesla wrote what he considered his most important article, entitled “The Problem of Increasing Human Energy Through the Use of the Sun” and published by his friend Robert Johnson in The Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine of June 1900, in which he describes a self-activating machine that would draw power from the ambient medium, a fuelless generator.

The exact title of the chapter where he discusses this device is worth giving in its entirety:

«A DEPARTURE FROM KNOWN METHODS – POSSIBILITY OF A “SELF ACTING” ENGINE OR MACHINE, INANIMATE, YET CAPABLE, LIKE A LIVING BEING, OF DERIVING ENERGY FROM THE MEDIUM – THE IDEAL WAY OF OBTAINING MOTIVE POWER

Tesla stated he first started thinking about the idea when he read a statement by Lord Kelvin who said it was impossible to build a mechanism capable of abstracting heat from the surrounding medium and to operate by that heat. As a thought experiment Tesla envisioned a very long bundle of metal rods, extending from the earth to outer space. The earth is warmer than outer space so heat would be conducted up the bars along with an electric current. Then, all that would be needed is a very long power cord to connect the two ends of the metal bars to a motor. The motor would continue running until the earth was cooled to the temperature of outer space. “This would be an inanimate engine which, to all evidence, would be cooling a portion of the medium below the temperature of the surrounding, and operating by the heat abstracted”, that is, it would produce energy directly from the environment without “the consumption of any material”.»

He wrote that he first started thinking about deriving energy directly from the environment when he was in Paris during 1883, but that he was unable to do much with the idea for several years due to the commercial introduction of his alternating current generators and motors. It was not «until 1889 when I again took up the idea of the self-acting machine».

Tesla stated later to the press:

«This new power for the driving of the world’s machinery will be derived from the energy which operates the universe, the cosmic energy, whose central source for the earth is the sun and which is everywhere present in unlimited quantities» – “Device to Harness Cosmic Energy Claimed by Tesla”, New York American, November 1st, 1933.

Tesla’s intent was to condense the energy trapped between the earth and its upper atmosphere and to turn it into an electric current. He pictured the sun as an immense ball of electricity, positively charged with a potential of some 200 billion volts. The earth, on the other hand, is charged with negative electricity. The tremendous electrical force between these two bodies constituted, at least in part, what he called cosmic energy. It varied from night to day and from season to season but it is always present.

The positive particles are stopped at the ionosphere and between it and the negative charges in the ground, a distance of 60 miles, there is a large difference of voltage – something on the order of 360,000 volts. With the gases of the atmosphere acting as an insulator between these two opposite stores of electrical charges, the region between the ground and the edge of space traps a great deal of energy. Despite the large size of the planet, it is electrically like a capacitor which keeps positive and negative charges apart by using a non-conducting material as an insulator.

ELIMINATE REACTION THROUGH RHYTHM

How a generator, even in theory, could be capable of producing a self-sustaining current? This has been clearly explained by Walter M. Elsasser in a Scientific American article (May 1958) titled “The Earth as a Dynamo”. How currents could be built up and perpetuated to maintain the earth’s magnetic field? Elsasser propose three options in the dynamo model that would explain the earth’s persistent magnetism.

«If we had a material that could conduct electricity a thousand times better than copper, the system would indeed yield a self-sustaining current. We could also make it work by spinning the disk very fast… a third way we could make such a dynamo self-sustaining … is to increase the size of the system: theory says that the bigger we make such a dynamo, the better it will function. If we could build a coil-and-disk apparatus of this kind of scale of many miles, we would have no difficulty in making the currents self-sustaining».

Tesla did not have a material a thousand times more conductive than copper, neither was he able to spin a disk at the ultra-high speeds needed to produce such a current, nor did he plan on using a piece of rotating metal several miles in diameter.

What he did was to use energy that is usually wasted in a generator and turn it into a source of power.

Tesla’ did some modifications on the Faraday’s dynamo design:

He did so in order to eliminate one of the biggest problems in any physical system: the reaction to every action. It is the reaction that works to cancel out whatever effort goes into causing the original action. Instead of the opposite reaction slowing down the system that created it, the reaction adds energy to the system.

Tesla already had described the relation between a motor and a stator as being similar to the production of rhythm (point and counterpoint corresponding to movement and inertia):

«The existence of movement unavoidably implies a body which is being moved and a force which is moving it. Hence, wherever there is life, there is a mass moved by a force. All mass possesses inertia, all force tends to persist. Owing to this universal property and condition, a body, be it at rest or in motion, tends to remain in the same state, and a force, manifesting itself anywhere and through whatever cause, produces an equivalent opposing force, and as an absolute necessity of this it follows that every movement in nature must be rhythmical» – “The Problem of Increasing Human Energy Through the Use of the Sun“, The Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine, June 1900.

As Edward S. Casey and Peter Z. Grossman, authors of “Introduction To Energy”, pointed out, the principles of a free magnetic generator are: «As the magnetic poles turn on the rotor past the coils embedded in the stator, the A.C. voltage in each coil alternates in polarity, positive and negative» (page 50).

So, Tesla created an unipolar dynamo, working simultaneously as a motor and as a magnetic generator (dynamo or electromagnetic inductor), then, self-sustaining, that is, capable of generating a current after being disconnected from an outside source of movement like falling water or steam. Rotation is started by, say, a motor powered by line current. Both a generator and a motor disk are mounted in the magnetic enclosure. As the disks gain speed, current is produced which, in turn, reinforces the magnets, which cause more current to be generated. That current is, likely, first directed to the motor disk which increases the speed of the system. At a certain point, the speed of the two disks is great enough that the magnetic field created by the current has the strength to keep the dynamo-motor going by itself.

For further details about how Tesla improved Faraday’s dynamo, please read this article.

 

“MORE GEOMETRICO”

What process keep the unipolar dynamo operating after the powered start-up? Two features of device’s geometry are significant.

First, when a resistive load, like a light bulb is added to the circuit, it lowers the voltage at the center of the disk. This lower voltage at the center means that there is a greater difference in voltage between the center and the outside edge of the disk than there was before the light bulb was added. As the difference between the center and the outside increases, the dynamo works harder and makes more current.

Second, yet more important, the dynamo takes either very little, or no energy to keep going because the current coming off the generator is doing double duty. The current makes the bulb glow, but on its way from the generator to the filament in the bulb, it travels a path that adds to the momentum of the dynamo and, therefore, consumes energy at a very low rate. The process continues , it would seem, until heat losses in the filament equal the rotational energy of the generator’s flywheel.

Tesla unipolar dynamo comes to be a better electrical conductor, not that a new material is used, but a new geometry is applied so that the current does not create its own opposing forces. It appears to be an ingenious feature of engineering that takes one of the basic principles of nature, an equal and opposite action for every action, and turns it, by the use of a novel circuit geometry, into a reaction that is additive to the original action.

Tesla, however, was not satisfied with his mechanical self-sustaining generator. The dynamo would provide the energy to run a single machine, but his vision was to light cities and in the 1900 Century magazine article he elaborated on the theory of such a machine.

Imagine, he suggested, an enclosed cylinder or tube (T in the figure below) with a small hole (O) in it near the bottom. Let us say that this cylinder, he added, contains very little energy (A) but that it is placed in an environment that has a lot of energy (B). In this case, energy would flow from the outside environment, the high energy source, through the small opening at the bottom of the cylinder, and into the cylinder where there is less energy. Also suppose that as the energy passing into the cylinder is converted into another form of energy as, for example, heat is converted into mechanical energy in a steam engine. If it were possible to artificially produce such a “sink” for the energy of the ambient medium then “we should be enabled to get at any point of the globe a continuous supply of energy, day and night”.

On the surface of the earth we are at a high energy level and can imagine ourselves at the bottom of a lake with the water surrounding us equal to the energy in the surrounding medium. If a “sink” for the energy is to be created in the cylinder, it is necessary to replace the water that would flow into the tank with something much lighter than water. This could be done by pumping the water out of the cylinder, but when the water flowed back in, we would only be able to perform the same amount of work with the inflowing water as we did when it was first pumped out. “Consequently nothing would be gained in this double operation of first raising the water and then letting it fall down”. Energy, though, can be converted into different forms as it passes from a higher to a lower state.

He said, “assume that the water, in its passage into the tank, is converted into something else, which may be taken out of it without using any, or by using very little power”. For example, if the energy of the ambient medium is taken to be the water, oxygen and hydrogen making up the water are the other forms of energy into which it could change as it entered the cylinder. Corresponding to this ideal case, all the water flowing into the tank would be decomposed into oxygen and hydrogen… and the result would be that the water would continually flow in, and yet the tank would remain entirely empty, the gases formed escaping. We would thus produce, by expending initially a certain amount of work to create a sink for…the water to flow in, a condition enabling us to get any amount of energy without further effort.

 

ECONOMICAL OPPOSED REACTION

With his prominent position in the world of science at the time, it is curious why Tesla’s invention was not commercialized or at least publicized more. Economics, not science, appear to have been the main factor. The adoption of alternating current was opposed by powerful financiers of the period.

When Tesla tried to create a light bulb that would last forever or an wireless energy source that we could use for free without connecting to regular power supplies, he was put out of commission.

Michael Pupin, another leading electrical researcher at the turn of the century, noted in his autobiography:

«…captains of industry…were afraid that they would have to scrap some of their direct current apparatus and the plants for manufacturing it, if the alternating current system received any support … ignorance and false notions prevailed in the early nineties, because the captains of industry paid small attention to highly trained scientists». – Michael Pupin, From Immigrant to Inventor, Charles Scribner’s Sons, N.Y., pp. 285-286, 1930.

Tesla’s patents for electrical generators and motors were granted in the late 1880′s. During the 1890′s the large electric power industry, in the form of Westinghouse and General Electric, came into being. With tens of millions of dollars invested in plants and equipment, the industry was not about to abandon a very profitable ten year old technology for yet another new one.

Tesla saw that profits could be made from the self-acting generator, but somewhere along the line he had pointed out to him the negative impact the device would have. At the end of the section in Century where he described his new generator he wrote:

«I worked for a long time fully convinced that the practical realization of the method of obtaining energy from the sun would be of incalculable industrial value, but the continued study of the subject revealed the fact that while it will be commercially profitable if my expectations are well founded, it will not be so to an extraordinary degree» .

Years later, in the Philadelphia Public Ledger of November 2nd of 1933, is an interview with Tesla talking about his fuelless generator, under the headline “Tesla ‘Harnesses’ Cosmic Energy”. In it, he was “Asked whether the sudden introduction of his principle would upset the present economic system, Dr. Tesla replied, ‘It is badly upset already.’ He added that now as never before was the time ripe for the development of new resources”.

Two days after Tesla’s death, representatives of the United States’ Alien Property Custodian Office went to his room at the New Yorker Hotel and seized his possessions. After the FBI was contacted by the War Department, his papers were declared to be top secret. The personal effects were sequestered on the advice of presidential advisers; J. Edgar Hoover declared the case most secret, because of the nature of Tesla’s inventions and patents. One document stated that “[he] is reported to have some 80 trunks in different places containing transcripts and plans having to do with his experiments [...]“. Tesla’s family and the Yugoslav embassy struggled with the American authorities to gain these items after his death due to the potential significance of some of his research. Eventually, his nephew, Mr. Sava Kosanović won possession of some of the materials, which are now housed in the Nikola Tesla Museum.

It has been nearly a century since Nikola Tesla claimed a radically new method for producing electricity.

Why has this simple energy technology is not being developed? Because big energy companies would lose lots of money if we start using free energy.

But, as the need for the development of new resources is greater now than at the end of the last century, perhaps these overlooked inventions will make Tesla’s vision of «increasing human energy through the use of the sun’s energy» become a reality.

 

BE YOURSELF THE INVENTOR

To create a magnetic generator device, just follow the instructions:

Step 1
Set a wheel, that will be the inner wheel, on a titling axis. The wheel itself should be of something that is non-conductive and can spin.

Step 2
Attach magnets of some kind (ceramic bar magnets work well) equally around the rim of this wheel. Make sure that each of the magnets faces out for the same polarity.

Step 3
Place a fixed outer ring around the inner ring. Make sure that this ring is also made of something non-conductive as you build a perpetual magnet generator.

Step 4
Line the outer, fixed ring of the perpetual magnetic generator, with magnets that face in.

Step 5
Make the inner ring of the perpetual magnetic generator you have built spin. As the inner wheel reaches the utmost portion of its revolution, the magnets on the outer ring should make the ring continue spinning until the next magnets set of opposing magnets face each other again.

Step 6
Allow the inner ring of the perpetual magnet generator spin until the speed increases and energy is generated.

Edward Leedskalnin's magnetic generator

As figuras de Chladni

«Um estímulo nervoso, primeiramente transposto em uma imagem! Primeira metáfora. A imagem, por sua vez, modelada em um som! Segunda metáfora. E, a cada vez, completa mudança de esfera, passagem para uma esfera inteiramente outra e nova. Pense-se num homem que seja totalmente surdo e nunca tenha tido uma sensação do som e da música: do mesmo modo que ele, porventura, vê com espanto as figuras de Chladni desenhadas na areia, encontra as suas causas na vibração das cordas e jurará então que há-de saber o que os homens denominam “som”, assim também acontece a todos nós com a linguagem. Acreditamos saber algo das coisas mesmas se falamos de árvores, cores, neve e flores, e, no entanto, não possuimos nada mais do que metáforas das coisas, que de nenhum modo correspondem às entidades de origem. Assim como o som convertido em figura na areia, assim se comporta o enigmático X da coisa em si, uma vez como estímulo nervoso, em seguida como imagem, enfim como som. Em todo caso, portanto, não é logicamente que ocorre a génese da linguagem, e o material inteiro no qual e com o qual mais tarde o homem da verdade, o pesquisador, o filósofo, trabalha e constrói, provém, se não da Cucolândia das Nuvens, em todo caso não da essência das coisas».

- Nietzsche, “Über Wahrheit und Lüge im aussermoralischen Sinn”, in “Werke” (1980, vol. III:310).

Apesar da banalização das consequências perniciosas do “stress”, ainda não nos apercebemos devidamente da amplitude e repercussão dos efeitos das vibrações sonoras sobre a matéria, em particular, sobre corpos constituídos em 80% por água e, logo, que se comportam como os plasmas na propagação das ondas: desde os apitos de abertura e fecho de portas nos transportes públicos, até à passagem dos produtos de supermercados pelas caixas registadoras, sem esquecer as ruidosas máquinas de limpeza e jardinagem dos funcionários camarários, e ainda as grávidas que bombardeiam os seus girinos com toques de telemóveis, os professores permanentemente torpedeados pelo clamor dos alunos, os jovens tímpanos sempre debaixo do tiroteio de uns “headphones”, os órgãos que expomos deliberadamente a exames de ressonância magnética, etc.

Collin Cunningham (2009). Papa de água e farinha sob a influência de vibração sinusoidal.

São conhecidas as experiências de Nikola Tesla com osciladores electromecânicos de ressonância magnética que, à época, causaram pânico sísmico, e o poder das vibrações que provocaram o colapso de pontes (Tacoma Narrows Bridge, entre outras).

De facto, mais poderosa do que todas as poluições visíveis, há uma invisível: a poluição vibracional. Talvez seja isso o que vulgarmente chamamos de “stress”, vibrações de alta frequência. Trata-se afinal de conhecer pela prática o espectro electromagnético, no sentido de optimizar o uso que dele fazemos.

Nikola Tesla e Ivan Illich sabiam por experiência que a zona do espectro ocupada por ondas amplas de menor frequência e energia (ondas-rádio, etc.) eram mais favoráveis à saúde humana do que a zona no extremo oposto ocupada por ondas de menor amplitude e máxima frequência e energia (a partir dos raios UV, raios X, radiação ionizante, etc.). Por isso, ambos advogavam que energias mais baixas ou “soft-energies” eram mais salutares: less is more.

Ivan Illich em “Energy and Equity”: «high quanta of energy degrade social relations just as inevitably as they destroy the physical milieu».

Por seu lado, Tesla denunciará todos os usos quotidianos que destroem tempo de vida, por excesso de estímulo: «Whisky, wine, tea coffee, tobacco, and other such stimulants are responsible for the shortening of the lives of many, and ought to be used with moderation. (…) Gambling, business rush, and excitement, particularly on the exchanges, are causes of much mass reduction (…). It is certainly preferable to raise vegetables, and I think, therefore, that vegetarianism is a commendable departure from the established barbarous habit.  That we can subsist on plant food and perform our work even to advantage is not a theory, but a well-demonstrated fact.  Many races living almost exclusively on vegetables are of superior physique and strength. (…) Suppose that an extremely low temperature could be maintained by some process in a given space; the surrounding medium would then be compelled to give off heat, which could be converted into mechanical or other form of energy, and utilized.  By realizing such a plan, we should be enabled to get at any point of the globe a continuous supply of energy, day and night. (…) Having recognized this truth, I began to devise means for carrying out my idea, and, after long thought, I finally conceived a combination of apparatus which should make possible the obtaining of power from the medium by a process of continuous cooling of atmospheric air.  This apparatus, by continually transforming heat into mechanical work, tended to become colder and colder, and if it only were practicable to reach a very low temperature in this manner, then a sink for the heat could be produced, and energy could be derived from the medium. (…) Thus, a mass which resists the force at first, once set in movement, adds to the energy.» (“The Problem of Increasing Human Energy“, Century Illustrated Magazine, June 1900).

Outro excerto de Tesla: «I work every hour I am awake but not with a feverish tempo. Although I live in the midst of the hustle and bustle of New York, I do not time my scientific experiments to the hectic, jazz rhythm of the hysterical metropolis» (“Radio power will revolutionize the world” in Modern Mechanics and Inventions, July 1934).

Pelo exposto, Tesla prognosticava que o que viria a impossibilitar a vida na Terra não seria o arrefecimento do Sol, mas antes altas energias (do tipo da energia nuclear):  «[Dr. Tesla] disprove the present theory of the high physicists that the sun is destined to burn itself out until it is a cold cinder floating in space. Dr. Tesla stated that he is able to show that all the suns in the universe are constantly growing in mass and heat, so that the ultimate fate of each is explosion. (…) He pointed out that his theory means a future for the earth as different from the general belief as the future of the sun. It is generally held that life on the earth will cease when the sun grows so cold that the earth temperature drops to a point where life can no longer be supported. Dr. Tesla prophesies that life on the earth will cease because the planet will grow too warm to support life, and he believes that life will then begin on outer planets now too cold.» (Source).

Depois de se referir ao carácter metafórico da linguagem convencional, Nietzsche menciona as “figuras de Chladni” como um possível meio de convencer um surdo sobre a “realidade” do som.

Chladni compunha padrões na areia fina que cobria uma placa rígida de metal, fazendo esta vibrar sonoramente, ao friccionar a sua borda com um arco de violino ou um pedaço de gelo.

Quanto mais elevada fosse a frequência, mais complexas se tornariam as formas produzidas, muito similares a mandalas, azulejos árabes, rosetas de vitrais de igreja, e desenhos das plantações de cereais.

Conforme a placa fosse circular ou quadrangular, os nodos de oscilação (onde a vibração é mínima ou nula) registados pela areia também variavam.

   

Ilustrações de Ernst Chladni, “Die Akustic” (1802)

  

Estes padrões são comparáveis às formas estruturais desenvolvidas pelos seres unicelulares e pelos cristais.

A Terra é uma imensa placa de Chladni onde se produz um labirinto por ressonância magnética, mediante a fricção das diversas limalhas de ferro (Fe da hemoglobina sanguínea) imantizadas que nós somos. A Lua, pedaço de gelo roçando a borda terrestre, gera ondas, vibrações, marés.

Masaru Emoto (n. 22/7/1943), fotógrafo e autor japonês, executou experiências com a água a determinada temperatura, submetendo-a à influência vibratória de diferentes palavras e pensamentos humanos. Segundo ele, as moléculas de água comportam-se diversamente, como atestam as suas fotografias microscópicas.

Cristal de água exposto às palavras ”Amor e Gratidão”

 

Aqueles que acusam Masaru Emoto de pseudo-ciência, não estão por certo familiarizados com os experimentos do físico e matemático Rugero Santilli sobre a “sensibilidade” especial da água em relação à ressonância electromagnética, reorganizando-se em magnéculas (moléculas que se ligam segundo os campos magnéticos emergentes da polarização toroidal das suas órbitas electrónicas).

Teseu e Ariadne (ou o ‘perpetuum mobile’ de Tesla)

«A DEPARTURE FROM KNOWN METHODS – POSSIBILITY OF A “SELF ACTING” ENGINE OR MACHINE, INANIMATE, YET CAPABLE, LIKE AN LIVING BEING, OF DERIVING ENERGY FROM THE MEDIUM – THE IDEAL WAY OF OBTAINING MOTIVE POWER»

- Nikola Tesla, “The Problem of Increasing Human Energy Through the Use of the Sun”, published in The Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine of June 1900.

Tesla read a statement by Lord Kelvin who said it was impossible to build a mechanism capable of abstracting heat from the surrounding medium and to operate by that heat.

As a thought experiment, Tesla envisioned a very long bundle of metal rods, extending from the earth to outer space.

The earth is warmer than outer space so heat would be conducted up the bars along with an electric current.

Then, all that would be needed is a very long power cord to connect the two ends of the metal bars to a motor.

The motor would continue running until the earth was cooled to the temperature of outer space.

I think Tesla was describing something he knew very well rather than inventing something really new.

Remarkably, even that denotes the vision of a genius.

More about it