"The service (task) of truth ought to be, our objectivity, our method, our calm, cautious and distrustful manner were altogether despicable.” [FNWP34]
006.30 What is Objectivity at individuality level ## the doctrine of objectivity does not differentiate object of attention / observation of object created from the Real Thing; Show that it is the same thing, since RT is APPEARANCE/ OBJECT when observed, to observe is the USE, the service of truth ought to be, our objectivity, our method, our calm, cautious and distrustful manner were altogether despicable.” [FNWP34] Commentary: Nietzsche, however, does not define objectivity as he understands it. From the answers to Artaud's questionings about thinking mechanism [GRPAPS], we have: by use of …show more content…
From the answers to Artaud's questionings about thinking mechanism [GRPAPS], we have: by use of Reality, yet this use be only contemplative, man made objects, or RT + USE = OBJECT. In another moment, the Real Thing and the object already made are signs of themselves for eliciting the remembrance of the object to be reproduced. The Need, Desire, Will of the object in his want are inner signs for eliciting the process RT + USE = OBJECT. Because a Real Thing can derive many objects, this OBJECT determined by this USE is a point of view (PV) about a Real Thing. When an object (amulet) is added to OBJECT 1 (RT + USE) and to OBJECT 2 (PRODUCT OF RT + USE) this amulet is sign that elicinting the remembrance of OBJECT and of the process of its fabrication (RT + USE). In sequence, this amulet will be a word or sequence of words. Man contacts with Reality only by fabrication of OBJECTS. The universality of OBJECTS is given by the probability of the process be repeated by other man; at levels of primary needs in a moment there are many …show more content…
the service of truth ought to be, our objectivity, our method, our calm, cautious and distrustful manner were altogether despicable.” [FNWP34] Commentary: Nietzsche, however, does not defines objectivity as he understandS it. From the answers to Artaud's questionings about thinking mechanism [GRPAPS], we have: by use of Reality, yet this use be only contemplative, man does objects, or RT + USE = OBJECT. In another moment, the Real Thing and the object already made are signs of themselves to elicit the remembrance of the object to be reproduced. The Need, Desire, Will of the object in his want are inner signs to elicit the process RT + USE = OBJECT. Because a Real Thing can derivate many object, this OBJECT determined by this USE is a point of view (PV) about Real Thing. When a object (amulet) is added to OBJECT 1 (RT + USE) and to OBJECT 2 (PRODUCT OF RT + USE) this amulet is sign to elicits the remembrance of OBJECT and of the process of its fabrication (RT + USE). In sequence, this amulet will be a word or sequence of words. Man contacts with Reality only by fabrication of OBJECTS. The universality of OBJECTS is given by the probability of the process be repeated by other man; at levels of basic necessities in a moment there are many OBJECTS of
006.30 What is Objectivity at individuality level ## the doctrine of objectivity does not differentiate object of attention / observation of object created from the Real Thing; Show that it is the same thing, since RT is APPEARANCE/ OBJECT when observed, to observe is the USE, the service of truth ought to be, our objectivity, our method, our calm, cautious and distrustful manner were altogether despicable.” [FNWP34] Commentary: Nietzsche, however, does not define objectivity as he understands it. From the answers to Artaud's questionings about thinking mechanism [GRPAPS], we have: by use of …show more content…
From the answers to Artaud's questionings about thinking mechanism [GRPAPS], we have: by use of Reality, yet this use be only contemplative, man made objects, or RT + USE = OBJECT. In another moment, the Real Thing and the object already made are signs of themselves for eliciting the remembrance of the object to be reproduced. The Need, Desire, Will of the object in his want are inner signs for eliciting the process RT + USE = OBJECT. Because a Real Thing can derive many objects, this OBJECT determined by this USE is a point of view (PV) about a Real Thing. When an object (amulet) is added to OBJECT 1 (RT + USE) and to OBJECT 2 (PRODUCT OF RT + USE) this amulet is sign that elicinting the remembrance of OBJECT and of the process of its fabrication (RT + USE). In sequence, this amulet will be a word or sequence of words. Man contacts with Reality only by fabrication of OBJECTS. The universality of OBJECTS is given by the probability of the process be repeated by other man; at levels of primary needs in a moment there are many …show more content…
the service of truth ought to be, our objectivity, our method, our calm, cautious and distrustful manner were altogether despicable.” [FNWP34] Commentary: Nietzsche, however, does not defines objectivity as he understandS it. From the answers to Artaud's questionings about thinking mechanism [GRPAPS], we have: by use of Reality, yet this use be only contemplative, man does objects, or RT + USE = OBJECT. In another moment, the Real Thing and the object already made are signs of themselves to elicit the remembrance of the object to be reproduced. The Need, Desire, Will of the object in his want are inner signs to elicit the process RT + USE = OBJECT. Because a Real Thing can derivate many object, this OBJECT determined by this USE is a point of view (PV) about Real Thing. When a object (amulet) is added to OBJECT 1 (RT + USE) and to OBJECT 2 (PRODUCT OF RT + USE) this amulet is sign to elicits the remembrance of OBJECT and of the process of its fabrication (RT + USE). In sequence, this amulet will be a word or sequence of words. Man contacts with Reality only by fabrication of OBJECTS. The universality of OBJECTS is given by the probability of the process be repeated by other man; at levels of basic necessities in a moment there are many OBJECTS of