relationality

let's call "relationality" the realm where we accept the existence of the "other" as a given. this is a big leap for me, honestly. awareness is the primary mystery for me. I don't know how awareness generates relationality, but let's call that a secondary mystery, and take it as given. welcome to relationality. let's call "life" the mysterious process by which awareness generates relationality.

so, here we are, hanging out in relationality together

if what you’re doing has life in it, life will do anything to keep you going

like a body maintaining its blood vessels

tricky thing: if the line of inquiry involving you-as-god (like Steven King's "The Life of Chuck") has life in it (well, not like Life of Chuck in that way), life’s gonna back you up on that one too

and it'll be real, in terms of obviously existing with ontically solid evidence, but it won't be the reality of the relational space between you and all of us here

real for you, but not for anyone else

(that's a distinguishing factor between "relationality" and "reality". the way relationality responds to you-the-first-person-observer is different than the way it responds to all-the-other-observers-that-you-observe.)

because coexistence in relationality is not ever about the form

the minute you start pattern-matching just form, you’ve lost the thread of life

well, on any one level of form, without life and the form on the other side, i.e. without relationality

operating without depth perception is hazardous

so: I propose "relationality", where things are "relationally real"; distinct from "reality", where things are "ontically real"

ohhh shit

is ontology the realm of concept, and ontics the realm of form? (am thinking of 20230917)

is technology... oh of course technology is relationality. form has no players, concept has no form; technology lets the players deal in form.

okay, the map is developing