From 6098d184521764cbd29b682605b0455df7f558d2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: grr <grr@lo2.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 19:27:13 -0400
Subject: pile of work-in-progress-crud

---
 extra/general_acognitive_culture.tex | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

(limited to 'extra/general_acognitive_culture.tex')

diff --git a/extra/general_acognitive_culture.tex b/extra/general_acognitive_culture.tex
index 24aed91..f839e1c 100644
--- a/extra/general_acognitive_culture.tex
+++ b/extra/general_acognitive_culture.tex
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
-\chapter{My New Concept of General Acognitive Culture (1962)}
+\chapter[My New Concept of General Acognitive Culture (1962)][My New Concept of General Acognitive Culture]{My New Concept of General Acognitive Culture (1962)}
 
 {\itshape [This essay was written c. May 1962 and published in \journaltitle{d\'{e}collage No. 3.} This transcription serves to correct the typographical errors. Footnotes are written in 1992.]}
 
-\plainbreak{2}
+\vskip 2em
 
 Of the adult (human) activities I discredit explicitly, consider pure mathematics (and structure art and games of intellectual skill), and Serious Culture\slash all art\slash literary culture\slash science fiction\slash music. I show that these activities (as such) should be repudiated. Now humans are likely in any case to resist this radical idea of repudiating these major institutionalized activities; but especially if nothing were to take their place, if the idea were negative only. Even when the activities' Serious Cultural pretensions have been discredited and repudiated, and their obvious confusions of purpose have been noted,\footnote{cf. \essaytitle{Concept Art} on music} humans are likely to be interested in them still, to like them in at least one respect: for their entertainment, recreational value; for their value as \enquote{ends,} in themselves. (And are thus likely to fear that to repudiate these activities without anything's taking their place would be to give up all recreation, doing things \enquote{just for fun,} doing things just liked.) Now this chapter will be first, an analysis of the concept of entertainment, recreation, of doing things just liked, which will criticize the activities even as just entertainment. (And will discredit my own initial notion of \term{acognitive culture,} as not going far enough.)
 
-I discredit these activities, show they should be repudiated, for \enquote{everybody,} adult humans and creeps. Now since I am a creep, my primary constructive concern is to point out something rather than these activities, for creeps: my new concept of \term{creep acognitive culture.} However, I am going to \enquote{do adult humans a favor} in the hope that it will keep them from just changing the discredited activities into something no less wrong and confused, and will encourage them to repudiate the activities. \enquote{Creep acognitive culture} is, to speak generally, a concept of \enquote{recreation} (resulting from analysis of the concept of recreation) for conscious organisms. Part of it is applicable for adult humans (as well as creeps), in replacing the discredited activities for them. I am going to give that general part here, in this book\footnote{This essay was a chapter in a book in early 1962; that book must have become From Culture to Veramusement.}---my new concept of \term{general acognitive culture.} (The specialization for creeps I will give in Creep.) The specialization of this concept for adult humans I will leave to them, since that is their concern. Incidentally, even though generally applicable, the characteristics of general acognitive culture may be reminiscent of creepiness, but they will not in any case embarrass mature adults, which is where I draw the line between the adult human and the really creep.
+I discredit these activities, show they should be repudiated, for \enquote{everybody,} adult humans and creeps. Now since I am a creep, my primary constructive concern is to point out something rather than these activities, for creeps: my new concept of \term{creep acognitive culture.} However, I am going to \enquote{do adult humans a favor} in the hope that it will keep them from just changing the discredited activities into something no less wrong and confused, and will encourage them to repudiate the activities. \enquote{Creep acognitive culture} is, to speak generally, a concept of \enquote{recreation} (resulting from analysis of the concept of recreation) for conscious organisms. Part of it is applicable for adult humans (as well as creeps), in replacing the discredited activities for them. I am going to give that general part here, in this book\footnote{This essay was a chapter in a book in early 1962; that book must have become From Culture to Veramusement.}---my new concept of \term{general acognitive culture.} (The specialization for creeps I will give in \essaytitle{Creep}.) The specialization of this concept for adult humans I will leave to them, since that is their concern. Incidentally, even though generally applicable, the characteristics of general acognitive culture may be reminiscent of creepiness, but they will not in any case embarrass mature adults, which is where I draw the line between the adult human and the really creep.
 
 To give a better idea of the major area of life, \enquote{recreation,} I am concerned with here, let me mention, along with the activities mentioned above: games, possibly athletics \enquote{for fun,} conventional entertainment and recreation, and children's play. Or \term{acognitive culture} in my initial sense. Further, let me suggest the area with respect to its place in (adult) human life today. Naively, a worker has a job, job hours, an occupation, does work (which produces material wealth), to obtain his means of consumption. His job is a \enquote{means}; even though he may like it he is pretty much forced to do it. This can be extended to apply to the whole area of his responsibilities to society. Then he has after-hours, time when he doesn't have to do anything, and does what he does more as an end, in itself, \enquote{for fun,} because he likes it: here is where recreation is included. This is when workers listen to music, read science fiction, play games, and the rest. A thing is more purely recreational the more it is done just \enquote{for fun,} the more is it is not an extension of the job, a means. This can be extended to apply to the whole area of what he does just because he likes it; and the area can now be conceived as existing (presumably as a matter of course) side-by-side what he does \enquote{for society.} All this can be said about recreation today.
 
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ Since acognitive culture is what one would do anyway, does entirely because one
 
 All this leads to the idea of (one's) acognitive culture as a part of oneself---as within oneself, at least so far as specifications are concerned. This would seem to be the opposite of contributions to impersonal Forms. Acognitive culture (being what one would do anyway) would not, it would seem, consist of artifacts built up outside of, separate from, oneself, to be gone back to (for ex. recordings, writings); or specifications one would have to be concerned about remembering. If one is wanting \enquote{what one likes, would do anyway,} one will have it; one shouldn't have to be concerned about retaining it.
 
-The reader may have been asking, 'But may not merely what one would do anyway be less interesting than the pseudo-recreation which is created by special exertion, such as Flynt's \essaytitle{Reproduction of the Memory of an Energy Cube Organism}?' Strictly speaking, this question doesn't make sense: how could anything be more interesting to oneself, likable, than what one just likes, than what one would do anyway \enquote{prior} to \enquote{knowing} the real, right thing to to? However, I will give a heuristic answer to the question. Asking the question shows that one has as yet no idea of what specific doings would be included by the category of \enquote{acognitive culture} as I have defined it. They may well be so different from the discredited activities, the traditional, established, common real right Forms supposedly for recreation and self-expression, as to be irrelevant to them, so to speak. They are going to be indefinitely\footnote{incalculably?} more \enquote{new,} \enquote{different,} interesting, just as individuality is more so than anonymity. It is a matter of one's realizing that what fulfills the supposed function of the discredited activities are things one would not have thought of as replacements for them. All this will become obvious, when one considers what specific doings of oneself meet all of the specifications, are included by the category of \term{acognitive culture} as I have defined it. It may further be asked whether doing just what one would do anyway won't lead to a nihilism of acognitive culture's becoming indistinct, being absorbed in undistinguished personality, life, leaving only \enquote{nature}; or a nihilism that if acognitive culture needs to happen it will just happen, a nihilism of not doing anything. Well, something disappears, namely trying to do things just liked as a real right objectively valuable Form, a profession, by special exertion. However, acognitive culture doesn't disappear, because conscious organisms in any case just do anyway things just liked, which are distinguished, and which are \enquote{then} included by the category of \term{acognitive culture,} \enquote{people have their recreation}---the category of \term{acognitive culture} represents a selecting out of things which presumably the life of any conscious organism will include, for which there will presumably be a place in any life.
+The reader may have been asking, 'But may not merely what one would do anyway be less interesting than the pseudo-recreation which is created by special exertion, such as Flynt's \essaytitle{Reproduction of the Memory of an Energy Cube Organism}?' Strictly speaking, this question doesn't make sense: how could anything be more interesting to oneself, likable, than what one just likes, than what one would do anyway \enquote{prior} to \enquote{knowing} the real, right thing to to? However, I will give a heuristic answer to the question. Asking the question shows that one has as yet no idea of what specific doings would be included by the category of \enquote{acognitive culture} as I have defined it. They may well be so different from the discredited activities, the traditional, established, common real right Forms supposedly for recreation and self-expression, as to be irrelevant to them, so to speak. They are going to be indefinitely\editornote{incalculably?} more \enquote{new,} \enquote{different,} interesting, just as individuality is more so than anonymity. It is a matter of one's realizing that what fulfills the supposed function of the discredited activities are things one would not have thought of as replacements for them. All this will become obvious, when one considers what specific doings of oneself meet all of the specifications, are included by the category of \term{acognitive culture} as I have defined it. It may further be asked whether doing just what one would do anyway won't lead to a nihilism of acognitive culture's becoming indistinct, being absorbed in undistinguished personality, life, leaving only \enquote{nature}; or a nihilism that if acognitive culture needs to happen it will just happen, a nihilism of not doing anything. Well, something disappears, namely trying to do things just liked as a real right objectively valuable Form, a profession, by special exertion. However, acognitive culture doesn't disappear, because conscious organisms in any case just do anyway things just liked, which are distinguished, and which are \enquote{then} included by the category of \term{acognitive culture,} \enquote{people have their recreation}---the category of \term{acognitive culture} represents a selecting out of things which presumably the life of any conscious organism will include, for which there will presumably be a place in any life.
 
 As I have mentioned the possibility that the reader may as yet have no idea of what specific doings would be included by the category of acognitive culture as I have defined it, it might seem in order for me to describe some examples of such specific doings. Actually, however, it is just not in the spirit of acognitive culture to try to describe such examples. Real acognitive culture is not likely to lend itself to reduction to words. And trying to describe examples of acognitive culture cannot but be a tendency to make them into works; actually, there is no reason why one's acognitive culture should mean anything to another, or even to oneself at another time. Thus, although I might informally describe examples in conversation, I am not going to try to write any up. The reader who does not yet understand what specific doings are included by the category will just have to study the specifications of acognitive culture some more, and then consider what specific doings meet all of them. When the reader does understand, then he can discover the parts of what he does anyway, already does, that are included by the category of acognitive culture: they are his acognitive culture.
 
-- 
cgit v1.2.3

