toc tweaksmaster

1 files changed, 18 insertions, 21 deletions

diff --git a/timeforms.otx b/timeforms.otx
index 4a95e2d..c4cd17f 100644
--- a/timeforms.otx
+++ b/timeforms.otx
@@ -883,24 +883,23 @@ You have by now no doubt become aware that I have been making a rather unsubtle
 
 \sec Rap I 
 
-
-\secc A. N. Whitehead, 1938.
+\notoc\secc A. N. Whitehead, 1938.
 
 The planets, the stones, the living things all witness to the wide preservation of identity. But equally, they witness to the partiality of such preservation. Nothing in realized matter of fact returns complete identity with its antecedent self. This self-identity in the sphere of realized fact is only partial. It holds for certain purposes. It dominates certain kinds of process. But in other parts of process, the differences are important and self-identity is an interesting fable. For the purposes of inheriting real estate, the identity of the man of thirty years of age with the former baby of 10 months is dominant.  For the purposes of navigating a yacht, the differences between man and child are essential. The identity then sinks into metaphysical irrelevancy. In so far as identities are preserved, there are orderly laws of nature. In so far as identities decay, these laws are subject to modification. But the modification itself may be lawful. The change in the individual may exhibit a law of change, as for example the change from baby to full grown animal. And yet such laws of change are themselves liable to change. For example, species flourish and decay; civilizations rise and fall; heavenly bodies gradually form, and pass through sequences of stages. 
 
-\secc Margaret Mead, 1970.
+\notoc\secc Margaret Mead, 1970.
 
 Today, suddenly, because all the peoples of the world are part of one electronically based, intercommunicating network, young people everywhere share a kind of experience that none of the elders ever have had or will have. Conversely, the older generation will never see repeated in the lives of young people their own unprecedented experience of sequentially emerging change. This break between the generations is wholly new: it is planetary and universal. 
 
-\secc Buckminster Fuller, 1970.
+\notoc\secc Buckminster Fuller, 1970.
 
 Is the human an accidental theatergoer who happened in the play of life---to like it or not---or does humanity perform an essential function in Universe. We find the latter to be true... In 1951 I published my conclusion that man is the antientropy of Universe. Norbert Weiner published the same statement at the same time. 
 
-\secc Buckminster Fuller, 1970.
+\notoc\secc Buckminster Fuller, 1970.
 
 Within decades we will know whether man is going to be a physical success around earth, able to function in ever greater patterns of local universe or whether he is going to frustrate his own success with his negatively conditioned reflexes of yesterday and will bring about his own extinction around planet earth. My intuitions foresee his success despite his negative inertias. This means things are going to move fast. 
 
-\secc The Beatles---In Abbey Road
+\notoc\secc The Beatles---In Abbey Road
 
 ``And in the end\nl
 the love you take\nl
@@ -916,37 +915,37 @@ Of course, we can't. Now world ecology has to be done, or no more man. Tempting
 There seem to be a number of approaches. 
 
 
-\secc Some say: 
+\notoc\secc Some say: 
 
 We'd better hurry up and industrialize the "developing" nations or they'll gang up and wipe us out. Spread the wealth. Sure, capitalism isn't a perfect system, but what is. Industrialization would at least feed 'em and clothe 'em, right? 
 
-\secc Others say:
+\notoc\secc Others say:
 
 Listen, that capitalist rap is thirty years dead, man. Haven't you heard about electronics and the \e{second} industrial revolution. We don't process matter (energy) anymore---we process information.  People don't have to work, pulling levers any more. Any repetitive process can be programmed, electronically. Automated, man. 
 
-\secc Others:
+\notoc\secc Others:
 
 What are you guys talking about. Don't you realize that we're in the mess we're in because nobody paid any attention to the \e{systems} those automated processes are part of, so now we have a polluted planet. From now on, we have to figure how automation relates to the ecosystem. Haven't you ever heard of feedback. You know, where the "effect" loops back to influence the "cause". From now on, we either plan for how our machines feed back on our life styles, or, like Leary said, all the metal back underground. I'm not for electronic laissez-faire \e{either,} man. 
 
-\secc Still others:
+\notoc\secc Still others:
 
 I find it hard to get into your progress metaphors. They all seem to ignore the terrible pain we're all in. I mean, how can you dream of rosy futures while Vietnam is tearing the skins off hundreds of thousands of young guys like us, while the pigs are practicing genocide on the panthers, while the trial is screaming that justice is only for the silent majority. Not to mention what they're doing to us. 
 
 My scene is to let it bleed. I don't wanna fix it. It's broke, man.  We need a new one. So, some of us got our shit together, built a dome out in New Mexico, and we live close to the land. No more mine-yours games, no more technology. Just getting into each other, man, finding that quiet still center within ourselves. 
 
-\secc Others still:
+\notoc\secc Others still:
 
 Jesus. You sit out there in the woods all peaceful and groovy but somebody \e{else} has to keep them off your back. You think they're gonna leave you alone, man, with your "sexual communism" and your dope and your "deprived" children. You think you can just concentrate on what's going on inside your head, and make believe you don't hear the whole civilization crashing into ruins all around you. Wake up, man. They're killing your brothers and your sisters right now, and you're next. 
 
 \sec Rap III 
 
-\secc First observer:
+\notoc\secc First observer:
 
 Obviously, they're all correct. The electronic industry is probably more aware than they are that national boundaries are obsolete. The synchronous satellites are only the top of the iceberg.  Trans-national conglomerates became necessary as soon as data banks in the computers could handle the complexity of a thousand branch offices. And before that, radio, telephone, jets, and television went beyond national boundaries. 
 
 The problem is not \e{whether} to spread the wealth, but \e{how.} Right now, we've got three political ecosystems;---us, the Russians, and the Chinese---worrying about how to get the Africans and the rest of the "little" countries on their side, like South America, or India, or the Middle East. To borrow a phrase from the kids, the concept "nation" is not where it's at. The problem is, how do we get beyond ideologies and belief systems which define spreading the wealth as imperialism, Communism, Maoism, what have you.  Personally, I think the kids are gonna do it. I mean, kids all over the planet are more like each other than they are national citizens, and I give them a lot of credit. They're gonna do it. I'm confident. 
 
-\secc Second observer:
+\notoc\secc Second observer:
 
 Sure, sure, the kids are a new post-industrial culture, beyond 
 ideology and all that. Sure they live in an electronic ecosphere 
@@ -959,13 +958,13 @@ precedent for coming up with a new planet-wide post-electronic
 culture. So \e{how,} to borrow your phrase, are they gonna do it. Even 
 the universe didn't do it \e{ex nibilo.}
 
-\secc Third observer:
+\notoc\secc Third observer:
 
 They won't have to. Didn't you hear 'em talking about cybernation and systems theory. Our minds boggle at the thought that each and every last unintended consequence of every little flea bitten automated factory product will have to be reckoned into the bargain, but, fer chrissakes, that's what computers are, don'tcha see, the screw driver that comes with the general systems theory manual.  Instead of thinking about the hardware all the time, try to realize that the kids \e{are} designing the software. What do you think rock and roll is. What about those costumes. Aren't their communes attempts to get past the wreckage of the nuclear family, that casualty of industrialism? Their whole generation seems marvellously capable of responding to our technosphere with an ecosphere of their own.  Don't you think the kids raised on computers and television, the kids now in grammar school, are going to be sufficiently flexible to take the steps they'll have to take. I think, just as the industrial generation came up with liberalism, and the computer generation came up with acidoxy, well, in the same way, the current generatibn is gonna come up with a hip version of cybernetics. They've had their McLuhan to cut their eye teeth on, so their politics is McLuhanesque. Look at Abbie Hoffman. Uses the media like a stick ball bat. He knows about feedback, let me tell you. And his kids are not gonna take any nonsense from trans-national conglomerates or the Soviets or the Maoists. They're gonna use the planet's media like Tom Paine used pamphlets. I think technology has met its match in the next generation. They're gonna make it serve them, not serve it, because they're not content to be the software for a hardware they can't control. 
 
 Don't tell me about no precedents. They've got plenty, and then some. 
 
-\secc Fourth observer:
+\notoc\secc Fourth observer:
 
 You're all missing the point, although I agree with what's been said. Using your own cybernetic metaphors, you could arrive at a more general formulation than you have, instead of getting stuck on the particulars, as I think you have. Look. Even Marx recognized that a given technology (or means of production, if you insist) calls forth a given ideology (or culture, with your permission). So, we design an electronic technology and they obligingly come up with hip cybernetics. The point is, \e{can they come up with a new culture \ul{before} a new hardware system elicits it.} In other words, if a new consciousness is always a response to a new technology, how do we know that the technologies now on our drawing boards---say, Tri-d---are going to elicit a brand of culture that will get us by---that is, insure species survival. The problem, it seems to me, Is much more serious than you guys seem to have seen. 
 
@@ -973,7 +972,7 @@ Put it this way. What if man is a feedback loop for planetary evolution, that is
 
 I'm asking whether the feedback theory of conciousness provides any hope at all. If it's an after-the-fact mechanism, I don't think it offers us any hope at all. More specifically, if you think all those kids out in those communes are doing anything more than becoming conscious of their condition \e{after} they're in it, I'd like to be told about it. 
 
-\secc Fifth observer:
+\notoc\secc Fifth observer:
 
 You don't understand feedback, or some other other things I'm gonna tell you. Let me start with an example. You know what happens after a forest fire. The forest goes into a condition of positive feed, proliferates like mad, changes its rate of growth, not because it wants to, as the teleologists would have us believe, but because the surrounding systems it interfaces with no longer maintain it through their feedback on it. Its growth becomes unchecked for a while, like a computer programmed to scan without any limits put on it. It becomes a temporary runaway, you might say. 
 
@@ -1169,9 +1168,7 @@ The dilemma---you can't have a revolution unless your head's together, but you c
 
 I think so. But, as Fuller says---"This means things are going to move fast." 
 
-\part Metalog
-
-\chap On Social Time (II)
+\part Metalog: On Social Time (II)
 
 \sec Prologue
 
@@ -1336,7 +1333,7 @@ Nevertheless, before passing on to the attempts we are making to investigate the
 
 % TODO lettered subsections
 
-\secc Thesis: 
+\notoc\secc Thesis: 
 
 Freud wrote: 
 
@@ -1379,7 +1376,7 @@ No such defect characterizes the recent work of Jean-Paul Sartre, whose preface
 
 I have passed in review the thoughts of the foregoing men to underscore the fact that these leading theoreticians to whom we look for guiding vision, without exception, have focused their principal energies on the notion of temporal experience, and yet none has produced a major tract on the subject. In the paragraphs that follow, I suggest some considerations which seem requisite for a beginning---notes, as it were, toward a new epistemology of experienced process. 
 
-\secc Antithesis: 
+\notoc\secc Antithesis: 
 
 Freud, Marcuse, Heidegger, and Sartre, not to mention Hegel and Marx, did not fail to allude to "the divine Plato," as Freud calls him. They were not unfamiliar with Plato's epistemology which, unfortunately, is far too often accepted as sufficiently well-expressed in the famous allegory of the cave. Sartre somewhere (I think in \essaytitle{Anti-Semite and Jew}) tells the charming tale of a young French student, rushing excitedly to his Professeur, asking eagerly, "Professeur, Professeur, have you read Monsieur Freud?" whereupon the old man peers above his spectacles and gently informs the budding metaphysician (approximately): "My son---the better part of Freud you will find \e{chez Platon.}"