Memetic Metanarratives And Conceptual Contextualism

In memetics you are not only able to effect change with 'bullshit' (aptly denoted), but you also can structure truth in-and-around memes (I call these 'Icons' -- formula like that found in propositional logic, for example, can become as Iconic [in this sense] as any myth [that is to say, the "truth" in myth], or "metanarrative"; or for more direct analogy, the programming logic that constructs the system [under layers over layers, etc] that we use to communicate these ideas here, this is replicated through Iconic means, ie, a Computer, a Keyboard (all the components involved with these things), Language in toto- binary code, or the programming language (break it down however you wish- I'm just saying these are analogical examples).

{Having a back-lit screen, computers [as like typewriters sans the aforementioned light apparatus] resolve the tension in having to use candle-light or some equivalent light-source, which source previously being fire [hence, the example of the 'candle'], and in the losing of light and thus in darkness losing also ones' wherewithal to spatial awareness and hand-eye coordination, even other considerations, you have the chance to lose the perception of your yield to the pen-on-paper: these are two ontic sources of differentiation, which lead to two different thresholds, and two different transforms each: one is discordant but then equally concordant, and the other is temporal, but as equally much spatial. When the discordant is found in the spatial, it's thru the writing-apparatus, and then the concordant is found in the temporal, it's thru the computer-apparatus. In the computer-apparatus [ecphory] one finds the binary code of 0 and 1, and in the writing-apparatus [engraphy] one finds the dual-sided strata of appearance and disappearance. This is the magic of the operation unto transhuman "awareness", by the loss of the codes of being in the reign of structure and representation bent to the will to power.}

So when something is memetic in the sense of a greater metameme of a memeplex (science leads to results, but unbiased from irrationality and non-materialist ideation, only strict double-blind proofed models (for group/sociological study), or empirical data defines what these results mean, epistemology is settled, we can only expect to study results as they come, and can come to no apt conclusions [save by graceful luck of the intellect on a guess that'd be presumed false until proven regardless], and the human condition is based in it's complexity, the chaotic dynamics of societal motive systems, and etc, and this is Truth, because we have reason to trust in our predilections that this is the most effective, rational [therefore safest], and most accurate and humble and truthful, and agnostic, perspective to learn and know about sources of knowledge and information our brains are vast repositories for learning and we can connect the dots as we go along, but the utmost objectivity is the goal —to treat subjective things with objective importance only regarding proofs and formula, statistics, social norms [which are also influenced by different memeplexes? and herein we find the paradox- let's continue]; these norms, medians and means, of these complex dynamic systems, economies, everything, are all materially contrived...etc etc etc)

When something is contrived as such...it's a meme. It's just a really complex one.

Onto the realm of the Conceptual now. I supposed a way to frame this properly, from my perspective I'd say that certain Conceptual Analytical Awareness' are individual in and of themselves, and as "facts" are held, but as holes are to be leapt out of — when "facts" are "holds", the memeplex holds as "fact" and if not certain, as an 'uncertain hole', or if so certain, than it holds as "Fact" but that of 'facts' that can change [if we are certain that facts do change and can be holes, if not held up to certainty involving scrutiny {obviously}...] (keep in mind the notion of "Further Facts"); but if scrutiny is not applied [acute and close observational methodology and verification — even according to the most rigorous of empirical or analytical or speculative delineation of certainty and the unreal], even the most fundamental observations must be taken on a kind of presumption that everything is operating coherently as it is usually observed — with this, in mind with the vagaries of fallibility, plurality, and perspective — it seems there is a slim probability of outcomes in which, even with strenuous resources (see: CERN) that we can experimentally bring forth, we cannot duplicate these outcomes with the application towards truth-values that rely on certainty rather than probability, and that provide a verification to the criterion of these outcomes, rather than confirmation of potential outcomes to their degrees of potential result on a probabilistic scale.

These are "potential outcomes", and forms of truth-value assessment that are predilections based on the Preliminal Scaling from Conceptual Individuality [eg 'separate minds'], which would denote the necessity of a theory of justification to mold throughout with — another place for the realm of memes to overlay itself.

I favor contexualism, as it's a very perspectivist standpoint. But really, the infinite regress seems...insuperable.

One needs the trajectory to leap out of Holes. Memes, no matter their value, are Holes. They are means to an end, not the ends itself. What we need are Holds. Facts which hold. Not for the sake of strict cogency, but for the sake of understanding when Holds are just Holes. But Facts change. Understanding, therefore, is an art. Not a science. There is just a science to the theory of the art, on a meta- or transpersonal/superpersonal level.