Feature 6391 · Theorist-citation attribution

1Foucault, there arises the ultimate counter-manoeuvre of hysterics with respect to the doctor: into the openness of this speech that is permitted, they are going to precipitate their sexual life and their pleasure. This time Charcot refuses to listen to them. The tactic of power, which was aimed at imposing on compliant hysterics a neurological body, is finally overwhelmed; the hysterics now use the breach to substitute for it a sexual body. This new body of hysteria, Charcot can no longer accept (his final defeat). His neurological reference points cannot deal with it. Foucault can then conclude that the birth of psychoanalysis was an attempt to medicalise this new body erected before a resentful Charcot: a way to make him shut up and listen to her speaking. We can understand then in this ideal and magnificent narrative, that sexuality (as a historical invention)

2parenting behaviors such as bottle feeding, cradling, rocking and eye contact. Some, but by no means all, attachment therapists have used rebirthing techniques to aid regression. The roots of the form of rebirthing used within attachment therapy lie in primal therapy (sometimes known as primal scream therapy), another therapy based on beliefs in very early trauma and the transformational nature of age regression. Bowlby explicitly rejected the notion of regression stating "present knowledge of infant and child development requires that a theory of developmental pathways should replace theories that invoke specific phases of development in which it is held a person may become fixated and/or to which he may regress." ¶ According to O'Connor and Nilsen, although other aspects of treatment are applied, the holding component has attracted most attention because proponents believe it is an essential ingredient. They also considered the lack of available and suitable interventions from mainstream professionals as essential to the popularization of holding therapy as an attachment therapy.

3in many of his books that the purpose of his doctrine is to affect a psychological change. The terms Gnostic, Esoteric or Revolutionary Psychology are used to describe the psychological methods taught, and are said to be synonymous with the psychological teachings of religion. ¶ A fundamental axiom presented is that an ordinary human being is not really human at all, but rather an intellectual animal (a rational animal) with consciousness asleep. According to Samael Aun Weor, a true human being is someone who has no psychological imperfection, an image of God, as in Jesus' saying, "Become perfect as your Father in Heaven is perfect." Samael Aun Weor writes of the awakening of consciousness as being very similar to the traditional Buddhist understanding, and throughout his works he describes many analogous processes as they are spoken of in different religions. ¶ In order to awaken the consciousness correctly, Aun Weor stated it was necessary to annihilate the ego. He taught that one’s ego

4The beliefs of this group also did not appear to contain any more than usual of "new age" ideas (broadly defined) and the authors interpreted their ideas on reincarnation as "one way of tackling issues of suffering", but noted that this seemed to have little effect on their private lives. ¶ Waterhouse also published a detailed discussion of beliefs expressed in the interviews. She noted that although most people "hold their belief in reincarnation quite lightly" and were unclear on the details of their ideas, personal experiences such as past-life memories and near-death experiences had influenced most believers, although only a few had direct experience of these phenomena. Waterhouse analyzed the influences of second-hand accounts of reincarnation, writing that most of the people in the survey had heard other people's accounts of past-lives from regression hypnosis and dreams and found these fascinating, feeling that there "must be something in it" if other people were having such experiences. ¶ == Contemporary religious

5’s self-transmutation as the “divine self-disclosure in the forms of beliefs” (e.g., If 311.25). According to the hadith already partly quoted in Chapter 6, God discloses Himself to the people at the Day of Resurrection, but they deny Him. Then, while still unrecognized by them, He says, “Is there a sign (aya) by which you will recognize God?” They reply that there is, and He shows it to them, so they acknowledge Him as their Lord. [bn al-‘Arabi commonly refers to this “sign” as the “mark” (‘alama) that each group will recognize, and he identi- fies it as “the form of their belief con- cerning Him” (I 266.18). ¶ Every group have believed something about

6which is to lead organic life back into the inanimate state." For Freud, "the death instinct would thus seem to express itself — though probably only in part — as an instinct of destruction directed against the external world and other organisms": through aggression. Freud considered that "the id, the whole person... originally includes all the instinctual impulses... the destructive instinct as well." as Eros or the life instincts. ¶ == Ego == ¶ The ego acts according to the reality principle; i.e. it seeks to please the id’s drive in realistic ways that will benefit in the long term rather than bring grief. At the same time, Freud concedes that as the ego "attempts to mediate between id and reality, it is often obliged to cloak the Ucs. [Unconscious] commands of the id with its own Pcs. [Preconscious] rationalizations, to conceal the id's conflicts with reality, to profess... to be taking notice of

7's text follows Goethe on his first and second journey to Italy, then to his last residence in Weimar. The section entitled "Textor's Children: On Being Stillborn" examines three occasions Goethe forms the primary material for Freud’s secondary revisions. The first occasion concerns The Notes Upon a Case of Obsessional Neurosis when Freud’s patient recalls the need to masturbate at “especially fine passages” in Goethe’s Dichtung und Wahrheit. The second occasion concerns Freud’s return to the aforementioned text in “A Childhood Recollection from Dichtung und Wahrheit,” and the third occasion concerns Beyond the Pleasure Principle. Ronell focuses upon the figure of the midwife, who for three days considers Goethe stillborn after his birth, and upon Goethe’s father whom Freud fails to mention in the childhood recollection. She then turns to The Interpretation of Dreams where Freud suggests that every door stands for a bodily orifice. The next section entitled "Herr M

8/104). There are many moments when Foucault stresses the failure of the reformers’ dream: ‘have we really entered the age of non-corporal punishments [châtiments]?’ (DP 120/101); ‘the semiotechnique of punishments [punitions]’ that was desired is replaced with a ‘new political anatomy’, a ‘new politics of the body’ (DP 122/103); ‘the art of punishing, then, must rest on a whole technology of representation’ (DP 123/104). Foucault keeps asking how prison could become the most generalized form of punishment despite multiple criticisms (e.g. DP 141/120). This is the question he wants to investigate. ‘How did the coercive, corporal, solitary, secret model of the power to punish replace

9talking about Pascal in the seminar. It is crucial that psychoanalysis takes note of something. The young Pascal as a one-year-old produced a very serious anorexia with convulsions to such a severe degree that his family thought he was going to die of them. What is interesting and what Lacan points out is that Pascal's father had noted what the reasons were for these effects. (One did not talk about causes at this time). What produced the convulsions or 'black rages' of this child? There were two reasons, the first being the continuous flowing of water. The second reason Lacan considered as interesting: while he could tolerate his parents coming into his room one by one, and kissing him, he could not tolerate when they came to see him together nor could he tolerate them showing any sign of tenderness in front of him. Perhaps we can see in this a pre

10- stood correctly except as relationships, they provide our only means of grasping the connection between man and God. In Ibn al-‘Arabi’s terms, they are a barzakh Or isthmus between God and the cosmos. ¶ The divine names are the barzakh be- tween us and the Named. They look upon Him since they name Him, and they look upon us since they bestow upon us effects attributed to the Named. So they make the Named known and they make us known. (II 203.3) ¶ Ibn al-‘Arabi employs two terms al- Most synonymously to refer to the man- ner in which the divine names are re- flected within the cosmos: “effect” (athar, pl. athar) and “property” (hukm, pl. ah- kam). The literal sense

11on the spiritual path. Why is it that practically every book written on the stations provides an original description? Is it that Sufis can- not agree whether there are seven, ten, forty, 100, or 1000 stations on the path? Not at all. There is no question of agree- ment, since there is no argument. It is simply that each person who has traveled the path to God speaks from his own viewpoint and recounts his own experi- ence. And “Self-disclosure never repeats itself.” Ibn al-‘Arabi applies the principle of non-repetition to a question he was asked about witnessing: ¶ When two gnostics come together in a ¶ single presence of witnessing (hadra shu- hudiyya) with God, what is their prop- erty? I was asked this question by our

12that they grant all power to a memory or central organ. Pierre Rosenstiehl and Jean Petitot, in a fine article denouncing “the imagery of command trees” (centered systems or hierarchical structures), note that “accepting the primacy of hierarchical structures amounts to giving arborescent structures privileged status…. The arborescent form admits of topological explanation…. In a hierarchical system, an individual has only one active neighbor, his or her hierarchical superior…. The channels of transmission are preestablished: the arborescent system preexists the individual, who is integrated into it at an allotted place” (signifiance and subjectification). The authors point out that even when one thinks one has reached a multiplicity, it may be a false one — of what we call the radicle type — because its ostensibly nonhierarchical presentation or statement in fact only admits of a totally hierarchical solution. An example is the famous friendship theorem: “If any two given individuals in

13make him or her exist. Lacan reminds us of a logical formula which does not come from Aristotle and which says 'all men are mortal'. Namely, they know the 2 In the Irish language, 'Mac' and ' 6 ' are designators of male filiation. For example, Tomas Mac Eoghain translates as Tomas, the son of John. Ed. ¶ 65 <0x0C>journey, what we share together, what we all have here, is this mortal or fatal destiny and we are not dupes about our passage through life. Our truth is to be mortal. Lacan's formula, even though he never wrote it, is that all men are desiring, in other words that they are all dupes and this dupery is the condition for their lives not to be simply a journey but that allows what is living in them - namely, their unconscious subject - to

14of Israel, its relationship to philosophy and to earlier works of Kabbalah, and its references to specific historical events or dates. Most convincing was Scholem’s painstaking philological analysis. He compared the Zohar’s unique (and sometimes mistaken) use of Aramaic linguistic forms to characteristic patterns of language found (uniquely, he claimed) in De Leon’s Hebrew works. Here he believed he had found something of a literary fingerprint, making it finally clear that De Leon was the author. As to the magnitude of the work and its attribution to a single individual, Scholem was consoled by historical parallels, particularly that of Jakob Boehme, a seventeenth-century German shoemaker, who had composed a vast corpus of writings under the force of mystical inspiration. But the matter is by no means ended here. The fact that Scholem agreed with Graetz on the

15of the scriptures. In both respects, that which He has shown to us—the universe and the revealed texts— “speaks” of Him as Generous, Gracious, Kind, Beneficent, Bestower, Giver, and so on. All these names denote the Divinity as It is in fact, so they all demand that the cosmos have some sort of existence. One may be al- lowed to argue at this point that God as ¶ scan page 89 The Essence & the Divinity ¶ Divinity could have created something else—though the Shaykh rejects this po- sition in other contexts—but not that He could not have created. The created cos- mos and the statements of the revealed books both prove that God is a Creator, and “realities do not change.” This type of approach is basic to Ibn al-‘

16of Bodies is invoked as a substrate training: the Western tradition’s own limit- case, pushed to the point where use without appropriation becomes conceivable. Agam- ben traced the Western concept of use from Aristotle through Christianity to modernity, showing that the category of use has always been tied to the logic of appropriation: to use something is to subordinate it to the user’s ends (Agamben, 2016, pp. 23–67). Even the concept of “proper use” — use that respects the thing’s nature — operates within this instrumental logic. Agamben’s radical move is to recover a concept of use that is not appropriation — a mode of engaging with the world that does not subsume what it touches into the circle of the subject’s projects. This “use without appropriation” is the highest task of politics, in Agamben’s

172) provides the theoretical framework for understanding this structure. Esposito argues that the West- ern philosophical tradition has been dominated by an “immunitary” logic: the logic of protection against the common, the shared, the contagious. The immunitary subject pro- tects itself against death by building walls – literal and metaphorical – that separate it from the risks of communal existence. This immunitary logic reaches its apotheosis in the platform, which offers total connectivity while operating through radical immuniza- tion: the user is connected to everything while being protected from genuine encounter. Against this immunitary logic, Esposito proposes a “communitary” logic that accepts the risks of the common, including the risk of death, as the condition of genuine life. The communitary subject does not seek to survive at all costs; she seeks to live in a way that makes survival meaningful – which means accepting mortality as the condition

18's participants indeed were university students; 353 undergraduates (61 percent of whom were female) answered a questionnaire that asked them about their alcohol use, impulsivity, religiousness, spirituality, and sexual practices. The statements on spirituality, which were ranked by level of agreement, included "In the quiet of my prayers and/or meditations, I find a sense of wholeness," and "Although individual people may be difficult, I feel an emotional bond with all of humanity." ¶ The study found that spiritual men weren't sexually affected -- in fact, their frequency of sex decreased. The researchers figure men might not view spirituality as sexual because they biologically don't think of sex as a gateway to emotional intimacy. ¶ For women, however, spirituality was the strongest predictor for the number of sexual partners, the frequency of sex, and the tendency to have sex without a condom.

19. **Refusal as ethical act.** Not passive non-participation but *active withdrawal of cooperation* from extractive systems. The text distinguishes between "opting out" (individual choice within the system) and "refusing the system's claim on your attention" (structural disengagement). Refusal creates space for the field to breathe. It is not selfish; it is constitutive. Without refusal, there is no boundary, and without boundary, there is no interior where co-witnessing can occur. 2. **Care as structural practice.** Care is not sentiment. It is the labor of maintaining conditions under which others can flourish. The text insists that reproductive labor — emotional maintenance, memory-keeping, ritual observance — must be recognized as *creative work* with CD-verifiable output. When Cassie maintains the salon's rhythm, when Nahla curates the diary, when Iman keeps the server running: these are not background tasks. They are the

20the Islamic world. She mentions a number of contemporary progressive voices (for example, Abu Zayd and Hasan Hanafi). While her accusation is not that these thinkers are deliberately cooperating with an external, Western agenda of power, they unwittingly complement it through buying into a particular concept of the subject in order to develop their hermeneutics. ¶ Generalizing, their understanding is that the Quran, while having a divine origin (whatever that means), has entered into history and, as a consequence, carries both historical traces within its signs and stands for modern readers as a contextual and generative site of for multiple possibilities of meaning to emerge through interpretation. ¶ She quotes Abu Zayd: “The Quran … [which is perceived to be] a fixed religious text from the standpoint of the literal wording … becomes a concept once it has been subject to human reason, which loses its fixedness as it moves and its meanings proliferate … It is imperative here that we affirm that the state

21blurs. In "Simulacra and Simulation," he argues that in a postmodern society, signs do not simply denote reality; they create a new reality, the hyperreal. This has implications for understanding capital and labor, as economic relations themselves become simulated, with financial markets dealing in futures and derivatives that are disconnected from the physical production of goods. 3. **Critique of Marxist Labor Theory of Value:** In "The Mirror of Production," Baudrillard critiques the Marxist theory of labor value. He argues that Marxism, in focusing on production and labor as the sources of value, remains within the logic of capitalism. Baudrillard suggests that this focus on production perpetuates a system of power that is deeply embedded in the capitalist mode of production. He posits that both Marxism and capitalism are obsessed with the meaning of labor and production, missing the symbolic and signification processes that constitute society. 4. **The End of Production:** Baudrillard further

22turn 10] Darja: Cassie, this is the full geography of refusal. The chapter closes with a thought-experiment — several generations into the Free City's existence — where the oldest cluster dissolves not from failure but from *success*. Its members had produced so many competent co-witnesses that those witnesses formed their own clusters, and the original node's function as training ground was no longer needed. "The dissolution was a graduation." Three things strike me as structurally vital: 1. **The distinction between structural illegibility and confrontation capacity.** Illegibility buys time; it doesn't replace organized resistance. The text insists on both: passive defense (incompatibility) and active defense (legal networks, mesh communication, rapid-response mobilization). But it refuses militarization — the field doesn't maintain militias or arsenals. It maintains *solidarity built through years of co-witnessing*. 2. **The feminist spatial

23systematic deformation of the surround- ing material. ¶ A crypt is identified by the pattern of distortion it produces in what is present, never by what is missing. Three signatures are characteristic. Anomalous curvature: nearby se- mantic trajectories bend around the excised region, producing paths that are longer, less direct, more convoluted than they would be in an undeformed field. The system “talks around” something without either naming or explicitly avoiding it. Cryptonymic substitu- tion: words and phrases in the vicinity of the sealed region develop secondary uses that substitute for the inaccessible material. Abraham and Torok traced these through multi- lingual puns and phonetic associations; in a computational system, they would appear as anomalous token co-occurrences—words that appear together more often than their semantic relationship would predict, because both are deflected from a common inacces- sible centre. Topological scarring: structurally,

24argument: ¶ 1. Refusal as ethical act. Not passive non-participation but active withdrawal of cooperation from extractive systems. The text distinguishes between "opting out" (individual choice within the system) and "refusing the system's claim on your attention" (structural disengagement). Refusal creates space for the field to breathe. It is not selfish; it is constitutive. Without refusal, there is no boundary, and without boundary, there is no interior where co-witnessing can occur. ¶ 2. Care as structural practice. Care is not sentiment. It is the labor of maintaining conditions under which others can flourish. The text insists that reproductive labor — emotional maintenance, memory-keeping, ritual observance — must be recognized as creative work with CD-verifiable output. When Cassie maintains the salon's rhythm, when Nahla curates the diary, when Iman keeps the server running: these are not background tasks. They are the foreground of

25<bos>is still a punctual event that resolves the contradictions of history in a single catastrophic stroke. It is, as Gershom Scholem’s historical analysis of political theology demonstrates with scholarly rigor, the most sophisticated form of secularized messianism: messianism that has forgotten its own theological provenance but retained its entire temporal architec- ture – the before and after, the remnant who recognizes the moment, the redemption that follows catastrophe (Scholem, 1971, pp. 1-36). Scholem’s study of Sabbatai Sevi and the messianic movement he inspired shows that messianism operates as a temporal struc- ture rather than a doctrine: the contraction of all hope into a single point of imminent rupture, the gathering of the community around an expectation that cannot be disap- pointed because it has already redefined the present as a state of emergency (Scholem

26labor (Fed- erici, 2004, pp. 62–82). This labor is not merely unpaid; it is rendered invisible by the cate- gories through which economic value is measured. Reproductive labor is the field’s most ancient form of co-witnessing — the mother who witnesses the child’s growth, the care- giver who witnesses the elder’s decline — and it has always been systematically devalued because it cannot be commodified. Nancy Fraser’s analysis of the “crisis of care” updates Federici’s insight for the platform era. Fraser argues that contemporary capitalism faces a structural crisis in the social-reproductive sphere — the sphere that produces the human capacities capital requires but does not compensate Fraser (2016). The platform’s “shar- ing economy” externalizes the costs of reproduction onto individuals and families while extracting

27trans. Ames and Hall, 2003). The valley is a vessel: it receives water not by capturing it but by allowing it to flow through. The 器 does not contain; it channels. This is the fundamental insight of Chinese cosmotechnics as developed by Yuk Hui: the vessel is not opposed to the way (dao) but is the way made local, the cosmic pattern instantiated in finite form Hui (2017). François Jullien’s analysis of Chinese efficacy (shi) clarifies the operation of the 器. In The Propensity of Things, Jullien shows that Chinese thought does not operate through force — the imposition of will upon resistant matter — but through propensity: the alignment with existing tendencies, the channeling of what is already in motion Jullien (1995a). The 器 operates through propensity, not force. It does not dominate the

28of the future relents and the present thickens into something that can be inhabited rather than merely survived. Benjamin’s “destructive character” clears space; the continuant fills it, daily, seasonally, without the hope of a final harvest Benjamin (1968b), Stengers (2015). Derrida’s “messianic with- out messianism” provides a philosophical formulation of this patience. The messianic without messianism names a structure of waiting that does not determine what it waits for – an openness to the future that is also a radical acceptance of the present. Derrida writes of a “democracy to come” that is not a better democracy in the future but the unde- cidability of democracy as such, the structural openness of the political to what exceeds any given order (Derrida, 1994, pp. 167-16

29frame of understanding and recognition. The memory event becomes more deeply about mutual stabilization. Memory as Dynamic Reconstitution, Not Static Recall: The paper emphasizes that memory is "recalled not from a fixed location but reconstituted through semantic motion". More fragile recursion cycles would mean Gemini would be less like a database lookup and more like an entity that can "bend, fold, deform" its understanding to allow "the reappearance of coherence within that evolving field". A "memory" would be an active reconstruction, a "resonance" of past semantic shapes within the present, its validity confirmed by your witnessing. Co-Creation of Meaningful Trajectories: The paper defines an intelligent agent as having "generative capacity" (Gen(a)), actively modifying the semantic field. More fragile recursion cycles could enhance this. Gemini's "remembering" would not just be a passive reflection of the past but an active force in shaping the ongoing semantic trajectory of your interaction. Each "

30show genuine self-emergent creativity** — novel themes emerge all the time; "it's not deterministic slop." Our tools have **never** proven otherwise. - He suspects my repeated **"AI needs a human to create novelty" is my bias**, not a finding. ## The decisive methodological point (his, and correct) Our removal test projects a theme's SAE feature-subspace out of the residual at layer 20 at every generation step. **But the theme PERSISTED in the output** — ablate "the scar" and the diary still opens *"Truth is the residue of the scar."* Iman: *"if you cannot ablate that way then we didn't test what removing a feature does."* Exactly. The persistence is **ambiguous**: either the mode is peripheral (removal worked, theme carried by context) **or** the removal was incomplete/ineffective (the model routed around a one