Perennial Problems

I suppose you might have missed out on Paul Feyerabend's, and especially Thomas Kuhn's Problem of Incommensurabiity. Oh, not at all. I have not looked at science or culture or language or even your attempts at communication quite the same since I ran across their big dilemma. Interestingly, it shares some dynamics with The Prisoner's Dilemma, in WinWin NonZero Game Theory, but that is a reiterative mapping story for mutual acclimation on some other, even more abstract, day. Put simply, it appears that a term used within some theoretical framework, at earlier Point A, take evolution, for example, may or may not evolve some incommensurable not entirely equivalent with, to, for, from the same term as it appears in a subsequent Point B post-revolutionary framework. For example, is what YHWH meant to Abraham an equivalent theological function to what Jesus of Nazareth meant by Abba? And, what Darwin meant by symbiosis may or may not be the same as what Jane A Gordon might mean by symbiosis... Not symbiosis, dear, her word is 'creolization.' Right of course; relentlessly flowingly so. Let's see, Darwin's use of 'evolution' to designate some regenerative function within a bio/ecosystem, may or may not be the same as Gordon's function of evolution within ecopolitically creolizing communication systems. Terms may have revolutionarily incommensurable functions, within evolving paradigms, especially between PreRevolutionary Frames and newer PostRevolutionary, still eisegetical, yet multiculturally forming, cooperatively functioning, more inclusively bilaterally WinWin extending family framework for co-empowering theories. And so, my darling, why is this your moment of epiphany? Why are both bloodless and bloody violent cultural revolutions necessarily precursors to an incommensurable multiculturing problem rather than a revolutionary point of potential resolution between a before and after, yet still co-interdependently incarnating, theoretical bilateral BothAnd frame extension? Well, because then our empirically fundamentally exegetical orthodox truths may look more like an ever-changing great chain of co-arising becoming framework, more like a revolving-recycling, perhaps even spiraling, regenerative string of interdependent events. And, this is a nightmare for you because...? What we have faith in as paradigmatic Truth and the American Competitive Survival of Fittest Nations Way, starts to look more like a creolizing archipelago, extending up and down from the equator, rather than God the Heavenly UnChanging Father beaming His divine light from the District of Columbia's Sacred Hill to spread freedom and healthy sunshine of true blue, I mean...true redmeat democracy across this multiculturing USA, from the inscription on Liberty's Statue of Original Constitutional Intent to the Cerebrally Pacific Centering Ocean, surf sounds, like breathing in and out, in and out... Well, honey, if it's all the same to you, I'll try to not get my panties in a notnot knot over this Problem, or Acclimation, of and for co-arising Incommensurability. Why don't we just assume our trusting best, and figure Kuhn's Incommensurability is also Gordon's Creolization of enculturing ecopolitics. You know, just growing the extended evolutionary paradigms out from genetics to wider memetic regenerate families. Yes, here we are, page 163 She says "If unable to fashion genuinely universal theories, creolization can help us to engage in universalizing thought..." I think she might have more clearly said universalizing multicultural thought. She's getting there. Just hang on. "...creolization can help us to engage in [multiculturing] thought or that which facilitates seeking of concepts and aspirations..." Meaning dynamic, maybe even organic, concepts and nutritional-digestive deductive aspirations. If you say so, dear. ...regenerative concepts and healthy aspirations "with what Molefi Asante (1998) has termed greater transcultural validity." Well, yes, transcultural, but especially transcultural between a pre-revolutionary frame and a post-revolutionary, more stretching-out inclusive, bilaterally temporal-continuous frame, if we assume both before and after politics of mutual cooperativizing regard rather than all that territorial and exegetical "Either This or That" and "Don't you dare Both-And me on this one" that puts our graduate students to sleep at night. And sometimes right after lunch too. Yes, bilaterally continuous does seem implied, and possibly in the Bohmian explicate/implicate sense, as well. She continues, if you could please refrain from editing... Of course, dear. Whatever will get us on to Tillich's Problem of Supersessionism the superfastest. Ok, we continue, "Moving beyond dialogue of respectful difference, which none of us should denigrate, we instead explore [re]creating ways in which otherwise [bilateral before-after] fragmented accounts of shared [eco]political, [bio]physical, and geopolitical [co-operative systemic network] spaces could and do [regeneratively] combine." Yes, exactly, it's Kuhn's Problem of pre- and post-revolutionary incommensurability of language meanings and empowerment functions all over again. Why Kayko Hesslein didn't use 'incommensurable' instead of 'supersessionism' or, even better, 'creolization', I don't know It sounds like super-secessionism, I suppose. Anyway, with that substitution of terms, Hesslein claim's Tillich's creolization theology of messianic redemption would, if truly fulfilled in the Christ event, invalidate Judaism's capacity to continuously deliver regenerative redemption even just among the Chosen People. What would Jesus say, do you think? Probably to reconsider the creolizing lilies in the well-composted bilateral fields, or frames, or whatever.