The Matrix and Matrix Thinking

The pre-post dialogue  
  
Neo 1 i cannot make this argument in the male way. 

i cannot (i “can” in the sense that i know what constructing this argument in the male way would require and i possess the technical repertoire to do it, but i also cannot because, ironically, that road will never get me there, whereas this road is direct) and/or will not make my argument any other way.  ·  

what i have bolded here is female.  · as is the lowercaseness of this piece but this argument requires maleness as all arguments do.  maleness is execution.  and i accept that, although it is not just.  (the desire for justice is a strong enslaver.)  it is the appropriate usage of maleness and femaleness, one in which strong maleness doesn’t kill strong femaleness that i aim to achieve. let yourself embrace the fact that what maleness and femaleness are, substantively, to what extent they are absolute and universal entities, from whence they came and come, to whom they belong, and how long they have been or will be around are irrelevant…for now. if i choose to care about those things, at this time, i will have missed my own point.  i speak of forces, of patterns, that i imagine fit behind phenomena.  “imagine” means i use my imagination.  when i speak of “being” male or female, i mean “to be” even in the minutest or most fleeting sense.  the forces, the patterns of which i speak, are maleness and femaleness.   maleness is the state of understanding oneself as a person, even partially, momentarily or subconsciously.  it is like confidence, or entitlement.  it exists whenever a thought is thought, a piece is crafted, a scene is surveyed.  it is language.  it is the explicit.  maleness is whatever is acknowledged as common currency amongst human beings.  it is the illuminated.  it is the visible.  it is “seeing,” “naming” and “doing,” as these words are commonly understood. femaleness is always the reason for the doing, whatever the reason.  femaleness is significance.  it is the condition of feeling what cannot be seen.  femaleness is reality, beyond the world. although maleness is equally reality and beyond the world…depending on one’s vantage point.  femaleness is the expanse of infinite possibility.  femaleness is the space around maleness, the infinitely many possibilities stripped away to create the idea and reality of cohesion.  as femaleness knows itself only through the male world, through concepts like value, good, evil, personhood, beauty, ugliness, etc., femaleness is the condition of being both a visitor and moulded/intended-to-exist for another.  to be male is to act visibly.  to be female is to absorb the invisible, ineffable residues attached to visible actions, and to act invisibly, even to oneself. to be male is to be “consistent.”  to be female is to appear to be inconsistent. femaleness, very often, seeing itself and being seen through maleness, becomes synonymous with weakness, rather than with bearing and enduring…teaching, knowing and carrying even while accepting and submitting to the roles of “student” and “dependent.”  femaleness silently and invisibly protects the confident and the strong in an unspeakably deep way. femaleness seems untrustworthy.  because femaleness knows itself only though maleness.  it speaks of itself only through maleness.  as a result, it can never speak sufficiently, nor justify its own existence.  of course, this does not matter when one decides not to exist for others.  maleness approaches a process, subject or task directly.  femaleness approaches indirectly.  but not because it can’t approach directly or even because it intends to approach indirectly.  great femaleness requires even greater maleness to be made visible.  like now, for example, i see each word of this piece as alive, as moving.  i see (literally, in images) the potential of the piece increasing with every word i put down—knowing that the play between the forces of which i write is essentially limitless in its capacity to explain phenomena—while, by the same action, the possibility of realizing that greatness decreases, because my capacity to create is finite. i see spiraling, pillar-like structures shooting up.  the higher the structure, the greater the significance.  great femaleness is the height of the pillars .  that i see pillars at all is great maleness; it is learning, and thinking and writing.  but i know that in order to render that significance intelligible, at a certain point i will have to disallow the growth of these pillars, so that i can build bridges amongst them and to what is readily apparent.  an impossible task…because significance itself knows no end.  brilliant female-thinking people become collectors of considerations, of perspectives from which they might consider a particular phenomenon.  they see innumerable possibilities and infinite significance. their perspectives are so wide that they are apt to let slide those things which, while finishing details to them, are fatal flaws, namely, logical, aesthetic, craftsmanly or structural inconsistencies in the male realm.  their canvasses are almost impossibly large to fill with perfect control and consideration for what is visible.  consideration for what is visible is the penultimate finishing detail.  to the female-thinking person, the visible is both pathetically small and the source of all pain and joy.  femaleness has a motion.  it can be very hard to maintain what is called “writerly control” when every second, words on the page feel different…when the environment one is in is always changing…even in stillness.  female thoughts, over time, decay.  certainty rises and falls.  precisely because to be female is to be cut off from visible tokens of action, thought, struggle.  a person who is strong in femaleness but at least as strong in maleness may not defend his or her work because s/he can readily see those errors pointed out to him/her, or because the thought s/he had has since mutated away, and s/he cannot reconnect with its truth.  i remember a graphic in one of Professor Steven Pinker’s introductory psychology lectures during my freshman year at Harvard:  i suspect, but will not attempt to “prove” to you, that the vast majority of female greatness is “lost” (in that many people cannot point to it, and women painfully feel its absence), not because brilliant female people do not attempt to communicate what they see, nor for the reason that they do not understand the principles of logic, aesthetic consistency or craftsmanship, but because true female genius is unrenderable without an at least proportionately developed mastery of maleness.   having mastered maleness, a person might be very successful.  having mastered maleness and studied femaleness, a person might put forth things/actions the world understands as “great”.  having mastered femaleness and studied maleness, a person is relegated to mediocrity by the world.  those who have mastered femaleness but not maleness can achieve peace either through destroying the part of themselves that lives for others’ respect of their perfection, or by aiming to make some of that perfection known. and that is as it should be.  this tension must exist. Beauty/greatness cannot exist without significance.but neither can it exist without being somehow framed.  happiness cannot exist without making peace with these, the only forces that create anxiety… there can be no peace if there is no anxiety.  but that does not mean we must cease to become “men” and “women” (or does it?).  at least, that is not what i have seen.  we must, in fact, become men and women.  i only care about “maleness” because it is necessary for my survival and happiness on one plane—the plane of the illuminated…common currency.  and that is only true for now.

Neo 2I am lucky that I don’t have the Anglo-Saxon legacy on this issue to grapple with. History and culture of my context approach this from a different perspective. Every Hindu (male) god has the female counterpart along with. They come in pairs (balanced) unlike the Christ/mother of god distortion. The west has either killed the woman or deified her. Both men and women and the world at large have come to pay a heavy price for this distortion. I have found the great women to be different from the crowd. Have effectively resolved this issue and understand this aberration as a distortion rather than a reality. I come from a society which followed the matrilineal system which is yet to be done away with. We also have the concept of the deep structure of the human as ardhanareeswara , the male/female principle in balance whether one is a male or a female. So the binariness is more of a peripheral issue, why I keep reminding myself that the design is perfect. It is not only the female who has to reinvent the female in her and the male in her, the male has to reinvent the male/female in him  to be at comfort with him/herself . I don’t know if I make sense but we reach the same conclusion “and then we cease to be gendered.”  We come to the same position; I am a transgender, one sure thing about the neo.  We need to work on this issue together. Hope we don’t have a serious divide, the very purpose of the attempt is to move beyond the divides. That graphics (Pinker), is more of a problem with framing and perspectives. The intelligent /moron duality is  in a way similar to the male/female binariness which too has no ‘real’ basis to it.  

Neo 3Would you sum up or shut up? ·   The new eyes help us to see. All of us need it.·   Unrealised potential is the root cause of our problems··   We are perfect by design. We are afraid to admit this BHAF, BIF HAIRY AUDACIOUS FACT.·   The gap between potential and performance is the waste ··   The invariant position, at the centre, the anchor is, to be human is to improve continually··   Fix the direction > continual improvement> reduction in waste· Metrics deals with the reduction in waste at the levels of the individual, groups, community. These are the variant positions on the path ··   Reflect continually

Neo 4Some more less FAQ s·   What are you willing to die for? ·   What is your purpose? ·   How would you rate the quality of two of your life long relationships, outside the immediate family? ·   What was the information about the recession that was missed out by IT?  

Neo 5 I read this the 3rd time, because it is in The Matrix lines. It’s very good however as in all the posts, I notice that you seem to deliberately introduce some 'noise' into each post which may divert one's attention off the topic at hand.

Neo 6 The matrix would be meaningless without the noise. Without reference to the context nothing is of any meaning