{"id":4719,"date":"2010-01-26T22:29:18","date_gmt":"2010-01-27T02:29:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/?p=4719"},"modified":"2011-01-16T16:29:02","modified_gmt":"2011-01-16T20:29:02","slug":"rothenberg","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2010\/01\/26\/rothenberg\/","title":{"rendered":"rothenberg emergence of nondeterminate residue after double negation"},"content":{"rendered":"<ul>\n<li>So we have<strong> P<\/strong>, the negation of <strong>P<\/strong> is written <strong>~P <\/strong>(not-P)<\/li>\n<li>The negation of <strong>~P<\/strong> or <strong>not not-P<\/strong> will be written as <strong>~~P<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Now in classical logic <strong>~~P=P<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>But in paralogic, <strong>~~P <strong>= P and some nondeterminate remainder. This remainder will be written as *<\/strong>.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong><\/strong><strong>~~P = P* <\/strong><\/p>\n<blockquote><p><span style=\"color: #000000;\">The operation of the double negation is homologous to the operation of the empty set: it &#8220;spontaneously generates&#8221; an excess.\u00a0 In the action of the empty set upon the thing, it is as though the thing is doubly negated, once from the outside (the cut or hollowing that unglues the thing from being) and once from the inside (the minimal difference from itself) &#8230; we could say that an object is really an <strong>object*<\/strong>. &#8230; <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\"> <strong>The object*<\/strong> \u2014 whether material object, linguistic object, or subject \u2014 is always <em>more than one, but not quite two<\/em><\/span><em>.<\/em> 39<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>So we have P, the negation of P is written ~P (not-P) The negation of ~P or not not-P will be written as ~~P Now in classical logic ~~P=P But in paralogic, ~~P = P and some nondeterminate remainder. This remainder will be written as *. ~~P = P* The operation of the double negation &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/2010\/01\/26\/rothenberg\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;rothenberg emergence of nondeterminate residue after double negation&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[24,15],"tags":[143],"class_list":["post-4719","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-lacan","category-subjectivity","tag-excessive"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4719","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4719"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4719\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6224,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4719\/revisions\/6224"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4719"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4719"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.terada.ca\/discourse\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4719"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}