Area	Play...course

	logogeny gary e. davis	January 11, 2019

Logos—> -logy can be troped to have evolved, from immanent domain (imagine a scene) to large-scale domain (imagine its theater), in a two-fold way: (a) scaling up within Greek understanding, then (b) that scaling having a genealogy of its own (beyond classical Greek eras), as the sense of discourse (trope for its level of ambiguity), doctrine (ditto), and expression (ditto) “changed” over the centuries—a change which was progressive: Discourse in Latinate Rome was distinct from discourse in Christiandom, distinct from discourse in Cartestian modernity, distinct from discourse in scientific modernity. We can model genealogy historiographically, but modeling that as evolving is beyond historiology , i.e., involving a qualitative progressivity that is beyond historicality (i.e., beyond era-relative monumentality—“historical!”—and chronologies). Historicality implied by a narrative history (historiography) may be thought progressively (in a qualitative sense), or not. Qualitative progressivity is relative to a conception of betterment between point A and point B: improving, innovation, better life, better inquiry, better thinking, better community, etc. For example, the historicality of an early-modern discourse (Cartesian) may be just as “historical” (culturally monumental) for its era (to its era) as a late-modern discourse (Kuhnian) is for/to its era. But Kuhnian conceptuality involves a paradigmicity that would be incomprehensible to a Cartesian. Indeed, Kuhnian discourse has a meta-paradigmatic conception of progress that is postmodern (relative to the physicalist structualism of metascience through the first half of the 20th century). One might model the generation of an era that allows for retrojective historization as something historiogenic: evolutionarity is generative. Discoursing a genalogy of domains (topical specialties in academia) may be topogenic. A genealogy of figurative thinking might be called tropogenic. I would defend the notion that an -ography grows from its -ogeny, such that how the -graphy emerges from its -geny is the -logicity or -logicality distilled into process. Likewise with phenomenality: Emergence of phenomena (phenomenogeny) result in presents (phenomenography) which are bridged in a conception of presence (phenomenology). All that isn’t serendipitous: a -logy as structure (domain, discourse, doctrine) is a derivative of the activities (articulated retrojectively as processes) that result in something whose genesis is there (irt presents) to explain or articulate. An ont-ology is a derived mode of its ont-ogeny about ontic presence or conceptuality implied by phenomena. The logicity of a genesis is always retrospective, actually retrojective relative to interests of articulation present after the fact, i.e., in light of (or facing) the presence having a mysterious genesis to comprehend (if not capture, for the sake of securing the warrant or integrity or authority of the present). next—> ecogeny

 

 

Be fair. © 2019, gary e. davis