Updated
Religious, Philosophical and Political Systems are Boundary Assertions as Attention Based Language and Symbolism Dynamics
There is no religious, philosophical or political sect that does not result into a divergence of different interpretted values, over time as new sects, nor is not subject to synthezing exterior interpretted values into their own system, so as to maintain a sense of identity in the face of opposition.
All religious/philosophical/political sects derive a set of self-evident truths, which at the primitive level are effectively boundary claims on existence where the act of questioning of said self-evident truths is given a further boundary of refusal through meta-language games that either divert of nullify the questions and questioning act.
And in turn of the asserted self-evident truths the sects use basic to advanced levels of reasoning by which to build a structure from said axioms. This reasoning is the scaling of the axioms in a manner where the single foundation exists in a variety configurations that reflects its appearance under differing contexts of application and conceptualization.
What remains across the sects is the execution of force behind the assertions as the founding point is purely assertion and what this nature of force is or is not is irrelevant as the nature of the force is limited to the act of assertion itself thus elevating the act of power and identity of the sect to a quasi form of a language game built into the structural level.
In these respects religion, philosophy and politics are boundary claims on existence, using language and symbols, thus elevating language as but the proto-typical religion, philosophy or political system given the language and symbolism act as means if containing and redirecting the attention of the members in a manner that maintains and expands the sects by very said act of attention.
The processual structure of religious, philosophical and political sects are reducible to the following:
1. A boundary in existence is drawn by the assertion of a claim as self-evident; the self-evidence of the claim is a meta-assertion within the primary assertion itself.
2. The asserted claim is scaled with further claims to result in a transmission of the claim in accords to the various contexts by which it expresses itself.
3. The sects diverge into new sects while synthesizing the nature of the various sects to reinforces the boundaries of the claims of there own.
4. Re-contextualization of the claim appeara over time as a divergence of the structure under the means of time itself where sect A in time X appears different in time Y.
5. What remains is boundary claims on existence by language assertion thus resulting the sect being the act of language itself.
6. Language is the sect; language is the bounardy claim of how, what, where, who attention is directed as without attention the sect ceases.
7. Attention is the energy of the sect, language and symbolism is how the attention is structured as the sect.
8. The sect is a meta-language game given empirical and abstract boundaries as the distinction of the sect itself, a meta-language game is the relation of language and symbol to language and symbol.
9. The divergence of the sect, from others, by elevation of axioms is the distinction of the sect itself thus conflict in language and symbolism is a necessary feature of the sect so that definition emerges.
10. This conflict is the divergence of the attention within and of the populace from which it emerges thus a sect appears within the sect from which it is derived.
11. Sect emerge and dissolve from sects, what remains is the scale invariance of the symbols and language from which the sect is derived thus the dissolution of a sect does not necessitate its complete absence when scaled across time but rather and expansion and contraction of the sect within a measure span of time.
12. What remains is boundary assertions as the language and symbol game that contains and directs attention.
13. The structure of attention is the sect itself as the attention is the meaning of the language and symbols and the language and symbols are how attention is directed and contained.
14. The boundary of meaning becomes scale invariant as language and symbols emerges and dissolvd over time thus what remains is a pure observer effect as scale invariance itself given the focal point of attention is the everpresent medium, the single point from which the sect emerges and dissolves, re-emerges and re-dissolves.
15. The scale invariance of attention results in the similarities of symbols across sects while the constitutive meaning of the symbol varies across the sect in some contexts while maintaining partial transferable meaning in other contexts.
16. The sect is meaning application, meaning as "means", is the transfer of one state of being into another thus resulting in the act of meaning application as the act of change itself thus in this context meaning and change are synonymous.
17. The direction of meaning is the direction of change thus the sect is a boundary for how, when, where and who change unfolds; power is the mediation of change, power is derived from attention, attention structure is determined the the sect.
18. The sect is the direction of meaning; the assertion of axioms as boundaries it the assertion of boundaries on the act of attention.
19. The divergence and synthesis of claims is moderated by the act of attention itself thus the axiom of the sect are the limits of the attention applied to itself where further attention results in the divergence and synthesis of further boundaries.
20. The sect is the transformation and maintainence of axioms; the sect is the transformation and maintenance of attention itself.
21. The divergence and synthesis of sects is the divergence and synthesis the the structure that contains attention; this act of divergence is synthesis is the focal point of attention itself.