Is generativism about recursive matter?

Is generativism about recursive matter?

John Bjarne Grover

The assumption is that recursive matter ex nihilo is characterized by the simple universal formula FORM = MATTER. The basis for this idea is the 'feeling' that certain pieces of recursive matter tend to recur in the same form over and over again. I do not have much empirical or theoretical reason for this - but use the lapis philosophorum which derived from my writing of the third part of DDS as the basis for this assumption. Since Böhme it has been more or less normal to recognize the idea that the lapis philosophorum = Jesus Christ. What is meant by that? For once, one can guess that much philosophy recognizes the vedic SOMA as such a lapis crushed in a mortar and dissolved in a fruit juice is distributed to the religious community during the sermon. That makes it a variant of the christian communion - and there are probably traditions which recognize Christ or his resurrection as a piece of recursive matter. However that be, it is interesting to observe that the lapis which I found contains some FORMs which associates it with christian dogma: The head looks like a LAMB, alternatively an EAGLE which also is part of christian symbolism, and the man with the uwards-pointing nose could symbolize the resurrection (when, that is, it is on this stone) and the frog could be the amphibial property of being both man and god. The diagonal to the smooth surface could be the wooden cross. What is the 'mountain' - a sort of Golgatha - or is it a face-and-throat of the transubstantiation - or the transfiguration on the mountain? Could be some of these which belong under the idea that the lapis = Christ. But if that is tradition, it means that the form is always the same. Furthermore, there seems to be tradition that the lapis is composed of salt, mercury and incombustible sulphur - and that the combustibility of the sulphur is the same as the light of the world and the object of attention during contemplation - it escaped the stone and brought light to the world. But, if so, it means that the matter is always the same.

Hence there is a basis for the idea that FORM = MATTER as the definition of recursive matter. It falls out of nothing - and some would speculate that it comes from anywhere and that it can transcend the einsteinian border of speed for matter. It would be the idea that FORM = MATTER which lends to it this ability to fall out of nothing.

It is this and only this assumption - that FORM = MATTER - which is the basis for the idea that recursive matter is the unpronounced theme of generativism - which is a theoretic framework which can open for an infinite variability in the FORM of a certain MATTER. Structuralism can also make infinities without problems - the difference is in the idea of the innate competence. You can collect woodpieces and rods in the forest - this looks like a dog, this like a rabbit, this like a frog - and decorate your garden with them. There is an infinite variability in the shapes, and if you search long enough you can find the shape you need. But generativism presumes an innate competence which provides humans with a set of carpentry tools with which you can make any form out of the same wooden matter. It means that if the lapis is always composed of the chemical substances of salt, mercury and incombustible sulphur, what is new with generativism is that it can make for a variability in the derivational history of its description (of a sentence) as an essential tool for shaping its form into anything you need: If formerly you could send a wooden tablet with the single word HELLO on it through the universe, and it always had this and only this message, what is new with generativism is that it now can contain any message. That is because the new grammar endows the sender with certain innate tools for giving ABSTRACT + CONCRETE FORM = MATTER in such a way that the concrete outer shape of the woodpiece can vary where it formerly had one and only one form.

That is the difference - but it depends on this idea of FORM = MATTER. I dont know if that is essential to recursive matter and neither do I know if such matter can travel through the universe. Could be it can. The new theory does not mean a revolt against christian dogma: If formerly Christ now and then sent this HELLO to humans on earth with the little stone, a sort of miniature bible, the new millenium can come to see a new variability in the messages from heaven.

Recursion is an essential part of generative grammar. Does the capacity for a phrase structure to call itself mean that FORM = MATTER?