Theory of Precedence

[PolyPeter]

Since I died about half a year ago, when I took dmt, I’ve been trying to articulate several things that became clear from that event.

This essay is one of them.

It’s called Theory of Precedence.

The basic idea is that whatever appears depends on something that precedes its appearance, but that “something” cannot itself be fully contained as an object inside what appears.

 

The essay separates three levels:

object,
representation,
presentation.

An object is what is being referred to. A representation is the model, symbol, code, description, or map of it. Presentation is the regime of availability that makes that representation count as a representation at all: interpretation, execution, attention, evaluation, consciousness, etc.

The core thesis is that representation depends on presentation.

 

A system can model itself, inspect itself, improve itself, represent previous layers of its own operation, and even build meta-frameworks. But it cannot fully capture the current presentation that makes those representations available without generating a new layer or collapsing the distinction between representation and presentation.

So this is not an attempt to “prove God” through formalism.

It is more precise than that: it tries to show the structural wall that any representational framework hits when it tries to contain the condition of its own appearing.

 

Metashifting is the operation where a framework turns its own horizon into an object of a wider horizon. You can keep climbing levels like this, and you can even define formal limits of the chain. But the limit of the chain is not Omega.

Omega is not the final level.

Omega is the precedence from which the whole chain appears as a chain.

In short:

every representation of presentation appears under a presentation.

That is the wall the essay is trying to formalize.

 

Check it out!

https://pedrocrohare.com/precedence/en/

Edited 1 hour ago by PolyPeter