Beauty and The Universe

Ends of Good.

Therefore, the learning learned from reification prolongs wandering and suffering. Being content with content, there is no need of further content. One is content. Description itself suffers by covering over oneness. All points of view are all good, whether split or whole. Envy is the name given to the desire for being. Babies are born without this desire in effect, and so are our learning. Learning learns from reification to prolong the splitting, shunting the virtuous circle of admiration to one side.

Beauty and the Universe

As we spoke about those human beauties which already no doubt share their portion of the nonhuman and the nonhumane, we may also think of the beauty of the universe as a summum bonum that clarifies and blows away all the rest. How is the beauty of the universe psychic and/or apsychic? How can I love it when I can love nothing but it?

Platonic, no doubt, an eidos of the form for which everything is empty except of the universe itself.

Defining beauty in this way is no doubt so new to us as to be unrecognisable, unlearned as it is by the learning learned in conventional learning. ‘All good’ is more than radical. Nothing can be more radical than the summum bonum of the All Good. Bébaios means constant and firm and reliable in Aristotle’s language. All good is the baby bébaios doing the unlearning.

Art of the Universe

The idea that the only art is the art of the universe, not least because this liquidates art in a way that NFTs (a new-fangled example) never quite can. Nun, stigme, hama, Augenblick, presence, NFT. All good.

That Art Which Does Not Exist For Which We Iterate Art

We always suspect somewhere in us that art does not exist, and that it is not capable of beauty, just if it is not the beauty of the entire universe. To be bored in a gallery and not admit it, or to find a piece of music beautiful but then to realize one does so only in the mind, the mind where the beauty of the entire universe is seated, which by no means indicates it needs the mind to be.

The mind knows within itself that which can exceed and outlive it. Only the mind can know the inhuman and the inhumane that will have no need of it, and still be thought.

No Business

Mind already minds itself. It thinks its outside. There is no business.

All Good Baby

We scramble around for ‘radical views’ but only the view of the universe as an entirety can be beautiful and beautifully more-than-radical, and only the single-focus of this viewpoint can be surprising to us. The move from the dimension of the World to the dimension of the Universe is something the later Laruelle has engaged. What Weil understood as a young girl, Laruelle has taken decades to formulate, though it matters little when we get there since we already are.

What arouses, arouses only in the dimension of the Universe, and we know that we fool ourselves all the time to think otherwise. But there is no fool in this as well, all good.

To engage beauty in this way, we glimpse or rather already fully inhabit a restrained and magnificent mode of being in which we do not have to be to be, and in which the art object is only known as the very fine art of the beauty of the whole universe itself.

Cinema

Films show perfectly well that humans in particular do not have to be (to be), and this is a joy.

The Ends of the Worlds

In my own family, the word ‘beautiful’ is present. My father, who left school at fifteen with little formal education, calls many things ‘beautiful’. He does so as the person he is, that is, as someone not exposed to a formalised education, and so as someone for whom beauty is a true and surprising boon.

In the hearing of this, I took in a sense of beauty as a word, without judging how it should be applied. We do not need to read Kant’s Third Critique to understand how beauty unties us from all finality. In beauty’s usages, and in my father’s usages, it is self-evident that beauty, and the beauty of the entire universe, is not related to finality.

We can say that there is an addiction to imperfection and that imperfection means an addiction to the transcendental illusion of finality. In Kant, in fact, the teleology is never completed but always defined as a moment of quasi-teleological self-exasperation. The end of the end is always the end.

No doubt had Kant lived longer, we would now have a Fourth Critique since the exposure of beauty to itself, as technics and intelligence, would have meant the elaborations of further ends. As we hear in the title of Derrida’s beautiful and famous but famously unread essay, ‘The Ends of Man’, we may deal with ends in the plural. For the end of the world it is the same. We speak of ‘ends of worlds’. A baby can see here that there is no one end of the world.

Good’s Bébaios Pageant

That beauty has and is thought according to ends (design as such) is a thought taken up by Weil when she notes that there is no finality in the thought of the entire universe. This is what we might call beauty according to an Additionalist NonFinalist Realism.

All good is Additionalist NonFinalist Realism.

Beauty and Envy, The Strange Attractors

Now, such a realism is able to entertain a kind of fractal blossoming of beauty in relation to itself that on a human scale is also called ‘envy’. How does human beauty develop as the shell of the beauty of the entire universe save as the motion of splitting that means we only ever see our own beauty reflected in the form of others who we will therefore inevitably see attempting to exorcise us in them?

We can say here that the question is moot. Envy only occurs absent the all good position.

The apex-predator relation is in fact one of complex, quantum self-envy. We move towards the beauty of the entire universe through moments of self-correction in relation to the other who will try to exorcise our own beauty as a threat to their own, and yet these ‘corrections’ are—and this is what we mean by beauty as baby wonder surprise—superfluous. 

Extinction Apophenia

Perhaps ‘extinction’ is the most apophenic word. In its iteration, we see that all words are apophenic and that all referential relations are therefore fractal. Grammar is all we need to know of futural cosmology.

Once fractally apophenic, the word ‘extinction’ alone is a lesson in there being no extinctness. There is never zero-evidence.

Bon

All words are baby born bon. All words are baby born good. All words are all good and all words are the words of the summum bonum baby.

The Beauty Change  

Beauty changes, therefore; beauty is the beauty change. Pre- and proto-ontologically, beauty is warmth before and without being. It is bask, macquillage of sextillion. Colour eucatastrophe.

Insofar as there is sexiness that is anaemic and without need of genealogy, then this beauty too must be envisaged from the dimension of the Universe and not the World. Children are beautiful and always a lesson to us, precisely because they do not yet have the Desire for Being which later on locates the lure and addiction of beauty’s defeat.

Envy splits us, for no reason at all. Psychic progressivism and psychological Marxism will teach us that beauty need be earned on a material scale, but this is a slowdown and a takedown. The Universe as we live it now does not have time for a transition. Having said that, since nothing may be forced, then the perfect immanence of beauty must be located in relaxation.