XIII: Value-in-Circulation: Through Overview and Oversight??*

0.    Introduction

	In the course of writing twelve papers on this topic of value-in-circulation I would like to produce a summary from another angle, namely, the space between the profession of an overview and our tendency to suffer also from a process of oversight. To some extent these two keywords have the same denotation, however, from a more connotative point of view there is a difference in that the former is treated more positively while the latter is often treated as defective (despite, or in spite of, the intriguing use of the expression in the formal titles of the Oversight Committees associated with the CIA and other branches of US Government, e.g.). In this paper let me re-examine this topic through this lens of these two keywords albeit in both their positive and negative aspects. (0)

1.    An ‘Overview’ as an Overview

	In overlooking our topics, or, rather our topic, namely, value-in-circulation (and not so much ‘value’ and separate considerations of its ‘circulation’) let me first look more closely at this subtle concept of representation as re-presentation. (1)

	Representation as a ‘map of that represented’ cannot be treated, philosophically and critically, as mere representation. Presentations can never be ‘pure’ since our phenomenal-phenomenological interactions demand forms of interaction in a gestalt field where no aspect of the field functions purely in its own right. There can be no pure intentional focus therefore, no pure intentional object, no pure intentional object-state, no pure intentional objective (or however else you might wish to define forms of gestalt focus). (2)

*Link to latest version of paper on my Homestead Homepage Site (circulation13.rtf).
www.homestead.com/noelshomepage/noelshomepage3.html 

That granted, then ‘representation’ is also a ‘re-presentation’. What are the ramifications in this subtle shift in meaning/s? For a start no representation should be treated as purely passive, as merely representative. Treated in an active mode, our psychic map of representation now has two aspects that need to be carefully and critically noted but non-absolutely demarcated, namely, as a text that has the power to re-present that of which it represents, and, furthermore, not only to re-present the same but actually represent the same. As we live in one Life-World and one World-of-Life only, and, there is this no absolute distinction between its representation and that of which it represents, it follows that our representation is to some extent in tune with that of which it both represents and re-presents. Is that possible, or, under what conditions should we take such into account? Let me tell the following story. (3)

	Captain Cook headed to Australia, the Southern Continent, aware there was land there but not exactly in what form it took. He circumnavigated Australia and drew a much more accurate map (although not without some defects such as treating Tasmania as a peninsular and not as an island). Later maps much more accurately represented the shape of Australia. Now, if I were Captain Cook the initial outline of the maps presented for him an objective to explore but not so much an accurate map for detailed exploration once he had arrived. After his considerable re-mapping of Australia, the new map of his effectively re-presents the then current understanding of that continent. In this light it is not just a passive piece of paper! It both ‘represents’ Australia and ‘re-presents’ the same. In some sense we might argue, if only metaphorically, that Cook’s re-mapping is ‘closer’ to how Australia has come to be seen mapwise. All maps, therefore, should be seen as both ‘representations’ but also as ‘re-presentations’. We live in one world, and, the meta-textual realm of genres of activity and interpretation imply a living dimension of power-in-dissemination rather than the scattering of pieces of text whether unique or replicated. Furthermore, from this inter-subjective dimension, an existential historiography should also tell us much about the total, overall formation of that text as it was produced through processes of meta-textual re-production. Then, through a parallelization of text versus meta-text an existential excess is re-presented in and through the apparent transparency of the non-textual by virtue of this re-simulation (as re-presented therein). Furthermore, in and through a certain degree of intentional alignment, a close reading of that text or set of associated texts, should reveal to us to what degree such a re-presentation was conducted in good faith, i.e., existentially. I would contend, e.g., that Cook’s mistaking Tasmania (Van Diemen’s Land) for a ‘peninsular’ and not treating it as an ‘island’ was not through some desire to obscure its existence from the rest of the world, say the French, e.g., but a genuine mistake whose genesis can be seen in an examination of his log book in this segment of his first trip to Australia. With each mapping, conducted in good faith, Australia has been progressively re-presented with an increasing semblance of authenticity, good-faith, etc. Today, the captain steering a large oil-tanker into a harbour can place a great degree of confidence that the maps they use bear a considerable resemblance to the reality on the sea (although the more accurate maps are the more they will mis-represent terrain over time given erosion, shifting sand-banks, the expansion of cities, etc. (4)

	Let me look more closely into this subtle concept of representation as re-presentation. Given that representation is a simulation, and, a Postmodern treatment of simulation would see it as only a form of re-simulation then it follows that the psychic distance between an indirect representative mapping and its re-presentation of that as directly re-presented is not an absolute distinction. That granted, for the sake of argument, in what manner is a representation to be treated as re-presenting that which it is a re-presentation of and not merely as a sheer representation? In what sense a simulation, as a simulation, should be treated as a re-simulation of a re-simulation, as a re-simulation of that which it represents? Obviously a ‘map of Australia’ is not ‘Australia’, yet, on the other hand, this subtle argument is not saying the mere opposite that there is no re-presentational interconnection between a ‘map of Australia’ and ‘Australia itself’ since the later should also be understood through our psychic mapping of the same. In this sense there is little difference, but, a difference all the same, and, it is our critical task to be able to observe the rules that allow us to dialectically navigate this in-between-territory! How is such dialectical navigation to proceed? (5)

	In my eleventh paper I noted:

Through critical re-formation of the relational representation 
There is the critical reformation of such material. (46)

But such a distinction between ‘reformation’ and ‘re-formation’
Is naturally lost in re-presentational re-simulation. (47)

Intentional responses follow on in this re-presented wake
Whose existential value is dependent upon the integrity of process. (48)

Thence the existential augmentation of value 
In the ongoing re-presented constitution of our relationships. (49)
Let me explain. In the footnotes to propositions 46 & 47 I discuss the concept of quantum de-coherence. In a quantum frame of reference there is no real difference between a presentation and re-presentation of the same presentation, a representation and a re-presentation. However, with de-coherence that relative non-difference breaks down. In proposition 48 I take up a similar concept in the ‘integrity of process’. From there it is but a short distance to formulating some rules that let us treat or not treat a representation as re-presentation (and a presentation as being re-presented). Let me elaborate. (6)

	When conducted in good faith a map of Australia not only represents Australia but also re-presents it. Our treatment of that map, in turn, conducted in good faith, has the power to navigate ourselves to its shores, around its shores and over the surface of its land. When we go from Melbourne to Sydney we more or less go ‘north’. When we go from Sydney to Melbourne we more or less go ‘south’. This mapping of the terrain ‘lives for-us’ in our passage between these two cities. We are operating in and through and beyond the genre of mapping both as an ‘activity’ and as an ‘interpretation’. There can be no absolute difference between this sense of activity and interpretation. ‘Mapping’ is neither a merely passive pursuit nor merely an active performance. In and through the overall hermeneutic circle of comprehension (with its balances interplay between synthesis and analysis, etc.) and its co-correspondence with the overall transcendental suspension, it follows that the sense of the existential unlocked therein is realized in an authentic fashion to that degree such authenticity is being exercised. To lie we must first be able to tell the truth (in order to lie in part)! To be inauthentic we must be relatively authentic with one another first in order to then be able to de-existentialize our current integrity of practice. But, given some degree of non-textual transparency through its parallel degree of integrity it follows that some degree of coherence is in play and that establishes us in the midst of such play! Encountering and engaging a map in this attitude is to recognize that same map as lived! So, through the auspices of the transcendental dimension, a map-as-lived is experienced as a direct representation of that which it is a map of to that extent it is well-formed and authentically constructed and enacted. (7)

	Hence, in an integrity of process, with a requisite degree of apposite coherence, that simulated is re-simulated to that extent that no absolute demarcation can be drawn between one or the other (except from a non-transcendental, non-relational point of view). Today with an increasing sense of the virtual (and its non-absolute separation from the relatively non-virtual), the realm of the Internet with its multiple, parallel inputs and outputs, this concept of non-absolute distinction in representation is beginning to be recognized as an inherent feature of our world. That, to that extent a relationship is empowered, authentically re-aligned, enacted with integrity and centered in its transcendental constitution ‘representation’ becomes ‘re-presentation’, a self-critical process of ‘re-formation’ becomes ‘reformation’, etc. (8)

	What difference does this ‘difference’ make? Through such alignment and re-alignment the individual has both the opportunity and the ability to be centered in that relationship under examination. What is meant by ‘alignment/re-alignment’? It is that psychic attitude wherein an adequate degree of transcendental identification is established through an overall transcendental suspension. Therein we are aligned with how things are to that extent we are able to proceed in this direction. Moreover, through a collapse of non-transcendental space and time and place our identification is established transcendentally. By such means we do science or history or theology or mathematics, etc., etc., albeit subjected to the limits of that time and space and place. We become part of that simulation and that simulation becomes part of us, conducted in good faith to that extent it is transcendentally aligned with the sense of the transcendental itself. Indeed, it is only through such a life that our life is indeed lived (in deed). Otherwise, through a complete sense of phenomenal isolation we could not live both in deed and in fact. Encounter and engagement can only be in and through relationships in such a manner that every point in those relationships is a living center of that relationship (when the parties concerned find themselves so existentially identified). Thence our simulation in a world of re-simulation, as a representation/re-presentation expressed through re-presentation/representation. (9)
	Looking over this topic what else can we add to this review? In proposition 49 as re-noted here, from such transcendental re-alignment a process of existential augmentation is facilitated and amplified. This is realized in two senses, passively and actively, or, i.e., through the behalf of that relationship from its point of view and our acting on the behalf of that relationship (in an act of transcendental reservation wherein in turn with that relationship we enact what that relationship appears to transcendentally dictate in this regard despite possible forms of non-transcendental approbation or non-approbation). In either case, I would argue that existential flows of value though an existential transcendental excess re-direct ourselves and/or permit us to re-direct it. The essential mechanism/s here being facilitated and enacted positively through processes of existential direction/re-direction and negatively though processes of relative non-obstruction and/or de-obstruction. Effectively, an augmentation of value is arrived at through processes of modal enrichment, i.e., the exercise of more modes of activity being co-opted and actively exercised and these same modes being engaged in a more richly intensive manner (as examined elsewhere; richness having this double sense). As a consequence, re-simulation is enriched contributing to an enriched sense of reality (rather than a misconstrued dialectic between real and unreal, or real and ideal, or appearance and reality, etc!)! (10)

	But an overviewing can be shortsighted or longsighted and much can be missed as we sink into a natural, concrete habit of ‘seeing reality’ as a process of engaging a so-called ‘external world’, etc. Let me make some comments in this regard in order to demonstrate how easy and how far we can fall into non-critical, no-philosophical thinking through overlooking its imputational and non-imputational natures! (11)

2.    An Overview though Over-Viewing

	Is there a difference between over-looking and looking-over? Negatively, we might refer the first to ‘oversight’ and the latter to ‘over-seeing’? In the latter we have, in effect, an over-viewing, an attempt to see too much. What form might that take? (12)

	In our looking over the world a number of biases seem to operate despite careful vigilance, or, indeed, in spite of the same. We have a tendency to let our emotions get in the way of a more objective analysis and judgment. A precondition of the operation of an overall transcendental suspension is the necessary bracketing of our emotional input. Emotion energy is necessary, it brings us to the task to hand with some force of motivation. However, once there, we should learn to counter-balance the same. (13)

	Another tendency is the current weighting our disposition. If we are cheerful mood then we tend to be more optimistic that perhaps we should be, or v.v. (14)

	In contrast to an internal disposition, as currently weighted, pre-contextual contextualization can also over-weight us in certain directions and under-weight us in others. Subliminal advertising is one case in point. (15)

	Contagion is another element in the mix of judgments that passes for an apparent objectivity. We head off and do what others are doing, or, desist from doing what others now desist from. The arena of the stock market, everyday, gives us examples of this type of either/or behaviour. (16)

	Or we have certain fixations that just distort judgment in those blindspots subject to such fixation. (17)

	Many other tendencies, too, can stop us from exercising a certain transcendental objectivity in our research. However, being aware of the same can also help us to correct these distortions in our lenses upon the world. How is such a feat carried out in the midst of such an uneven sea of chaos? Through the invocation of an overall transcendental suspension that manages to effectively overcome such imbalances. Difference is always to be observed, however, through the imposition of an adequate overall transcendental suspension such bumps on the landscape can be adjusted or corrected for? Misreading this psychic landscape is a form of over-viewing. On the other hand, oversight is more a matter of not seeing what should be seen. (18)

3.    An Oversight through Overseeing

	In oversight, in the negative sense of missing what should have been seen, we have, more or less, the opposite type of scenario where we just do not look hard enough, draw the necessary connection and make the appropriate conclusions that should be relatively obvious. Another set of mechanisms come into play. (19)

	Unpleasant things are avoided. In time, consciously repressed or suppressed. Or pleasant things are relatively magnified in hindsight that equally distort our memory and processes of recognition. (20)

	Strands of meaning are not seen as connected, or, strands that should not be connected are (whether treated pre-conditionally, conditionally and/or post-conditionally). (21)

	Or, conclusions are drawn without realizing their full import. Altogether, we have another series of distortions that also cloud, obstruct or divert our judgment from taking a more proper course. (22)

	How should we cope with these mechanisms that arise through too much seeing and not enough seeing (in both senses of that expression). We see with our senses and we see with our minds (through logic, expectation, causal consistency, etc.). Better ‘to see’ in both senses by noting these positive types of distortions in overseeing and negative types of distortion in oversight assisted by the careful operation of an overall transcendental suspension that brackets our ontological and epistemological beliefs and prejudices and learns how to suspend the same through parallel processes of balance, neutralization, attempting to see both more immanently and more transcendentally through a more intense form of encountering and engagement along with the desired forms of recognition that come through such attuned processes of practice, etc. Is such a transcendentally clarified position possible – yes, as an ongoing work in progress! (23)

4.    Oversight as an Oversight (That Effectively Oversees)

	To some extend it might be true to say that there are two ways of seeing an object, directing ourselves towards an intentional object(ive). We can look ‘at’ this object in its objectivity, or, we can identify with that object in its objectivity and attempt to see things from its point of view. The first view is conducted in a transcendent orientation, the second in an immanent orientation. Then, we can either entertain either orientation or overdo or underdo the same; overdoing an over-view or underdoing an effective act of oversight through not attending to what needs to be overseen. Of course, the middle path through this thicket of too much, too little and/or just right is realized through conducting an adequate overall transcendental suspension. Interpreted through this schema just noted lets us treat a temperate practice of oversight that effectively oversees as a process of immanent identification that allows us to also see into what is under or, rather, ‘within’ that act of examination. Accepting that each of these four stances has both its defects and its compensations let us note that a critical perspective is realized in and through an adequate transcendental suspension. Then, if clarity of vision is obtained through an adequate overall transcendental suspension how is an effective process of oversight going to be conducted in its own terms of reference or able to be set up in such a manner so as to contribute an effective input into a critical process of suspension? Because all processes of examination are already based upon the performance of an overall transcendental suspension! This equivalence between an overall hermeneutic circle of comprehension and an overall transcendental suspension (or a gestalt reading or the imposition of a harmonic theory, etc.) imply that no particular attitude is going to be able to operate in its own right. That granted, then we only need to perceive how all facets and factors, all positions and perspective are drawn out of such a basis and how with a proper balancing of such stances a more balanced reading is able to be produced. Let me now examine the nature of this critical process. (24)

4.    The Critical Treatment of Representation through Re-Presentation

	Through the critical treatment of representation there critically emerges the more perceptive stance of re-presentation which both passively and actively re-presents that situation to hand as the current intentional objective under examination. To that extent accessible to-us, our recognition of reality as encountered and engaged, is revealed for-us in its essential configuration as found in its essential co-understanding of its contextual configuration as phenomenal-phenomenologically appreciated by-us for-us. ‘Passively’ it is seen whilst ‘actively’ we are ‘empowered’ to respond in and through such an emergent understanding as it is progressively thematized. By ensuring a balanced reading of the situation, in its apparent essential configuration, a representation of the intentional objective as that situation-currently-to-hand and immanently there-in and transcendentally there-from, we become empowered there-after through re-presentation to respond in empathy and in sympathy with this essential understanding as it is progressively thematized for-us by-us. From an existential surplus realized in this simulation/re-simulation of this re-presentation we are given the power to respond in an adequate fashion, i.e., properly, appropriately and validly (in and through processes of alignment/re-alignment of value). (25)

	How is this critical process realized and how is it, in turn, critically appreciated? By exactly the same mechanisms! I.e., in and through the virtual/non-virtual simulation/re-simulation of that situation to hand as it is appreciated to-hand, and, through a repetition of this process wherein that sense of progress itself is subjected to the same simulated/re-simulated scrutiny. (26)

	This granted, by what rules are we to operate in order to ensure a critical appreciation of the intentional objective to hand? (27)

	By ongoing balance to that extent all processes are either balanced by both all other encountered relevant processes and all mirrored by parallel counter-processes (in a re-reading of the same). I.e., all that is relevant is totally encountered and mirrored through countering! But, as we can only do one thing, or a few different things, at the same time, how is this complex process able to be engaged? (28)

	Through the emergence of a resultant representation of the overall-situation-to-hand and its non-destructive neutralization there emerges a re-presentational refinement of the same that allows us to act in such a manner that is more fully informed by the same (through such alignment/re-alignment). Such a process naturally re-occurs till such a time additional information and/or additional responses are both neither called for nor called forth. (29)

	An operative mechanism here, I believe, is a matter of emergent-resonance both passively constituted and actively constituted. Let me explain. The relevancy of the parts of our examination have a certain emergent resonance in the ambit of those investigations. If I were meant to be ‘counting the fruit’ in a fruit-bowl and part way through counting the number of apples in that fruit-bowl I were to start counting individual grapes in a bunch of grapes then the resonance of this more focused form of counting should have an echo of relative irrelevance. In the normal practice of counting fruit in a fruit-bowl this genre does not usually ask us to count individual grapes, bunches, yes, but not individual grapes in a bunch. Correctly, counting individual grapes in a bunch of grapes is not normally expected in the genre of counting the fruit in a fruit-bowl even though a process of counting is still occurring. If we understood our mission properly we should find an immediate loss of relevance emerging in this process given our instructions to count the fruit in that bowl. We might want to check our tally and so conduct the whole process again, but, once a firm tally has been arrived at we would not normally keep on repeating this process of counting. Again, we should experience a general loss of relevance in our repeated acts of re-counting. So, with a loss of emergent-resonance (emergently realized value in addition to value already realized) in this regard this process-in-process would naturally come to an end given this loss of additional interest (to re-invest). Generally, when our investment of psychic energy is relatively less productive or non-productive then our investment is terminated and re-directed in some other intentional direction. As long as there is a desired investment in a certain intentional process and that process is relatively productive then that investment is continued to that extent until it finds it has run its course, is diverted to some other process or finds itself naturally leading to some other inter-connected process through close current association or past association. Now, as I perceive it, passively this emergent-resonance is operative in emotive terms of reference, cognitive terms of reference and judgmentally appreciative terms of reference. Actively, emergent-resonance would take the form of provoking and sustaining an intentional response whose intensity or gravity is of such weight that it over-rides and rides-over other possible responses. How then is an encountered process able to neutralize this emergent-resonance – through an opposite and equal reaction to the same; i.e., a counter-emergent-resonance. Moreover, through a balance of emergent-resonance and counter-emergent-resonance a corresponding sense of an overall transcendental suspension is automatically put into effect. Furthermore, though a suspension of this suspension, the consequences of our responses become naturally re-enacted albeit re-directed either through ongoing re-direction (already in play) or through some form of discontinuity wherein there is some degree of a radical re-direction put into play. An emergent-resonance having both a passive and active aspects in the intentionally patterning of this intentional response. What has resonance, is found to have a relatively greater sense of resonance and what is found to be given resonance altogether redirects and/or re-directs this process of objective-refinement. Redirection through relative continuity and re-direction through relative dis-continuity. Such resonance is sought for, without the same our investigations are neither relevant nor directed and would become irrelevant and directionless. In the light of this analysis, I would argue that this echo of resonance, as a registering of its relevance, is preferentially and selectively sought and focused upon in the thematic light of those current investigations. By such means a ‘representation’ is established that simulates/re-simulates the overall topic-to-hand. That representation is subjected to an ongoing process of an overall transcendental suspension that either is productive of either a redirecting of that representation basically in the same intentionally desired direction or a relatively radical re-directing of the same in and through and beyond some form of a relatively non-absolute discontinuity. As a result we either coast along in the same metaphorical direction or suddenly find ourselves headed off in a new direction through the re-presentation of that relatively radical sense of re-direction. We might say that this assembled semblance of emergent-resonance is productive and reproductive of the relevance of that under investigation and which, through suspension, through radical forms of ‘re-writing’ is eventually re-productive of the re-directed/re-presented re-valuation of that to-hand under investigation. Re-writing in the sense that a textual trace is effectively rewritten and/or re-written in the course of this critically oriented process of re- evaluation. (30)

	Rules for this natural, intuitive process of critical evaluation being basically assisted through both the promotion of those contributions that promote such evaluation, and, a de-motion of those non-contributing factors that demote the realization of such surplus value (though existential enrichment that stems from progressive processes productive of an existential surplus in that regard). (31)

	More specific rules might include the following: maintaining a focused thematization of the nature of those investigations; seeking a preservation of the current existential value being discovered/re-discovered in the course of those investigations by monitoring the relative levels of emergent-resonance being revealed; re-simulating the realizations redirected/re-directed in the critically treated course of those investigations. I.e., maintaining thematic directedness; maintaining relative levels of emergent-resonance, and, maintaining a critical atmosphere of productive/reproductive/re-productive redirection/re-direction (along with, when and where possible and practical, a re-examination of the existential relevance of those investigations). (32)

Thence a difference between redirection and re-direction. The critical factors instrumental of value-enhancement co-conspiring to advance this type of cause. Although apparently complex in this philosophical appreciation it does not follow that this complexity is a barrier to the formation of such reformation/re-formation of our understanding of the Life-World as lived, as lived by us in this world of the other who intentionally constitutes us, and, who in term, are re-constituted by us. Into this sea of potential contention we make our passage through this World-of-Life usually untroubled by such an ocean of choice (since pre-negotiated genres of conventions are forever there to guide us in this regard). Moreover, re-direction is usually promoted by its acceptance and adoption, in an active sense of re-direction, and, thereafter in relatively less ‘active’ processes of redirection. (33)

6.    Provisional Conclusion/s

	Although we might attempt positively productive processes of overseeing and oversight often we appear to fall into over-done processes of overseeing and under-done processes of a missed oversight/insight. I would like to argue that these various transcendentally and immanently oriented points of view are all already foundered upon a critical base of the overall transcendental suspension (which is equivalent to an overall hermeneutic circle of comprehension as examined in detail elsewhere). That in an existential clarification of the same (through phenomenological, hermeneutical and existential forms of evaluation) do we head in a direction of increased conformity with the current actualized-potential of the World-of-Life as we come to progressively know it in and through and beyond these points of redirection and/or re-direction! Therein, representations become re-presentations and cease to become mere representations! Passively they represent the world as we have come to know it, and, actively, re-constitute this same world through dis-continuous processes of re-presentation. Thence we are able to overcome our appropriate efforts to comprehend the world through over-commission or under-commission or mere omission of our inputs in that regard. The relevant strengths of emergent-resonance helping us to focus on what is both more relevant and more productive of value, in an enhancement of value, as sought in those investigations. Thence our engagement with the other when plunged into a realm of relative discontinuity through the re-direction of re-presentation itself! (34)

	What are the ramifications of proposing a non-absolute demarcation between representation and re-presentation? (35)

	Obviously, we are not proposing that there is absolutely no demarcation between the same. On the other hand, it is being more than tentatively suggested that there is no absolute demarcation between representation and re-presentation. Consequently representation and re-presentation must bear some form and some degree of a relationship. For a start we should recognize that we are not dealing with mere imputational products but with the phenomenal-phenomenological space that links both forms of presentation. At the same time, recognizing the imputational nature of simulation qua simulation is to center such phenomenal productivity in the unity of the transcendental Life-World as a simulation qua simulation, albeit in, through and beyond a phenomenological dimension. In this regard there is little phenomenological difference between a representation and its re-presentation. On the other hand, a representation is modally deficient in comparison to its re-presentational locus/loci. Still, a relationship must still be in play. That granted, what is this relationship in play between a ‘map’ on one hand and that which it is a ‘map of’? In phenomenal-phenomenological ‘space’ we are not dealing with imputational products extracted from the same. E.g., our ‘vision of Australia’ is just as much a ‘map of Australia’ as is a map of Australia. Although there is this difference, that no map of Australia can be as complex and as rich as our vision of Australia should we be acquainted with this country, and, no uni-vocal, mono-dimensional map could ever compete in terms of richness and complexity with a multi-dimensional map. Maps, as traditionally understood, e.g., have a built-in limit of richness beyond which they cannot meaningfully traverse. What is the length of the coastline of Australia, correctly, is an impossible question to ask with out some circumscribed pre-conditions? The more closely detailed that mapping, the more the length of coastline will find itself extending. Imagine if you would if the coast around every indentation and every indentation on such indentation, etc., were to be mapped – where would it end? Obviously, certain parameters must be in place in order to conduct and finalize such a calculation (in those same terms of reference). Then, reading a map back into or on to this source material must mutually enrich both aspects in this equation, an equation of identity that cannot be absolutely severed given that our map of x is also part of a more complex mapping of x. In the instance of this example, our map is a map of Australia. If we were unaware as to what that map was a map of then we could only read that map in terms of its constitution to that extent it be a map and a map only. But a map is not meant to be just a map being a representation that also re-presents that which it is also a map of. In some form and to some degree an eerie like relationship and interaction is established with that of which it is imputed to be a map off! Between the two, between representation and re-presentation, there exists a certain relational resonance centered in the semblance of presentation. Given this resonance, it follows that some form and degree of a complex middle ground must be present and able to intermediate between the same, namely, a distinctive isomorphism that allows the map to function as a map (without having to invoke some mysterious form of interaction or presence). It follows, then, that a deficit in a certain feature should be a deficit in that same co-partnered feature in some fashion or other. Similarly, there should also be some form of isomorphism between positive attributes. So, e.g., a bend in a river is matched by a similar bent river on a chart. Or, the absence of a river or lake in the middle of a desert section should mirror the same absence on the ground so to speak (unless mirages accidentally get ‘mapped’.). How is such a relationship possible? Because we are not dealing with the land or landscape per se but with its representation as a re-presentation, and v.v., etc. So, if I am in a desert and am thirsty I am hoping the oasis nearby on the map is an accurate representation of the oasis I am desperately heading for. Ah, there it is! (36)

	Does this imply some form of resonance between one map and some other or that of which the map is but a small part of its mapping or re-mapping? Yes? But the nature of the relationship establishes the nature of that relationship in keeping with the very nature of that relationship. And all of this mediated. E.g., a river has a certain shape and that shape is borrowed for the mapping. On the other hand, can we work in reverse, say, put something on our map and expect it to occur on that piece of land our map supposedly represents? Common sense would tell us that there is no reciprocity here. However, we should not treat that mapped as a mere imputation. Regarded as a map then if we were to map it incorrectly then it would be regarded as accurate until shown otherwise (much like street directories include a few features that do not accurately map the streetscape in order to incriminate those map-publishers who abuse ‘their’ copyright). I remember looking for a waterfall in the Blue Mountains that on later maps I was to discover was placed a couple of kilometers further downstream. This waterfall had a name and so thought it was worth going to have a look at it. But I was not able to find ‘it’. Or, one could imagine a bogus treasure map being drawn up by merely adding an ‘x’ to a legitimate map already to-hand and noting on its margins “x marks the spot where treasure can be found”. It is still a ‘treasure map’ even though there was never any treasure to find. The moral here is this: a map is usually not a mere map, and, ‘that mapped’ is itself a form of mapping albeit more complexly and more richly configured. Now, their relationship is as one map to another albeit with a difference in richness and complexity, and differences in degrees of comparative accuracy that can be tested when placed in a mutual frame of reference. Furthermore, there can be no absolutely accurate map even though maps can become more accurate as long as they do not transgress certain natural limits imposed upon their configuration (just as no map can absolutely depict the coastline, e.g). Given this analysis and these qualifications what is one allowed to assume in this regard? (37)

	That imputations are given sense, find meaning and given meaningfulness, i.e., value, in and through forms of mapping. There can be no absolute imputations and neither can there be forms of absolute accuracy in our psychic mapping. Indubitability can only be established in relative, circumscribed terms of reference until otherwise disproved. Moreover, all forms of mapping have surprises for us to the extent that the existential is forever existentially more rich than its mere appropriation be that confirmed in valid or non-valid terms of ongoing reference. That, in effect, only through the progressive transformation of the otherness of the Other into non-otherness that we can find a passage through this Life-World, in, through and beyond the apparent existential richness of this one-World-of-Life! (38)
	
							    Noel Tointon, Sydney, 25.6.09.