II. On the Circulation of Value:
An Exploration through Examining a Set of Argument on the Nature of Value

1.    Introduction(/s)

	What is value? In a second paper, in answering that question we might then be in a position to discern the nature of a variety of values – What is right? What is true? What is good? What is beautiful? What is real and what is reality? Is this more useful than that? What is my duty in this situation? Did that person act correctly? Should that organization have acted in that manner, etc? Is this interpretation valid, or, more valid or less valid? Why is value ‘valued’, and, what relationship it might have, if at all, to what might be valuable? And then there is the perplexing question of how one type of value might relate to some other, say quantity versus quality, or, prescription versus description, or, duty versus a pragmatic response, etc? (1)

	Could such a basic question be asked? And if we can ask it might it already be half-answered by virtue of the fact that in the meta-textual genre-construction of this type of question what counts for an answer, a resolution, has already been predetermined in general terms of reference (as is to be found in any well-formed question)?! (2)

	In this exploration it will be basic presupposition, albeit provisional in nature, that value is arrived at through circulation, through relational interaction (and cannot be ontologically encountered and epistemologically recognized, i.e., engaged, in absolutistic terms of reference, i.e., value is neither intrinsic nor extrinsic in absolute terms of reference). Moreover, through the adoption and adaptation of a relational point of view (w.r.t. circulation) that an object-oriented language basis of natural languages has to be translated though the lens of a relational point-of-view with, as a consequence, the presentation of a counter-intuitive perspective on the nature of reality and the reality of nature. But let this not be an obstacle to correctly discerning the nature of our topic and realizing its general conformity with reality as ‘reality’…. (3)

	To this end let me precisely delineate what is at stake in this endeavour as we come to engage our understanding in this regard… as we attempt to better answer this question “what is value?” In this process let us turn on its head all things that need to be turned on their head, and, let us turn inside out all things that need to be turned inside out… taking nothing for granted… testing and trusting our presuppositions, rigorously tightening the logic of our propositions, and, trialing the conclusions and consequences of our provisional determinations…! (4)

Latest version of paper: www.homestead.com/noelshomepage/noelshomepage3.html
1.    Dismissing both Intrinsic Value and Extrinsic Value in an Absolutistic Modality

	Value cannot be discerned intrinsically nor extrinsically in absolutistic terms of reference. (5)

	E.g., the value of gold is not in the gold per se. As a ‘currency’ it needs to circulate or be able, potentially, to enter that cycle of circulation. (6)

	Nor is a definitive sense of value supplied in merely external terms of reference (as if bestowed by its creator). (7)

	E.g., You could buy a painting for $1000 and it might be worth-that-to-you, but, it could be a fake and worth much less, or more if others do not realize that, or, in ten years time it might be still a genuine work ‘worth’ $1000 despite the fact that ‘$1000 then’ is most likely not worth what ‘$1000 is worth today’, or, it could be a masterwork worth much more when correctly re-ascribed, etc. Now, none of these values captures its ‘value’ only its worth with respect to person or persons x in market situation y, etc. Since none of these extrinsic values precisely captures the set worth of that painting then its true value cannot be given to it extrinsically. (8)

	Intrinsic worth cannot be engaged through non-circulation. Extrinsic worth cannot be engaged through mere circulation. Value being engaged through the relative, non-absolutistic dialectic of something-in-circulation, e.g., in and through our relational engagement with that under examination within the auspices of the Life-World! So can we discern a relatively intrinsic sense of value and a relatively extrinsic sense of value; as in, e.g., this painting is a genuine masterwork and a very good example of the master’s work, and, is probably worth more that the estimate suggested in the catalogue in this upcoming auction? (9)

	However, a relatively critical mixed intrinsic-extrinsic position would allow us to discern the circulation of value therein being circulated and entertained, etc! (10)

	Through the overall circle of hermeneutic comprehension as mirrored through the adequate emplacement of an overall transcendental suspension (as discussed on numerous occasions elsewhere). (11)
2.    The Nature of Circulation

	Intrinsically, there is nothing that circulates, and, extrinsically, there is no circulation. However, circulations are encountered and recognized, i.e., engaged through relational interaction! How can this be the case? (12)

	Through resolution! I.e., through the resolution of replicable relational difference/s within the context of the consonance of a field all within the contextualization of the Life-World. The imputation of fields, differential foci and observers taking place through the relative privileging of the overall transcendental suspension as engaged through an open hermeneutic circle of comprehension. Let me explain this relational philosophy. (13)

	There is only relational engagement. Within this matrix of origination the replicable discernment of difference is imputed as identity through its identificational preservation, i.e., the relative transformational isomorphic stability of such transformations where relative preservation is realized through the resolution of such difference within the context of its appropriate field. Because there is only the relativity of judgmental privileging there can be no absolute identity only its imputation. However, in conventional, empirical terms of reference the empirical truth of such imputations can be ascertained in conventional terms of reference. E.g, identity is ascertained through the differences observed within a field and the relative preservation of the same. Preservation is achieved through transformation and not through absolute flux or alteration. This being achieved through the relative preservation of the patterning of that flux able to be imputed in keeping with the logical nature of its phenomenal-phenomenological determination, i.e., its (simple or complex) phenomenological essence. (14)

Moving from an object-oriented language to a relational-process-oriented language demands a radical conceptual and linguistic shift in how phenomena are to be correctly appreciated. Let me attempt this task and in the transformation of our perspective establish the phenomenal-phenomenological nature of (the) circulation (of value). (15)

	Let me establish something of the flavour of this radical translation through the following series of micro-meditations in order to discern the nature of circulation and its flow of value in an economy of value. (16)

	How is difference to be discerned? Rather than taking an object-oriented point of view let us say that difference is discerned from the point of view of that doing the differential interaction, i.e., that being subjected to such auto-differentiation. What makes that tree a ‘tree’? What makes me as an embodied individual observing that same tree-like phenomenon an observer of that particular tree? I find that within this body a certain phenomenological sameness (unless in pain or attempting to discern some section of my embodied being such as a hand or a foot, or, concentrating on novel taste sensations with my tongue, or, processing sounds discerned by my ears, etc.). Beyond the imputation of the physiological extent of my body I find a sea of differences, however, some of those differences also seem to be integrated as well as differentiated from their own point of view. The tree in question has a certain intact intactness, can be described as possessing an integrated existential descriptor (and existential axis within, internally, its own hierarchically organized physiology and, externally, within the surrounding forest, e.g.). How can I perceive this sense of integration of identity from its own sense of perspective (i.e., from the perspective of the tree qua tree?)? I am not a tree because as an individual person I am not a tree (except if morphed in a mythical transformation like Daphne). Similarly the tree is not me. How could one perceive the tree from its own point of view as different from another tree over there and from the soil from which it emerges and different from me when it is the case I am both not that specific tree nor any other tree in general? However, all interaction is engaged through the resolution of dissonance within the appropriate field of interaction. Through a transcendental perspective engaged through the inauguration of an overall transcendental suspension I am able to impute the point of view of the tree by virtue of both its tree-like differences as seen by me, and, my non-tree-like nature whilst operating in a field that allows both of us to interact by virtue of our common physicality in this World-of-Life. So I can walk around it, touch it, see if the leaves are scented, etc. This dialectical interaction between the relative difference/s within the relative consonance of a (pre-negotiated) field (or re-negotiated set of fields) of accommodation allows me to discern this particular tree before me within this forest of trees and both transcendentally identify with it and discern myself as vastly different from it! The nature of this interaction allows me to entertain its expected modal richness (in both sense of this expression, i.e., engaging the tree in all the richness of expected modalities and many of those modalities being engaged in a manner saturated with a full richness of expected engagement) along with a confirmation of all our expectations in that regard – finding the bark rough to touch, the leaves distinctly scented, etc. In this I can virtually or vicariously experience a tree both from its own point of view and from my own point of view as a tree-object, and, the dialectical resolution of all of the above within the wider relational context of a forest of trees. Because we are all projected and emplaced within this same One-World-of-Life there can be no absolute isolation of one party from another if and when perceived to be in a process of interaction. From this process of interaction all identity is imputed and identificationally extracted. Indeed, from the economy of such circulation, all value is discerned; be it in the form of identities, aesthetics, ethical de-ontological determinations, pragmatic considerations, hermeneutical distinctions and/or factual discernments. These (ordered) forms of value finding forms of accommodation through the commonality of the Life-World (through the common archetypal transcendental nature of judgment [as examined on numerous occasions elsewhere]). When such imputations derived from this economy are no longer seen as imputations (i.e., as simulations relatively maintained through re-simulation) then we enter the non-critical conventional world of object-languages. Reversal of this process allows us to see-things-as-they-are and involves a radical reversal of how we see ourselves in this one-World-of-Life as an embodied person before-others and an equally radical reversal of how we can see others and other things (that can be found to be phenomenologically accessible in that regard). (17)

	All value is realized through an economy of value, i.e., its circulation, and, all identity is therein imputed, i.e., simulated. Through an overall transcendental suspension such imputation, treated as imputation qua imputation, is critically engaged and through the same type of critical process is critically realized through this form of direct engagement. Such engagement being realized as direct by virtue of the unity of the Life-World and the entire absence of both intrinsic and extrinsic value. However, through the loss of the centrality of the overall transcendental suspension without critical care we return to the natural attitude with its rootedness in the limitations of an uncritically exercised object-language. Habitually sedimented and crystallized in such a natural attitude we treat imputations as non-imputations and directly divorce ourselves to a considerable extent from the circulation of value wherein these imputations were initially derived. On the other hand, without imputations as a starting point we could not re-enter the living embrace of the open, overall transcendental suspension in order to re-experience the direct richness of such phenomena and therein and thereafter re-adjust our ongoing understanding of the world along with our place therein. Through the transcendental re-simulation of our emplacement in the Life-World we again, and again, return to ‘the reality of our existence’ as ‘the existence of our reality’…. (18)

3.     Relational Difference and Relational Investment

	The sum of the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. That accepted, what then is the difference between the sum total and the mere addition of its parts? This I define as a relational difference. Now, I would argue that this simulated relational difference is re-invested back within the matrix of its basis. However, through re-simulation, a re-simulated sense of relational difference is existentially re-manifested and this ‘totality’ is (re-)engaged when we appreciate a ‘phenomenal-phenomenological whole’ as a relatively distinctive identity. (19)

	Let me explore this concept of a re-simulated relational difference. (20)

	A Greek temple is assembled from carved and sculptured marble. Each piece of marble is no longer a mere piece of amorphous marble rock. A temple emerges. The relational difference of the temple over its marble basis is invested in its matrix of origination, namely, its marble blocks. Even in its destruction as a temple, still, those marble blocks are pieces of a marble temple albeit now defunct. Those blocks are informed by that temple, each from its own point of view. The pieces could then be gathered up and reassembled to form a house or a church, etc. As the fabric of a new house or a new church they still remain pieces of a defunct temple to that extent they retain their block-like shape, etc. What is the moral of his analogy? (21)

	That overall identity is also to be found stamped on its participating elements. E.g., the holistic ‘treeness’ of a tree is stamped on all its parts. Look at its leaves, at its small branches and how they branch from each other, look at the trunk and how the secondary branches make their way in a similar fashion to the shape of its smaller branches, even the nature of its leaves. The tree exhibits a distinctive sense of fractal symmetry throughout its totality. E.g., in the development of the person we find archetypal stem cells morph into a variety of cells with distinctive functions. This cellular nature permeates the entire body and within each cell we find genetic mirrors of all the other cells presented in the sameness or near similarity of their genetic material. That, in this type of fashion, identity is monadically assembled and re-assembled, etc., horizontally (simulated through our imputation of existential descriptors) and vertically (simulated through our imputation of the hierarchical arrangement of its existential axes [be they relatively internal and/or external to that identity]). An appreciation of this holism is an appreciation of its phenomenal essentiality (as discerned in and through the auspices of an adequate, overall transcendental suspension). An appreciation of this holistic nature of the phenomenon or phenomena in question allows us to virtually and vicariously appreciate the existence of the same from its own relative point/s of view albeit through the lens of our own selective focus in the light of our current interests and objectives with a richness of detail in keeping with our experience and critical abilities in that regard. (22)

	Is there such a thing as a relational difference? How might we experience it? A Greek temple may well be just an organized pile of marble, still, it possesses attributes that can only apply to its temple-likeness. The same building, more or less, could be made of granite instead, or wood (or a simulation of a wooden structure like early Buddhist cave temples). Such an edifice can be entered into unlike a solid marble block or an uncut hill of marble. Moreover, the formation and information of this structure is invested in each individual marble block even though no individual block need be temple-like, still, those blocks are recognized as part of a temple even when that temple is defunct and has collapsed and has been quarried. The ‘totality’ under examination is an emergent totality. It has a history and a place in the history of the world (or cosmos). Non-natural states are perceived as being brought into being through the exercised intent of humans. Through the matching of our genre expectations we usually can easily determine what has emerged by the hand of an intentional architect and what has occurred naturally. (23)

	Does a relational difference make a difference? Yes! Take a particular isotope of a heavy element like uranium (U235) or plutonium (Pu239) and bombard it with neutrons and fission may well be the result. Or, in an act of fusion, fuse certain isotopes of hydrogen (say deuterium) and witness the release of energy that results. Yes, a relational difference can make quite a difference. It can also make quite a psychological difference – a grand Greek temple can be very impressive. A difference in this instance that cannot be reduced to its mere marble (even though the immensity of some temple blocks in themselves can also incite a general feeling of awe as in the Syrian temple of Baalbek (sometimes written Balbec), e.g.). An emergent totality emerges with a number of novel modalities, has a richer list of modes to interactively engage and therein experience. In this sense of novelty we experience a relational difference. How is relational investment experienced? When we see a marble block on the ground on an archaeological site we automatically assume that it was part of the structures erected there. We are told that a temple once stood here and what remains are only a few blocks of marble. We see the marble was quarried, chiseled and shaped as a block. In its very blockness we see its possibility as a block placed upon another, etc., to form a building. In this sense relational investment is also appreciated. A form of appreciation assisted by being also able to see a number of blocks still in the form of a temple-like edifice. Now, in an object-oriented language I see, have been told, and, can recount my perception of a block of marble and their modular construction to form an ancient temple. How can this temple, with its blocks of marble, be seen from its own point of view. Through my ability to simulate this edifice from its own point of view since I am immersed in the same one world of the Life-World, and, have the transcendental ability to relocate a transcendental-like sense of self (because all identity is imputed in and through simulation [subject to relative isomorphic stability in transformational re-simulation] and not formed through the impossible circulation of intrinsic identity nor/and the mere circulation of extrinsic identity). Through simulated engagement imputation is possible, and, through the same or similar re-simulation the same or similar imputation can be arrived at. Approached by conventional treatment it can be judged accordingly, and, approached by transcendental treatment it can be appreciated from its own point of view albeit virtually or vicariously. Correctly, all processes of (phenomenological, hermeneutical and/or existential treatment) are engaged in a mix of natural and transcendental processes of appreciation. Through their correlativity we are able to more from one orientation to the other. Through a transcendental purification of intentional material associated with that under examination we approach a transcendental orientation in this regard. Through the loss of transcendental perspective a more natural perspective is arrived at, and v.v. Transcendental purification being arrived at through the instantiation of a critically exercised adequate, overall transcendental suspension. (24)

	Therefore, through our natural ability to transcendentally focus on the phenomenon or phenomena in question and/or our trained ability to focus on the transcendental constitution of that identity (through a recognition of its intentional constitution qua intentional constitution) we come to appreciate both relational difference and relational investment co-inhabiting the phenomenon or phenomena currently being engaged with through our direct engagement with that under examination to that extent we are capable and able to perform in this psychic state of re-identification in these types of matters. (25)

4.    The Existential Manifestation of Relational Difference

 	So, a relational difference and its investment must be able to be appreciated, indeed, the very phenomenon of identity through simulated imputation could not come into being if this sense of a relational difference, etc., were not existentially palpable (reinforced through a perceived sense of an associated surplus value). How then is this difference, etc., experienced? Through our engagement with an existential surplus of value. In other words, through an investment of intentional effort we find a surplus of value results from that process of direct engagement in keeping with the nature of that engagement. When I visit an ancient temple I find myself engaging with an ancient temple. When I engage another person I find my engaging with another person who may or may not be engaging with me. The other party or parties directly colour the nature of that engagement albeit in keeping with the nature of my association with it or them, and v.v. If I am watching a basket ball game and told to count the number of passes completed by team members dressed in white I may not see the person in a dark gorilla outfit wander on to and off that same court. We see what we seek to see and as a result we overlook what else might be seen. How then is an existential surplus of value appreciated as an existential surplus of value? Why is it described as existential? (26)

	A surplus of value is experienced as a surplus both expected and unexpected in our appreciation of its engagement. ‘Existential’ by virtue of its surplus, i.e., since what is emergent is existentially engaged. In other words our appreciation of a relational difference is received existentially, and v.v. Hence the linking of emergent with relational difference with existential and surplus of value; value both expected with emergent identities and unexpected in the sense of the discovery of an existential novelty that emerges through its distinctive relational difference/s as situated in its own emplacement within this World-of-Life as experienced by-us, and v.v. This surplus of value is experienced as an insistent reality, a reality whose engaged form is sedimented and crystallized through natural processes of imputation. A surplus of value that naturally finds itself being subject to processes of imputation. However, that being the case, such imputations should still be seen for what they are, namely, imputations, i.e., constructions of our own mind with a conventional reality and a transcendental sense of unreality (when treated beyond their proper, appropriate and valid levels of deployment)! (27)

	Engagement demands an economy, a circulation of value; a circulation wherein ongoing value is able to emerge. That granted, how is value to be engaged properly, appropriately and validly? In and through the adequate exercise of an ongoing overall transcendental suspension! By such means our imputations are reversed and returned to their matrices of origination albeit through re-simulation. Let me examine this contention more closely. (28)

5.    The Reversal of Imputation?

	Without imputation there could be no reversal of imputation. Despite processes of imputation, sedimentation, crystallization, habits of classificational ossification, etc., imputation is never absolutely realized. Similarly, mere processes of imputation are equally never absolutely realized. The sense of the transcendental is only realized through the transcendentialization of the relatively non-transcendental. Equally, processes of imputation are realized through the de-transcendentialization of the relatively transcendental. Ideally, in an adequate ongoing overall transcendental orientation a state of balance is arrived at between all forces and factors exercised in intentional consciousness and its transcendental-judgmental treatment, and v.v. Subtle forms of bias in privileging and/or de-privileging realizes subtle forms of value differentiation (as in our ordered distinctions) or in the taking of a certain transcendental attitude (be that phenomenal-phenomenological and/or hermeneutical and/or existential in orientation), etc. All of this is also subject to pre-negotiations as to which mix of genres is to be appropriated and negotiated/re-negotiated, and, how such (simple or complex) attitudes of appropriation are to be adopted and adapted. In all of this then how do we draw a line (and maintain an ongoing balance) between habitual imputation and critical reflection? (29)

	By habit we do certain things. By intuition we monitor and moderate such processes. By insightful practice we can more deliberatively re-direct the same. Habit, intuition and insight all being dependent upon each other… critical insight allowing each province to speak with its own voice, so to speak, in a melodious choir of insightful cooperation. Let me elaborate upon this set of interrelated process distinctions. (30)

	As already argued, the imposition of an overall transcendental suspension necessitates the suspension of prior imputations. This is conducted through both habit and intuition. Habit in the sense that we have learnt to direct our enriched sense of intentionality. Intuitive, since all forms of judgment naturally enlist transcendental processes of appreciation. Through a clarification of both aspects of this cooperative process we arrive at a greater sense of insightful engagement through the proper, appropriate and valid deployment of the materials and processes to hand under the auspices of a fully and critically engaged overall transcendental suspension. Thus it behooves us, as a critical transcendental philosopher (and phenomenologist and/or hermeneut/hermeneuticist an/or existentialist) to properly, appropriately and validly apply our transcendental insights and ensure we do not stray beyond the level of their deployment. In this process, imputations are to be seen as imputations qua imputations, i.e., constructions of the mind wherein the relational differences of emergent phenomena are fully and adequately appreciated through this modified and moderated reversal of the process of imputation itself. And that is conducted in and through the critical exercise of an adequately open overall transcendental suspension (as discussed elsewhere in detail). (31)

	Now, we are in a position to answer a number of key questions asked at the beginning of this paper. (32)

5.   Provisional Conclusion(/s)

	Value is realized through circulation, or, more correctly, something-in-circulation. That something is an imputative product in keeping with the nature of its engagement. Imputations have a co-existent conventional and a non-conventional character. Through habit, imputations are sedimented, crystallized and habitually classified, whereas, on the other hand, intuition allows us to transcendently engage/re-engage the same as imputations qua imputations. Insight, however, helps us to intentionally enlist a full cooperation between natural imputation and intuitive transcendental engagement/re-engagement. Value emerges through the formation of a relational difference. This difference is invested/re-invested back into the matrix of its origination. Through the repetitive replication of the simulation as a re-simulation this relational difference minus its investment/re-investment is allowed to flourish as an existential surplus of value. Indeed, all identity is able to form from its own point of view and be seen as an identity in imputation through this palpable surplus of value engaged/re-engaged through that simulation being re-simulated in intentional consciousness. Judgment of that value arising through its transcendental treatment and a recognition of the subtle forms of privileging/de-privileging allowed to operate at the core of its matrix of origination. Complex forms of judgment finding a validity of operation through a negotiation/re-negotiation of genres in keeping with the nature of that intent or, i.e., its objective intent.  By ‘objective intent’ is meant the clarity of our intentional directedness vis-à-vis our intentional objectives be that in habitual, intuitive and/or critical insightful terms. (33)

	We are now in a philosophical position to answer two questions, namely, what is value, and what type of value is in question? (34)

	Value is that which emerges through phenomenal-phenomenological engagement and is that surplus of value that emerges through its perceived relational difference-as-invested (replicated and magnified through re-simulation). The type of value being engaged being the type of value being engaged, i.e., in what manner is it being subtly privileged/de-privileged (in the cognitive-intentional terms of its judgmental treatment in its phenomenal-phenomenological/hermeneutical/existential orientations) and thence its ordered-ordering as a reflection of the overall privileging of the former. Hence this is value through the psychic emergence of relational difference, and, thence its ordered re-direction through negotiation/re-negotiation of objective intent. Value arising in an economy in keeping with the nature of its invested circulation. (35)

	That the transcendental attitude is insightfully engaged through a thoughtful reversal of the imputational process (through a recognition of imputation as imputation qua imputation and nothing more) (with an ongoing balance between habitual imputation, intuition and insightful practice and appreciation).  (36)
                     Noël Tointon, Sydney, 30.1.09.

6.    Postscript: On Relational Difference and Theological Difference

	An important side aspect of this research now is to re-ask the question what is the nature of the relationship between a(n imputed) theological difference and a(n imputed) relational difference? In some measure, there is no difference, only a difference in philosophical direction of application by virtue of the fact that through emergence a relational entity is simulated whose engagement is in keeping with the nature of its emergence, i.e., its relational difference (as invested). In theological terms of reference through natural emergence we can impute a natural theology, and, through mundane emergence we can impute a mundane theology, and, through trans-mundane emergence we can impute a trans-mundane theology. Within a natural theology we would find the emergence of all natural forms of intentional imputation with their relational differences (such as e.g., our own subjectivity, the subjectivity of others, the collective organization of organizations and communities, the objectivity of objects, object-states, intentional objectives, intentional intent, etc.). However, a functioning theology would necessitate a circulation of value in keeping with its philosophical pretensions. Furthermore, its imputation would necessitate its interpreted imputation able to deliver a considerable existential excess over its relatively non-considerable investment through forms of transcendentally suspended ontological commitments, epistemological commitments, belief commitments, etc., etc. that, in essence, a functioning theology necessitates a relatively trans-theoretical imputative excess of value in keeping with its imputative claims, etc! Assessment of functional competence, moreover, would need to be undertaken in terms of the ‘provable’ claims put forward by that theology under critical examination. As to determining ‘proof’ is meant, in this context, a non-traditional examination of presuppositions, propositions, and, conclusions in the form of consequences that are relatively demonstrable in critical terms of internal propriety, external appropriateness and causal-consequential validity within the explication of that associated theological system augmented by miscellaneous elements like faith, belief-testing, religious-experiential-interpretations, etc. (in keeping with the traditional and/or non-traditional nature of that associated theological system); a degree of ‘proof’ that may or may not be acceptable to either subscribers or non-subscribers of that relatively systematic approach. N. (37)