XXII: Value-in-Circulation: A ‘Practical’ Overview:
Living through Our Embodiment with the Other – Part IV
And, Re-Negotiating Existentially with the Other: Part V*

0.    Introduction

	We are constituted by an inescapable otherness, and that inseparable otherness is constituted by us! Otherness and selfness are negotiated! In order to understand how such negotiations can be existentialized let me examine how intentional ‘response’ is converted into intentional ‘responsibility’ so that in a process of reversed engineering, so to speak, we might be able to understand how this existential orientation can be realized and promoted in our relationships? (0)

	In this paper let me further explore this conundrum between economic circulation on one hand and the non-circulatory nature of value-formation on the other. I would like to explore the possibility that a counter-circulation (to emissive acts and contents) accounts for the emissive field and that together circulation and counter-circulation are instrumental in the ongoing realization of an overall transcendental suspension through whose auspices value-formation is realized (in an act that is essentially non-circulatory in orientation). Moreover, I would like to suggest that through intentional responsiveness an intentional response is rendered existential in orientation though a process of economic alignment with that relationship in question in its relational-situatedness. That, what ever promotes an increased degree of alignment in this regard is essentially existential in orientation. To achieve these ambitions I would like to structure this essay under the following heading: A Brief Definition of the Existential Orientation; The Role of Counter-Circulation in a Transcendental Suspension; From Response to Responsibility through Re-Alignment; Practical Ramifications of this Approach; Insights into the Instigation of the Existential; and, Provisional Conclusions. (1)

1.    A Brief Definition of the Existential

	Previously, I noted a number of senses in which the expression existential has been defined and utilized (i.e., technically used). In a free-flowing balanced relationship between the phenomenon of the text and the hermeneutics of its meta-textual genre/contextual interpretative appreciation we have the formation of an existential excess of value that cannot be reduced to these former orientations. The metaphor of a ‘key in a lock’ was used to express the resultant phenomenon of qualified access (to the value of that text, etc.), textual-transparency, non-obstruction, sense of freedom when text and meta-text/context appear to be aligned. Furthermore, an ‘overall sense of the existential’ was defined as the dynamically, balanced, free-flowing of interaction between these three senses of the phenomenological, hermeneutical and the existential (in it non-overall aspect). That, generally, a broad sense of the existential is realized between these two aspects of the existential as just noted (when not precisely articulated). (2)

*Link to latest version of paper on my Homestead Homepage Site (circulation22.rtf).
www.homestead.com/noelshomepage/noelshomepage3.html
In this light existential augmentation is the actualized realization of the existential through a more full thematization of the potentiality of that relationship in its relational-situatedness and that this is realized in and through and beyond a greater degree of re-alignment being realized with respect to the same. I would propose that it is in this economy and its overall transcendental suspension that value-formation is realized. (3)

	In this paper let me explore how an insightful examination of the existential, in a broad sense, can contribute to an existentialization of our relationships with others in and through our re-negotiations with the other. (4) 

2.    The Role of Counter-Circulation in a Transcendental Suspension 

	Interaction is in evidence when we observe an emissive economy, i.e., processes of exchange and reciprocity. However, we noted in the previous paper that such processes also occur in an emissive field. That with respect to interpersonal relationships much of that emissive field can be examined under the heading of obligations. Now, it is also our intuition that the formation of value is intimately connected to an emissive economy despite such being spontaneously devolved equally throughout its relational embodiment without ostensive circulation. How could we connect an emissive economy with the non-circulated nature of value-formation? (5)

	One stratagem for squaring the circle here might well be in running a parallel counter-economy. Economy plus counter-economy, in effect, would give us an overall transcendental suspension and the spontaneous emission therein of emergent value associated with that economy (subjected to such a suspension). Let me examine this in more detail. (6)

	Let us say in a relationship AB a gives b a gift of x. In the process, b now feels under obligation to some extent with a. Let us call this sense of obligation bOa, i.e., b is under an obligation to a. At a later point in time b gives a a gift y. Now a is placed under an obligation to b, namely, aOb. However, at that moment or period of time the net obligational field is now bOa – aOb. Assuming that is not zero in some permanent sense then let us define it as a positive O’. The point we need to note is that this overall sense of a net obligation is going to swing back and forth between a and b. If we add the performance of services s’, s’’, s’’’, etc. Then, hopefully, in this oscillation a mid-point will be often reached wherein we might say that economy was under a state of balanced suspension, if only for a moment or short period of time. In other words, the integration Z [of all (bOa + aOb)’-n] should be zero more often than not. In this light we might say that a series of balanced suspensions are arrived at in which value could be emergently emitted in a non-circulatory form. Saying the same thing, we could note that the net sum of s’s (services) and g’s (gifts) is effectively zero but never zero for more than a short period of time as long as the relationship remains operative, when, otherwise, the net differential value would then be v which remains invariant (say, e.g., through the death of one of the parties in a relationship or the cessation of that relationship). Let me re-examine this concept of a counter emissive economy wherein obligations run counter to emissive acts (with emissive content) and emissive services (with or without emissive content). (7)

	We could say that in a relationship the emission of a gift or service incurs an opposite but equal sense of obligation. That this degree of obligation finds some degree of diminution when gifts and/or services are reciprocated. We might say, by adapting the following formula, that the net sense of obligation is equal to the net density of modal interactions multiplied by their respective intensities taking into account the polarity of such reciprocity (along with average periodicity of oscillation?). We could define a modal interaction as a unique instance wherein a certain gift and/or service is given or supplied to a certain party or parties. Polarity being dependent upon the number of parties present in that relationship in question. A balanced, existential relationship could be provisionally defined as a relationship wherein the net overall economy is effectively centered in a dynamic zero-state through the proposition and counter proposition by all resident parties of their perceived obligations and their neutralization through expected, adequately matched counter-obligations. Moreover, through the non-virtual simulation and/or virtual simulation these dynamic zero points can be conceived and put into practical effect when and where acts of reciprocity occur in those regards. That through such virtual and non-virtual points of effective suspension, value formation is able to function through re-direction and/or redirection. I.e., through the tenor of that relationship heading off in a relatively new direction or staying headed in the same direction. (8)

	The net effect of reciprocity through gifts and/or service is to run an economy versus a counter-economy with the net result of a properly functioning relationship to be effectively zero without equaling zero. I.e., dynamically passing through this zero-point through reciprocated oscillation. That value is emitted or realized through such a dynamic mid-point (through the non-virtual realization of these virtually envisaged emissive acts). (9)

	However, although value-formation may be centered in dynamic zero-points let us say that the obligational fields perpetuate a certain degree of ongoing value-formation through the persistence of relative obligational deficits. That the persistence of obligational deficits and their ongoing intermittent discharge establish a sense of relational continuity, i.e., a sense of relationship (dependent in character upon the overall nature of its economy but not reductively able to be so reduced to that same sense of the economic). (10)

	What might we surmise in this regard? Value is non-reductively and emergently released through virtually envisaged dynamic zero-points. That such value is able to emerge by virtue of their resident senses of an overall transcendental suspension. That value emitted through such release persists by virtue of its associated  sense of an obligational differential (along with virtually envisaged points of suspension practically engaged, entered and left, through the discharge of those senses of obligation experienced in our re-alignment within the relationship in question). In such a harmonic atmosphere of ongoing resolution (of these obligational differentials) response is interpreted/re-interpreted and expressed/re-expressed through a lens of responsibility (by virtue of such re-alignment). Let me now examine how responsibility arises through the contextual rapport of a certain response within its associated emissive field? (11)

3.    From Response to Responsibility through Re-Alignment 
	
	The question is asked what connection if any is there between an intentional response and a sense of intentional responsibility? In other words, what makes for a responsible response rather than a non-responsible response or an irresponsible response? As all intentions are realized in their associated meta-textual frames of reference, as genres of engagement, it follows that when those genres are incorrectly or inadequately adopted and adapted that our responses therein will be to that degree defective. However, an appreciation of responsibility seems to indicate something more than mere conformance to a particularly apposite genre. There is the intuition that responsibility entails not only propriety, appropriateness and validity but also a deontological moral dimension of doing what should be done! But, an element of the pragmatic might also be called up and so one might hazard a guess that an existential sense of responsibility entails a maximization of value in all six transcendental sense fields as outlined in our ordered analysis elsewhere, namely, pre-essential essential value (like calculations, correct syntactic formations [ruling out round-squares, green noises, etc.]); essential-aesthetical unification (in essential formation like a successfully integrated vision realized in a well-executed painting, valid syntactic formation of identity such as ‘a red-brick house’, ‘a white cloud’, etc.); de-ontological value; pragmatical value; hermeneutical value (meta-textual and/or contextual in orientations); and, ontical or factual expressions of value (such as affirming the existence of Caesar, expressing an affirmation of your own existence as defined, correctly or incorrectly, through the representative device of a summarized existential descriptor, etc.). Moreover, realization of a more full potential of a certain identity is also a process of re-alignment wherein possible potential-identity is actualized within the limitations of that limited sense of identity (in line with its recent history, its essential phenomenology, hermeneutic sense of genre/context and apparent redirections/re-directions being entered into, etc.). Lastly, we should also note that relational-situatedness also needs to be taken into account. Expressions of intent (or apparent non-intentional redirections currently in play) can be either discounted or augmented in their (immediate) relational environment. If we were to weekly ‘water and weed’ a huge conifer growing on the side of a cliff our efforts are not likely to prevent it from being blown over in a storm. On the other hand, a rare orchid growing on that same cliff may well benefit from such weekly care since it is in its appropriate environment and storms are not so likely to dislodge it. All in all, we might hazard a guess to say that existential augmentation of a particular identity in its relational setting is a process of re-alignment wherein that identity is facilitated in its ‘self-expression’ (be that intentionally conscious or non-intentionally non-conscious). Let me examine this complex proposition more closely. (12)

	Let me use this collection of insights, in their order as just noted, to map these considerations, namely, to what extent, if any, has there been or not been a process of existential augmentation (and if augmentation is absent to what degree there has been a process of diminution or non-diminution?)? I shall do this under the following headings: nominated responses; adequacy of meta-textual adoption and adaptation in the exercise of associated genres of engagement; implication of transcendental sense-fields (especially in regards to de-ontological/pragmatical forms of expected value input/expressed value output; the extent an incremental differentiation of potentiality-actuality has been entered into or not entered into; questions of overall relational-situatedness; retrospective considerations as to effectiveness or non-effectiveness of these overlaid redirections/re-directions of responsive response, i.e., that sense of process that established and/or disestablished the overall integrity of responsive-responsibility (in our focusing upon that nominated response or nominated responses in question). (13)

	In nominating a response or set of responses our time frame could be retrospective, contemporaneous and/or prospective in temporal orientation. Connected to such considerations we can also explicitly or implicitly note associated spatial limitations along with a general sense of context that could be determined, perhaps, in and through some relevant form of narrative or set of narratives. E.g., subject x hit a person y in a situation wherein y was just about to assault x. Was x’s response able to be considered a responsible act given y was either a knife-wielding serial killer… or a child of five years… or a boxer in the boxing ring like x…? Without going into more detail we might consider, as a rule of thumb, that the first situation would be quite a responsible response if there were no help to hand, the Police could not be called, x was not able to flee the situation, etc. On the other hand, in the second situation, a child does not need nor deserve to be assaulted even if that same child had ‘assaulted’ one’s own person. Lastly, the rules of boxing, whether you consider them to be barbaric or not, call for both parties to assault each other in a contest of such force as qualified by the rules adopted in this type of combat. Obviously, our nomination needs to operate through the lens or lenses of the genre or genres being apparently invoked in the intentional expression of that type of response. (14)

	Descriptions of nomination are going to explicitly or implicitly invoke the genre or genres apparently associated with that type of intentionally redirected/re-directed response. An appreciation of genre assisting us in determining to what degree that response was in keeping with the nature of that genre or mix of genres apparently being invoked. So the response was self-defense skillfully conducted. Or, in the second instance, it might be judged an inappropriate and improper response (since a five year old child may hit you, still, there is no need to mirror them and respond in a similar fashion [unless other considerations were to override such qualifications and it was though better that the child experience the fact that hitting someone can be painful and sometimes fatal by somewhat returning the blow in such a manner that this lesson in growing up be effectively taught without too much ado or consequence]).  Then, in the boxing ring, both parties have willingly agreed to spar. Hence this formulaic observation: nomination – simple/complex genre associative imputation – reflective appreciation of same. (15)

	Appreciation now widens to entail a consideration of all six transcendental sense-fields as to their relevant implication. In this light we might say self-defense is a de-ontological duty (as an obligation to ourselves to maintain our existence and as an obligation to others dependent upon us or related to us to be still there for-others). On the other hand, to hit a child back might be considered inappropriate in form and/or degree. Then, again, as boxers we should at least box with both the rules and the spirit of the game in mind (in an alignment of intent already agreed upon through mutually playing the ‘game’). (16)

	Our next set of considerations investigate to what degree a relationship could be actualized in keeping with the essential nature of its overall relationship to its intender within the immediate context of that invoked relationship apparently associated with that responsive act. So, if we must defend ourselves let us be successful in this obligation to ourselves (and others). In other words, let us maximize its actuality to that extent possible that ensures success in this regard. Or, in the context of hitting a child back after it has ‘assaulted’ you we might say that such an action or reaction is most likely not responsible. Then, again, one could pretend to defend yourself and spar with the child in an appropriate fashion (perhaps ensuring that the child’s frustration that provoked this assault was transmuted into something less frustrating and more enjoyable and illuminative for that child [perhaps it was in need of attention and this would be one way to appropriately respond to the root causes of such an action]). Similarly, in a mutual boxing match, both parties might desire to play the game in such a manner so as to possibly win whilst adhering to a sensible interpretation of the effective rules that appear to constitute that same game. It would not be responsible to box with a partner who you have made to think that the rules are in accordance with those constituted by the Marquess of Queensberry when you really intended to utilize Thai kick boxing techniques as well and thereby completely overcoming your partner through such unsportsmanlike surprise. In all of this, generally, we seek legitimate actualization of process in the realization of a state of affairs in keeping with our intentions and the nature of that relationship being entered into, etc. (thence these [increasing] degrees of alignment [being sought] whose mutualization is realized in this type of appreciation). (17)

	The last ‘etc.’ just noted above, now considers the important question of responsible alignment in its relational-situation. Despite our conformance with expectations in nomination, genre, appreciation, actualization… consideration of the relational-situatedness could well over-rule the former! What is entailed in considerations of relational-situatedness, and, how should we determine the manner and degree of overall responsibility in this regard? Such questions are central to our current investigations! (18)

	Ethical consideration, culturally based or trans-culturally oriented, normally proscribe murder and political assignation as a subset of the same. However, it is a moot point that if we knew, or justifiably believed, that a certain dictator was about to murder many millions of their citizens belonging to certain minorities, because of his irrational contempt for minorities, if the situation were to present itself where one could dispatch this mass-murderer would you not do so?! Would you feel it your duty to do regardless of whether you belonged or did not belong to one of his despised minorities?  If your remonstration with this dictator would be a pointless, ineffective and counter-productive act why not do your ‘self-perceived duty’ and dispatch this monster regardless of the consequences to yourself (knowing or hoping that no one else would carry out such acts of mass-murder in his stead)? Where would you draw the line here? Before, during or after such crimes against humanity. And how many people would need to be murdered before you considered it to be an act of mass-murder, or, are we missing the point here and not entering into a disputing of the general point regardless of whether we agree or disagree with its particular or specific detailization as an exemplar for hypothetical consideration. My example is provocative, but, the point of its consideration is not disproved through the rejection of an attempt to exemplify that same point. The general point is this, namely, that certain responses may appear responsible within the limits of a certain relationship but may not appear to be responsible when examined in the wider context of the relational-situatedness of that relationship under such consideration. So, killing may be wrong, but, killing someone like Hitler, e.g., might well be a virtuous and responsible act (regardless of the consequences for yourself?)? Indeed, how are such considerations to be investigated when the consequences of our acts cannot be investigated till after their commission and/or omission and, then, sometimes at a much later stage… if at all? (19)

	A resolution of this last question can be proposed on parallel lines to matters of appreciation taken into account in the third link of our formula. In ‘appreciation’ certain intentional lines of commission and/or omission can be hypothetically examined virtually in the light of the genres of engagement apparently invoked. If we murder someone we usually get caught, appear before a court of justice and go to jail or worse. In our contemplation of certain actions, consequences are usually co-entertained (and either discounted or accepted as too expensive, improper, inappropriate, etc.). Let me call this last link in our chain supervision wherein responsibility is appreciated in its wider environmental sense. (20)

	Hence our formula for determining virtual and/or non-virtual responsibility should consider the following with more emphasis being placed on latter items in this chain of overall responsibility, namely, nomination, genre, appreciation, actualization, situatedness and supervision. Let me now examine, hypothetically, how this formula might be applied in practice? (21)

4.    Practical Ramifications of this Approach 

	Now, I do not believe that this chain of six headings is actually enacted, sequentially or simultaneously, rather, as a (psychically realized) resultant a certain nomination becomes thematized that we find acceptable given the situation to hand. In effect we visualize what is virtually possible, and, therein and thereafter, decide to enact or not to enact the same (possibly in the light of our determination as to its being or not being responsible, thought desirable or not desirable, to what extent anticipated consequences should be discounted, sought, minimized, avoided, etc., etc.). Often such enaction is realized in the habitual light of part performances considered as successful or satisfactory. Although this seems to give the process an epistemological priority of the possible over the actual (through our virtual envisualization of its possibility) an ontological priority covertly takes a relatively greater precedence by virtue of the fact that reality is assessed in the light of its past actuality. So, if I were to envisage myself as a millionaire through imagining my finding a suitcase stuffed with that amount of money, the reality of the matter, unfortunately, is that I am not such a millionaire even though I currently exist, suitcases exit, banknotes exist and a million dollars could be easily stuffed in a suitcase of the requisite dimensions. However, alas, all of these factors do not nor have co-occurred for me in order for me to claim this possibility as an actuality. Hence their collective ontological priorities over any collected epistemological priority when merely thought about as a possibility. (22)

	Although I am not suggesting this list is sequentially or simultaneously, diachronically or synchronically, conducted in virtual and non-virtual experience, I do believe its utilization could be of use in our more formal deliberations in proposing suitable nominations for intentional enaction. Between theory, practice and critique there is always a certain degree of variance since in their representation of each other (albeit through their own lenses) they will naturally mis-represent each other in this pursuit of their representation of the other. E.g., theory will misrepresent practice, and v.v. E.g., a theoretical understanding of practice is an understanding about practice rather than practice qua practice. Being ‘about’ practice rather than being practice directly it must mis-represent that type of discourse. On the other hand, even though ‘about’ some other field or aspect or discipline, it still cannot be absolutely divorced from the same hence in understanding the misrepresentative nature of that act of mis-representation it follows that such misrepresentation will be lessened therein. Hence this dialectic between presentation and misrepresentation through re-presentation. It could also be added that just as presentation is achieved through re-presentational iteration it follows that even our practical understanding of practice, or theoretical understanding of theory, or critical understanding of critique, must, equally, be subject to such mis-representation. However, again, an awareness of this element of mis-representation, through re-iteration, can lessen its overall sense of acting as a misrepresentation to that extent as we have also become accustomed to its distorting presence in the reality of our representational experience. In effect, a natural process of re-alignment should correct this element of mis-representation (through, perhaps, an ongoing harmonization of narrative, the apparent increasing effectiveness of our consequential analysis, etc?). (23)

	Now, to propose a certain nomination is for us to formally declare the intentional form of a certain response. Virtually envisaged it can then be enacted if we are in such a position to do the same. I would like ‘to see the Tower of London’ is not something that can be currently enacted. On the other hand, I would like to look at the computer-screen while I type up this paragraph on the computer is obviously achievable (having been achieved)! So, for a virtual nomination to be actually realized non-virtually entails that its full pre-conditions must first actually be met. Full enaction in this regard entailing a co-option of all relevant pre-conditions and conditions. Hopefully, an envisaged post-conditionally realized state of affairs is successfully realized in the envisaged ambit of genre-predicted expectations in that regard. (24)

	Even though the intentional nomination is treated as the starting condition for this theoretical sequence of overlaid processes of reflection and intervention, etc., the overall process of thematization should exhibit its own process of unveiling. However, formal nominations can be hypothetically and practically examined/re-examined through the use of this device. In this direction let me continue. (25)

	Nomination when articulated is formalized. When searched for it is left non-formalized until nomination is thematized. Realization of nomination is conducted through a formal process of co-opting an apposite overall transcendental suspension conducive to such intentional formation. Nomination necessitates an appropriate intentional field to conduct the same and this is supplied through an invocation of genre in the light of past-experience. Implicitly or explicitly this entails some form of a narrative we could tell ourselves or someone else in which we would attempt to explain our intentions (be that in effective alignment with the reality to hand or not so aligned in falsified narration or deluded narration). Obviously, nomination demands the invocation of genre or a mix of genres, adopted and adapted to the task to hand in that situation to hand. This refinement of appropriation, in turn, demands a certain degree of appreciation wherein we can manoeuvre within the confines defined by genre, etc. Then, given the full prior saturation of pre-conditions a process of integrated and coherent enaction of actualization can then follow if that intention, in turn, is able to be enacted and is enacted. In effect, we could envisage an overall dialectic self-operating in such a manner so as to mutually thematize these processes of nomination, etc. Before, during and after actualization, a process of assessment can be entered into wherein an appreciation of the relational-situatedness of that ‘state of affairs’ can be registered. Again apposite genre or mix of genres are invoked in order to appreciate to what extent our nominations, enacted or non-enacted, can be assessed in terms of their possible and/or actual situational consequences. Therein and thereafter a process of supervision can either re-direct and/or merely redirect what re-nominated adjustments that might be considered necessary in the light of this ongoing assessment (yet apparently spontaneous in its own sense of a ‘self-assessment’). Such intervention, realized in this process and enacted (virtually and/or non-virtually), in turn, being similarly assessed, etc. Although a complex process, a certain degree of simplexity is realized by virtue of the transcendental unity of consciousness already in place proposing such nomination\s, etc. Hence our ability to non-calculatively assess such complex intentional states of affairs in and through and beyond this apparent semblance of simplexity. A state of affairs assisted through pre-negotiation of genres, inter-pre-negotiation between potentially interactive genres, habitual practice, our ability to assess the simplexity of machinations, etc. (26)

	As a guideline, our list of heading should be able to help us achieve a thematized process of nominative formation and actualization. In the process realizing a degree of responsibility in keeping with the nature of that process of enaction, especially if the relational-situatedness of that state of affairs is also carefully taken into account. In effect, an envisaged (and possibly enacted) process is achieved through a form of ordered analysis concerned with the existential nomination of intentional responses in an apposite field of responsibility. As examined elsewhere, an ordered analysis examines to what extent a certain intentional objective can pass through a series of cognitive orders and therein and thereby determine its (highest) epistemological status. The serious nomination of emitted intentional responses can only occur in a sixth order of ontical or factual assessment and realization. At each stage a distinctive type of intentional process is enacted through the utilization of the corresponding type of judgment necessary to enact that objective in the next order in a state of actualization in keeping with the nature of that ordered form of intentional existence. Hence the first order status of square-circles and green noises, etc. However, in contrast, a circular table can be observed perceptually if such an object is actually being observed in a fourth order and its actualization extends to the intentional object-state or objective being so experienced. It is true to say that if I think I am currently experiencing a round table-phenomenon that I am actually experiencing that phenomenon of experience in a sixth order of ontical or factual determination. However, if in our alignment with this phenomenal situation this satisfaction of a sixth order status also extends to the intentional content in a sixth order then we would be safe to say we are directly experiencing a round table phenomenon in a sixth order of intentional appreciation. So we can think of whiteness and cloudness, think of a white cloud, entertain the idea of the same. Then entertain a perceptual-like experience of the same (virtually or non-virtually), therein determine its (virtual) possibility and thence its actual-actuality given a confirmation of its existence in an examination of the modal density and modal intensity of those activated modes of engagement discovered to exist therein (in that representative intentional objective). By such means we make our passage through the world in an engaged fashion wherein we find ourselves normally being able to determine and differentiate fact from fiction, non-illusion from delusion, etc., etc. Such deliberations invoking a hermeneutical dimension in a process of historical deliberation. Such deliberations invoking a non-overall existential dimension in our prospective speculations, etc. An apposite consequential analysis invoking past, present and future dimensions in an analysis of the relational-situatedness of that situated-relationship under relationship examination (in the light of the nomination of various responses if present). The overall existential treatment of a particular modal complex of intentional operations realizing this sense of responsibility as outlined above. (27)

	How is an existential complexion realized and appreciated? In other words, how is a process of progressive re-alignment appreciated? (28)

5.    Insights into the Instigation of the Existential

	As argued to date, responsibility is an existential process realized through a determination of situational re-alignment. Such a state can only be realized in, through and beyond a properly conducted process of an overall transcendental suspension. Let me elabourate. (29)

	No response can occur in and of itself alone. All emissions are emitted in an associated emissive field and in no other way (even if represented in some other field of appreciation). Similarly, an intentional response is nominated in and emitted from its associated field and in that field a determination of responsibility can or should be able to be appreciated (in the light of our appreciation of past experience, etc.). (30)

	Given this theoretical account how can we account for the existential, the responsible and their (complete) coincidence? (31)

	In the light of our six headings let me note the following. Nomination is existential if it survives an adequate overall transcendental suspension. Nomination cannot be reductively treated as existential if able to be merely reduced to its incremental input (or there abouts). Genre is not existentially developed if inappropriately supplied or appropriately supplied but defectively instantiated. Moreover, it remains non-existentially oriented if it cannot survive an adequate overall transcendental suspension, and v.v. In other words, if existentially oriented if it can survive the same. Similarly, when examined through the lenses of appreciation, actualization and supervision. (32)

	The existential is instrumental in releasing a greater degree of psychic value above and beyond that merely invested in our reading of that situation or that situation to hand. In such an existentially oriented experience in our passage through the world we meet with less obstruction; invoke a more profound sense of freedom (be that personal or spiritual, etc.); become suitably transparent before the other and v.v; are empowered before the other; given a greater range of opportunities and possibilities; find ourselves more thoughtfully and intensely engaging the world of the other and the otherness of the world; that our actions are coloured by a degree of responsibility in keeping with this existential manner of their commission and/or omission and our alignment with-others before-other in the transcendental unity of the Life-World. All in all, a state of affairs that has us engaging the world in a state of refined alignment that, in turn, releases its own distinctive sense of value-for-us. That such value can be re-invested in this economy of emission wherein nominated enactions are invested and re-invested with greater degrees of existential merit…. (33)

	In this light of the above, how might a provisional conclusion be summarized that addresses these considerations of embodiment, re-negotiation with others, an economy of responsible interaction, non-circulation of responsible value, the existential benefits of responsibility, etc? (34)

6.    Provisional Conclusions

	What provisional conclusions can be reached in the course of this analysis? How can the simplexity of these complex considerations be expressed in an integrated fashion whilst obviating processes of associated mis-representation. Through the intuitive expression of insight! Let me elabourate. (35)

	The “intuitive ‘expression’ of insight” can be read as our conscious awareness of what a situation calls for, calls forth (in nominated responses) and how we might call that same situation both to-our self and for-others before-others (in and through a narrative of responsibility). An essential understanding of a relationship, especially in its relational-situatedness as well, can deliver for-us, for-others, to-others-through-us certain nominated responses that should be judged as responsible if mutually arrived at or mutually arrive at on the behalf of others when our intuitive receptivity to the situation to hand in its relational-situatedness is insightfully ‘entered’ and ‘left’. And the means for such an entry and exit is in and through and beyond the auspices of an adequate overall transcendental suspension! By such means we facilitate the economy of that relationship in its relational-situatedness, augment its existential possibilities and promote an overall sense of existential advancement and insight. In this pot, or black box, let us feed what appears to be relevant with the weight of its relevance attached to that extent this imputed finding is advanced in and through such research. Then, through its maturation of envisaged interaction hopefully find both its alignment to the situation to hand and those measures that would advance its existential advancement through re-alignment when and where called for and called forth. From this mix, let us realize a sense of narrative currently being expressed in and through and beyond such transcendental research. ‘Transcendental’ by virtue of its operation of an overall transcendental suspension wherein our intuition into these matter can be formed and reformed, found in conformance with the reality of the situation as it is to be found-to-hand and find-itself-being-reformed-to-hand. What does this fine tuning entail? Refinement of nomination, refinement of genre invocation, refinement of appreciation of the same, refinement of enaction, refinement of our current understanding of our consideration of its embodied-situatedness, a supervision of all such acts of refinement along with a further enaction of re-negotiations, processes of formal and formalized re-alignment, etc. All in all, a realization of a greater degree of responsibility in keeping with the nature of that current situation-to-hand under investigation along with all the existential benefits to be gained through that existentialization of responsibility. (36)

	How do we critically assess the responsibility of our habitual and not so habitual patterns of response as formalized before others through our share of actions as enacted? Let me deal with this dimension of the critical assessment of responsibility in my next paper. (37)

   Noël Tointon, Sydney, 25.9.09.