III. Squaring the Circle: On a Circulation or the Non-Circulation of Value?*

0.    Introduction

	First, in a third essay on the ‘circulation of value’, I would like to establish the case for the necessary circulation of value in order for there to be value. That without circulation there could be no economy and its expression of value. (1)

	Second, that the realization of value appears to arise momentarily in and through such spontaneity without recourse to circulation. Thence the presentation of a dilemma (as encapsulated in the title to this paper). (2)

	In a third section, I will attempt to square the circle so to speak and present a resolution of this dilemma. (3)

	In a fourth section, in the form of a provisional conclusion, I will indicate the potential ramifications of this dialectical approach to the apparent circulation/non-circulation of value with respect to such topics as identity, authenticity, etc. (4)

	Now, let me introduce some definitions. For a start, what is value as focused upon in this paper? Let me note a broad definition for the purposes of this paper while noting in passing a parallel series of other definitions developed elsewhere. (5)

	Value occurs in and through an economy of phenomenal-phenomenological activity in such a manner so as to leave a surplus in the form of a residue. E.g., my home town of Dunedin in New Zealand was officially founded in 1848. Within a dozen years numerous building were erected. One could say that one way of perceiving the value of the labour performed by these early settlers was evident in the manner and extent of such constructions. That the net residue of such activity was the creation of this newly formed urban landscape (along with the meta-textual establishment of associated institutions, etc.). (6)

	Another way of treating value is to perceive its context of circulation. For example, gold is highly prized as a form of currency. With pieces of gold, either as nuggets or dust or coins or jewelry or ingots or mere lumps, as a substance it is usually a highly convertible commodity which can be exchanged for a vast variety of goods or services, e.g., the requisition of food. However, if we were marooned on a desert island where gold could play no part in an economy by being marooned by our self, or, we were to be placed in the midst of a society where gold has no economic value, then in either situation no amount of gold in our possession could be traded for the requisitioning of food. In this context gold can have now no value in that regard. From our personal point of view, we might wish to continue to value it from habit or in the hope that we might be able to return to a society where it would be highly valued. However, for the current moment, in our need for food, it just has no value. We certainly cannot eat it! (7)

*Link to latest version of paper on Homestead Homepage Site (circulation3.rtf).
	From a philosophical perspective, I conceive of value as arising in and through a hermeneutical circle of comprehension (as examined elsewhere in numerous papers). By this I mean, that surplus of value that arises through analysis, synthesis and their net conjunctive-product (considered, respectively, as the three moments of the hermeneutic circle as previously examined)(also equivalent to an overall transcendental suspension). These same three moments being viewed through a number of lenses (e.g., in terms of meaning through representing textual sense, meta-textual meaning and non-textual meaningfulness; in a phenomenological mode through mirroring Object, World and Ego; in a temporal setting through representing past/retrospectivity or retention, future/prospectivity or protention and present/contemporaneity or a current sense of (specious) duration; etc., etc.). Value can also be construed as an ordered phenomenon (as previously defined) through a privileging/de-privileging of these moments of Object, World and/or Ego (or their parallel equivalents) and their transcendental re-expression as pre-essential considerations of essential value (in lexical entries, formulae and the [syntactic] manipulation of both); integrated essential considerations of aesthetical value; de-ontological considerations of ethical value; pragmatical considerations of utility; hermeneutic considerations of meta-textual value and evaluation; and, finally, questions of factual value [rather than mere potentiality as examined in a hermeneutical light]). (8)

	Paralleling these three moments, in a harmonic lens (treated in a gestalt field), we can view these three moments as respectively a sense of focal-dissonance, an associated-background field of consonance, and, the dialectical relationship between the same wherein an expression of harmonic resolution is constituted (and re-constituted in order to re-constitute an apparent sense of circulation). Elsewhere I have argued that value is expressed through an overall process of harmonic resolution. Indeed, meaning can be re-traced through a similar re-tracing of the same harmonic process. That all communication, as a communication of value, is realized (in apparent transmission and reception) through the simulated/re-simulated re-constitution of that same, or closely similar, simulated/re-simulated process of value-formation.  (9)

	For the purposes of this paper, let us merely treat value, provisionally, as an existential surplus invested/re-invested in its associated field/s of circulation whose expression is established and maintained through the continued re-constitution of its circulation (as a restatement of definition in para.6) (10)

	Obviously, value is expressed/re-expressed through an existential surplus that cannot be reductively treated into its constituent elements. The function of a broom is not something that can be adequately reduced to either its handle or its mere broom head or the mere addition of these two essential components in the formation and function of a broom. Or, again, for example, a family is not something that can be merely reduced to its constituents in the form of a father and/or a mother and their offspring, but, instead, the net interaction of the interactions between such family elements that constitute that family in question. (11)

	That through simulation/re-simulation of circulation value is expressed! (12)

1.    On the Apparent Circulation of Value

	A family was treated as the net interaction between the interactions engaged between the members of that family in question. Without an actual process of interaction there would be no actual sense of a family (and only a vestigial sense of family could remain as a possibility that might be able to be reconstituted or merely referred to as a past memory, as an historical state of affairs or fact, etc.). In other words, without circulation (through appropriation/re-appropriation of information) there can be no associated form of value… no associated value-formation. (13)

	Now, that granted, it follows that our appreciation of a specific value must involve some form of a simulation/re-simulation of the associated context in which that specific value appears to have arisen. How do we appreciate the current worth, or worthlessness, of a company? We look at its accounts. Such figures collectively allow us to simulate a re-simulation of the current realized value of that economic institution. We look at its books, or, rather, more commonly, we examine the summary of its books as prepared and signed off by a reputable accountant. This gives us a picture of the financial health or non-health of that company in question that, hopefully, bears some resemblance to the current reality of that company from a financial point of view. (14)

	Without such a simulation or re-simulation of that economy in question we could not form a realistic opinion of the value of that company under such examination. Therefore, without the simulation/re-simulation of that circulation being focused upon we could not form an adequate appreciation of the value therein being expressed. Value, therefore, is expressed through circulation, and, appreciated through a re-simulation of that circulation. (15)

	Gold functions as a currency in an economy that can incorporate its convertible utilization. Gold is exercised as an essential participant in a process of transformative conversion. Gold ‘buys’ x and x is ‘bought’ with gold. An existential excess is engendered when this process of transformative conversion is engendered. E.g., food is bought with some gold coins and eaten with an associative resolution of our hunger over a considerable period of time. If these noted elements have interacted in that manner as recounted then our resolution of our hunger is an existential excess that cannot be merely reduced to the mere presence of coins and food (but the conversion of the former into the latter and its subsequent consumption). In other words, through circulation value arises! (16)

	If we were to merely interact with gold coins as gold coins to-hand and food as food not-to-hand there could be no satisfaction of our ongoing hunger. Only through circulation in such a manner that the requisite number of those coins are no-longer-to-hand for-us and that food is now to-hand and can be eaten through the conversion of some of those coins from a state of being to-hand to being no longer to-hand is the economic satisfaction of our hunger to be resolved if no other pathways for the acquisition of food are currently open to us. So gold is traded for food and our hunger over a certain period of time is now no longer problematic. Without this process of conversion the associated form of value could not arise for-us. I.e., through distinctive forms of circulation, distinctively associated forms of value are there for-us to appropriate. Nothing could be more simple! That value arises through circulation! (17)

2.    The Apparent Non-Circulation of Value

	In  a previous paper communication, more or less, was described as holistically realized in the spontaneity of the moment. A new and more simple model of communication was presented based upon the realization that the communicative act was spontaneous and holistically represented throughout the phenomenal-phenomenological range of that relationship in question. Therefore, value, and its communication, could not arise from an ongoing process of mere circulation since its inception was spontaneous and holistically engendered in the mere appearance of that communicative act. That, therefore, value, as now understood, could not be communicated through an act of circulation! (18)

	Let me restate this rather counter-intuitive argument. Communication was perceived as a sudden chaotic change of state that was realized simultaneously and spontaneously from every point in a relationship in that same moment of time engaged by that relationship in question (in a perspective of appreciation where this change of state could be simulated/re-simulated). That communication was not the mere transmission and reception and interpretation of signals, but, instead, the transformation of that relationship that ensues from their collective, non-reductive interaction of such factors. So, if value is communicated holistically, equally from every point in a relationship, it follows that there can be no circulation of value per se! (19)

	On one hand, value appears to circulate, result from circulation. On the other, value is expressed through every point and moment of a relationship without any apparent recourse whatsoever to a mere act or process of circulation! How might one square the circle in this regard? (20)

	In this light of the holistic moment of communication, value is communicated through a chaotic process of re-organization. Communication, therefore, is more an illusion and appearance, indeed, only an illusion of an appearance. (21) 

	Hence this dilemma: value is expressed through momentary, chaotic, spontaneous re-self-organizations of state and, therefore, must appear to completely bypass processes of circulation!? (22)

In other words, given a change in value as merely the change of state through its momentary re-self-organization it would appear that circulation need not be invoked (other than as an illusion)?? (23)

3.    On a Resolution of this Dilemma between Circulation and non-Circulation

	I will attempt to resolve this dilemma through noting that harmonic resolution is both a process (of circulation) and a(n ongoing definitive) change of state (through [ongoing] re-self-organization). (24)

Now does this (self-organized) change of state, in an apparent process occur within this moment of re-organization or between two adjacent moments that become relatively re-organized? Asking this question is not a scholastic exercise in sophistic reasoning if it were to be properly formulated and resolved!? How should we go about its examination in such a manner that actually illuminates its proper, appropriate and valid formulation (or, rather, re-formulation as a change of value)? In other words how should we view the ‘moment’ in the self-organized change of state (and its apparent expression of a change in value along with its ongoing re-constitution as an apparent ‘process’?)? (25)

	For a start, we should perceive the moment as a relative artifact of the appearance (or illusion) of circulation. In other words, finding ourselves dependent upon the apparent nature of the circulatory process without absolutely asserting the existence of that imputation of a process of circulation, a moment of communication, the momentary expression of value, the very momentary nature of that moment of value-formation, etc. Metaphorically we might like to conduct the following thought experiments or, rather, our following interpretations of the same. (26)

Imagine, first, if you would, two pixel on a television screen. Theoretically, what information do we have, indeed, how many units of information might there be here? Let us say pixel a has an intensity of illumination x, and, a contiguous pixel b has an illumination of 2x units in intensity. Just two units of information therefore? No, for we also have the relationship r between these contiguous or adjacent pixels such that r = x : 2x. So, we have three units of information? Or, perhaps more correctly, we have only one unit of information, namely, r; which with an increasing number of pixels exponentially rises accordingly with the number of possible relationships between these pixilated inputs (although, correctly, pattern recognition, in turn, re-organizes such relative inputs with a corresponding increase in epistemological organization and an inverse decrease in the degree of apparent complexity). (27)

	A close parallel to this hypothetical modeling is how the eye is deemed to work. Now the eye does not discern mere points of light, rather, their relationship/s, and interrelationships, and so on. Overall, some information is promoted through identificational convergence whereas other information is suppressed through relative destruction or loss of form through approximating associated background noise, etc. All in all, identity is noticed and reinforced, and, that not noticed and/or de-reinforced is productive of non-identity by default (processes of identification being determined through the adoption and adaptation of the invoked meta-textual frames of reference thought relevant to that type of task). (28)

	Identification of an identifiable surplus of value is reinforced through supportive mechanisms of pattern recognition and equally lost when there is no economic surplus of value to note. Into this apparent illusion of identity-formation and existential excess value is either recognized and perceived or not recognized and not perceived. Similarly, the moment of recognition itself must be recognized and appreciated between two differing moments and so the question “is communication of value expressed and experience within the moment or between the moment” can be answered by noting that there can be no absolute moment and no absolute moment between apparent moments since a relationship of difference must be present for this illusion of a momentary illumination to take place (and find reinforcement through re-iterative retention). In other words, a hierarchy of relevant inputs of relational difference-within-relational-conformity when finding an adequate degree of resolution will present the apparent illusion of value-formation. Or, more simply, the ongoing stability of relational difference (through retention) finds itself signaling a change in output, i.e., a change in value. A circumscribed sense of change, a channeled  sense of difference communicated as a change in communicative value. Let me demonstrate this sense of reinforced differentiation. Say a person were to regularly and softly utter the number word ‘9’ over a certain period of time and then pronounce the word ‘10’. At first we might feel a certain change has taken place but with the repetition of this new number-word of ‘10’ we now find our perception of the word ‘10’ being reinforced despite the fact that ‘9’ and ‘10’ have a nasal ending and almost rhyme. Such a transition is like our perception of rhyme. A mixed semblance of unity-in-diversity, or, apparent-diversity-in-the-midst-of-an-apparent-unity. Once a transitional process is in place the shift is sudden but not absolute! Say a door is about to be opened. It is closed, but once opened, even if only a fraction, once perceived as opened it is opened! There is no absolute exclusivity here between ‘openness’ and ‘closure’ (since a door could be slowly opened or slowly closed and this process not recognized) but once a particular state is recognized and reinforced then a change of value is imputed! Is this the way to understand how we might square the circle in this regard, find a non-exclusive relationship between the spontaneous communication of value and its prior necessity of apparent circulation (subject to an ongoing process of harmonic resolution)? (29)

	The phenomenon of identification needs phenomenological fixing of focal content in order to determine ‘that being identified’ (as a first ordered process of pre-essential lexical determination) (whilst the integrity of that identified is subject to a second ordered process of essential-aesthetical integration). A process of identification imputes a bearer of that imputative process be that a logical subject, a concept or universal, etc., whilst a determination of its objective integrity determines to what degree that identified bearer is an identity rather than a non-integrated series of identities. Identification being a dialectical interaction of (first order) differentiation and (second order) integration focusing upon an imputed bearer phenomenologically fixed through a union of phenomenological retension, protension, and duration. However, such identity cannot be absolutely separable from its processes of identification in order for it to remain ‘identified’. Consequently, identity can only be a relative phenomenon differentiated-and-integrated in the transcendental unity of the one-World-of-Life; a Life-World of transcendental possibility-actuality metaphysically explicated in this one-world-of-experience as constituted for-us by-us! In essence, identity is an illusion but a wonderful illusion (to the extent that there is value-for-us in this one-world-with-others). This ‘illusion of identity’ being discovered to possess a perception/apperception of reality to that extent it ‘feels’ real-for-us through the comparative existential richness of that phenomenon or phenomena in question (as situated in its relevant context of origination). Our engagement with a quantitatively greater range of modes of phenomenological engagement, and, their qualitative enrichment of experience, establishing or disestablishing a respective sense of reality in our appreciation of that process of engagement (thence the difference between dream apples and non-dream apples, etc.). (30)

	This process of identificational fixing and thematization effectively is an active process entered into by the engager in their ongoing constitution/re-constitution of their appreciation of experience to-hand. Transcendentally it could be characterized as a process of transcendental illusion to that extent we actively constitute that identity, but, we also remain a passive participant to that extent identity is meta-textually pre-formed through protentional expectations, etc., and such expectations are actually met in our encounter with such bearers of identification from their point of view given that this process of identification is neither a purely passive affair nor a purely active affair, etc. (31)

	Consequently, in our engagement with the world, in this one-World-of-Life, there is a dialectical engagement between passive and active forms of phenomenological constitution of identity within our intentional processes that has us both engaging with and being engaged by those identified bearers of identity (regardless of their phenomenological complexion). Moreover, although processes of identity can be treated as transcendental illusions from a transcendental perspective, from a non-transcendental perspective identity maintains its own ‘empirical’ sense of reality (unless those expectations are somewhat radically revised in that regard). (32)

	Given this type of understanding (on the nature of identity) we can now regard both ‘the bearers of identity’ and ‘their associated processes of circulated value’ as ‘illusions’ from a transcendental perspective. That granted, we now should have no problem dealing with the holistic nature of value-formation and the communication of the same given that all forms of identity and all process of circulation are ‘illusions’ from a transcendental perspective. In absolute terms of reference (but not in absolutistic terms of reference through the absolute imputation of substantial bearers, etc.) we can now perceive the transcendental nature of relationships as being constituted in a relevant form of relational time-and-space in such a manner that their transcendental illusion is engaged as relatively real in empirical-like terms of reference by virtue of this surplus of value therein engaged. In such relationships we find our psychic engagement to be relatively better rewarded when the nature of our engagement is existentially open to the transcendental-relational nature of those relationships under focalized engagement. By realizing there are no real absolute boundaries between all forms of objective and subjective identity other than their relational contiguity and the qualitative richness of possible interpretative engagement currently open to us it follows that all forms of relational encounter are open to us as potential fields of invested engagement. The existential return on such investments, in the form of an engaged existential surplus, being dependent upon those limitations as just noted (namely, psychic contiguity and its relevant pre-interpretative richness of recognitional development). Let me illustrate these two non-limitations/limitations associated with all forms of invested engagement. All forms of engagement are investments of psychic energy to that extent we become intentionally involved with such imputations in question. Moreover, the quality of our engagement is dependent both upon our ability to be contiguous to that to-be-engaged and our ability to recognize-such-engagement. I can talk to those people beside me if they are beside me and can hear, etc., but, must shout to someone outside this room. On the other hand, using a mobile I am effectively contiguous with them if they too have their mobile, it is on, and they hear me make this call, etc. Then, our conversations engaged in, given such proximal contiguity or virtual contiguity, have a greater qualitative prospect of an invested return if the parties concerned can speak the same language, have a similar degree of education, conceptual awareness, etc., mutually wish to be engaged in that manner, etc. Within the moment and between the moments, as limitational artifacts of our engagement, value is continually re-constituted as an existential surplus that is immediately invested in the ‘psychic body’ of that relationship equally from every point within the same. Hence the illusion of circulation and the immediate non-circulatory expression of value as communicated within that relationship. But, to what extent is the apparent phenomenon of circulation (as a transcendental illusion) still a necessary feature of a relationship and its momentary, auto-communicated expressions of value? (33)

	Just as there can be no absolute boundaries between all apparent forms of objective and subjective identity (other than the limitations of psychic contiguity and mutual recognition) so too it follows that there can be no absolute demarcation between the sense of the transcendental and the sense of the non-transcendental (be that the natural, the empirical or the phenomenal world, etc.) it follows that the mutual obverse of a transcendental illusion is a non-transcendental non-illusion. Hence although the imputation of all forms of identity and circulated expressions of value are transcendental illusions it also follows that such illusions cannot be ‘absolute illusions’! Indeed, by virtue of such non-substantiality of identity, etc., engagement becomes an actualizable-possibility for-us to activate through psychic contiguity and mutual recognition, etc. Thence the existential richness of this world-for-us as found engaged by-us through our existential investment with all forms of imputation! In and through such metaphysical recognition, by such a philosophical manoeuvre, we find we have squared the circle, that there is no absolute dissonance between circulation and holistically communicated expressions of value. Let me re-explain. (34)

	From a transcendental perspective all forms of imputation are a transcendental illusion, i.e., possess no absolute/absolutistic basis or substantiality. But, such transcendental illusions are not just ‘transcendental illusions’ being also non-transcendental phenomenal-phenomenological ‘realities’! The transcendental illusion of the imputation of circulation is also a non-transcendental phenomenal-phenomenological reality. Similarly, the imputation of a transcendental-holistically communicated expression of value is also a non-transcendental phenomenal-phenomenological reality! To that extent all imputations are perceived and treated as ‘imputations’ to that same extent as phenomena they remain there-for-us. So, from a transcendental perspective we might say that the imputation of circulation is as necessary as the imputation of relative contiguity and mutual recognition for a process of engagement to be encountered along with its co-extensive expressions of such value, etc! In other words, the transcendental expression of value (and its investment/re-investment) is as dependent upon the equal prerequisite of the non-transcendental instantiation of circulation as the latter is dependent upon the former (and v.v.)! Thence this provisional conclusion: no transcendental value without non-transcendental circulation, and v.v! (35)

	Let me now look into some of the ramifications of this research and its implications for our understanding of identity and the existential augmentation of engagement (i.e., authenticity). (36)

4.    The Ramifications of this Dialectical Position on Value-Formation

	All identity should now be seen as imputed. As that sense of apparent ongoing continuity naturally imputed in a productive process of engagement (through mutual recognition, etc.). (37)

	An attitude that perceives all things as imputed is realized in an overall transcendental suspension. In such an attitude we no longer perceive things as ‘substantial things’ but as ‘phenomena’ with the ‘appearance of things that appear to be more or less substantial’. Moreover, when understood from a transcendental perspective that there can be no substantial things and that appearance is a phenomenon of illusion as an illusory-like phenomena’ then we realize that interaction is possible by virtue of this necessary non-substantiality of all forms of identity. The ‘reality’ of such interactions is now appreciated through the richness met and expected in that type of interaction. So, e.g., the ‘mirage of water’ does not meet our expectations of a ‘body of water on the horizon’ when more closely approached (hence their non-identity). From an epistemological point of view a mirage is no more real nor less real than an encounter with a body of water such as a lake, etc. From an ontological orientation we could say that a mirage is not a body of water because our expectations in this regard will never be met if we were to treat a mirage merely at face value. Then, from a transcendental perspective, entered and left through the practice of an overall transcendental suspension, we can say that there is a quantitative and qualitative difference in existential richness between these two different types of phenomena. In our interaction with a body of water a greater richness of modalities are more richly engaged, and, such engagement effectively meets with our expectations in that regard. (38)

	Does this (double dialectical) transcendental (-non-transcendental) attitude account for subjective identity, objective identity, natural limitations imposed upon identity along with its apparent stability of presentation, etc., and, the imputative nature and consequences of identity, circulation, psychic contiguity, mutual recognition, apparent processes of existential engagement and potential pathways for existential augmentation in attitudes of relative authenticity, etc? (39)

	Identity is processed and treated as contiguous when a uniquely identified existential descriptor adequately identifies that under focus. Similarly, an existential axis is relatively maintained when the emplacement of that identity is preserved in the same essential set of fields wherein its identity is thematized and maintained hierarchically. So, e.g., clouds form in the sky (as an existential axis) and appear to persist for a certain period of time (as an existential descriptor). Similarly, a person is uniquely born into a certain family and social culture (as its existential axis) with a certain continuity of identity through time (as an existential descriptor), etc. (40)

	Rhetorically, we might ask “how is identity preserved in time, say for a tree, and, how does a tree-object differ from a subjective identity such as the person who chops it down or attempts to prevent it from being chopped down? (41)

	‘Treeness’ pervades a tree object. Hence this value is preserved in the physical extent of that tree. On the other hand, from the perspective of its existential axis one might say that its epistemological organization is not as comparatively rich as that found in the phenomenological nature of a person. Thence this subjective difference between a tree-object and a subjectively-constituted person. On the other hand, because all identity is constituted through an explication of its transcendental possibility within the transcendental unity of this one-World-of-Life it follows that there can be no ultimate difference between objective identity and subjective identity, only a difference in existential richness as determined through the respective epistemological organization of that under transcendental investigation along with matters of relative contiguity or non-contiguity, mutual recognition or non-recognition, etc.) . (42)

	This type of philosophical insight into the constitution of identity also opens up an avenue for the existential augmentation of our relationships in this World-of-Life with-others before-others through a recognition of an existential surplus of value-formation and its augmentation (through openness, transcendental reservation [in existentially acting on the behalf of others when and where necessary], mutual recognition, etc.). (43)

This granted and accepted what provisional conclusions should one reach in our dealing with these topics of identity, circulation and the associated holistic formation of value? (44)

	That value is expressed holistically, simultaneously, momentarily and distinctly in keeping with the existential axes, existential descriptors of its associated imputative identity. (45)

That although identity and circulation of relational interaction are a transcendental illusion along with the expression/re-expression and investment/re-investment of value, yet, from a non-transcendental perspective, there can be no absolute illusion. (46)

	Because all forms of identity are discerned and recognized in this one-Life-World it follows that there can be no absolute distinction between objective identity and subjective identity. (47)

	Through psychic contiguity and mutual recognition identities are apparently engaged (through harmonized interaction productive of relationships). (48)

	That the reality of value formation is existentially augmented through its mutual existential enrichment (in and through attitudes of authenticity). (49)

	That phenomenal-phenomenological enrichment is augmented through an enrichment of circulatory processes (in and through the psychic center of the relevant relationships concerned) (by means of adequate overall transcendental suspensions and/or other non-cognitive equivalents in the apparent establishment of effective processes of ongoing harmonic resolution). (50)

	Hence this intimate interrelationship between objective-identity, subjectivity-identity, phenomenological circulation, value-formation, imputative processes, apparent continuity of identity, psychic contiguity, mutual recognition, the transcendental unity of the Life-World, existential insight and augmentation, etc., etc! (51)

	Thence the transcendentally-oriented expression of value through momentary re-self-organization of identity-in-its-contextual-context, and, the phenomenally-oriented presentation of circulation as a pre-requisite for changes in the formation and expression of value (such as identificational features, integrity of apparent identity, de-ontological  and pragamatical inputs, hermeneutical treatment of processes of mutual recognition and factual assessment/re-assessment). (52)

	Thence the mutual, harmonized, dialectical interaction between ‘transcendental value’ and ‘phenomenal-phenomenological circulation’!! (53)
							     Noël Tointon, Sydney, 3.4.09.