Property:Selflance

This is a property of type Selflance.

This text will be the reflection of an attempt to formulate a term as selflance.

As it is "they are" with self and lance, "selflance" itself should be out of in/for statements of self, in addition to the manner of the "lance" that can be related to the term of lense from the point of its visuality.

Surveillance from the point of its multidimensions for today, is already a disciplinary subject. And maybe evaluated back a social hegemony management model "for itself" on "in itself". Surely this seems conflictional and paradigmatic, and that is also the general manner for the concşusions in this era. In a simple case of this sens, while there are tendencies or critiques on the subjects of surveillance by some technologies, there have been also tendencies and researches to formulate the education or learning values and approaches for the same technologies that next generations should be able to adapt and manage it for their future.

These are also where generation is with problems for their own ( self development.) -but is it necessary?-

Which is referance for their own self?

User name with password as its extention, ironically, or contents contributed/evaluated by them?

It looks as level stages, because possible answers may change in terms of accessible permissions, as guest user, member, moderator, admin, cpanel manager, even domain, or server owner/renter, also with all possible user types by admins.

Rather then the clarifiation of these level stratifications, their being as validitor of referance for identity of self, seems essential and operational.

And I will attempt to interpellate this scene as unity of "self" with "lance" to construct "selflance".

- So what? -this is for my other page types.-

Selflance .. that looks as a "whitepaper" irony against density of determined conditions. But not so much. Because "hisenbergian undeterminancy should protect against it. Hence the remaining risk becomes the duality of body-mind priority. At the end it comes the question of cognitive paradigmes as if holistic or constructivist or augmantic or reflective and so on etc.

The general discussions waves the clarifications of this duality between mind and body. And even holistic approach itself tries to overcome it within the unification of both.

But is it? And any refernce of the results for these paradigmes will be the criteria for new generations adaptability. That also makes the validity of mind-body model of that generation a well.

With a quotation from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_philosophy:

Moreover,some questions seem necessary:

CAN

HOLISTIC COGNITION BE

A METHODIC WAY OF LEARNING

FOR NEW GENERATION

WHO HAS AN OPEN DNA SYSTEM

WITHIN

UBIQUITOUS ASCII TECHNOLOGY

OF TODAYS ?

Can the term of "holism" be so significant from the point of project implementations and vision.

However, the next or digital generation is a real criteria that carries on the era of all developments as a way of their lifelong learning. The way of their life also represents their being a particular or an essential particularisation of new developments which represents ascii codifications as a new language of technology.

Moreover, these paradigmatic developments also replace the classical corner-concepts as ontology-epistemology and so on, by the developments of nano or synthetic biology in a way of social life, all represents the unity of life as a system where body and mind are open parts of these developments within rejection of being and having a closed value.

Holism as a methodic value can not live long in such a kind of new verifications and validities of life. Otherwise, it becomes a source of so many new forms of value conflictions as a cheap ascii games.

-- -

---

tags: all for role, base, user, value, differs to selfish, reflective theories, walking types in mirror forest.

The allowed value for this property is:

• surveillance