By Joshera Rudertsitxenophage exotic quest
Contingency is a necessitous framework for understanding action. Michel Foucault plied the heterogeneous social spheres a framework for understanding the materializing of contingent practice. In principal an array of practices site upon the spectra of contingent time horizons, on either side of the past present and future. These regimes of time entails a panoply of actions and orientations for actions. The resultant assemblage of forces that all dimensions are in perpetual dissensus. These relations and time horizons are moment–laden, a punctuated equilibrium of specific action. Hart stresses an action–theoretic contextualism. The practico–inert, is the ontological space for a pseudo-independent array of action constellations. These channels of action are contingent meaning within the frames of would–be, served parallel sovereignty and subjecthood. A diagram of a continuum of action subjectivity is represents the distinction between would-be and networked pseudo–agents. Practical knowledge gains are the initial keystones, towards any action or reflection. The vernacular these contingent universes generate are framed utterances for instance design or structural analytical categories like agency, actor–network theories. In specific terms these are the final state of interaction between anonymous actors action, action affects, feedback and initiated and exhausted patterns of interactions. The self-referential dimension invites meta-paradoxes in the study of reality and institutions as an investigated object. Semiological spaces is the contingent condition in the experience of many different forms of activity. This can be gleaned from the object–agency distinction. Magnitude impasse modifies the character and purity of said action schema. Equilibrium is a fluent security modality, aka the conventional intention.