Editing User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand (section)

=== L1 - L900 ===

{{HueCSS}}<!-- {{BopCSS}} --><ol class="hue clean reset">
<li class="field_exstruct" value="1" data-dimension="L">master signifier
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="2" data-dimension="L">Lacanian discipline -> symbolic castration (Lacanianism)
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="3" data-dimension="L">The Real -> Lacanianism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="4" data-dimension="L">The Symbolic -> Lacanianism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="5" data-dimension="L">The Imaginary -> Lacanianism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="6" data-dimension="L">other / Other / The Other -> Lacanianism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="7" data-dimension="L">object small-a / <i>objet petit a</i>

</li><li class="field_geo" value="8" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|knowledge / know]]
 <ol><li>association through signifier equation
 </li><li>factical observation
 </li><li>Amalthean interpretation
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_geo" value="9" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|philosophy / philosophical]]

</li><li class="field_geo" value="10" data-dimension="L">facticity / factical
 <ol><li>(MDem) set of all entities in material reality
 </li><li>(Existentialism) Lived Experience
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="" value="11" data-dimension="L">category error

</li><li class="field_geo" value="12" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|science / scientific]]
</li><li class="field_geo" value="13" data-dimension="L">ascientific / non-science
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="14" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|scientism / scienticist]]
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="15" data-dimension="L">non-overlapping magisteria

</li><li class="field_geo" value="16" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|rationalism]]
 <ol><li>internal definition
 </li><li>(Existentialism) pejorative definition -> science imperializing philosophy
 </li></ol>

</li><li value="17" class="" data-dimension="L">revolution

</li><li class="field_geo" value="18" data-dimension="L">fallacy  ->  common definition; fallacy fallacy or double fallacy where somebody's error is incorrectly thinking something is an example of a fallacy; "fallacy" in loose usage as any kind of physically inaccurate axiom used as a pillar of thought as if it were fact (<cite>MDem</cite> scraps have used this a lot, as with "printing press fallacy" and "Twilight Sparkle fallacy")

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="19" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|history / historical / historicize]] / historiology (Heidegger) / material-history / historiography
 <ol><li>(center-Liberalism, Existentialism) -> series of unique events
 </li><li>(Marxism) -> material-history
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="20" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|bias]]
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(Existentialism) -> corrupted ideology held immorally
 </li><li>(MDem) the presence of any preferences, worldviews, or codes of morality whatsoever - which is not inherently bad; see Amalthean interpretation
 </li><li>(Toryism) -> anything from another ideology; heresy against Toryism
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="21" data-dimension="L">orthodoxy / orthodox
 <ol><li>(religion)
 </li><li>(philosophy)
 </li><li>(Marxism, meta-Marxism) -> formation of "orthodox Marxism"
 </li><li>(Trotskyism) -> early Leninism, which is good
 </li><li>(right-Liberalism) -> classical Liberalism, which is good
 </li><li>(Toryism) -> "the establishment", which is Bad
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="22" data-dimension="L">heresy / heretical / heretic
 <ol><li>(religion)
 </li><li>(center-Liberalism) see fascism
 </li><li>(Toryism) see bias
 </li><li>(Trotskyism) see anti-Stalinism
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="23" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|lived experience / Lived Experience]]
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(Existentialism)
 </li><li>(existential materialism, MDem)
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="24" data-dimension="L">schizophrenia / schizophrenic
 <ol><li>real-world condition
 </li><li>schizoanalysis metaphor
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="25" data-dimension="L">escape / Escape / escapism  ->  schizoanalyst sense, escaping reality sense

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="26" data-dimension="L">subject / The Subject
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(Existentialism)
 </li><li>(existential materialism, MDem)
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_geo" value="27" data-dimension="L">Being
</li><li class="field_geo" value="28" data-dimension="L">Dasein
</li><li class="field_geo" value="29" data-dimension="L">object

</li><li class="field_geo" value="30" data-dimension="L">truth / true
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(Existentialism) Lived Experience; see Idealism
 </li><li>(religion) see Truth specifically excludes physics; see Māyā
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="31" data-dimension="L">norm / normalcy / normal / normative

</li><li class="field_geo" value="32" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|real / reality / realism]]  ->  many fields have realisms speaking about the reality of that field, note for instance theoretical physics realism. as well any model at all can have a "realism", including so-called "race realism" (the realism of a conspiracy theory) or the assumption that particular art styles represent reality when they might not, etc.

</li><li class="field_geo"  value="33" data-dimension="L">theory  ->  there are many, many definitions for this, though almost every one of them subsets "an ontological model"
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="34" data-dimension="L">idealism / Idealism
</li><li class="field_ML"   value="35" data-dimension="L">materialism / Materialism
</li><li class="field_geo"  value="37" data-dimension="L">objectivity
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="38" data-dimension="L">neutrality
</li><li class="field_ML"   value="39" data-dimension="L">historical materialism
</li><li class="field_ML"   value="40" data-dimension="L">dialectical materialism
</li><li class="field_mdem" value="41" data-dimension="L">existential materialism / exmat
</li><li class="field_geo"  value="42" data-dimension="L">meaning
  <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(structuralism) -> signifier meanings
 </li><li>(existentialism, nihilism) -> the actually-okay definition that meaning is constructed
 </li><li>(Existentialism) -> b<s class="censor">ullshit</s> concepts that the shorter you live the more it means
 </li><li>(postmodernism?) -> end of history confusion about what means anything
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_geo" value="43" data-dimension="L">false / falsify
  <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(science) to a show a testable theory to be inaccurate to reality based on observations; to show a testable theory to be badly matched to the [[redlink|Factical systems]] that constitute reality.
 </li><li>to create forgeries or misleading versions of something; to create a false version of something which was not false
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="44" data-dimension="L">revisionism / revisionist
  <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(historiography) field of history which seeks to re-examine and update historical facts; see "falsify"/science
 </li><li>(Toryism) purported malicious attempt to erase accurate historical facts because they are inconvenient; see "falsify", item for "historical-revisionism/inclusive-history conspiracy theory"
 </li><li>(Marxism) the act of promoting a political-economic model or model of history which has been shown to be inaccurate; see "falsify"/science
 </li><li>(mainstream Marxism-Leninism) category of ostensibly Marxist models regarded with great doubt which may include plans to realize Marxism inside Liberal democracy, ultra-imperialist models of waiting for imperialism to slow down, labeling a free-floating sea of private business territories as "socialist transition", and so forth.
 </li><li>(Trotskyism) category of Marxist models claimed to be incorrect or disproven which may include [[redlink|socialism in one country]], strategies involving government ministries over workers' councils, and so forth.
 </li><li>(Western Marxism) category of Marxist models claimed to be incorrect or disproven which may include models that treat the emergence of movements as in any way predictable, and so forth.
 </li><li>(Existentialism) category of either all Marxist theories or some subset of Marxist models which is claimed to be incorrect or disproven, and may include the entire category of historical materialism, or models which do not make their most fundamental scale [[redlink|The Subject]].
 </li></ol>

</li><li value="45" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="L">liberal / liberalism / Liberalism / liberalize / illiberal / illiberality  ->  oh boy one of my least favorite words in the English language
  <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>relaxed set of rules given to a particular set of rules
 </li><li>Washingtonism. anti-monarchist republicanism. center-Liberalism
 </li><li>capitalist anarchy; right-Liberalism
 </li><li>(Toryism) actual anarchist ideologies presented as if they were the inevitable result of Menshevism or center-Liberalism. see PragerU videos
 </li></ol>
</li><li value="46" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="L">left / Left / The Left
  <ol><li>a direction
 </li><li>(center-Liberalism) all compatible and utterly-incompatible progressive movements in unison
 </li><li>(meta-Marxism) any plural progressive movement which is not directly affiliated with other progressive movements; should be pluralized as "The Lefts"
 </li></ol>
</li><li value="47" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="L">progress / progressive / progressivism / progressivist

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="48" data-dimension="L">take  ->  category: noun-based term. movie scene attempt; design attempt; interpretation, arts; fan theory; political proposition, often pejorative
</li><li class="field_geo" value="49" data-dimension="L">indeterminism  ->  I have my suspicions there's not actually any such thing, and it's just the presence or absence of predictability or the ability to measure things in a sea of otherwise deterministic processes. it's relativity and physical-plurality that screws everything up, it's the fact that for most of its existence the universe has generally never been a single object and has always been a collection of separate objects. are these objects particles, or something else? that's the thing science genuinely doesn't know yet
</li><li class="field_geo" value="50" data-dimension="L">determine / determined / determination / determinism  ->  category: action or process term (verb-based)
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="51" data-dimension="L">predetermine / predetermined / predetermination
</li><li value="52" data-remark="playing cards" class="field_geo" data-dimension="L">random
</li><li value="53" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="L">vote  ->  don't forget the skewering sense of people being convinced voting will result in policies, where it really means nation membership
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="54" data-dimension="L">party  ->  Liberal party versus party-nation
</li><li class="field_ML" value="55" data-dimension="L">party-nation

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="56" data-dimension="L">fair / fairness / unfair  ->  category: abstract condition term, adjective-based term, positive term having negation
  <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>fairness as in no unnecessary obstacles: unfair card game
 </li><li>fairness as in objectivity: evaluating art etc on the standards it intends to deliver on and that are most applicable to it
 </li><li>fairness as in the presence of morality or standards: the claim that nature or life is "unfair" when the intended meaning is that they have no standards and are neither fair nor unfair
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="57" data-dimension="L">just / justice / unjust  ->  category: abstract process term, adjective-based term, positive term having negation. seems to me that fairness is a state of things while justice is generally an active process

</li><li value="58" data-remark="local 58" class="field_horror" data-dimension="L">anomaly  ->  unrelated to "fairness" and "vote". normal definition; Star Trek; SCP definition with its full connotations

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="59" data-dimension="L">should / ought to / must  ->  words like this get me every time somebody says a moral statement and it's practically unenforceable. "should" sometimes means "absolutely will not, but I will be utterly furious at everyone else when my model doesn't work"
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="60" data-dimension="L">morality
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="61" data-dimension="L">ethics
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="62" data-dimension="L">good / Good
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="63" data-dimension="L">evil / Evil
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="64" data-dimension="L">right / Right
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="65" data-dimension="L">wrong / Wrong

</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="66" data-dimension="L">enemy
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(Toryism) -> evil and criminal nationality purportedly intending to destroy one's country - "the United States' enemies"
 </li><li>(Christianity) -> people in separation from God
 </li><li>(Buddhism) -> arbitrary separation between individuals which results in violence
 </li><li>(Maoism) -> class subpopulations who actively oppose Communist revolution - see <cite>The Communist Necessity</cite>
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="67" data-dimension="L">opponent
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(meta-Marxism, MDem) separate free-floating group or individual with which one exists in open plurality and for which re-unifying the plural groups is not trivial
 </li><li>(center-Liberalism, right-Liberalism)  ->  prescriptive connotation that ideologies are not separate and they inherently want to respect each other and regard themselves as part of the same group
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_nations" value="68" data-dimension="L">territory / territorial / territorialize / deterritorialize
 <ol><li>a bounded area associated with a particular use or occupant
 </li><li>(ecology) the bounded area occupied by an individual animal or animal social unit
 </li><li>a particular bounded domain recently added to the borders of a global empire: Northwest Territory, Oregon Territory
 </li><li>a particular bounded area permanently occupied and administered by a global empire: United States territories
 </li><li>(arts) the mutually-exclusive division between concepts believed to be separate and non-overlapping
 </li><li>(schizoanalysis) whatever (de)territorialization means
 </li></ol>

</li><li value="69" class="field_horror" data-remark="meme culture; detachment from the horrifying" data-dimension="L">irony / ironic / unironic
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="70" data-dimension="L">individual / individual / individuality / individuation
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="71" data-dimension="L">authenticity / authentic / inauthentic  ->  Existentialism, Zinovievism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="72" data-dimension="L">will / individual will / free will
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="73" data-dimension="L">free will / Free Will / libertarian free will / compatibilist free will  ->  entry for "Free Will" specifically
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="74" data-dimension="L">volition / volitional
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="75" data-dimension="L">voluntary
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(right-Liberalism) of an agreement or relationship, being determined purely by the two parties involved. despite the word <i>voluntary</i> generally having to do with concepts of will or freedom, a "voluntary" agreement is characterized not by whether somebody wants to agree to it but whether the agreement is currently active or not. an agreement two parties are currently in is voluntary, and it becomes involuntary specifically when one of the parties involved Escapes.
 </li></ol>
</li><li value="76" data-remark="United States" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="L">freedom / free  ->  almost as fraught as "economics", easily 15 definitions
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>... various definitions
 </li><li>Free Software definition
 </li><li>Free Culture definition
 </li><li>(physics, chemistry) available for the purposes of particular physical processes: free energy equation
 </li><li>(physics) the ability to produce more outcomes in the sense of a Cartesian dimension of outcomes: degrees of freedom
 </li><li>(early-existentialism) the prisoner parable or Jevil definition where supposedly nobody is not free if they merely will otherwise, the definition where physical freedom does not matter to the definition of freedom
 </li><li>(pejorative) freedom units: tools used by an enclosed cultural region which does not want to change itself
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="" value="77" data-dimension="L">power -> at least 3-4 specific usages
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="78" data-dimension="L">[[Term:anarchy|anarchy]] -> needs to link several Signifier items for different theories of what Archons are
</li><li class="field_nations" value="79" data-dimension="L">anektiry / ektirion
</li><li class="field_nations" value="80" data-dimension="L">anektirism / ektirionism
</li><li class="field_nations" value="81" data-dimension="L">thoughtcrime
</li><li class="field_nations" value="82" data-dimension="L">doublethink
</li><li class="field_nations" value="83" data-dimension="L">newspeak
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="84" data-dimension="L">censorship
</li><li class="field_nations" value="85" data-dimension="L">Objective / Objectivism  ->  separate from objectivity/objectivism because it has its own complex array of definitions
</li><li class="field_nations" value="86" data-dimension="L">Tory / Tories / Toryism

</li><li class="field_nations" value="87" data-dimension="L">stochastic terrorism
 <ol><li>(center-Liberalism) -> common definition
 </li><li>(MDem) -> violent horizontal attack, has alternate mathematical definition
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_nations" value="88" data-dimension="L">fascism / fascist
 <ol><li>(historians) a militant nationalist movement of the 1940s World War II period associated with re-making national culture and imperial conquest over other countries.
 </li><li>internal definition
 </li><li>those ~3 lists of characteristics
 </li><li>(Trotskyism) a nationalist movement begun by the <u>petty bourgeoisie</u>  ->  retrieve work where Trotsky claimed this
 </li><li>(Gramscianism) -> requires nationalists to fill up all available slots as a graph
 </li><li>(center-Liberalism) literally any ideology which is not orthodox center-Liberalism; anti-center-Liberal heresy. -> "Radical intellectuals and the subversion of politics"
 </li><li>(Toryism) -> absolutely not Toryism even when you can't tell their values apart
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_nations" value="89" data-dimension="L">mathematical fascism
 <ol><li>(MDem) when millions of individuals who agree on nothing all agree to team up and commit imperialism for the separate benefit of each individual. logical result of: chunk competition; incidentally resembles: Saiyan kingdom
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="90" data-dimension="L">politics
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(historians) the process of operating any government, state, regime, class society, or warring states periods; sometimes near-synonymous with material-history
 </li><li>(center-Liberalism) the process of operating Liberalism
 </li><li>(Toryism) bringing up opinions that are not consistent with Toryism; anti-Tory heresy; see: "politically correct" "artists with politics" "don't talk politics"
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="91" data-dimension="L">end of history  ->  has more precise meanings than you'd think

</li><li class="field_mdem" value="92" data-dimension="L">molecular democracy
 <ol><li>molecularized democratic regime / molecularized democratic theory
 </li><li>Marxist Molecular Democracy / Molecular Marxism
 </li><li>(unattested) Existentialism as purported molecularized democratic regime
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_geo" value="93" data-dimension="L">signifier -> remember the ontological senses
</li><li class="field_geo" value="94" data-dimension="L">ontology  -> companion to signifier
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="95" data-dimension="L">excess
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>relativistic definition thanks to Heidegger where there can be excessive rainclouds
 </li><li>(Lacanianism) unreachable information inside each Subject; alleged to be a good thing
 </li><li>(existential materialism, MDem) unreachable information inside Subjects or objects which may or may not be a huge problem; see Vegeta effect
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_geo" value="96" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|quantum]] -> literal, mathematical, figurative-math definitions
</li><li value="97" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="L">subjectivity / Subjectivity
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="98" data-dimension="L">culture / cultural / countable culture / Culture -> possibly 20 definitions
 <ol></li><li>... various definitions
 </li><li>(Toryism) the purported only correct way of doing things such that if somebody does not follow it, it will result in the ruin and destruction of the overall population - see "stupid idiot garbage trash"
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="99" data-dimension="L">hegemony -> man I hate this one. guess it's going in here

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="100" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|economics]] -> very controversial term with like 10-15 definitions. this wiki is about unraveling the word economics into every hyper-specific sense. screw economics
</li><li value="101" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="L">market
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(right-Liberalism) -> the neoliberal nonsense definition
 </li><li>(MDem) -> Market Society, Filamentism, primitive Existentialism
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_geo" value="102" data-dimension="L">microeconomics
</li><li class="field_geo" value="103" data-dimension="L">macroeconomics

</li><li class="field_nations" value="104" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|empire / imperialism]] / anti-imperialism
</li><li class="field_nations" value="105" data-dimension="L">hierarchy / anhierarchy
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>accurate medieval definition; spatial hierarchy
 </li><li>anhierarchy: the crude absence of spatial hierarchy and "territorialization" for utterly any reason they are absent including the area being uninhabited or contested
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_geo" value="106" data-dimension="L">feudalism / feudal / feudal order  ->  I temporarily deleted warring states period, reassign that later
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="107" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|capitalism]] / capitalist adj. / capitalist agent-noun

</li><li class="field_nations" value="108" data-dimension="L">crime / criminal / criminal
 <ol><li>(center-Liberalism) requires definition in legal code
 </li><li>can refer to any action that "should" be illegal: criminally underrated
 </li><li>(Toryism) -> thug, gangster, mafioso, bandit, barbarian, Sea Peoples
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_nations" value="109" data-dimension="L">terrorism / terrorist
 <ol><li>(center-Liberalism) -> common definition
 </li><li>(Toryism) -> international mafioso who attacks countries out of malice
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_trotsky"  value="110" data-dimension="L">wrecker
</li><li class="field_nations"  value="111" data-dimension="L">counterrevolutionary
</li><li class="field_nations" value="112" data-dimension="L">reactionary
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="113" data-dimension="L">deviant -> Lacanianism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="114" data-dimension="L">perversion -> Lacanianism
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-remark="rebellion" value="115" data-dimension="L">body without organs / Body Without Organs / BWO

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="116" data-dimension="L">patchification / patchify  ->  when a country population is divided into tiny populations of "a million countries per 300 million people", either ideologically or more literally into tiny ethnic patches scattered wildly
</li><li class="field_nations" value="117" data-dimension="L">choppification / choppify  ->  pejorative term for concepts of "decentralizing" or "de-monopolizing" societal structures over and over, sometimes to such extreme extents that structures don't even exist and society has truly been atomized into just a bunch of individuals. the word "competition" might be thrown around to justify how choppifying things and making them less coordinated will inherently improve them. the need to choppify things ultimately originates from Blobonomics and Escape models of society, which always slowly create large <em>centralized</em> blobs as smaller ones die or people simply begin to think large ones are better because they're more consistent.

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="118" data-dimension="L">anarculture  ->  the stance that culture should be smashed to take away its power over people. democulture is the notion that chunks of people exert the authority of the Spanishness Office to punish people for not performing their part in culture perfectly, and anarculture is the notion that everyone sort of just, attempts to not have culture. usually for really specific reasons that a specific empire has power over people by filling their minds with the wrong signs of "Whiteness" etc. to be clear the problem is not that the process of alterity isn't real, the problem is that people try to remove the notion of physical populations and historical events from the model and reduce it purely down to ideas as if ideas and signs mechanically, near-deterministically cause all human behavior. I had a hard time naming this thing because for the longest time it didn't even make sense. "so anarchism has been turning into... an-... a-culture-ism? what even is this?" I still don't know what the agent-noun form is. but to be fair, I don't know what that is for <i>democulture</i> either. democulturalist? not sure.

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="119" data-dimension="L">zeroth world problems  ->  problems so divorced from the basic layer of local individual survival in the First World that they are uniquely bourgeois problems. problems that employed Careerists complain about but which can feel completely irrelevant to the lives of unemployed people like they should not matter whatsoever. for some reason, zeroth world problems are the primary kind of problem complained about on most of YouTube, as people continuously do things like "review media" by discussing the best way for distant owners of specific business territories to order workers and subsidiaries inside corporations in order to generate products they would be satisfied with.

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="120" data-dimension="L">copyright
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="121" data-dimension="L">copyright violation / copyright infringement
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="122" data-dimension="L">copyleft
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="123" data-dimension="L">artist  ->  has a great many connotations nobody notices that require documenting
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="124" data-dimension="L">creator
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="125" data-dimension="L">indie / independent
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="126" data-dimension="L">centralize / centralized / centralization
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="127" data-dimension="L">decentralize / decentralized / decentralization
</li><li class="field_geo" value="128" data-dimension="L">algorithm / The Algorithm  ->  method of calculation; machine learning algorithm; recommendations algorithm; reciprocal effect of a consumer base on creators which creators have difficulty distinguishing from the recommendations algorithm

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="129" data-dimension="L">[[Ontology:L129|democulture]]  ->  the hypothetical or theoretical concept that culture is a government in a similar sense to how a monarchy is, and a particular corrupt individual or locus of corrupt culture can be overrun by the masses and turned into a new form. I find the idea really stupid to be honest, but almost every single theory within "The US Left" since the 1990s seems to invent this concept as one of its core principles. Existentialism is in general a group of theories that ignores democracy <i>per se</i> and by going on and on about Free Will and The Subject tries to find the best way to invent democulture. queer theory is <em>infamous</em> in Tory settlements for constantly attributing the "institutional power" of homophobia and transphobia to the absence of democulture in "institutions".
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="130" data-dimension="L">Demos / Demotes / demo-  ->  a group of people which really does function as an unbroken "we" which can describe its shared process of government as "our". the whole United States is not one of these, and the United States consists of at least two Demotes.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="131" data-dimension="L">democracy / our democracy  ->  tons of connotations. I am coming to really hate this one English word for how much hidden complexity it conceals that nobody notices. however... we can fix that
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="132" data-dimension="L">demofederation  ->  a structure composed of multiple linked Demotes. what the United States _actually_ is.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="133" data-dimension="L">democompetition  ->  etym: Demos + competition; mutually-exclusive competition of populations over a demoinstitution, in place of "dem<em>ocracy</em>". the process of two separate Social-Philosophical Systems or Demotes competing to exclusively control the process of demorevision.
</li><li class="field_mdem" value="134" data-dimension="L">demoinstitution  ->  etym: Demos + institution; the basic building block of republicanism, in which multiple people take the place of one person. a demoinstitution is almost or exactly the same thing as an ektirion depending on the context; the definition of demoinstitution subsets the definition of ektirion.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="135" data-dimension="L">demorevision  ->  etym: Demos + revise; the process of changing the country's current layout of demoinstitutions.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="136" data-dimension="L">demoadministration  ->  etym: Demos + administer; the process of running demoinstitutions in a particular consistent way with no current possibility of change.
</li><li value="137" class="field_geo" data-dimension="L">constant  ->  has nothing to do with demoinstitutions but is a very important number
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="138" data-dimension="L">demosuccession  ->  the process by which one defined Demos overtakes another defined Demos and comes to decide but not fully control the process of demorevision. if there is not democolonialism there may be many demosuccessions. however, the outcome of a demosuccession is separate from and above the outcome of a demorevision, which is something that issues from inside each particular Demos, i.e., contains the things individuals actually vote on. democompetition is the larger account of a daily process of many smaller demosuccessions.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="139" data-dimension="L">democolonialism  ->  the process by which one plural Demos completely secures control of the process of demorevision and effectively takes ownership of the territory and population within which another Demos lives, allowing it no part in determining demoinstitutions or culture. named by analogy to neocolonialism and the associated process of stripping autonomy from Third-World countries by overwriting everyone who manages their external relations with allies or puppets of a particular global empire

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="140" data-dimension="L">anarchism / Anarchism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="141" data-dimension="L">archon / Archon  ->  not typically used, but very important to discuss as part of the definition of Anarchism; historical definition; definition in religion
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="142" data-dimension="L">RDem / relativistic democracy  ->  a category of molecularized theories of society which properly enter the era of unifying survival, economics, sociality, culture, politics, and government, but which choose to do this by reifying plurality and focusing on unbridgeable gaps between free-floating plural entities as making them fundamentally uncontrollable. "relativistic" in the sense of the universe having no center and all events having to travel at or below the speed of light in space and time to hit other objects; an object in motion not affected by another object keeps independently flying along "relativistically". RDem theories seem like trouble because they seem to bake in war and authoritarian attacks over the top of other populations after leaving no physical method to preemptively influence decisions and prevent bad decisions. Gramscianism, Existentialism, Liberalism, and some Anarchisms tend toward creating RDem. Deng Xiaoping Thought <em>may</em> tend toward RDem as well. Stalin Thought and Trotskyism each tend toward MDem whether they do it well or badly.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="143" data-dimension="L">multitude / The Multitude  ->  an Anarchist concept that at first sounds like nonsense (see "spaghetti".) but then later you suddenly realize is in a bunch of other theories including alterity theories, Liberalism, and Trotskyism. the origin of the Multitude concept is in people thinking that material boundaries between populations aren't present when in reality they are - Trotskyism thinking the whole entire world is one big unbroken population of workers is the same error as Anarchists talking about The Multitude, it's just a matter of what scale the error is made at

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="145" data-dimension="L">multiculturalism  ->  one of those words which is no problem as far as its surface value but whose overall context for being and connotations baffle the hell out of me. who could be against multiculturalism? and yet, why do we need this word, and what's with everyone talking about it
</li><li value="146" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="L">language  ->  prescriptivist definition; descriptivist definition; plural languages versus post-language; language registers; etc
</li><li value="147" class="field_exstruct" data-dimension="L">sign

</li><li class="field_mdem" value="149" data-dimension="L">[[Ontology:L149|significary]]  ->  the equivalent of a dictionary or thesaurus which covers all possible connotative definitions of a particular written sign, within reason, up through every meaning which is relatively common or notable though not necessarily the most obscure ones

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="150" data-dimension="L">prejudice
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="151" data-dimension="L">racism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="152" data-dimension="L">sexism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="153" data-dimension="L">homophobia / homomisia
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="154" data-dimension="L">transphobia / transmisia

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="160" data-dimension="L">microaggression
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="161" data-dimension="L">microinvalidation  ->  when these are real terms people use, you can see where exactly I got started on eventually creating new monstrosities like "demosuccession", "Everybodyism", and "PeopleWhoMadePeopleRunAwayism". the bright side is that I think that silly words are just as useful as words that aren't silly; my models have room for microaggressions if they have room for Everybodyism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="162" data-dimension="L">microinsult
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="163" data-dimension="L">microassault
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="169" data-dimension="L">microdisaster / microDeoxysMeteor (obscure)  ->  an instance of an individual behaving in a problem manner according to a lack of information they could not possibly have known thanks to the limitations of communicating through material physics — a mindless meteor in motion tends to stay in motion.

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="170" data-dimension="L">-phobia / [https://diversitypride.org/misiapledge.html -misia]
</li><li class="field_nations" value="171" data-dimension="L">PeopleWhoMadePeopleRunAwayism  ->  a generic category of corrupt ideologies or philosophies that end up making people run away, such as fundamentalist religious sects (the primary thing the term was created to explore). theoretically includes "Stalinism" if such a thing were to actually exist, given the fact some number of people and Trotsky fled the Soviet Union. does not refer to a narrow prejudice such as "homophobia", but specifically to a larger ideology which <em>generates</em> a narrow prejudice such as homophobia. perhaps we are talking about a "metaprejudice"? I don't quite like that term yet but maybe I'll find reasonable justification for it and realize it does have to be added.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="172" data-dimension="L">PeopleWhoMadePeopleRunAwayphobia / PeopleWhoMadePeopleRunAwaymisia
</li><li class="field_nations" value="173" data-dimension="L">PeopleWhoRanAwayphobia / PeopleWhoRanAwaymisia  ->  a generic category of processes of demographic identities being pushed away from the area of some particular PeopleWhoMadePeopleRunAwayism. coined to explore the difference between targeting particular PeopleWhoMadePeopleRunAwayisms and particular PeopleWhoRanAwayphobias as well as whether either effort is physically possible in a universe full of Vegeta effects.
</li><li class="field_nations" value="174" data-dimension="L">TheseAreTheDefinitionsEveryoneHasToUseionary  ->  a dictionary that operates according to linguistic prescriptivism or one that only accommodates definitions of words within a single ontology or narrow range of ontologies instead of the full range of possible ontological assignments used in practice

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="180" data-dimension="L">system / systemic / structural  ->  almost every time I read a work by "The US Left" I have no idea what this is actually supposed to refer to. it sounds like it makes sense at first, and you think you understand it, but <em>what really is a system</em>? could anybody explain it materially in terms of what parts or ongoing processes distinguish a "system" of oppression from something that is not a system?
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="181" data-dimension="L">monosexism  ->  the counterpart to biphobia. I do prefer these to the individual-action terms on the level that they are attempting to describe the actions of groups of people, although I honestly really doubt that the actions of groups of people can be neatly described as ideas versus literal material objects. my beef with "colonialism" is that colonialism is not an idea, an oppressive colony is a material object
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="182" data-dimension="L">cissexism  ->  the naturalization of cisgender behavior and "biology"
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="183" data-dimension="L">heterosexism  ->  similar


</li><li class="field_geo" value="181" data-dimension="L">unique  ->  specific identifiable entity within a sea of free-floating entities; Heidegger had a sillier term for this I do not remember
</li><li class="field_geo" value="182" data-dimension="L">non-unique  ->  the policy is becoming that grammatical negations use the same Lexeme, but given the unique/non-unique distinction is so absolutely central to Materialist ontology, this will be one exception

</li><li class="field_geo" value="190" data-dimension="L">speciation
</li><li class="field_geo" value="191" data-dimension="L">evolution
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(sciences) progression of any particular physical process through different points in time: stellar evolution (stellar life cycle), evolution of quantum-mechanical systems (development of wave functions and entanglement over time)
 </li><li>(sciences) speciation by way of natural selection; progression of speciation across geologic eons, eras, or periods
 </li><li>(sciences, obscure) emission
 </li><li>(fiction) progression from one growth stage of a virtual pet or fictional Subject-style being to another; similar usage to "stellar evolution", see sense S2
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_geo" value="192" data-dimension="L"><span lang="ja">進化（しんか）</span> -> evolution as it is used in the Japanese language
</li><li value="193" class="field_geo" data-dimension="L">species / sp. / spec. / spp. (plural)
</li><li value="194" class="field_geo" data-dimension="L">subspecies / ssp. / subsp. / sspp. (plural) / subspp. (plural)
</li><li value="195" class="field_geo" data-dimension="L">variety / var.
</li><li value="196" class="field_geo" data-dimension="L">forma / form / f.
</li><li value="197" class="field_geo" data-dimension="L">kind  ->  has been used to describe Pokémon stages; has also been used to confusedly describe creationism
</li><li value="198" class="field_geo" data-dimension="L">clade

</li><li class="field_geo" value="200" data-dimension="L">class  ->  so many right and wrong definitions
</li><li class="field_ML" value="201" data-dimension="L">worker  ->  cover different definitions of "working class" in mainstream Marxism-Leninism vs Maoism, etc
</li><li class="field_ML" value="202" data-dimension="L">proletariat / proletarian  ->  cover "big proletariat" model versus smaller-proletariat models
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="203" data-dimension="L">entrepreneur / undertaker  ->  super often misused to mean investor/capitalist, when it best means director/founder
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="204" data-dimension="L">bourgeoisie / bourgeois
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="205" data-dimension="L">petty bourgeoisie / petty-bourgeois  ->  in my opinion a confused and outdated term that has conflated two different classes: Artisans and Careerists
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="206" data-dimension="L">Artisan / Artisan type / Artisanal / Artisanize  ->  a tiny business so small it has absolutely no room for employees
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="207" data-dimension="L">Careerist / Careerist / Careerism  ->  the class of people who survive by seeking out higher-quality Job Slots and insisting "social mobility" is normal
</li><li class="field_nations" value="208" data-dimension="L">Refuse / Refuse class / refusariat (obsolete form)  ->  the class of people who are persistently never integrated into capitalism/Careerism because there aren't enough Job Slots or aren't the correct ones. becoming less relevant in recent MDem drafts as Careerism has been turning into the main focus
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="209" data-dimension="L">Filament / Filamentism  ->  micro-sized local subpopulation / nameless tiny subpopulation; process of large-scale populational Bauplan stochastically forming through Filaments swapping in and out on an open graph connection

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="210" data-remark="you might think it would be 331" data-dimension="L">structural racism / systemic racism  ->  specific Sense-term combining L180 systemic + L151 racism. I had this in the S Items but I now think it's better to just when reasonable have Items reference Lexeme Entities
</li><li class="field_nations" value="211" data-dimension="L">chunk competition / chunk-compete
</li><li class="field_nations" value="212" data-dimension="L">spatial slot hierarchy  ->  very specific mathematically-defined process of individuals claiming slotted resources or spatial positions; can occur in simpler forms with animals in nature
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="213" data-dimension="L">Blobonomics
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="214" data-dimension="L">Everybodyism  ->  nameless prejudice against all other individuals as all individuals participate in Careerist competition to shove others out of social slots
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="215" data-dimension="L">Populationism  ->  nameless prejudice against all other populations

</li><li class="field_ML" value="217" data-dimension="L">construct / constructive  ->  this had a very specific use in earlier MDem versions, where it was used to describe social graphs combining together instead of shoving each other out of things. "molecular" was also sometimes used for this, until I decided that was more obvious to use to refer to everything that happens at small scales instead of specifically things fitting together. as time went on I realized that even if it wasn't wrong that description was a bit too simplistic, and Particle Theory analysis was more critical

</li><li class="field_geo" value="219" data-dimension="L">rank / ranking / pecking order  ->  common definition; numerical list position; spatial position in spatial slot hierarchy; taxonomic level; military title; others. some people confuse "class" for "rank", such as in terms like "middle class" (middle rank). it is still possible to do Marxism about rank, but the key is you can't confuse the two things. Saiyans have ranks. they have no real social structure except number 1, 2, 3, 100. earth people in <cite>Dragon Ball</cite> have classes, like capitalists and peasants. rank is all about plurality and relativity, and to overcome rank you have to actually build structure where there wasn't structure.

</li><li class="field_geo" value="220" data-dimension="L">networkism / networkist / networkize  ->  the notion of modeling capitalism as a stability process of capitalist owners having to solve the physical stability of industrial structures, and stock markets being a process of groups of investors attempting to predict and make money on social stability — unless they are day traders trying to make money on social breakages.
 <ol><li>networkism: the system of workers ultimately gaining their pay from the presence of a surrounding Audience, Careerists striving to manufacture more Audience as Directors, and capitalists owning the activity of congregating people into an arbitrarily-created culture-group they will exploit the existence of to earn money
 </li><li>networkize: to tightly connect into the Audience of a particular Director
 </li><li>microcolonialism: old synonym for networkism, used to emphasize the framing of profiting off people being a certain culture that also must be the culture of the old established population that first solidly conquered that slot a while ago. "networkism" and "Careerism" can still have this connotation; those terms are just favored over "microcolonialism".
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_geo" value="221" data-dimension="L">Audience / Audiencize  ->  because this isn't the standard use of the word, don't put the regular word "audience" here. link to regular word in first definition only
</li><li class="field_geo" value="222" data-dimension="L">Director / Director type / Directorize / Directorization
 <ol><li>link to regular word
 </li><li>Director: a skilled expert with the unique ability to create assets that might successfully become capital or attract a large Audience of customers
 </li><li>Directorization: conversion of an owner, Artisan type, or Careerist into a permanent resident expert without the right to pack up the company or take the capital elsewhere
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_geo" value="223" data-dimension="L">Serializer
</li><li class="field_geo" value="224" data-dimension="L">Metaserializer / Franchiser
</li><li class="field_geo" value="225" data-dimension="L">Metafranchiser

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="230" data-dimension="L">identity  ->  process of Being; mathematical graph definition of things being linked together into the same object; mathematical equality comparison between different data objects; operation that does not change a data object (identity transformation); arbitrary list of characteristics that an individual Being has picked up; synonym for demographic; identity politics - "identity and hypocrisy!"
</li><li class="field_geo" value="231" data-dimension="L">graph
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>(graph theory) an arrangement of connected points
 </li><li>(graphemics) smallest functional piece of a given writing system, or one of the variations of such units; informal variant for grapheme, glyph
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_geo" value="231" data-dimension="L">relative / relativism  ->  common definition; family relation; cultural relativism as the study of free floating populational Beings that develop over time - "Sonic is not Shadow", potential building block of historical materialism; pejorative misunderstandings of cultural relativism; various uses of things being relative; definition of words being relative to other words; "Marxism is spatially relative" (relativity); link to relativity

</li><li class="field_nations" value="241" data-dimension="L">ecological fascism  ->  ecofascism definitions; purported encroachment of "Green Faceism" (gotta retrieve what that even was again)
</li><li class="field_geo" value="242" data-dimension="L">nature / natural

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="250" data-dimension="L">empiricism  ->  it is such a pain point for me that like, philosophy terms will name things like the world is made of alchemy, and as if everything is made of Fire or Water or Light or Darkness, act like it's possible for ways of doing things to be entirely made of "rationalism" or "empiricism" just so they can act powerful over people by pulling this fake gotcha of "wow I told you everything had to be separated into abstract Platonic categories and then I caught you red-handed using a fake category that can't be universally applied Way Too Much in violation of The Alchemical Principle of Moderation!!" and it's so stupid
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="251" data-dimension="L">verificationism  ->  god why are there so many terms... I hate most of what people call traditional philosophy, I really do. on a different note: I am not a logical positivist because verificationism doesn't have room for predictive theoretical models, and in my mind that makes it not science. if you believe this thing you'll get dreadfully stumped by black holes, yet unfortunately black holes are real.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="252" data-dimension="L">logical positivism  ->  I hear this thrown around so much and each time I increasingly feel like logical positivism and verificationism are fake categories that nobody truly practices and the terms are only tossed out as strawmen when people are confronted with hypotheses or possibilities they don't want to hear. I will get opinionated on this one initial prototype page, yes I will.

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="270" data-dimension="L">ego / egoism  ->  individualist concept of a self; id, ego, and superego; a few definitions
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="271" data-dimension="L">individualism  ->  people say this like it means something but it's like six different philosophies. I accidentally <s class="censor">piss</s>ed someone off when I was a young adult by not knowing there were six different things called individualism and guessing they were talking about a different one than they were. I thought "individualism" referred to the Existentialist celebration of individuals in things like identity politics movements, efforts against prejudice toward things like the arts and humanities, and "Wackytown" style be-yourself fables. years later after reading a whole bunch of things about different demographics and philosophies I still don't really know what "Western individualism" actually meant or what its opposite might be.

</li><li class="field_geo" value="281" data-dimension="L">dieconomics  ->  hypothetical study of managing the links between pairs of things (two "houses") as opposed to one thing at a time. di- as in two things, but also by analogy to "dialectic", "dialectical materialism"
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="282" data-dimension="L">dipsychology  ->  hypothetical study of human psychology as primarily driven by relationships between two or more people rather than the development of either of the individual Subjects. this is one of the major reasons Lacanianism believes it has become profound. in reality, the goal is good but the methods are bad. saying Lacanianism is good because it attempts dipsychology is like saying Trotskyism is the correct Leninism because it attempts dieconomics by merely proposing the possibility of a global civilization instead of workers' states fighting each other.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="283" data-dimension="L">diphilosophy  ->  hypothetical study of doing philosophy in a world where people have multiple philosophies they will always misconstrue any philosophical statement through. approximately the same thing as meta-philosophy, but since being obsessed with "meta-" versions of fields is meta-Marxism's thing, a decent way to hide that you are actually talking about meta-Marxism.

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="300" data-dimension="L">Existentialism / Existentialist-Structuralist tradition  ->  put all of like 20 senses of Existentialism on here because why not
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="301" data-dimension="L">existentialism / early existentialism
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="302" data-dimension="L">phenomenology  ->  Husserl's definition (which is the bane of me); scientific definition of reality that rarely uses the word but is the same thing (which I'm fine with)
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="303" data-dimension="L">psychoanalysis / psychoanalyst / psychoanalyze / Freudian psychology / Freudian / <s>Jungian</s> / Lacanian  ->  I think Jung is weirdly discarded these days, which is fair enough but odd when the stuff Lacan says is still so strange
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="309" data-dimension="L">schizoanalysis / schizoanalyst

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="310" data-dimension="L">primitive Existentialism  ->  see "[[ES-strands]]"
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="311" data-dimension="L">entropy Existentialism  ->  see "[[ES-strands]]"
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="313" data-dimension="L">morality Existentialism  ->  see "[[ES-strands]]". seems like it's been shown to be synonymous with <i>democulture</i>.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="314" data-dimension="L">free-choice Existentialism  ->  see "[[ES-strands]]"
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="315" data-dimension="L">hyper-Liberalism / fractal Liberalism  ->  see "[[ES-strands]]"
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="316" data-dimension="L">Difference Existentialism  ->  see "[[ES-strands]]". near-synonymous with <i>intersubjectivity</i>. the more accurate name for this might be "intersubjectivity theories".
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="318" data-dimension="L">Prejudice Existentialism  ->  a seemingly distinct category from Difference Existentialism. Prejudice Existentialism is purely focused on the act of constantly smashing signs in the hope that depriving people of any notion of facts or truth will lead to everyone perceiving reality correctly, although paradoxically Prejudice Existentialists typically claim that it is impossible to see reality through anything but signs and ontological models, which should make their task literally impossible to achieve for even a second. a rather intellectually dishonest field of philosophy in my opinion. if it were true that it is potentially a prejudice to call basically anything a fact, it would also be true that reality is nothing more than a bloody chunk war where whoever wins is automatically correct for the rest of history. Prejudice Existentialists have no way to actually disprove that claim, so they just resort to saying that acknowledging it to be true is Evil and equivocating everything else to be equally true is Good. I really hate the notion that morality is the only thing that's true. because first of all, how do you even know if morality is correct or real if nothing else is, how can you use it as your grounding? the problem they always run into in real life is that people all over the real world reject morality, and then when they point out prejudice as the fundamental sin that is the most obvious thing that makes any statement wrong nobody actually listens or cares. how do they know that thinking anybody cares about the concept of "prejudice" isn't a prejudice that makes their own theory obsolete?
</li><li class="number_empty" value="319" data-dimension="L">right-Existentialism  ->  the manifestation of various common themes of Existentialism within Toryism, right-Liberalism, and other such ideologies, seemingly forming the scaffolding of "conservative" ideologies the same way regular center-Existentialism forms the inner structure of center-Liberalism and progressive ideologies. it's really all the same Existentialism, but this is the same thing being used to serve questionable ends.

</li><li class="field_geo" value="320" data-dimension="L">filter / filtrate / filtration  ->  literal grating; censorship process in linguistic communication; meta-Marxism definition of process that orders people into movement Bauplan
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="321" data-dimension="L">Washington's filter  ->  the process by which a Liberal republic builds up certain consensuses and various layers of experts or constitution-partisans who are allowed to administer the consensuses, supposedly all in order to determine what's true with regard to living in a republic, but filters out people who don't understand how the Liberal republic works
</li><li class="field_ML" value="322" data-dimension="L">Lenin's filter  ->  as soon as I noticed this thing in [https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/dec/30.htm one of Lenin's writings] I immediately had to throw a name onto it just because it was so unusual compared to any non-Marxist writing about movements. Lenin's filter is the process of taking a coarse movement of people and building up correct answers, procedures, strategies, and movement shapes such that the movement improves itself and becomes a party-nation. according to some Maoists, the process of operating Lenin's filter is synonymous with the party itself, and I'd say that is broadly correct but I still prefer to label a filter as the process that creates the party and the Bauplan as the shape of the party-nation
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="323" data-dimension="L">rhizome / the rhizome / Rhizome  ->  I've taken to always calling this thing like a proper name just because schizoanalysts insist it's totally uncountable — okay then, people don't form "a" rhizome, people form Rhizome. this thing may technically be schizoanalysis' filter, as well as the filter of a number of other Existentialist periods. as a filter, Rhizome is the process that magnetically pulls together anybody who is suffering into one big slime mold that then crushes everything in its path. I find this harder to dispute than some other models but I don't quite like it because of how mystical it is.
</li><li class="field_trotsky" value="324" data-dimension="L">Trotsky's filter  ->  theoretically exists inasmuch as Trotsky has a different movement-building strategy from Stalin. at one time I heard a Trotskyist group very much try to explain it, so I presume that it exists

</li><li class="field_nations" value="327" data-dimension="L">Village filter  ->  this is approximately the same thing as networkism, but not exactly the same, because its context is meant to be social instead of economic. it's when people sort away from each other into separate non-interacting groups or "villages" of people.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="328" data-dimension="L">Goku's filter / Potter's filter  ->  one of the most crude filters there is. this is the filter where Good people are defined as humans who are part of the population and Bad people are punished, and all the Good people come together to punish all the Bad people. I don't like this filter. it makes it very hard to distinguish the mathematical shape of progressive movements from the shape of racism, xenophobia, Colonial Exploitation, bigoted monotheisms, or the anti-mental-illness processes described by Deleuze and Guattari or Foucault. this filter is the thing that makes me outright dislike the concept of morality and feel like we need to use other methods to avoid morality ever turning into a justification for atrocities
</li><li class="field_mdem" value="329" data-dimension="L">Lattice model / The Lattice  ->  this is either MDem's filter or at least another mathematical transform very adjacent to filters. it's the process of taking isolated islands and linking them, going through a "search for quantum lions and avoid quantum leopards" process until people aren't isolated and are safe from being surrounded by threats. this concept can apply to many different scales from very small ones to very large ones, such it could be used to diagram going from isolated individuals all the way up to a Communist International. why is it a lattice? because it's a graph of nodes, and before meta-Marxism the idea of using graph theory to describe movements wasn't heard of as far as I know. final note: the Lattice model is different from Rhizome in that it explicitly acknowledges the possibility of many tiny plural "rhizomes" and that as separate objects they may not inherently want to come together. it's also different in that it recognizes that every tiny "rhizome" can be a different Social-Philosophical System, only deciding where to go based on what it actually believes and in no way magnetically pulled toward anything without deliberately following the Lattice model as a guide.

</li><li class="field_mdem" value="330" data-dimension="L">Bauplan  ->  building structural plan; animal body shape; in meta-Marxist usage, the physical shape of a movement or society
</li><li class="field_mdem" value="331" data-dimension="L">Particle Theory / particle theory (old) / molecular theory (old)  ->  Lexeme for meta-Marxist usage, in case this is also a "normal" phrase. a mathematically-describable arrangement of people arranged into a graph, as it applies to society models or movements. sometimes a synonym for Bauplan when it describes the whole picture of something. in a few cases, <i>Particle Theory</i> connotatively suggests the local graph structures inside a larger Bauplan.

</li><li class="field_geo" value="360" data-dimension="L">degree  ->  mathematical measurement; extent or extreme; certificate of academic expertise
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="361" data-dimension="L">moderation / moderate (v.) / moderate (adj.)
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>the process of regulating the position of something after it has been ranked on an artificial abstract-quality based scale
 </li><li>forum oversight or censorship  ->  isn't it telling that people would use "moderate" for this? it really does show how Existentialism is Liberalism is Platonism is alchemy
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="368" data-dimension="L">absolute / Absolute / absolutism / absolutist
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="369" data-dimension="L">[[Ontology:L369|extreme / extremist]]  ->  absolute weasel word. the strangest thing is I can't think of the exact antonym: it isn't center, moderate, middle-ground, normal, reasonable, equatorial. I think in an Existentialist perspective the antonym may actually be "tolerant". "extreme" conceals the concept of <i>totalization</i> and the contrast to a morality-based view of individual tolerance of absolutely anything and everything from other individuals or groups unless it is absolutely hazardous. (previously I had this at L58, but it belongs much more nicely next to degree)

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="370" data-dimension="L">alchemy
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="371" data-dimension="L">quality / qualify / qualifier  ->  it's remarkable how Platonism is not necessarily distinguishable from alchemy. or how the way normal people talk about ideologies and philosophies seems indistinguishable from this Platonism-alchemy.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="372" data-dimension="L">idea / Idea
</li><li class="field_mdem" value="373" data-dimension="L">[[Ontology:L373|'pataphysics]]  ->  I'm pretty sure the SCP wiki uses it slightly wrong. pataphysics seems to be the use of creativity and nonsense-jamming to uncover problems in ontologies including things easily recognized as metaphysics. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWZhbJXFzQ8] it also seems like certain chapters of MDem are basically doing the same thing as pataphysics in the way they start with strange associations and throw in total curve balls to get everyone off their established scripts and get them to actually think. Alfred Jarry called it 'pataphysics, I just call it "meta-ontology". in a sense, it's like the SCP wiki has to use a wrong definition because the Foundation is all about containing things and keeping things normal, but 'pataphysics is actually about using such insane strategies to solve things it would go against the Foundation's typical protocols. "Admonition" was a missed opportunity to define 'pataphysics utterly correctly yet make it this bizarre anomalous almost-scary thing that's not just philosophy and is nearly forbidden most of the time
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="374" data-dimension="L">metaphysics

</li><li class="field_geo" data-remark="spatial reactions" value="380" data-dimension="L">chemistry
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>chemistry of relationships
 </li><li>metaphor for history and movements being material objects with structure
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="381" data-dimension="L">threshold
 <ol><li>sill-sized doorstep
 </li><li>mathematical / ecological definitions
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="390" data-dimension="L">religion  ->  favor every serious definition before getting into joke definitions — although if they are popular or firmly historically-established for even a small group of people, joke definitions become okay. joke definition example: religion - a system of rituals designed to prevent people from investigating and thinking about material reality and all its deeper horrors beyond their current comprehension - see "opium of the masses", <cite>The German Ideology</cite>
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="391" data-dimension="L">cult  ->  a localized religion for a specific local god or religious ontology; corrupt local religion - see "body without organs" / "Escape"
</li><li class="field_trotsky" data-remark="yeah" value="392" data-dimension="L">sect / sectarian / sectarianism  ->  category: concrete association process, noun-based
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="393" data-dimension="L">sacred  ->  religious status; figurative sense of something which is taken for granted as a core assumption grounding people to their current ontology of reality. ("my god!" implies God is the standard for what is unsurprising to be real; <cite>Wings of Fire</cite>'s "by the trees!" is one of the few things that genuinely captures the same purpose)
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="394" data-dimension="L">worship / idol worship / idolatry  ->  religious ritual; figurative sense of "idolatry" toward some particular cause
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="395" data-dimension="L">eschatology  ->  I am so <s class="censor">damn</s> tired of Lacanians and Western-Marxists and <s class="censor">shit</s> trying to say Marxism fills the role of eschatology. if you understand the fundamental role of religion and most theories of morality as justifying why one group is better than another you would know that if Marxism really were eschatology it would be doomed.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="396" data-dimension="L">invisible pink unicorn
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="397" data-dimension="L">garage dragon / dragon in my garage / invisible garage dragon
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="398" data-dimension="L">flying spaghetti monster / FSM
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="399" data-dimension="L">god / God  ->  I hated allocating Items for religion until I thought of instead making them Lexemes. now I am laughing about the probably 200 Senses God is going to have. most likely more than any other single Lexeme. unless "we/our" ended up containing a definition of "we" for every single Social-Philosophical System of people believing a philosophy and assuming everyone else has the capacity to believe it.

<!-- <li value="666" ... data-dimension="L">Satan / Satanism / Lucifer ... -->

</li><li class="field_ML" value="400" data-dimension="L">Leninism / Marxism-Leninism
 <ol><li>any and all sects of Leninism
 </li><li>(Trotskyism) Trotskyism; see "Trotskyism" for further claimed definitions of Leninism
 </li><li>(mainstream Marxism-Leninism) Stalin Thought to the exclusion of Trotskyism - as used in the form "Marxism-Leninism"
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_ML" value="401" data-dimension="L">Bolshevism
</li><li class="field_ML" value="402" data-dimension="L">Marxism
</li><li value="404" class="field_trotsky" data-dimension="L">[[Ontology:L404|Trotskyism]] -> every variation of Trotskyism, so I don't have to put it on Leninism

</li><li class="field_ML" value="405" data-dimension="L">communism / Communism / Communist
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="406" data-dimension="L">socialism / Socialism / socialist

</li><li class="field_geo" value="500" data-dimension="L">tag  ->  common definition; HTML tag; xml tag; mediawiki pseudo HTML tag; mediawiki edit label; etc
</li><li class="field_geo" value="599" data-dimension="L">(... [[:Category:HTML tags ontology|HTML tags]])

</li><li class="field_geo" value="600" data-dimension="L">relativity / relativistic  ->  special relativity; general relativity; earlier relativity models; separate term from "relative/relativism", but ok to link the two
</li><li class="field_geo" value="601" data-dimension="L">predict / prediction / predictive
</li><li class="field_geo" value="602" data-dimension="L">stochastic / stochastic process
</li><li class="field_geo" value="603" data-dimension="L">unistochastic
</li><li class="field_geo" value="604" data-dimension="L">orthostochastic  ->  I have no idea what this even is yet
</li><li class="field_geo" value="605" data-dimension="L">observable  -> noun
</li><li class="field_geo" value="606" data-dimension="L">beable  ->  yeah, I started out using Lexemes to try to group equivocated concepts but there's a point where I just started recording fine-grained slang/jargon forms the way Lexemes are "supposed" to work
</li><li class="field_geo" value="607" data-dimension="L">emergeable
</li><li class="field_geo" value="608" data-dimension="L">indivisible  ->  has a special definition regarding non-Markovian stochastic processes
</li><li class="field_geo" value="609" data-dimension="L">unitary
</li><li class="field_geo" value="610" data-dimension="L">field  ->  data parameter; area of study; mathematical object in physics. on most but not all pages on this wiki it's the second
</li><li class="field_geo" value="611" data-dimension="L">symmetry
</li><li class="field_geo" value="612" data-dimension="L">invariance
</li><li class="field_geo" value="613" data-dimension="L">gauge  ->  gauge transformation; gauge boson; gauge potential
</li><li class="field_geo" value="614" data-dimension="L">quaternion
</li><li class="field_geo" value="615" data-dimension="L">vector  ->  mathematical object; disease carrier
</li><li class="field_geo" value="616" data-dimension="L">tensor
</li><li class="number_empty" value="617" data-dimension="L">placeholder  ->  to be used for testing Lexemes, but also literally the concept of placeholders
</li><li class="field_geo" value="618" data-dimension="L">matrix / matrices / The Matrix  ->  mathematical object; false reality

</li><li class="field_geo" value="620" data-dimension="L">emergence / weak emergence / strong emergence
</li><li class="field_geo" value="621" data-dimension="L">ergodicity  ->  I may or may not have used this slightly wrong in various v4 MDem scraps, saying ergodicity when I meant emergence. in my defense, when you see the world really literally and tend to conceptualize everything through a kind of non-well-founded set theory where a group of things that quacks like a duck is a duck, it can be hard to understand how things arranging into a particular consistent shape <em>doesn't</em> also "inevitably" lead to emergence. it does lead to emergence sometimes, just not in every single case.
</li><li class="field_geo" value="622" data-dimension="L">pattern / repeated pattern  ->  I say "repeated pattern" a ton, and I always mean it relatively literally. normal people might call the same notion of repeated patterns ten different things. they would look at mathematical objects consistently forming the same data structure and say "proper class". etc
</li><li class="field_geo" value="623" data-dimension="L">superposition  ->  general mathematical object of multiple possibilities considered at once; quantum superposition

</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="660" data-dimension="L">metagame / The Meta / metagame (V) / metagaming  ->  real-world surrounding staging-ground of how different people play a competitive game; figurative use of finding the best ways to play a game, similar to <i>minmaxing</i> but arguably includes the broader concepts of creativity and finding ways to solve many different goals - like if we have a [https://dragonball.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Fighting_games Dragon Ball simulation] you could find the most optimized way to play Gogeta, <em>or</em> you could find the best possible way to succeed with Tarble. in my mind both of those are "metagaming".
</li><li value="661" class="field_fantasy" data-dimension="L">role-playing (N,A) / roleplay (V) / roleplaying / experience taking ([https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-psychology-fiction/201208/entering-anothers-experience] [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22448888/]) / live-action roleplaying / LARPing  ->  several connotations. dungeons & dragons as terrible gnostic alternate reality leading people away from the one true God; reasonable thought experiment activity of understanding different possiblities; what you arguably do when you read any book, by reconstructing the characters' inner experiences; thinking that putting on an identity equals action when it doesn't
</li><li value="662" class="field_trotsky" data-remark="heresy" data-dimension="L">Gnosticism / Gnostic / gnosticism  ->  make this a different term from "agnostic"/"gnostic", because this has its own conflicting connotations. to some people it's just a rival religion, to others it's basically the devil
</li><li class="number_empty" value="663" data-dimension="L">??
</li><li value="664" class="field_geo" data-dimension="L">speedrun / speedrunning
</li><li value="665" class="field_trotsky" data-remark="heresy" data-dimension="L">lateral thinking / thinking with portals  ->  I think it's so stupid how every guide to jobs and business is like, lateral thinking! lateral thinking! but if you really truly have lateral thinking you turn the entire thing sideways and realize the inherent contradictions and paradoxes of capitalism that make it eat itself, and once you've thought so laterally you turn against capitalism they really don't like that. then they're like, no, don't you go thinking laterally, there's only one way to do things. this seems to be the heart of that one reactionary video I saw where the guy I can't remember was really mad about the concept of speedrunning. he was like, I hate that people are spending their time speedrunning, it's definitely a synonym of a crumbling civilization when people are going around the real way to do things and looking for shortcuts. and I thought it was unbelievably stupid, because the point of speedruns is basically to learn about the physics of the particular game engine and do science experiments to see if there are different ways those artificial physics could be applied technologically. speedrunning is basically a fictional process of research and development. you're shooting your civilization in the foot by getting rid of all the scientists and inventors. and why would you do it? because you think pure numerical ranking and graph placement produces stuff rather than labor and creativity. you're King Vegeta. but he can't build a <s class="censor">fucking</s> scouter and has to buy it from another country. all because he doesn't like speedrunning, but speedrunning is lateral thinking.

</li><li value="666" class="field_trotsky" data-remark="enemy/rebel" data-dimension="L">Satan / Satanism / Lucifer
 <ol><li>bible definition - literally described as the opposer of God
 </li><li>(Toryism) Satanic: anybody or any thing theorized to secretly be plotting Evil conspiracies to prevent everybody from joining the one correct human social circle and knowing the narrow set of behaviors and cultural associations which are Good. a wrecker who prevents realizing the Material System of world Christianity.
 </li><li>Satanism: a code of morality and moral Right designed around social connection to Satan, taken as entirely figurative and poetic
 </li><li>(Dragon Ball usage) Satan: someone who tells a lot of lies and is very popular - see book of Revelation
 </li></ol>

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="696" data-dimension="L">post-language  ->  don't know if other theories have other definitions of this word. in MDem entries post-language refers to a kind of communication which eradicates all mental associations and has a hard requirement to be equally understandable to any individual who reads it anywhere regardless of what that particular individual believes words to mean. in some cases this can lead to wordy, absurdly-precise descriptions which put readers to sleep and are equally <em>unintelligible</em> to everybody. art is almost always written in language and hardly ever in post-language. any nonfiction statement posted to the internet almost invariably ends up having to be expressed in post-language. "logical fallacy" and "cognitive bias" guidelines very frequently force perfectly understandable language into stilted and unnatural post-language: somebody says "there are two options" not intending to rule out others, and a pedant comes along forcing a correction to "there are at least two options", "there are two major options", or "there are two options but I was not saying those were the only ones" (these explicit disclaimer clauses seem to be one of the most common forms of post-language). the "[[Philosophical_Research:Molecular_Democracy/5.2/1019_ours-democracies|ours groups]]" chapter is very deliberately and satirically written in post-language.

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="697" data-dimension="L">nonsense  ->  oddly enough, has several jargon definitions. nonsense mutation; non-sense (Lacanianism); others?
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="698" data-dimension="L">bull  ->  I'm hesitant to quite put "bullshit" in the first 2000 Lexemes, although I don't see any reason it shouldn't be added <em>after</em> that; we've gotta contain our swearwords somewhere before we ban them, and what better place than here? oh well, now this term can also contain senses of "bullcrap".
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="699" data-dimension="L">spaghetti / spaghetti code / ontological spaghetti  ->  literal food; difficult to understand code; completely meaningless-sounding plate of unfamiliar philosophy words that never seems to get easier to understand (meta-Marxist term first used to mock Lacanianism). similar to "word salad", but with the difference that it strongly appears to actually mean something due to its proper lexical structure of signs and statements until the points at which all the self-referentiality and insular forms of meaning render it impossible to actually comprehend or explain to anybody. ontological spaghetti is twisted and woven into a neat yet unexplainable structure just like spaghetti noodles.

</li><li class="field_fantasy"  value="700" data-dimension="L">narrative  ->  history; legend; fantasy book; of or relating to dramatization techniques; slanted sociophilosophy; fascist rhetoric; single official record of history everybody is fighting over; etc. this word is an adventure in itself
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="701" data-dimension="L">alien  ->  how many different rhetorical meanings are there in science fiction, there are a lot. also: foreigner
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="702" data-dimension="L">unicorn  ->  first I think of the usage of something that nearly never appears, then of the notion that unicorns are 'wonderful', then the notion that they are overrated
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="703" data-dimension="L">dragon  ->  like lions these creatures have multiple readings as monsters or as strong beings of courage. monster; courage; Satanic anathema; word reused for arbitrary new creatures; plurality, diversity, outright used in scheme of Media Representation (<cite>Dragon Masters</cite>)
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="704" data-dimension="L">greed
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="705" data-dimension="L">corporate greed  ->  I hate this phrase because it is in nearly every critique of capitalism indicating in the space of one two-word phrase that the critique is b<s class="censor">ullshit</s>
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="706" data-dimension="L">hero  ->  has fairly common pejorative usage dismissing its possibility; also, the concept that reactionaries can have heroes and they certainly aren't other people's heroes
</li><li class="field_horror" value="707" data-dimension="L">villain  ->  driving arts experts crazy by including descriptivist accounts of fans downgrading villains to antagonists and explaining the hell out of them. I love it because as much as some people are total beginners at writing, it does show they're thinking about things and questioning the assumptions of real or fictional societies
</li><li class="field_horror" value="708" data-dimension="L">immortality  ->  why is this word 2/3 of the time a backdoor to sneak Buddhism and its model of the individual into Christian or progressive-philosophical discourse. the moment before we discuss fiction people have ordinary comprehensible definitions of what life and death are. the moment we start talking about "immortality" suddenly everyone on earth believes in Buddhism and thinks life and death are each totally different things from what they usually are.
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="709" data-dimension="L">immortal  ->  separate Lexeme which contains the concept in Buddhism sloppily called this when it's something different

</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="710" data-dimension="L">verisimilitude / verisimilitudinous / verisimilar  ->  very relevant when analyzing fiction. why are Marxist analyses of fiction possible when in theory it should be that fiction can be anything at all and a great number of authors do not know anything about Marxism? because of verisimilitude. people create fictional ontologies by superficially copying real-life ontologies, which can amusingly result in fiction containing ontologies that are specifically realistic enough they provide for the possibility of Bolshevism.
</li><li value="717" data-remark="gaster or something. Undertale-Deltarune" class="field_fantasy" data-dimension="L">diegetic
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="718" data-dimension="L">metanarrative  ->  in my scrap about Vegeta and Asriel I realized there were multiple possible definitions of metanarrative. so here we go.

</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="776" data-dimension="L">bookman's bluff  ->  when an author tries to claim that the story goes together and makes sense on some level even though it doesn't. [https://www.reddit.com/r/tipofmytongue/comments/gi29qv/tomt_whats_the_name_of_the_term_when_an_author/] can turn into Calvinball if done really well to continuously expand mistakes into believable lore; can turn into a scottcon if done badly.
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="777" data-dimension="L">signifier mad libs  ->  when an audience fails to ask what a fiction or non-fiction work is actually trying to communicate and begins carelessly filling in all the nouns, verbs, and adjectives with their own meanings
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="778" data-remark="no good rationale for where I moved this one." data-dimension="L">Calvinball  ->  game created by Calvin & Hobbes; metaphor for serialized writing
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="779" data-remark="retcons go backwards. did it unintentionally, but pretty good joke" data-dimension="L">retcon
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="780" data-dimension="L">lore
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="781" data-dimension="L">continuity
</li><li class="field_fantasy" value="782" data-dimension="L">canon / canonical
</li><li value="783" class="field_fantasy" data-dimension="L">scottcon  ->  when Scott Cawthon writes a story beginning with one underlying narrative or none and leaves a bunch of unclear clues as to what it is but then comes back and "solves the mystery" by assigning all the surface manifestations of things to new meanings. basically a form of bookman's bluff that occurs specifically in the case of serialized or ongoing stories. the only reason this isn't the same thing as Calvinball is Calvinball implies the author is carefully following rules and creating consistency rather than strictly making rules up as they go along.

</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="784" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 1  - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="785" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 2  - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="786" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 3  - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="787" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 4  - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="788" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 6  - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="789" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 5  - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="790" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 6  - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="791" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 7  - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="792" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 8  - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="793" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 9  - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="794" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 10 - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="795" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 11 - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="796" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 12 - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="797" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 13 - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="798" data-dimension="L">Wings of Fire book 14 - qww
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="799" data-dimension="L">wild west  ->  it is so bizarrely common to use this phrase to specifically describe a time before things were well ordered and when they flowed around chaotically without thinking about the fact this ends with the creation of territories and the crystallization of particular internal ontologies that begin to function like laws of physics. Sonic the Hedgehog adaptatons were the wild west! but that was because the arrangement of characters, objects, and processes in the Sonic universe had not become consistent, or simply because the arrangement of real-life corporations producing the Sonic series and arrangement of people and teams inside them had not become consistent.

</li><li class="field_geo" value="800" data-dimension="L">timeline
 <ol><li>common definition
 </li><li>different scifi definitions
 </li><li>many-worlds model
 </li><li>material-history
 </li><li>colloquial usage: observed series of real-life events on the news, which is usually stated to be "the worst timeline", or occasionally "the best timeline"
 </li></ol>
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="801" data-dimension="L">past  ->  recorded material-history; hypothesized origins, as with folk etymology; memories of a different social structure taken as a time period, as with nostalgia; partisan outright-fabricated version of reality said to exist a while ago - this ties into inflammatory definitions of "revisionist history"
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="802" data-dimension="L">present
</li><li class="field_exstruct" value="803" data-dimension="L">future  ->  in fictional models where the future literally exists, it is effectively just a kind of (material-)history no different from the past; there are also reasonable hypotheses that the future might not exist except in the relativistic sense of areas of the universe going along faster or slower
</li><li class="number_empty" value="810" data-dimension="L">??
</li><li class="field_mdem" value="811" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|Amalthean interpretation]] / Amalthean
</li><li class="field_mdem" value="812" data-dimension="L">[[User:Reversedragon/FirstNineThousand/inflections|Beagelian interpretation]] / Beagelian / Beagelize

</li></ol>