The concept of representation, people, things.

I have been searching for a treatise on "representation" of people, things, etc.

It seem that you must have the ability to think in the "abstract" to comprehend that people can be represented as well as things. Michael Joseph has made excellent points that you must have a fundamental comprehension of trusts, and how trusts are derived from relationships. I think that a to understand relationships, you must also have to be able to understand that you can have a relationship through an agent, and as a principal, that agent represents you.

If you have any leads, please let me know.

Just notations on my search:
*********************

Things That Represent Other Things

Quote:

---

A synecdoche (/s??n?kd?ki?/, si-NEK-d?-kee; from Greek ????????? synekdoche, meaning "simultaneous understanding"[1]) is a figure of speech in which a term for a part of something refers to the whole of something, or vice versa.[2]

A synecdoche is a class of metonymy, often by means of either mentioning a part for the whole, or conversely the whole for one of its parts. Examples from everyday English-language idiomatic expressions include "bread and butter" for "livelihood", "suits" for "businessmen", "boots" for "soldiers", etc.[3] It is also often used in government announcements where a building stands in for a government official or agency, such as "No. 10" or "No. 10 Downing Street," the address of same, being used to represent the British Prime Minister, or "The Pentagon," the building housing its headquarters, to represent the United States Department of Defense.

Synecdoche is often used as a type of personification, by attaching a human aspect to a non-human thing. This is used in reference to political relations, including "having a footing", used to mean a country or organization is in a position to act, or "the wrong hands", to describe opposing groups, usually in the context of military power.[8]

Synecdoche is a rhetorical trope and a type of figurative speech similar to metonymy—a figure of speech in which a term that denotes one thing is used to refer to a related thing.[4][5] Indeed, synecdoche is sometimes considered a subclass of metonymy. It is more distantly related to other figures of speech, such as metaphor.[6]

More rigorously, metonymy and synecdoche can be considered sub-species of metaphor, intending metaphor as a type of conceptual substitution (as Quintilian does in Institutio oratoria Book VIII). In Lanham's Handlist of Rhetorical Terms,[7] the three terms have somewhat restrictive definitions, arguably in tune with a certain interpretation of their etymologies from Greek:

Metaphor: changing a word from its literal meaning to one not properly applicable but analogous to it; assertion of identity rather than, as with simile, likeness.
Metonymy: substitution of cause for effect, proper name for one of its qualities, etc.
LINK

---

Quote:

---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representation_%28arts%29

Representation is the use of signs that stand in for and take the place of something else.[1] It is through representation that people organize the world and reality through the act of naming its elements.[1] Signs are arranged in order to form semantic constructions and express relations.[1]
Bust of Aristotle, Greek philosopher

For many philosophers, both ancient and modern, man is regarded as the "representational animal" or homo symbolicum, the creature whose distinct character is the creation and the manipulation of signs – things that "stand for" or "take the place of" something else.[1]

Representation has been associated with aesthetics (art) and semiotics (signs). Mitchell says "representation is an extremely elastic notion, which extends all the way from a stone representing a man to a novel representing the day in the life of several Dubliners".[1]

The term 'representation' carries a range of meanings and interpretations. In literary theory, 'representation' is commonly defined in three ways.

To look like or resemble
To stand in for something or someone
To present a second time; to re-present[2]

Representation began with early literary theory in the ideas of Plato and Aristotle, and has evolved into a significant component of language, Saussurian and communication studies.[2]

---

Quote:

---

Hagar and Sarah

21Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.

24These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27For it is written:

“Be glad, barren woman,

you who never bore a child;

shout for joy and cry aloud,

you who were never in labor;

because more are the children of the desolate woman

than of her who has a husband.”e

28Now you, brothers and sisters, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29At that time the son born according to the flesh persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30But what does Scripture say? “Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.”f 31Therefore, brothers and sisters, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

---

http://biblehub.com/niv/galatians/4.htm

#1 Consider that one does not represent oneself, although one may present oneself.
#2 That to symbolize and to represent something or someone may not necessary always be the same.
#3 The etymology of words can be very insightful.

Attachment 3404

#4 Consider, despite the push not to, to represent someone who is not present being to "make them present" or to "bring them to mind by description".
#5 Then there is the idea of a certificate of title or a drawing or a word or sound being mistaken for the thing itself--the map being mistaken or taken for the territory.

Unabridged dictionaries and etymological references can be very handy and informative.

Related:
Etymology Online - http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?...search=present

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

#1 Consider that one does not represent oneself, although one may present oneself.

---

Exactly! And that's the games the wordsmiths of the legal society play on people. Like the cliche, "putting the cart before the horse". They have the man represent the person (NAME). So, wouldn't it be an oxymoron to say, "are you representing yourself?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gavilan

Exactly! And that's the games the wordsmiths of the legal society play on people. Like the cliche, "putting the cart before the horse". They have the man represent the person (NAME). So, wouldn't it be an oxymoron to say, "are you representing yourself?"

---

Quote:

---

“He who represents himself has a fool for a client.” Quote by Abraham Lincoln.

---

On the surface that quote has a 'cheeky meaning' but further investigation will show that someone who thinks they are representing themselves might be some inept with regard to the subject matter. Also it might be worth considering what they mean by "self" or generally what is a 'self'. Self is somewhat close to 'serf' or even 'slave'.

I might "present" myself with an initial 1040 Form - my first ever. Then, subsequently I re-appear, re-presenting myself as my own informant/IRS agent?

I agree with the premise above though. But representing as presenting a second time...

A mammal "presents" herself by a certain posture. Representing could mean presenting to the same male a second time, as a second witness this might be constructing jurisdiction as an appearance?

It might just be that I love mulling things over far too long!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I might "present" myself with an initial 1040 Form - my first ever. Then, subsequently I re-appear, re-presenting myself as my own informant/IRS agent?

I agree with the premise above though. But representing as presenting a second time...

A mammal "presents" herself by a certain posture. Representing could mean presenting to the same male a second time, as a second witness this might be constructing jurisdiction as an appearance?

It might just be that I love mulling things over far too long!

---

The word terniary is related to the Latin (?) word terni which refers to thrice or three-by-three--something to do with threes. Imagine: a-terni. Man, person, attorney (the third) makes three.

The failing to appear warrant funnies once while not representing or presenting EVIDENCE into the administrative hearing or muted portion of MY own trial or that appearance appearing to be so evident well your here aren't, you.will you be no i will be me the similar appearance is a lawful issue please excuse Me this appears to be a legal issue my business here is done . We will continue without you dam wright you will.warrants are benefit writs lottery adjournments till you not me gets kidnapped 3 clear day,s is all a adjournment is well who can ask for a adjournment a clerk a jp or you and every 3 days you keep asking for adjournment how not guilty plea was entered on your NAME the judge has re venued re presented or presented you as dead a paper warrant hardly when is the last time any one seen a endorsed warrant now oathless bench witch warrant that's not a adjournment a bench warrant is breech adjournment of contract.If you is found guilty without you being present the warrant is issued for the body ME to re present my conviction presented for employee benefits comes with the job 4th july pic or late night nic.I got a 6 month adjournment on a probation order i refuse to re present me or present me as i might be appearing or surrendering to title.I was picked up true name me on traffic issues and after being arrested and printed a trick to establish a criminal identification of you presenting your prints as further evidence of what how my fingers can make a difference in self conviction.dust the car for prints and nothing its you saying i drive with gloves on the same ones we took of to get the criminals prints.They need a DL if its not in the wallet the prints is how you've understood.Sign for your prints my favorite got any red ink. so you need to sign a promise to appear as you been identified or your identifying with that NAME. I said once i sign this its my release yes well the CITY has a warrant for your arrest after i sign that how are you planning on forcing me to stay arrested and how is it i would be in a federal building wanting arrest when im free to go i sign it they lock the door.My chaperone has no paper work its in the car bring it in he cant its a night in the bucket and a promise to appear the order and adjournments .r4c dont leave home without it. PRESENTS REPRESENTS offers legal identification.

Within two monetary systems you is debt Me is gift tithing tribute Gods money is debt free.or start demanding the system that's designed for me. HOW AL becomes the taxpayer words like [him] DA always asks do you recognize HIM is that HIM are you not him. But your here aren't you. FARGIN BASTAGES.

The following statement is made without prejudice to the rights of the above-mentioned taxpayer in any proceedings that may be instituted against him. The facts stated are upon information and belief only.

The taxpayer is now 31 years old, and has continuously lived with his wife since his marriage in 1917. He has one child, a son, now nearly 12 years old. Since 1922 he has been the principal support of his widowed mother and his sister and brother, now 19 and 21 years of age, respectively.

Prior to the latter part of the year 1926 he was employed at a salary which at no time exceeded $75 per week. During the years 1926 to 1929, inclusive, he was the recipient of considerable sums of money, title to which vested in him by right of possession only.

Taxpayer became active as a principal with three associates at about the end of the year 1926. Because of the fact that he had no capital to invest in their various undertakings, his participation during the entire year 1926 and the greater part of 1927 was limited. During the years 1928 and 1929 the profits of the organization of which he was a member were divided as follows: one-third to a group of regular employees and one-sixth each to the taxpayer and three associates.

The, taxpayer was at no time the banker for the organization, nor did he, ever actively participate in the conduct of its individual enterprises.

The only attorneys employed by the taxpayer personally during this period were Nash & Ahern, Ben Epstein and Capt. Billy Waugh, all of Chicago, Ill. The so-called bodyguards with which he is reputed to surround himself on the occasion of infrequent appearances in public, were not, as a general rule, his personal employees, but were, in fact, employees of the organization which participated in its profits. Several of these employees stopped at the same hotel with the ,[taxpayer] while he was in Chicago.

That a large force of bodyguards did not continually surround him is established by the fact that on the occasion of his arrest at Philadelphia in 1929 only one companion was with him.

The furniture in the home occupied by the taxpayer while he was in Florida was acquired at a cost not in excess of $20,000. The house and grounds have been thoroughly appraised and the appraisal has been heretofore submitted to you.

There is a mortgage against the house and grounds of $30,000. His indebtedness to his associates has rarely ever been less than $75,000 since 1927. It has frequently been much more.

Notwithstanding that two of the taxpayer's associates from whom,I have sought information with respect to the taxpayer's income insist that his yearly income never exceeded $50,000 in anyone year, I am of the opinion that his taxable income for the years 1925 and 1926 might fairly be fixed at not to exceed $26,000 and $40,000 respectively and for the years 1928 and 1929 not to exceed $100,000 per year. THAT internal market place exchange 10/40 form has a hebrew king for 40 years exemption saul david solomon. demanding a tenth ave freezeout.keep 40 years earnings for a fraction tithing SAM. lawful funnies.

I am not having much success with finding research into representation and abstract thinking, but there is more information ready available regarding symbolism. This is a very interesting paper:
http://www.vonsteuben.org/ourpages/a...%20Culture.pdf

http://marxist-theory-of-art.blogspo...2-animals.html

That brings to mind the basis of the entire guilt trip, building the Gospel of Pragmatism. Abraham and Sarah were half-siblings. Additionally Abraham allowed Sarah to banish Hagar in negligent homicide, resulting in Ishmael surviving to father a more genetically sound bloodline as twelve Arabic nations.

These may be treated as historical but I prefer the symbology.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gavilan

I am not having much success with finding research into representation and abstract thinking, but there is more information ready available regarding symbolism. This is a very interesting paper:
http://www.vonsteuben.org/ourpages/a...%20Culture.pdf

http://marxist-theory-of-art.blogspo...2-animals.html

---

getting "page not found" from the first link.

from the second link youve posted:

Quote:

---

Lacking the advantage of intense intervention from a symbol-using species, our own ancestors had to make the leap to using symbols for themselves. It was probably an uneven process, with flashes of symbol use emerging and dying here and there before it finally became a universal human trait. How it might have arisen is the subject of our next post.

---

we were just discussing this on Davids latest thread:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

In the writings of Israel the ability to read is from one of the Fallen Angels, Semjaza and his followers brought things to man like forging iron, currency etc. Semjaza is better known as Lucifer - who got his start in the Book of Enoch.

---

but somehow, from following your links ive ended up snipe hunting LOL! or is it snark hunting?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snark_%28Lewis_Carroll%29

Im keen to find out what Lewis Carroll was on about with this!


thanks

Hello, george!

Been tied up with some heavy reading. Here is a link to a phenomenal site that has given me even more to leads:

http://www.mindserpent.com/American_...y/sitemap.html

http://www.mindserpent.com

Wish you are well and enjoying life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gavilan

Hello, george!

Been tied up with some heavy reading. Here is a link to a phenomenal site that has given me even more to leads:

http://www.mindserpent.com/American_...y/sitemap.html

http://www.mindserpent.com

Wish you are well and enjoying life.

---

thanks for your well wishes and i express the same to you and yours!

wow! that URL looked familiar but it wasnt unless there has been a lot of changes to the site. that is a whole library of some really interesting books and stuff. I started at the beginning before seeing all that, it would take a lifetime to digest at my reading pace.

from the begging it starts off in agreement with the "out of africa" theory which i dont subscribe to but hey, its all hearsay anyway so I wont let that common subscription stop me from reading more from there.

thanks for posting that.

edit: wow! someone has really put some time and effort into that site Gavlin! I'll be spending some hours there for sure.

Amazing!

I wasn't expecting on finding out my answer so soon, that is, that I suspected only a few are privileged to think in the abstract.

Here I have come across my answer:

Quote:

---

http://www.mindserpent.com/American_...Hall/sta04.htm
WHEN confronted with a problem involving the use of the reasoning faculties, individuals of strong intellect keep their poise, and seek to reach a solution by obtaining facts bearing upon the question. Those of immature mentality, on the other hand, when similarly confronted, are overwhelmed. While the former may be qualified to solve the riddle of their own destiny, the latter must be led like a flock of sheep and taught in simple language. They depend almost entirely upon the ministrations of the shepherd. The Apostle Paul said that these little ones must be fed with milk, but that meat is the food of strong men. Thoughtlessness is almost synonymous with childishness, while thoughtfulness is symbolic of maturity.

There are, however, but few mature minds in the world; and thus it was that the philosophic-religious doctrines of the pagans were divided to meet the needs of these two fundamental groups of human intellect--one philosophic, the other incapable of appreciating the deeper mysteries of life. To the discerning few were revealed the esoteric, or spiritual, teachings, while the unqualified many received only the literal, or exoteric, interpretations. In order to make simple the great truths of Nature and the abstract principles of natural law, the vital forces of the universe were personified, becoming the gods and goddesses of the ancient mythologies. While the ignorant multitudes brought their offerings to the altars of Priapus and Pan (deities representing the procreative energies), the wise recognized in these marble statues only symbolic concretions of great abstract truths.

---

Quote:

---

http://www.mindserpent.com/American_...v1b2.htm#trust
As all ancient Heathen nations had their mysteries or secret doctrines, which the priests carefully kept from the knowledge of the vulgar, and which they only communicated to a select number of persons whom they thought they could safely trust; and as the Jewish religion was anciently the same as the Persian, it will not be thought extraordinary, that, like the Persians, it should have its secret doctrines.

---

Front this page http://www.mindserpent.com/American_.../epilogue.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george

edit: wow! someone has really put some time and effort into that site Gavlin! I'll be spending some hours there for sure.

---

George, a treasure trove indeed!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gavilan

I have been searching for a treatise on "representation" of people, things, etc.

It seem that you must have the ability to think in the "abstract" to comprehend that people can be represented as well as things. Michael Joseph has made excellent points that you must have a fundamental comprehension of trusts, and how trusts are derived from relationships. I think that a to understand relationships, you must also have to be able to understand that you can have a relationship through an agent, and as a principal, that agent represents you.

If you have any leads, please let me know.

---

The terms 'fungible' and 'fungibility' may lend some clues in to understanding of representation.

Voters, rights, duties, and obligations are all fungible.

To represent someone could also be a party to an agreement or controversy.

A few jural relationships to consider (the list below is not exhaustive):

Principal - Agent
Patron - Client
Master - Slave
Master - Servant
Employee - Employer
Principal - Surety
Obligee - Obligor
Mortgagee - Mortgagor
Promisee - Promisor
Beneficiary - Trustee
Trustee - Trustor

All the above have to do with obligations and duties which can be transferred.
The parties are fungible. That which is fungible is capable of substitution, a placeholder. Substitution is a key element of representation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

The terms 'fungible' and 'fungibility' may lend some clues in to understanding of representation.

Voters, rights, duties, and obligations are all fungible.

To represent someone could also be a party to an agreement or controversy.

A couple party relationships to consider:

Principal - Agent
Patron - Client
Master - Slave
Master - Servant
Employee - Employer
Principal - Surety
Obligee - Obligor
Mortgagee - Mortgagor
Promisor - Promisee

All the above have to do with obligations and duties which can be transferred.
The parties are fungible. That which is fungible is capable of substitution, a placeholder. Substitution is a key element of representation.

---

Thank you! I enjoyed that.


Urantia Book - State Development.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Thank you! I enjoyed that.


Urantia Book - State Development.

---

I have to give credit to palani from another forum for the idea.

https://books.google.com/books?id=W-...ngible&f=false

From another treatise, not the one above, things include men, but men with rights are persons thus not things.

https://books.google.com/books?id=wf...1%2C406&edge=0

Consider representation as the feigning of IDENTITY.

Capital and Interest: A Critical History of Economical Theory

With respect to representation, analyze the terms actor, actions, acts, and author.

There is inter-relationship between the above and representation.

He who acts for another.
He who acts for himself.