Agreeable Instantia

Hello!

Welcome to Agreeable Instantiations Volume 0: The Introduction! This is meant to be the introductory post for the blog I am starting… truthfully, I’m not entirely sure what the unifying theme of the posts here may be, but with these exercises I believe and I hope to better realize that there are always ideas that can compel a sufficiently interested individual to develop and test a theory and also explore its practice. At the moment, the volumes I plan to write focus on ideas I believe are noteworthy and wish to introduce to a more measured line of dialectic inquiry. 

Still, more can be said to introduce the Agreeable Instantiations volumes, without loss of generality. 

The data presented here are hopefully understood as subjects of and subjected to the scientific method. I believe it’s best if the topics and data of the volumes can be understood as theories, to distinguish between thought and being.

The Agreeable Instantiations volumes hope to be a fun and concise number of exercises in admiration of the gravity of information. A technical focus and a functional standard of mathematical and logical rigor may provide a valuable element to growing dialogues in the Information Age. 

With as far as I can take my considerations in an online cafe, I hope the subjects of the volumes are interesting enough for more serious research as well. I deeply hope that the resolutions and constituents thereof found in these volumes take new direction through consideration in further research. Everyone loves a complement. My goal for Agreeable Instantiations is that, at best, the volumes aspire to be like unpunctuated text(s), hoping to be punctuated by more serious consideration. At worst, I can only imagine the volumes may represent reflections of a time past.

As I challenge myself to explore exciting premises, I believe it is important to say that hypotheses and meta-hypotheses are to be explored as subjects and yet speculation about their futures have no guarantees—indeed, it is important to make sure all interests are well represented in any policy. Continuity and/or generalizability are not de facto artifacts of any premise, logical or otherwise, and so discretion seems highly suggested at this point.  

The introduction may soon be over, but it is meant to light the way for Agreeable Instantiations Volume 1 and beyond. I understand if you don’t want to get lost with me, so I will be as forthright as I can be and become along this journey. If you would like to join to follow along and/or share/exchange relevant information, please don’t hesitate to call me on over—I will make an effort to write about anything I can advocate for as an interested individual and researcher, sharing thoughts of my own as well as various additional unique perspectives through cited work and publications. 

Presently, I would like to leave you with information shared from sources other than myself, in the spirit of Agreeable Instantiations volumes of the future which will hope to consider interesting things to think about, maybe keep an eye on, and hopefully explore further. 

In closing, I hope this introduction is the start of an opportunity to study a number of theories, hypotheses and thoughts of particular interest to be presented in the volumes as just noteworthy matters—Agreeable Instantiations. In the words of NBA Champion Kevin Garnett, “Anything is Possible”. Whether I am a small inspiration, whether we are true believers, the Universe is home to many a miracle; the volumes that follow are meant to be an inspired application of the theory that positivity is the best possibility.

O death, where is thy sting?
O hades, where is thy victory?

[1 Corinthians 15: 55]