All of these Aphorisms are Nave. Meaning1 1. There is only the Sign. 2. The Sign is not. [(S=)] 2.

1 The Sign is meaningless. 2.11 There is only that which is meaningless. [From Axiom 1]
_____________________ 1 The meaning of the sign is the finite set of signs to which the sign consistently stands in a relation of identity.

Description1 1. There is only the Sign. 2. The Sign is not. [(x)~Sx] 2.1 The sign is indescribable. 2.11 There is only that which is indescribable. [From Axiom 1]
_____________________ 1 All descriptions of the sign are finite sets of signs that consistently modify the sign.

Emanation and Distinction1 1. There is only the Sign. 1.1 The sign is the one. 1.2 The one is the sign. 2. The sign is not. 2.1 The sign is not the one. [From 1.1] 2.11 The sign is many.2 2.111 Each sign of the many it itself the one. [From 1.1] 2.1111 Each sign of the many is itself not the one. [From Axiom 2] 2.11111 Each sign of the many is itself many.3 ()1 Herein is the emanation of the sign. ()2 All that is possible is actual. All that is actual is possible. 2.112 There is no distinction among the signs of the many. [From Meaning 2.1 and Description 2.1]
_____________________ 1 There is distinction between those signs that differ in meaning and/or differ in description. 2 There are many signs. 3 Each sign of the many consists of many signs.

Irrational Meaning1 and Repression (and the resultant Nave Meaning) 1. There is only the sign. 1.1 The sign is everything. [(S=V)] 1.11 The meaning of the sign is infinite. 1.111 The meaning of the sign is irrational. 1.112 All definitions of the signs meaning are necessarily nave. 2. The sign is not. _____________________
1

The meaning of the sign is irrational iff the set of signs to which it consistently stands in a relation of identity is infinite.
2

Mediation and Absolute Synchronicity 1. There is only the sign. 2. The sign is not. 2.1 All possible relations between the sign and that which it is not are actual. [From Emanation and Distinction ()2] 2.11 If the sign is actual then all that it is not is actual.1 2.12 If all that the sign is not is actual then the sign is actual.2
_____________________ 1 Here the antecedent mediates the consequent. Consider: there is death because there is life. There would not be the latter without the former. Death therefore can be said to mediate (and therefore actualize) that which it is not (i.e. life as such). 2 Here again the antecedent mediates the consequent. 2.12 parallels 2.11 to show that there is no immediacy. Consider: there is life because there is death. This is the inverse of the assertion in footnote 1. The crux is this: there is no unidirectional mediation. There is no immediacy. There is only absolute synchronicity. Life did not precede the lack thereof. Life and death were necessarily actualized simultaneously during the bright birth of possibility in the sign.

Untranslatability Nave Distinction It is not merely the case that language is inadequate to talk about that which is other than language. It is inadequate to talk about itself.