close friend speaking Buddha to me
in the silent park
in the silent park
the quiet was listening
Aug 31, 2017
On Listening...an offering
This blog is essentially about two narrative topics that are or will be more important to us in the near future, chaos and determinism. To quote Edward Lorenz, "Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.” and, oddly, William Faulkner, "The past is never dead. It's not even past." Strangely, both succinctly declare what this blog is all about and how chaos, determinism, and the past along with sentience or awareness are in process of generating human subjective experience--again, the life of each one of us as it is lived. This blog seeks to humanize our language of experience and to help us focus on experience at the expense of an undue prioritizing of theory over experience.
Aug 30, 2017
On Thinking, Thinker, and Me as Intended Object
When thinking, there is the tacit assumption that you are thinking "to yourself." At one and the same time, there is the tacit assumption that you are the thinker." In thinking, "I am both thinker and hearer of thoughts, i.e., a subject and an object. How is that possible? This is a well-known paradox that, to the best of my knowledge, remains unanswered or dissolved. (At this juncture, I wish to give credit to Edmund Husserl's Fifth Cartesian Meditation for inspiring me to write about the paradox. I'm still looking for the page to quote from. It's forthcoming.)
When faced with another sentient being, we are--at one and the same moment--both the subject who faces and the object being faced. All of this occurs in our own experience. The other is other in our experience. And, we are also an other in facing the other. Questions arise. Does it matter if what you are facing is sentient? Yes and no. When faced with a situation excluding any sentient beings, do we not assume that we, as an object, are there, in a world? How can we be both subject and object at once? However, when facing a sentient being, human or animal who is aware of us, by the very fact that both are aware of us turns us into an object for another--in our own experience. Again, we are both subject and object. Is this possible? Logically speaking it is defiant. We have a seeming contradiction. Does it or can this contradiction be "resolved." How? Remember, this bifurcation occurs in all experience, barring specialized states of awareness.
Several important points must be added in the form of questions. What kind of self as object are we to the other? Can we have a say in that? Like it or not, we are an object, not only to the other but to the other in our own experience. We as subjects are simultaneously aware of being both the subject and object. How is that possible? The other gives us our selves as objects. But in this instance, we have no choice but to be the object for the subjective facing of the other in our own experience.
The sentient other turns me into an object for me--the subject (I) becomes an object (a thou) to me at one and the same time as I am a subject, similar to what takes place in thought. Note well this comparison. Often, we concern ourselves with the kind of "objective" self we "give" to the other--all taking place within our own experience. Maybe, we then concern ourselves with our "objective" self as others may view it. After all, it is the power of otherness that gives us this objective self that clearly resides in our experience. What kind of other do we wish to project to others in ourselves?
When faced with another sentient being, we are--at one and the same moment--both the subject who faces and the object being faced. All of this occurs in our own experience. The other is other in our experience. And, we are also an other in facing the other. Questions arise. Does it matter if what you are facing is sentient? Yes and no. When faced with a situation excluding any sentient beings, do we not assume that we, as an object, are there, in a world? How can we be both subject and object at once? However, when facing a sentient being, human or animal who is aware of us, by the very fact that both are aware of us turns us into an object for another--in our own experience. Again, we are both subject and object. Is this possible? Logically speaking it is defiant. We have a seeming contradiction. Does it or can this contradiction be "resolved." How? Remember, this bifurcation occurs in all experience, barring specialized states of awareness.
Several important points must be added in the form of questions. What kind of self as object are we to the other? Can we have a say in that? Like it or not, we are an object, not only to the other but to the other in our own experience. We as subjects are simultaneously aware of being both the subject and object. How is that possible? The other gives us our selves as objects. But in this instance, we have no choice but to be the object for the subjective facing of the other in our own experience.
The sentient other turns me into an object for me--the subject (I) becomes an object (a thou) to me at one and the same time as I am a subject, similar to what takes place in thought. Note well this comparison. Often, we concern ourselves with the kind of "objective" self we "give" to the other--all taking place within our own experience. Maybe, we then concern ourselves with our "objective" self as others may view it. After all, it is the power of otherness that gives us this objective self that clearly resides in our experience. What kind of other do we wish to project to others in ourselves?
This blog is essentially about two narrative topics that are or will be more important to us in the near future, chaos and determinism. To quote Edward Lorenz, "Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.” and, oddly, William Faulkner, "The past is never dead. It's not even past." Strangely, both succinctly declare what this blog is all about and how chaos, determinism, and the past along with sentience or awareness are in process of generating human subjective experience--again, the life of each one of us as it is lived. This blog seeks to humanize our language of experience and to help us focus on experience at the expense of an undue prioritizing of theory over experience.
Aug 24, 2017
Facebook, Youtube, other tech giants launch joint, state-backed censorship programs
This is important for all of us. Please read. It's not just for these websites.
Facebook, Youtube, other tech giants launch joint, state-backed censorship programs
Facebook, Youtube, other tech giants launch joint, state-backed censorship programs
This blog is essentially about two narrative topics that are or will be more important to us in the near future, chaos and determinism. To quote Edward Lorenz, "Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.” and, oddly, William Faulkner, "The past is never dead. It's not even past." Strangely, both succinctly declare what this blog is all about and how chaos, determinism, and the past along with sentience or awareness are in process of generating human subjective experience--again, the life of each one of us as it is lived. This blog seeks to humanize our language of experience and to help us focus on experience at the expense of an undue prioritizing of theory over experience.
Aug 22, 2017
What-,who-ever gave us the belief...?
Whatever gave us the belief
that what we perceive is anything
other than our experience?
Perhaps metaphysics?
Perhaps the who is
the Ancient Greeks?
Perhaps Parmenides?
Whatever gave us the belief
that technology was changing anything
other than our experience?
When we seek to change "the world,"
we are looking for "everyone," or
"the means of production,"
or "society" to change.
When we seek to change experience,
we are "seeking" change
in ourselves.
Change in experience
is the radical change
that will change our worlds.
we are looking for "everyone," or
"the means of production,"
or "society" to change.
When we seek to change experience,
we are "seeking" change
in ourselves.
Change in experience
is the radical change
that will change our worlds.
This blog is essentially about two narrative topics that are or will be more important to us in the near future, chaos and determinism. To quote Edward Lorenz, "Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.” and, oddly, William Faulkner, "The past is never dead. It's not even past." Strangely, both succinctly declare what this blog is all about and how chaos, determinism, and the past along with sentience or awareness are in process of generating human subjective experience--again, the life of each one of us as it is lived. This blog seeks to humanize our language of experience and to help us focus on experience at the expense of an undue prioritizing of theory over experience.
Aug 20, 2017
Question...
Why are "spiritual" experiences spiritual?
This blog is essentially about two narrative topics that are or will be more important to us in the near future, chaos and determinism. To quote Edward Lorenz, "Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.” and, oddly, William Faulkner, "The past is never dead. It's not even past." Strangely, both succinctly declare what this blog is all about and how chaos, determinism, and the past along with sentience or awareness are in process of generating human subjective experience--again, the life of each one of us as it is lived. This blog seeks to humanize our language of experience and to help us focus on experience at the expense of an undue prioritizing of theory over experience.
Aug 16, 2017
The "Body"
Many materialists and naturalists hold the view, with variations, that we encounter some version of a physical, natural, or material world in perception and cognition. Once that metaphysical and epistemological view is in tact in the body-memory with its attendant feelings, the world is cast away from its dynamic and living source in a feeling-body. The mistake here is to believe in an encounter with the world. Being unaware "of" the always and already prior union of the body-world, the body-world union is concealed. By repetition, this embodied encounter belief regularly operates to render the union hidden. It glides unobtrusively into a background function that is subject and object (form khanda*) yielding.
Identities are manifest in relation to objectification. "I am in relation to my circumstances." Both selves and circumstances are generated in reciprocal relations. Circumstances incarnate forms, feelings, perceptions, and consciousnesses shaped by incarnate memories, the "cognitive unconscious" of the cognitive scientists. These derive from prior acts of body, speech, and mind. These prior acts form the intentional memory configurations that provide meaningful manifestations of selves and situations. We find ourselves, in all cases, on the manifest side of these memory configurations. Selves and situations are at the effect end of the evanescence of experience. We are not the agents of these acts that produce time as experience. We find ourselves already in identities and situations. Hence, there is no perception of creations or beginnings. This process of experience is without beginning.
At this point, a question may arise: "If this union of the body-world is prior to thought and perception, how is it known?" The answer, perhaps a seemingly elusive one is "We are it." It is held in the body. It is felt in the body, it is breathed in the body. The body, as mentioned in a previous blog post, lives in real time, experience time. The body holds the felt evanescence of time. Its manifestations are the manifestations of worlds, of experience.
Ever had the experience of noticing the halt of an air conditioning unit? Or, the silencing of a birdsong? Or the cessation of children's laughter as they play nearby? How is it that we do not notice the air conditioner, the birdsong, or the children's laughter when it was occurring? We seem to notice only the cessations. Well, we may say, I wasn't conscious of the sounds but I became conscious of them when they ceased. Are you sure you were not conscious of them? Perhaps a different type of knowledge was operative that held the sounds. Perhaps we were able to become conscious of the sounds because they were held in a different kind of knowing, one that we are not habituated to call "knowing."
More to follow...
Identities are manifest in relation to objectification. "I am in relation to my circumstances." Both selves and circumstances are generated in reciprocal relations. Circumstances incarnate forms, feelings, perceptions, and consciousnesses shaped by incarnate memories, the "cognitive unconscious" of the cognitive scientists. These derive from prior acts of body, speech, and mind. These prior acts form the intentional memory configurations that provide meaningful manifestations of selves and situations. We find ourselves, in all cases, on the manifest side of these memory configurations. Selves and situations are at the effect end of the evanescence of experience. We are not the agents of these acts that produce time as experience. We find ourselves already in identities and situations. Hence, there is no perception of creations or beginnings. This process of experience is without beginning.
At this point, a question may arise: "If this union of the body-world is prior to thought and perception, how is it known?" The answer, perhaps a seemingly elusive one is "We are it." It is held in the body. It is felt in the body, it is breathed in the body. The body, as mentioned in a previous blog post, lives in real time, experience time. The body holds the felt evanescence of time. Its manifestations are the manifestations of worlds, of experience.
Ever had the experience of noticing the halt of an air conditioning unit? Or, the silencing of a birdsong? Or the cessation of children's laughter as they play nearby? How is it that we do not notice the air conditioner, the birdsong, or the children's laughter when it was occurring? We seem to notice only the cessations. Well, we may say, I wasn't conscious of the sounds but I became conscious of them when they ceased. Are you sure you were not conscious of them? Perhaps a different type of knowledge was operative that held the sounds. Perhaps we were able to become conscious of the sounds because they were held in a different kind of knowing, one that we are not habituated to call "knowing."
More to follow...
*Rosenberg, Alex. 2017. "THE STONE; A Foundation Of Science". Query.Nytimes.Com. Accessed August 18 2017. https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F00E7DF1F3CF93BA2575AC0A9679D8B63&rref=collection%2Fcolumn%2Fthe-stone&action=click&contentCollection=opin
**"Khandha Sutta: Aggregates". 2017. Accesstoinsight.Org. Accessed August 16, 2017. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.048.than.html.
This blog is essentially about two narrative topics that are or will be more important to us in the near future, chaos and determinism. To quote Edward Lorenz, "Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.” and, oddly, William Faulkner, "The past is never dead. It's not even past." Strangely, both succinctly declare what this blog is all about and how chaos, determinism, and the past along with sentience or awareness are in process of generating human subjective experience--again, the life of each one of us as it is lived. This blog seeks to humanize our language of experience and to help us focus on experience at the expense of an undue prioritizing of theory over experience.
Aug 15, 2017
Upcoming: Suffering and the Foundation of Ethics
This blog is essentially about two narrative topics that are or will be more important to us in the near future, chaos and determinism. To quote Edward Lorenz, "Chaos: When the present determines the future, but the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.” and, oddly, William Faulkner, "The past is never dead. It's not even past." Strangely, both succinctly declare what this blog is all about and how chaos, determinism, and the past along with sentience or awareness are in process of generating human subjective experience--again, the life of each one of us as it is lived. This blog seeks to humanize our language of experience and to help us focus on experience at the expense of an undue prioritizing of theory over experience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)