It is not always clear to me what scientific activity is getting at, while with religion it is clear to me that that language points at something essential, in as much as it points directly at experience itself.
And often I see the ecstasies of scientific excitement as quite empty. A tautology in excitement. That is, exciting only in that it has proven itself true.
Posted: July 7th, 2016
Consider the motivational expression, “We make our own destiny.” And I would argue this is the case. Yet, we make it so only after ‘the destiny’ is there for interpretation as destiny, and not before. That is, we write the story of destiny after reflecting on what has already transpired. “I found true love”—and I did write that destiny. See The Romantic.
Posted: July 2nd, 2016
Tags: The Romantic
The pursuit of the scientific spirit is one of building of a uni-verse by describing it in terms of time and space. Compare this with the pursuit of the Theosophical Society. This universe building, I want to theme in spirit, something similar to imperialism, epistemic.
Posted: July 1st, 2016
, Theosophical Society
When we were imagining ourselves as scientists in a lab (See lecture The Romantic) and exclaimed, “I simply discovered nature!” We were referring not to the observation itself, but to an object, virus.
And isn’t it the same with feelings? Don’t I simply “discover” them? And once identified as feeling, don’t I read them backward into my own internal/mental history (forever how long or short that duration may be)?
But I do expect that disposition (feelings or mood) to be the most unlikely thing to call objective—these are not entities we find in the common world—and this is usually the distinction between objective and subjective. I suppose that here I am making less of a claim to dispositions and instead drawing boundaries to an area which I would like to call objectivity.
I’m not surprised when I find myself anxious about the fact that I will lecture soon or that I find myself in love, despite that the breakup is far behind me. Quite the opposite. It’s to be expected that I experience a detachment and disownment from my most ‘subjective’ experiences. That is, I find them in the same way I find anything else in nature. Natural things (natural entities?)—I’m not sure which word to use here. (See Albert Hofstadter’s translation of Martin Heidegger’s The Thing in Poerty, Language, Thought.) “Things” feels better and I do not have a terminological distinction. They are interchangeable everywhere in my current writting.
“We describe reality. Or at least our descriptions are compatible with reality. Just look what we have uncovered!”
Or “We live the righteous life. Just look how they live. Their world is disgusting. We live in the true world.”
Or “My languages are just several of many. And each are just as right or wrong as the next.”
——And all three are a form of universal language, yet the first and second express a certain arrogance, while the last acknowledges a certain type of modesty, epistemic.
Posted: December 19th, 2015
Should I have to dismiss the priority of any historic entity to any ‘present’ entity which has, as part of its constitution, the possibility of affirmation before the senses?—for example, sight of apple or taste of apple. And I ask this since I find that it is often the case that historic entities strike me harder than ‘present’ entities—and do so in such a way that they draw me away from anything ‘actually’ present—I have placed ‘actually’ and ‘present’ in quotation marks since any historic entity is just as present. I mean, any historic entity exists only as a memory or as a story which has been written, and that memory or the reading, telling, or hearing of a story is surely present.
Imagine a scene in which two are lying in bed together. One reveals to another a past which involves a moral offense of sexual nature. It would not be too hard to imagine that this historical entity could color many other phenomena. Surely the presence of this historic entity has potential to color every other entity of a sexual nature.
I, in the story of my life, allow the historic entity do what it wants to. Intensify. Color or Distract. Fade away.
Posted: December 12th, 2015