I’m not sure what caused my perspective to have been altered in a manner that I thought my mindset unchanged and yet have performed actions which reflect otherwise. The heartless, uncompassionate, and cold forcing of my will onto another now seems as though it were an impatient attempt at participating in conversation. However, such contribution to a conversation was much more like the involvement of a vomitus dog. Moreover, this dog smelled what used to be nourishing at one point, but was mostly decayed by stomach acid, and continued on to think that there still might be something of worth in such puke. No, all that was once good in thought and even intent turned vile during its own projection into existence. Abhorrently, speech was used contrary to its own purpose for existing. Instead of sharing in communion of thought with someone else I simply forced idle signification to breaths shaped by the lips of my mouth. May my tongue learn to wield prudently the voice of justice in humble consideration of all others.
I wrote previously of understanding in both the “acquisition of” and the “dissemination of” (To understand and be understood). However, in my expression of what I understood (and still understand), I did not intend to place the focus or emphasis upon the “self.” My intention was not to emphasize the individual as the origination of understanding. Rather, I find the necessity of something external, distinct, and separate from “self” in order for the activity of understanding to fully take place. One may be capable of understanding a “something” but might be better acclimated to understand a “someone.” In the “dissemination of” what an individual understands comes the potential to be understood. It is precisely in the activity of “to be understood” where a “someone” is addressed. One does not expect to be understood by a “something” as one does not perceive their own “self” as a “something.” An individual perceives their own being as a “someone” and does not expect to be understood by none other than a fellow “someone.” Even when perceiving to be understood by a supposed “something,” attributes are ascribed to that “something” that would make it more like a “someone” than not. Thus the model here (as applicable to what I wrote previously) is not one of arriving at certainty, comprehending fully, or obtaining bits of exhaustive knowledge; the model is that of Relationship, with particular emphasis on selflessness instead of selfishness.
In a model of Relationship, understanding would approach an object-to-be-know more like a subject-to-be-known (the term subject seen as a “someone”). Understanding then becomes less interested in “self.” This understanding is appropriate since its selflessness is dependent on a subject-to-be-known. This subjectification (subject-to-be-known instead of object-to-be-known) then promotes an abandoning of, or at least removing focus away from, “self.” Satisfaction from understanding would likewise be found more abundant outside the “self,” as opposed to within one’s “self.” Disassociation would be near non-existent due to association being an intricate part of relationship. It is when looking into the “self” as the knower and primary source of understanding that satisfaction becomes disillusionment and the disassociation inherent thereafter. Attempting to understand an “other” as an object will only setup disappointment since the approach is immediately conceptualized egocentrically; merely looking inward toward the “self” in constructing a narrow view of the “other.” Hence, the disillusionment which leads to a grotesque misunderstanding of the “other” then produces a false notion of “self” and “other,” especially in terms of relationship. This false understanding is then what disassociates one’s concept of “self” with the concept of “other.” “Self” and “other” can be understood in dissimilar terms which then creates the disillusionment and disassociation from the very inception of “other” as a concept (that is to say that this occurs when objectifying a person rather than the subjectifying them as noted above).
Understanding is relational as love is relational. Both understanding and love can become focused on the “self” in very similar ways. However, both also feature the opportunity to be selfless and refrain from egocentricism. If love is thought of in terms of ego connecting with ego, does not each ego conceptualize the “other” as an object instead of a subject? Thus leading to disillusionment and disassociation in the same manner as noted in the previous paragraph? Yet when removing focus off of “self,” no alignment is needed to facilitate love because unselfish concern for the “other” serves as a greater means of love in action, in actuality, in a state of existence. That is, love is found not only in the end goal brought about by some action but also in the means to that end, love in action. Love is not something built up but rather comes into existence in the means and ends. This perspective of love coincides perfectly with the idea that “at the moment one knows an enemy well enough to defeat them, they love them.” (C. Johnson’s post The struggle to Understand and be…) To love an enemy could then be seen as the denial of “self” and likened to selfless consideration and attention for the “other.” Just as understanding is better developed in a self-sacrificial model of relationship, love also develops to a greater maturity when denying our “self” (our heart).
In the statement, “the only way to align our ‘selves’ in this world appears to be through love,” the focus is mainly on “self” and an internalized, egocentric understanding of the word “love.” However, phrases such as “tune our hearts,” “outlooks become the same” and “focus becomes the same” are consistent with a relationship model of understanding as described above. If one does not objectify the “other” then a heart need not be tuned into similar conceptions of “self” but merely aligned through selfless consideration of the “other.” Outlook and focus are then only descriptive of one’s selfless concern for the “other.”
Through such a manner of love and understanding, I believe we do “connect on some intangible level…”
| — | William S. |
If the only thing I were to do was read then I would find it easy to understand.
If the only thing I were to do was write then I would let imagination create numerous texts. However, I can do neither exclusively and so I become acquainted with a difficulty.
The struggle to Understand and be Understood.
I read to understand what someone wrote to be understood regardless of how failed my attempt might lead. I write in attempt to be understood and guide as far as I comprehend though failed my effort may be.
Who will let you live
while I stand still to wait
for someone else to scream
words that I once held
on the skin of my lips
but failed to let fall
to the ground and feed
the earth from which man once came
to be and to continue being
subside or desist
into a greater lack of space
without recognition of clock or date
but there is where I’ll wait
then will I yell
as to never be heard
dissipate into dissolution
then I will be not
and who will let you live
1.1. EIGHTH ARTICLE
1.1.1. Whether man’s happiness consists in the vision of the vision of the divine essence?
1.1.1.1. Objection 1 - final perfection of intellect, happiness, does not consist in God being seen in His Essence
[this here, between the time of 1:45a and 2:08a, is when I took a nap and had several dreams that intertwined together: 1)writing on a computer at work and struggling to stay awake; lights in the small office turn off while I nod off for who knows how long, and I’m unable to turn the lights back on as I desperately try the switch; 2) I come to a house, open the door, walk in to a small entrance continuing to walk leftward toward a backdoor to get to what I perceived was a small garage or room of some sort from which I could continue to write on a computer from, to type, never made it outside, said hello to the babysitter watching my siblings, my younger brother doesn’t want me to go write because he wants me to spend time with him, in my dream he hunches over in sadness toward the ground until he is lying on the ground, I tell him that I need to write but perhaps I can read while hanging out with him. 3) Suddenly I’m in my apartment awaking from what seems to be a long nap, it’s still late into the night or early in the morning, I can’t tell. I go to the kitchen to make some coffee, espresso, then I hear someone in the living room which is on the other side of the wall I’m facing in the kitchen, I move around the dividing wall to see who it is. All the while I’m struggling to regain an awake-consciousness, it’s difficult for me to see and adjust my focus in the dark and my movement is staggered and lazy, I notice that it’s my dad. Walking in from what was, in my dream, the patio door of which had a pool on the outside of the apartment living room, and drying his hair off with a towel. He addressed me just as a means of acknowledgement. I started to walk toward the bedroom since I believed Sarah to still be asleep and wanted to make sure she was undisturbed from her sleep, I however, while my eyes struggled to adjust to the dark light and even darker hallway to the bedroom, saw Sarah standing in the hallway. My dad addresses her as if he and she knew of something I was completely unaware of. At that point I felt as though there was something I was completely unaware of. My dad reaches for Sarah’s hand and they lift their hand holding to about shoulder height, I had no thought to think about what I observed. Then, as if there was a gap in time, I was embracing Sarah. She was mostly hugging me as I was not sure what to make of the entire situation until I started to hug her back. It was then that I knew, or at least hoped was the case, that I could test Sarah. I could hug her to see if what was occurring was a true event. When I was thinking while hugging her, my hand feeling the texture of her shirt and the soft skin behind it while squeezing a section of her ribs right blow her arm pit due to the manner of which my arms wrapped around her torso in our embrace, in my hugging her to the test, I sensed that it could not be her. At the same time I heard my dad’s voice saying something to me, I don’t know what he was talking about or what words he was saying but slowly, as I was thinking that this could not be Sarah, my dad’s voice started morphing into my own. I began to take the place of the narrator in the movie I was both watching for the first time and also starting in. As I focused on my own voice, everything started fading into darkness and the volume of my voice lowering to silence. In a movie this would have be the dissolve to black, a fade out.
Awake (for real), I had no sense of what real time it was. Had I napped longer than I should have? Did I turn off my alarm? I looked at the screen of my cell phone, since I had set the timer on it for twenty minutes, and noticed that I had eight seconds left before the alarm would trigger and sound. Still having a feeling of drowsiness I let the eight seconds go by as I thought to myself “what?” At least that’s the closest word I could think of to encapsulate what I was actually thinking. The alarm sounded. Back to writing, typing on a computer. …I think I’ll quickly write what I just dreamt about before I forget it partially or entirely. 12/16/2010 2:47am]
1.1.1.2.
Objection 2 - higher perfection belongs to higher nature, therefore final perfection does not reach this, but consists in something less
Wore my denim jacket for the first time in a long time and found an old drawing of what coud possibly be my next tattoo.
| — |
Thomas Jefferson’s letter to his nephew, from Paris, August 10, 1787 Writing about philosophical inquiry on the subject of Religion |
