Has anyone ever succeeded in getting it down in words? Any philosopher or poet or blessed spirit, to say what it is to be in time, to be conscious, to taste, to see, to feel, to know, to say exactly why it isn't obvious, why there should even be a question? Or perhaps the answer is right on the surface but only lacks a reader, lacks the reader in you to recognise it? You wouldn't even consider throwing yourself into this abyss if you didn't feel it silently screaming at you in each moment - making each moment. Is it a matter of lacking something or of something too much? How is not-knowing possible? Is all knowing impugned, just a semblance of something else? But then, semblance? Most likely it's that the question has never been correctly framed, that the addressee for the answer has never fully emerged. Who or what is it that could recognise at once the composition of this? What kind of terrifying satisfaction is at stake? Where in the dream is the dreamer, what tyger, what monstrosity?
Blog Archive
-
▼
2018
(365)
-
▼
January
(31)
- People speak of desire as if it were a ta...
- To have a self is to have purposes; the self...
- Complex phenomena which include a form of re...
- The relationship between consciousness and d...
- Every identity is unconscious; identities ar...
- Flights of fancy might make it seem complex,...
- It depends on what it you are trying to expl...
- Not just in thought but in comportment as ...
- A = X'? There are two ways of thinking about...
- Begin with the reduction of A to A'. [Perha...
- The reduct A' of an experience A might be re...
- Biography, or your sad history, sets tight b...
- You might say it was a series of stuffy lit...
- Paradise worlds, worlds of desire. But th...
- Has anyone ever succeeded in getting it dow...
- There is a bitter sweet alienation in the re...
- Whatever it is that is real, you are that, n...
- That which is written falls curling like a r...
- As your experience this is accompanied with ...
- In desiring something, some X, it is not tha...
- There are elements in you that want to spea...
- In waking life you are the character, but i...
- But who's experience? To speak of experie...
- Weather conditions not conducive to the spr...
- A double movement: on one side artificial i...
- Sometimes you almost get the joke. It's all...
- How can you distinguish an original though...
- The mind is metaphors and metaphors are seek...
- It ought to be seen as odd that when philoso...
- If there is some interior act that brings ...
- The purest lyricism does not partake of the ...
-
▼
January
(31)
Wednesday, 17 January 2018
Has anyone ever succeeded in getting it down in words? Any philosopher or poet or blessed spirit, to say what it is to be in time, to be conscious, to taste, to see, to feel, to know, to say exactly why it isn't obvious, why there should even be a question? Or perhaps the answer is right on the surface but only lacks a reader, lacks the reader in you to recognise it? You wouldn't even consider throwing yourself into this abyss if you didn't feel it silently screaming at you in each moment - making each moment. Is it a matter of lacking something or of something too much? How is not-knowing possible? Is all knowing impugned, just a semblance of something else? But then, semblance? Most likely it's that the question has never been correctly framed, that the addressee for the answer has never fully emerged. Who or what is it that could recognise at once the composition of this? What kind of terrifying satisfaction is at stake? Where in the dream is the dreamer, what tyger, what monstrosity?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.