2004-09-26 - 9:59 p.m.
very solid, human day today. went shopping, neighbors left fruit outside my door, bought paint to replace my empty tubes, and watched City of God, a great movie by the way.
despite my general mundane existence, have been filled with grand thoughts today. mind spreading out across the vast expanse of empty perception as always to codify life into an understandable euphamism (preferably one I can spell) In the end it's a problem of scale of awareness as always. inevitably we try to build things within life. by build I mean come to an understanding of the interrelation of forces such that we can construct items or ideas based upon a goal structure, and be successful in making what we set out to. This is of course the essential tenant of practicle existence. We need to build things after all, careers, relationships, houses, families, windows, and small lamps. I think the end fault in the process is we will work within this practical framework when we transfer to concepts that perhaps do not mest with a bottom up method of creation.
The two primary things i think of are the sense of self, and the concept of reality or the world. They are to some degree interrelated by nessecity, they must mesh with each other in a manner to not conflict, or else we end up with issues. Mostly I mean that the manner in which we chose to interpret our stimuli will have to comply with our concept of the reality that creates these perceptions. Yet people for the most part seem to approach the problem of construction of these two ideas from that bottom up mentality. we think of ourselves as a combination of certain components, usually emotions, abilities, character traits, etc etc. We think of the world in terms of places, times, physical geography, and other people's opinions.
this is never going to actually be perfect. Its my complexity argument of course. simply that in order to fully comprehend something from a component mentality, you have to have a receptive matrix that is ultimately larger than all of the building blocks combined, as well as the interrelation of those blocks. It can't happen. I always tell pauli in our discussion that I don't think we'll ever really understand the brain and how it operates on a physical level, because in order to do so, we'd need a much larger brain to comprehend the smaller one.
so i attempt constantly to construct these two essential ideas (i tried to live without both, and each one in turn, and it doesn't work so well. because of course, the absence of something is in of itself something, and therefore removal of these two concepts from a being will have impact on operational sucess similar to the presence of such concepts) now that I've come to the belief that these concepts are essential, I've been trying to work out how to frame them within my life, or rather how to approach the problem of framing these ideas. A wholistic approach is I think essential. All truly powerful thought-systems contain them. Whether it is a faith in religion, or a satisfied secular solophism, or a devotion to a greater whole concept (that greater whole being any number of things) these systems are similar in that they have a generalized more wholistic approach to sense of self and reality. And they also tend to fall into trouble when they are scattered into ground up blocks, usually done through doctrine or that wonder of mental tricks, logical rationalization.
So my approach is developing, but how to put such a thing into words? words are just traps for meaning, and their creation will have in of itself a segmenting affect upon the concepts themselves. I'm so wrapped up in semantics most of the time, that I lose sight of any goal I may have.
actually, I set out to put down my thoughts and process, and as such try to solidify it in my mind and capture things for the future. But the simple fact is, that this is conterproductive to what I'm trying to accomplish within my own mind. So fuck it, I'm not going to. Instead I'll say that anything and everything that has ever been or will be spoken or written down is false and a perversion of a truth by it's very existance. (with the exception of self-contained idea structures... what I call paradoxes. Namely something that proves itself by the nature of its statement. Read Catch-22 cause those things are true.)
left with nothing else to say, I'm going to stop writing tonight.
