About a boy
I wanted to talk about love, life and the pursuit of spiritual enlightenment. But in my research all i was able to come up with is a bunch of clichés that everybody already knows. We know everything. So then i decided to create a piece of 'art'. i figured that telling you all about love, life and spiritual enlightenment would be an exercise in redundancy, in that the reference material on those topics fill libraries. Generalities are usually lost on individuals. Case in point, if i say the word flower, a very general platonic form, inevitability each individual will think of a specific flower that references what they see as that form in their own consciousness. For me, a rose, for you a tulip. This is where art comes in. Art has the ability to take a general form/idea strip away al traces of it, forcing the observer to stretch their imagination to recapture it. This is a journey into the individual subconsciousness. When someone says they didn’t like a piece of art what their really saying is that they don't like the place in their own mind the art took them. Although i must admit we would have to agree on what could be considered art.
So i thought that to be art the story should be an individual story that the forms/ ideas would have to be extracted via that subconscious journey i was speaking of. Otherwise you’re doing a religious, academic, psychological, sociological study to be published and studied. What i wanted was a story that was like music in that it inspired thought not dogma. But how do you talk about something without using dialectic structures, facts, premises, arguments that lead to synthesis. If you know anything about 'Hegel's Dialectic' you know that this leads to knowhere (intentional misspelling). This realization, was very unnerving to a sophist such as myself. i recognized that true reality lies in art. This is because forms are unknowable and unseeable and more importantly unapprehendable. Therefore truth lies in each individual cognitive representation.
I wanted to talk about love, life and the pursuit of spiritual enlightenment. But in my research all i was able to come up with is a bunch of clichés that everybody already knows. We know everything. So then i decided to create a piece of 'art'. i figured that telling you all about love, life and spiritual enlightenment would be an exercise in redundancy, in that the reference material on those topics fill libraries. Generalities are usually lost on individuals. Case in point, if i say the word flower, a very general platonic form, inevitability each individual will think of a specific flower that references what they see as that form in their own consciousness. For me, a rose, for you a tulip. This is where art comes in. Art has the ability to take a general form/idea strip away al traces of it, forcing the observer to stretch their imagination to recapture it. This is a journey into the individual subconsciousness. When someone says they didn’t like a piece of art what their really saying is that they don't like the place in their own mind the art took them. Although i must admit we would have to agree on what could be considered art.
So i thought that to be art the story should be an individual story that the forms/ ideas would have to be extracted via that subconscious journey i was speaking of. Otherwise you’re doing a religious, academic, psychological, sociological study to be published and studied. What i wanted was a story that was like music in that it inspired thought not dogma. But how do you talk about something without using dialectic structures, facts, premises, arguments that lead to synthesis. If you know anything about 'Hegel's Dialectic' you know that this leads to knowhere (intentional misspelling). This realization, was very unnerving to a sophist such as myself. i recognized that true reality lies in art. This is because forms are unknowable and unseeable and more importantly unapprehendable. Therefore truth lies in each individual cognitive representation.
i guess i like forms because they promise infinity. The journey to recapture a form could take forever. While to me, pragmatic acceptance of empirical knowledge seems like death. In that where can you go from there? Even if you keep discovering new facts it just means you die frequently.
i guess this is why i've never written a book or built a house or had a family. i would always be unhappy with that stasis, always searching for perfection. i'm not alone in this. Albert Einstein himself was not satisfied with the theory of relativity, he was still searching for the theory of everything and died without realizing it. i believe that endless search guides him in eternity. The seeker to me, is humble and not in love with his own ideas, knowing he doesn't know it all. A pragmatist is content, almost enviable in his ability to accept reality, and seemingly sublimate his sense of self. i really believe that there is a balance that is struck between the idealist and the pragmatist. In that the idealist can push man forward while the pragmatist is able to capitalize on achievements. Both helping mankind.
So i figure if i create a great piece of art it could possibly capture the forms i search for and represent the journey itself. i've written poetry but unless its the 'Iliad and the Odyssey' in scope it doesn't quite capture enough of the forms i search for. When i start to write a book i tend to cultivate ideas in such short fashion the journey is missed. Then i thought that a film would do. But who would watch a movie that offered so many ideas. First of all it would be a life-time long and you would end up missing the point because the viewer/observer would not have gone on their own journey therefore negating their own existence (in the Spinoza sense of existence).
What’s the answer? I meditated on it and realized that a body of work fully represents both a subconscious journey and forms via cognitive apprehension. It is also pragmatic in that it capitalizes on accomplishments, creating points in space-time that form a line. Consciousness is the apprehension of points in space-time. Consciousness negates enlightenment because if you are capturing points in space-time then you’re missing the line or more importantly the pattern or the form the line makes. The purpose of my art would be to to illuminate a form, line or pattern thereby enlightening the observer. Prophets, enlightened ones and our Messiah, in my opinion had the ability to be unconscious for times, enabling them to see points, lines and the patterns connecting them, therefore seeing into the future and the past (linear space-time). Most importantly, they had the ability to articulate those patterns to the masses via artistic expressions.
my theory is that, existence by definition, is a disturbance. If something doesn’t disturb a natural stasis (thus creating a relative reference) it cannot be cognitively apprehended. Man’s doom is his insistence to exist. In this vain he disturbs natural stases which by effect, puts in motion events that will lead to his destruction. And because he also seeks consciousness he cannot see his own folly. The key to sustainable life (everlasting life) is to stop trying to exist and just be, symbiotically coexisting with your environment. This, to me, is the highest level of thinking. The id needs, the ego knows how to get it, and the super-ego knows how to get it without ultimate destruction. i submit that it is the holy spirit, the unconsciousness that when tapped into or when it taps into you, reveals those forms that put you on a journey to recapture them, leading your being to eternity. The very essence of love, life and the pursuit of spiritual enlightenment.
-the thelosopher
