From: "Dunja Seselja" <[log in to unmask]>
> --- Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >PM> I am moved by fancies that are curled
> >PM> Around these images, and cling:
> >PM> The notion of some infinitely gentle
> >PM> Infinitely suffering thing.
>DS> I'm not sure I understood your point well, but do you
>DS> want to say that these lines represent an example of
>DS> finalistic causation? If so, why would "being moved
>DS> by" be an example of the finalistic, instead of the
>DS> efficient causality?
I'm referring to the fancies and their unifying character.
The infintely gentle, suffering thing is there first, and they
manifest it. Or to put it differently, the "thing" is the end
toward which the images point, and from which they
derive their meaning.
It is hard to find words here, when one is discussing a mystery,.
>DS> What would be "natural perceptual modes"? (Is human a
>DS> "natural being" at all (taking into account the world
>DS> of morality)?) What you bring here is sometimes
>DS> referred to as "myth of the framework", which we can
>DS> easily jump out of. But if every seeing is "seeing
>DS> as", that is, if every perception is perception in
>DS> light of some "background theory", how do you imagine
>DS> getting rid of those influences without jumping in the
>DS> new ones? I absolutely support the idea of rational
>DS> questioning of every sort of tradition one might have
>DS> inherited (5 minutes of skepticism per day and this
>DS> world would look entirely different), but why do you
>DS> think this should be especially applied to Cartesian
I am referring to a discovery of one's own natural perceptions
of seeing things instead of looking at them the way one gets
conditoned to doing as a child by all the surrounding forces.
It is breaking through habits and stereotypes to see things
more on their own terms without cultural, social mediation
of different kinds of filters. If such a process is described by
one theory or another , fine, but I don't think the freeing is
achoeved by studying the theoiries.
Help comes from artists especially.
One may be conditioned to react to certain kinds of people
in a certain way, instead of being free to respond in one's own way.
A child may respond to all people as being beautiful, but then a parent
comes along and says those kinds of people (say with really big noses),
are scarey, or whatever. Ideally one might become freed to rediscover
that original response.
As to the Cartesian business, it has caused the visual perception to
subsume and control all the other senses. It is extremely strong, and
yet it is so relatively neww (only the past 400 yrs or so). I thik it
is long since time to counter that effect. The new electronic media
may be helping us, perhaps inspite of ourselves.