professional philosophers alone would care enough to think it through but the blind spot in the middle of their forehead blocks the third eye that allows us not just to scan, but see.
if I have no audience but truth itself, still I shall speak
it's the duty of philosophers to love truth, so c'mon at least concede to the most obvious logical empirical bottom line
A novel insight consists in a novel arrangement of old insights.
What's the difference between sentient life and moribund matter?
It's all atoms and molecules.
The difference lies in the arrangement.
The arrangement is known by the material eye and the calculating mind, but it is neither material nor calculable. In this case it takes one who is Not one to know one. How can this be? The visual order defies human understanding just as it arises in it.
We live in a visual order
Philosophy that accepts categories
Philosophy does not need more arguments refuting the previous arguments based on such inflexible categories, normally quite ill defined.
Philosophy does not need to complicate the arguments until incredibly specialized philosophers teaching in incredibly expensive programs breaking it down into smaller and smaller units discover the original particle of philosophy -- because they never will discover it, if it exists, just by complicating the arguments.
Philosophy needs to find a way spatially to arrange its ideals or words in open assurance that the ideals or words mean completely different things when not so arranged in space in this way.
Words can also gather into an arrangement that defies their surface disconnection, while respecting the differences to which these different ideals point.
The mongrel discourse involves a novel world order,
Before this fresco appeared at the dawn of the Renaissance, the fresco that I call the parent of perspective, giving birth to the modern world, all of culture (all over the world, one just got there first) moved to converge on it, a notion that is difficult for us, versed in dispersal, to fathom. But sacred cultures everywhere all face toward, and move toward a unity or oneness, the godliness of their gods. (By my anomalous nature and nurture, I managed to catapult myself or get sucked back there to see how quite precisely it worked.)
After the fresco appeared, as if godliness had somehow touched down to prove or disprove itself, depending on your perspective, some drew back to the back of cage, terrified, and others took off like a flock of birds, as they were now free to. Again this is hard for us to fathom, that it must have happened once and only once, in a specific place, but from back there, on the other side of the divide, where everything is converging, not dispersing, it would have had to be like that.
Alas, the brave birds who sought to fly so high and free forever cannot collectively survive in the wild, and even if they could, the infrastructure remains in the cage now dominated by bullying cowards among those who remained back there in augmented fearful and trembling reverence for what godliness to them survived all the arguments that surfaced against it in its naked exposure in all its parts. For the species to survive, they, the best and brightest, must return to the cage and take comfort that the door is now open, and they are free to fly around close to the cage, where godliness hovers, neither proven nor disproven.
This place has never before been located. This way of speaking and thinking has never before been done. It is like learning to speak the language of dolphins. For whomsoever lives indigenous futuristically (moving forward by going backward, which in fact is indigenous to all native humanity, as forging ahead ungrounded amounts to slipping back), it is a paradigm shift of Copernican proportions, the one proclaimed and initiated by Immanuel Kant, who restored and expanded on ancient and medieval insight that the world is a mirror of the mind. For Kant it was such a dramatic shift, but for most if not all others, I doubt it ever crystallized in a truly novel perception of what's going out there, as well as in our heads.
This project moves to crystallize the idea to give birth to the novel and empowering perception Kant (not that I'm a Kant scholar or needed Kant, but as he located a key node of the constellation before I did I am happy to credit him) conceived to remove yet another huge impediment to personal and collective consciousness -- however, alas, the gap between serious philosophers and the public is increasing as fast as the gap between rich and poor. But the mindful must dredge this well before it's bulldozed over and worry later how to distribute it.
if I have no audience but truth itself, still I shall speak
it's the duty of philosophers to love truth, so c'mon at least concede to the most obvious logical empirical bottom line
A novel insight consists in a novel arrangement of old insights.
What's the difference between sentient life and moribund matter?It's all atoms and molecules.
The difference lies in the arrangement.
The arrangement is known by the material eye and the calculating mind, but it is neither material nor calculable. In this case it takes one who is Not one to know one. How can this be? The visual order defies human understanding just as it arises in it.
We live in a visual order
and need a visual order
to which words conform
to navigate the waters
and steer the ship. Neither facile linear arguments opposing this to that, nor incoherent deconstructions apply. They impose findings on a world that twist it horribly in self-fulfilling prophesies.
Philosophy that accepts categories
of experience as if the meaning
of these ideals does not change depending on how they are arranged
in relation to each other
is out of sync with living reality.
Philosophy does not need more arguments refuting the previous arguments based on such inflexible categories, normally quite ill defined.
Philosophy does not need to complicate the arguments until incredibly specialized philosophers teaching in incredibly expensive programs breaking it down into smaller and smaller units discover the original particle of philosophy -- because they never will discover it, if it exists, just by complicating the arguments.
Philosophy needs to find a way spatially to arrange its ideals or words in open assurance that the ideals or words mean completely different things when not so arranged in space in this way.
All ideals apart from the arrangement that allows them to make sense are nonsense, but words separated in space from one another drink from their roots and flower in such sweet sounds that illuminate the sense they carry.
Words can also gather into an arrangement that defies their surface disconnection, while respecting the differences to which these different ideals point.
The mongrel discourse involves a novel world order,
the visual order.
I discovered the map
for this novel world order
in a fresco by Giotto.
That's why I call it a novel, versus new, world order.
Before this fresco appeared at the dawn of the Renaissance, the fresco that I call the parent of perspective, giving birth to the modern world, all of culture (all over the world, one just got there first) moved to converge on it, a notion that is difficult for us, versed in dispersal, to fathom. But sacred cultures everywhere all face toward, and move toward a unity or oneness, the godliness of their gods. (By my anomalous nature and nurture, I managed to catapult myself or get sucked back there to see how quite precisely it worked.)
After the fresco appeared, as if godliness had somehow touched down to prove or disprove itself, depending on your perspective, some drew back to the back of cage, terrified, and others took off like a flock of birds, as they were now free to. Again this is hard for us to fathom, that it must have happened once and only once, in a specific place, but from back there, on the other side of the divide, where everything is converging, not dispersing, it would have had to be like that. Alas, the brave birds who sought to fly so high and free forever cannot collectively survive in the wild, and even if they could, the infrastructure remains in the cage now dominated by bullying cowards among those who remained back there in augmented fearful and trembling reverence for what godliness to them survived all the arguments that surfaced against it in its naked exposure in all its parts. For the species to survive, they, the best and brightest, must return to the cage and take comfort that the door is now open, and they are free to fly around close to the cage, where godliness hovers, neither proven nor disproven.
This place has never before been located. This way of speaking and thinking has never before been done. It is like learning to speak the language of dolphins. For whomsoever lives indigenous futuristically (moving forward by going backward, which in fact is indigenous to all native humanity, as forging ahead ungrounded amounts to slipping back), it is a paradigm shift of Copernican proportions, the one proclaimed and initiated by Immanuel Kant, who restored and expanded on ancient and medieval insight that the world is a mirror of the mind. For Kant it was such a dramatic shift, but for most if not all others, I doubt it ever crystallized in a truly novel perception of what's going out there, as well as in our heads.
This project moves to crystallize the idea to give birth to the novel and empowering perception Kant (not that I'm a Kant scholar or needed Kant, but as he located a key node of the constellation before I did I am happy to credit him) conceived to remove yet another huge impediment to personal and collective consciousness -- however, alas, the gap between serious philosophers and the public is increasing as fast as the gap between rich and poor. But the mindful must dredge this well before it's bulldozed over and worry later how to distribute it.
