To dismiss something because it seems obvious has been the source of many grievous errors even in the most concrete disciplines.
The topic is the cosmic pneuma. Weird sounding topic I know, but I will explain.
Life consists of two aspects. The phenomena, or that which is evident to the senses, and the pneuma, or that which lends character, substance, behaviour, or animation, if you will. This facet of reality is all inclusive, but most deem it imperceptible. They spend a great deal of time going in circles engaging in what they feel to be sagacious speculation about the ultimate “why” of everything in the phenomenal world. Supposedly, much wisdom comes from this. What do you think, friends?
This reminds me of philosophy books I’ve read. Some are hard to understand. I see the majority of mainstream philosophy as tantamount to intellectual pornography myself. A wonderful display of all the funny features of the human mind, but not possessed of much substance beyond that.
They seem to be rooted in the self of the philosopher. Yes, and when they go into that branch they call metaphysics, they just project man out onto the universe. They are actually onto something, but they (perhaps like a puppy or kitten) get hung up on their image in the universal mirror which doesn’t give much sense of root causes or structural causation. We admire our own consciousness, but haven’t really gotten into what to actually do with it. Like the infant who doesn’t really know what their hands are for.
Is philosophy just a smart and grown up way of saying you like to play pretend? Yes, indeed, but they stop short. They pretend that the pretending is not real, or that it has the “sane” rational limits that they are most comfortable with.
Have you ever looked at an old photographic negative? As a child I was fascinated with them, because they made more sense to me than the stream of light that informs normal vision. My retinal register works slowly, and it makes things look sort of reversed.
We project a reality around us. This is the phenomenal world. It has qualities like space and time and substance, order and structure and … Does it have meaning?
People are always overlaying that. So if it does, it’s not seen. Yes, regrettably.
Time doesn’t have meaning if you don’t have a watch. Time doesn’t have meaning, if your episodic memory is all borked, and you otherwise have an eidetic memory.
It depends on the activity? Well, that is the point. The concept that is so common in normal thinking. “It depends.” On what does it depend?
Intention. Point of view. Yet, our point of view seems to change almost uncontrollably.
Circumstances. And circumstances seem to have no universal meaning.
Well, it’s the stepping stone to an important insight, because it’s true. It does depend, but what people think it depends on is what gets so horribly off the mark. They list any number of things, and yet the circumstances themselves don’t become any more clear. Why is that?
Saying it depends seems to set limits. Seen materially, it does set limits.
If we were right about what our understanding depends on, wouldn’t we be at least partially omniscient? If we are not, then why aren’t we?
Too many variables? Too many variables. Too much differentiation. It’s been said in a lot of different ways, but it all means the same thing. We get lost in the “real”. That is where understanding pneuma kicks in.
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.