Something strongly stirs in me whenever I hear someone being accused of selfishness for not doing what someone else wants them to do. I used to lash out at this most primordial of exploitation of natural childhood attachment, but I gradually came to understand that this refrain is as much a sign of the repressed […]
I think we could come up with a thoroughly relational astrological syntax. The semantics shouldn’t be grounded in any primary representations, but be an actual abstract alphabet–purely formal placeholders in an abstract series that only gets meaning within determinate contexts. It would then be scientific (formal, methodological, and abstract) and poetic and creative (completely dependent
Some of my favorite films in no particular order: Apocalypse Now, The Master, Perfume:Story of a Murderer, Antichrist, The Whale, Mother!, The Fountain, To The Wonder, The Thin Red Line, Tree of Life, Eyes Wide Shut, 2001, The Shining, Silence, Interstellar, Oppenheimer, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, Synecdoche New York, Waking Life, Before Sunrise and the
As Steiner says, “The universe seen from within is light. Seen from without, it is thought”. In Aurobindo’s terms, the absolute Self (interiority) of Sat-Chit-Ananda, the existence-consciousness-bliss of divine light, pours forth the creative-truth as a supramental force. This “plane of immanence” as Deleuze calls it, he says is an “absolute outside” of pre-individual singularities.
There is certainly an intellectualism that complicates what should be simple, but this is just the flip side of reductionism– making simple and homogeneous what is actually heterogeneous and complex. They usually go hand in hand. For instance, when answering the question, why does someone get ill?, the reductive response is always to answer this
I find Jorjani generally interesting. His conversational partner here, Mr. Davis, though is definitely more up my alley. In fact many of his points here are almost verbatim echoed in my last essay. Jorjani gets a bit too pompous and nationalistic sometimes for sure. But I do see his point, which I think is not
