In my notes from a few years ago this has a title (World According to Me!) which suggests that I made it up, but looking back over it I can’t believe that I did. I can’t have. I didn't. Little bits, yeah, but some of it looks as though I may have been making notes from a textbook. The term "non-intentionally" sure sounds textbook to me!
I’d like to take a minute to consider the ‘automatic response’ that occurs when you see a flashlight or hear a siren, about the way the brain has no choice but to experience it, whereas a concrete block doesn’t. What is that automatic response all about? The sheer autonomy of it!
What about the ‘occasion of flight’ too? The point where a moving grounded object takes to the sky. What exactly changes in the physics world to allow that to happen? A blackboard full of mathematical equations, that’s what.
Is the world an idea in the mind of God? Is God an atom in another structure? Believe in what you have good reason to believe in. Reality develops between reconciling of contradictions: Synthesis.
Is the aesthetic skin of what we know a fragile cloak to something else? Does pleasure-seeking influence a loss of morals and failure of duty and obligation ethically? Does despair submit us to God, and in turn true freedom?
We control what we can of the world. Private property through labour makes people means to another person’s ends. Nothing can be proven, but sufficiently vague is certain enough for poetry.
Truth in thought: Morality in action. Value has no value in itself. Nature is valueless. We bestow currencies and determine worth. A tree is non-intentionally conscious.
Does the method of how we perceive our thoughts have any bearing on their content? Ideas are instruments for affecting the physical world. Is there a relationship between the physical world and the kinds of these ideas we have about it then?
The longing for love: The search for knowledge. Pity for mankind: the inhumanity of man. It’s a world of facts and rules, not objects.
Above image: Rene Descartes