"Language is a labyrinth of paths. You approach from one side and know your way about; you approach the same place from another side and no longer know your way about" (Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, No. 203).
"The way up and the way down is one and the same" (Heraclitus, DK 60).
When we follow a path do we follow an image of the path or do we feel the path directly without any mediation of the imagination? I mean our everyday experience of following a path. Although we are able to immediately feel something that could be called a path, provisionally, awareness of such immediate feelings tends to be extraordinary. We can cultivate divergence from the image of the path, just as we, in most cases without clear awareness, cultivate a convergence upon the image of the path. In either case perhaps we walk a path our imagination has laid out for us. (Yes, we can speak of not walking a path as irrealization of a(nother) path, as well as as an irrealization of walking a path, i.e. the path allows itself to be not-walked, or irreally walked, in multiple ways. Walking is a labyrinth of paths....) In a real and vibrant sense we walk in our imagination. Is this walking in our imagination a parallel walking, a walking that walks alongside actual walking? (Does such a parallelism–representation as such–only appear as an artefact of philosophical reflection, whereas in the raw walking and walking in our imagination are one?) Is this walking in our imagination what should be meant by saying "walking"? Or is it something else entirely? You tell me.
I'm of the opinion that mostly our abilities, the bulk of our abilities, are dormant. We don't feel the need to break paths, so we don't. Is sleep an ability? Should we be able to sleep our way into the breaking of a path? How else? What would lack of preparation have to do with breaking paths? Quick. Extemporize extemporization.
When we're following a path are we making good use of our imagination? Do we imagine in accordance with an image of the imagination? We should feel exhilarated by our imagination. Could it really be imagination itself that would keep us from feeling exhilarated by our imaginative exercises? Sometimes I realize that all my images are dull. That sucks.
"The way up and the way down is one and the same."
"Language is a labyrinth of paths. You approach from one side and know your way about; you approach the same place from another side and no longer know your way about."
Labels: habit, Heraclitus, imagination, improvisation, labyrinths, spontaneity, wandering, Wittgenstein
2 Comments:
Yak,
you sound like a Buddhist who hasn’t quite decided yet.
I continually find myself unable to respond to your posts, and continually fail to understand why. I have questions I could ask and things I could comment on, but they all seem so pointless. Heck, I can think of all sorts of questions and responses for Kant, and his Critique is arguably the most mind numbing incomprehensible piece of work put on paper by mankind.
Language may be a labyrinth of paths, but it is not “the path”. I continually see this notion reflected in your writing, but you seem to not be satisfied with it.
Even what I’m saying right now is not a critique, not a question, not an idea, but a pondering regarding the nature of the source of such an idea. I don’t see myself as wanting to question it, or respond to it, but know it, and knowing is not a matter of words and questions, but of understanding.
I can’t help but say again, I really love how your mind represents itself. I’m at a loss.
Hi, Andrew. Yes there is always a temptation for me to embark upon a silence. In a sense I do but I always come back to language. I think of such things as vows of silence and meditation, nonthinking, but I am not disciplined. Not at present. Lately I worry about "the hum of insignificance," much preferring a more serene silence, if that's what it comes down to. I'd like to bring more silence into my use of language.
Post a Comment
Fido the Yak front page