Arts and Minds

Everybody’s Out Of Step But You

As a child I often felt humiliated by a parent or teacher who used the phrase 'everybody’s out of step but you' in response to my questions, beliefs, or criticisms of the world around me, or in reaction to my own actions. It is a dangerous phrase, one that assumes the correctness of the assumptions upon which it is based, and the context out of which it arises.

Are Emotions The First Layer of Meaning in Mind-Space?

Are emotions the primary filters or categories for meaning in experience?
Are experienced sense data recorded into long-term-memory and rendered recallable only after they are tagged with emotional meanings? Learning and remembering may require us to sort among experiences, sorting them by our associations to their emotional meanings, in order to create our knowledge and understanding of the world. I suspect that we depend upon the strength of our emotional responses to direct and mediate the assignment of experiences to memory, and for building connections among those experiences.

Feelings and emotions appear to define and determine the meaning of sensory events (or percepts). It is hard to think of any exceptions. Mathematical thinking, the realm of ‘purest’ logic, comes first to mind as a system of thought so removed from everyday life that emotion could hardly play any role in mathematical thinking. Were it true it might offer proof that this, at least, might be the exception where emotion holds no sway in meaning or memory. However, mathematicians are often moved or motivated by the beauty and elegance of great mathematical propositions. Mathematicians and musicians (music is a first cousin to mathematics) share similar aesthetics of form, order, proposition (musical theme), development, and resolution. Our aesthetic responses to music are rich with emotional overtones and impressions. To be motivated by these same aesthetic qualities in mathematics, engineering, physics, chemistry, or any ‘pure’ science may provoke deep emotional responses to discoveries of the order and patterns in the universe we explore: Q.E.D.; ahhh!

Metaphor, Simile, And Analogue

Perhaps the mental functions of metaphor and of simile and analogue, are those of grouping, gathering, estimation and approximation.

BOUNDARIES: A Field-Guide To The Associative Nature Of Our Own Minds.

The brain has no hard edges; neither does information. There are no gray interior walls to prevent ideas from wandering across the boundaries between and among fields. Many paths of curiosity lead to intellectual, artistic and scientific questioning, and onward to understanding. For many of us and for our children, these curious pathways are barred by signs that say: “Private Property—Do Not Enter Without Permission”). In the words of a song: “We have to be carefully taught.”

What does the term syncretic mean?

What does the term syncretic mean, and what does it mean as used in the context of this writing? Here are some definitions loosely extracted from the Random House Dictionary of the English language. They give us the following understanding:

WE FORGET PROPER NOUNS

REFLECTIONS OF REALITY: Some Notes On Archetypal Place And Syncretic Process: Proper Nouns:
The mind hides its deepest structure. We cannot remove it from our thoughts to see or know nature (or our own nature) 'clearly', for the structure holds our thoughts together. When things make sense, they make this particular structural sense. We cannot isolate this structure for examination because without the foundation, the building of our mind collapses in upon itself. It’s presence is so pervasive and we are so embedded in it, that if we were able to remove these deep foundations, we would cease to exist as the individuals who entered upon this quest. However much we become aware of structure, our very awareness is based upon our own ontological self-creation of structure. A frame fabricated to support what has been learned; it is the lens, the language, the embedded concepts and the constant and dependable floor of our lives. I have read numerous neurological case-histories that present patients who have memory loss of various kinds and degrees. In some cases the report asserts that amnesia is nearly complete. The observer fails to mention, almost universally, that the patient retained language, knew how to sit in a chair, and when asked to name the president, did not reply: “what’s a name?”—“what is a president?”—“what is what?”.

Many Level Thinking: The Meaning Of Bats In The Belfry

I have a longtime friend who thinks in seven levels at once. He is not admired for this ability, instead, most people find his conversation confusing; he skips around from subject to subject, changes times of reference, sensory modalities, and other dimensions of normal conversation. His discussion drifts, we are soon in a sea of ideas, lost. I ask: “what were we talking about?” He looks at me as if I were simple. Have I been inattentive? I am unsure and confused, after half an hour, I think I am losing my mind.

MEMORY AS MEANING

When first my consciousness surfaced this morning from the night-long swim through sleep, I directed my attention to remembering a photograph of a woman who has been traveling much too long, someone I love, whose photograph I have looked at often, and with serious consideration during the writing of these essays.
While these sentiments may be important to her and myself, they are also important to my subject. I have been motivated to regard this image, to find charming details, new discoveries, to memorize it. I know this photograph. I have searched it almost microscopically for meaning. I also know other photographs, for there are many photographs that I admire as art, that I have examined carefully. This one is not art, only a snapshot. Before opening my eyes I readied myself to observe the experience of remembering this photograph. It happens fast. First there is no photo, then as I become aware that I intend to remember it, it is there in memory. But what has “appeared”, and where is it? What kind of representation am I examining so earnestly? Can I actually see it “in my minds eye”?

The Mind Sees A Mirror

The Mind Sees A Mirror

Publishing a web-log has shifted some gears in my mind— from neutral into first gear. It has also put me in touch with an audience that I have not had in forty years. Even one serious reader can make that happen.

I think that no one can be a writer unless they first love reading wonderful writing by others. That is not a sufficient criterion by itself, but it does ensure an occasional artistic warmth and generosity among otherwise often crusty competitors. Necessary for the ‘natural’ or real writer is a compulsive need to remember and refine, by means of ‘writing it down’, thoughts that come in waves, often in storms of waves, threatening to swamp and drown one another in foamy confusion leaving nothing on the beach for the next day. Writing, my own included, is therefore narcissistically not very generous (that is not to imply it is un-generous), and self-inventing. What can save a sinner like me are intellectually and artistically generous friends who are fine writers and who will ungrudgingly read one’s work. So for the first time, when I write, I imagine the eye and mind of one who will read and comprehend, whereas before I always wrote into the abstracted impersonal void. I never imagined an audience. Maybe my writing will become simpler and more personal for this favor—and personal writing demands more courage than writing impersonally.