Showing posts with label objectivism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label objectivism. Show all posts

Monday, April 10, 2017

Rite of Way to Bliss or At Least, Euphoria



I’m finishing up The Power of Myth after some stylistics excursions and as a result, am reminded of the power of rite. Campbell talks about ritual but nothing like Emile Durkheim in The Elementary Forms of Religious Life.
Am I ritual-less? Nah, probably not, but which rituals are the correct rituals?
“It is subjective” you say.
“Indeed” I harrumph sarcastically.
“Look,” you say, “if you don’t like the subjectivity of rituals, maybe you don’t like rituals…or subjectivity.” Then you motion for the door curtly, as if to imply my being thrown through out of it at a high rate of speed.
“I get it,” I’d say. Fully aware of my subjunctive tense. “You say subjective and maybe you even mean subjective, but you, yes you, reek of objective. Absolutely malodorous with it.” Then I would pinch my fingers around my nose to indicate the universal sign for sewage treatment pond, you know the one, then I would probably look you square in the eye (your good one) and wink as if to imply my own objectivity in a roundabout way, if you are picking up what I’m putting down.
Then you’d say you are tired of me and I would say some things I don’t mean.
Moving on…to


A peak experience is a moment accompanied by a euphoric mental state often achieved by self-actualizing individuals.[1] The concept was originally developed by Abraham Maslow in 1964, who describes peak experiences as "rare, exciting, oceanic, deeply moving, exhilarating, elevating experiences that generate an advanced form of perceiving reality, and are even mystic and magical in their effect upon the experimenter."[2][3] There are several unique characteristics of a peak experience, but each element is perceived together in a holistic manner that creates the moment of reaching one’s full potential.[4] Peak experiences can range from simple activities to intense events;[5][6] however, it is not necessarily about what the activity is, but the ecstatic, blissful feeling that is being experienced during it.[7]


Campbell said that he had a peak experience running a race during his time at Columbia, where he was 30 yards back but knew (objectively? See what I did there) that he was going to win.
I am trying to think of a peak experience of my own. It is that last part of the paragraph that is throwing me, the “blissful feeling…during…”
I intercepted a jump pass in pee wee football once but was nothing like blissful during the experience but I did know (yes, objectively) just from the nanosecond look of the quarterback, that he was going to try to hit the tight end.
I had one night with a band at a bar that at the time was named O’Hooley’s where I could not make a mistake, felt like I could play anything I wanted to without fear of mistake, with complete (for me, anyway, subjectivity rears its ugly head) facility.
But did I feel blissful?
Have I ever felt blissful?
I think I need examples.
I’ve felt euphoric but I just don’t know about blissful.
Am I splitting hairs?
Can one be blissful splitting hairs?

Friday, March 31, 2017

Our Sitch

Reading Metaphors We Live By from George Lakoff and Mark Johnson -1980.

And while I am reading the book as part of a Stylistics  course to improve my writing and while I found the first half of the book quite laborious, things have picked up in the second half but not relative to improving my writing, rather this second-half hotness relates to (gulp) truth.

[Woman Screams]

"What did he say!"

[Child Cries]

"Dad, I'm scared!"

[Sirens Wail]

"Objectivism shot, repeat, objectivism shot! Get an ambulance down here!!!"



Yes folks, objectivism, the idea that there is an absolute truth, non-relative to anything, especially kooky humans, took one right in the chest at point blank range.

From the authors:

A statement can be true only relative to some understanding of it.

Understanding always involves human categorization, which is a function of interactional (rather than inherent) properties and of dimensions that emerge from our experience.

The truth of a statement is always relative to the properties that are highlighted by the categories used in the statement.

Categories are neither fixed nor uniform. They are defined by prototypes and family resemblances to prototypes and are adjustable in context, given various purposes.

 Ah, objectivism, we hardly knew ye.

But, don't fret, don't get your panties in a bunch (unless you enjoy that sort of thing), don't pull your money from the bank, because deep down in places you don't talk about at cocktail parties, you know objectivism isn't true. You know relativism is the case and you don't mind one iota because if you did mind, you couldn't operate in this world.

You certainly couldn't drive in Massachusetts where objectively true driving laws, designed to keep us relatively (see what I did there?) safe, are completely and in all ways thoroughly and objectively violated every god damned second.

They just pull out into the middle of the road! And do you know why? Not because the road is clear - it isn't - not even close. They pull out because they are tired of waiting.

Mid-westerners with a sense of decency and oh I don't know, respect for the law, have trouble adapting to this kind of driving.

When I arrived in RI I advised my brother of this sort of thing and he was dubious.

Fair enough.

He visits.

We drive and what does he see: someone pull out without the right of way.

IN FRONT OF A COP!

But...

wait for it...

The cop doesn't do anything!

Why?

Objectivism isn't tenable. 

Relativism is our sitch (short for situation).

If you don't like it, lump it.


Featured Post

In The Static

He had about 4 hours and 30 minutes. He, like Jack London, was going to use his time. What else did a man have…but time? Christians hav...