1.  

    The most knowable piece of information known to man!

    The ultimate philosophical question: ” why is there something instead of nothing? Why does anything at all exist?”

    No one really knows, but the fact that something does exist is the one absolutely incontrovertible known fact about the world” ;)

  2.  

    Something very important to know

    September 29, 2011 Conscious Decisions Going Against What Is Popular

    Because an idea or way of doing things is popular doesn’t mean it’s right for everyone.

    Just because an idea or way of doing things is popular doesn’t mean it’s right for everyone. However, part of the way that something becomes popular is that many of us don’t take the time to determine what’s right for us; we simply do what most of the people we know are doing. In this way, our decisions about life are made by default, which means they aren’t what we call conscious decisions. There may be many other options available, but we don’t always take the time to explore them. This may be the result of feeling overwhelmed or pressured by family, peers, and humanity at large, to do things their way, the way things have always been done. Regardless of the cause, it is important that, as often as we can, we decide for ourselves what to do with our lives rather than just drift along on the current of popular opinion.

    It is not always easy to make decisions that go against the grain. Many people feel threatened when those close to them make choices divergent from the ones they are making. Parents and grandparents may be confused and defensive when we choose to raise our children differently from the way they raised us. Friends may feel abandoned if we decide to change our habits or behavior. Meanwhile, on our side of the fence, it’s easy to feel frustrated and defensive when we feel unsupported and misunderstood simply because we are thinking for ourselves. It can be exhausting to have to explain and re-explain our points of view and our reasons.

    This is where gentleness, openness, and tolerance come into play. It helps if we are calmly persistent, consistent, and clear as we communicate to those around us why we are making the choices we are making. At the same time, we have the right to say that we are tired of talking about it and simply need our choices to be respected. Our lives belong to us and so do our decisions. Those who truly love us will stand by us and support our choices, never mind what’s popular.

  3.  

    Sooo to get what I need I should get it myself first. ??

    The problem seems to be sooo funny and yet fucking frustrating. Basically the things I think I need and want most will only come that they’re not so significant. Hehe

    If you find that you are experiencing suffering in some area of your physical life, perhaps your spirit is asking you to look deeper in your search for what you want. For example, if you want money so that you can experience the feeling of security but money keeps eluding you, your spirit may be asking you to understand that security is not to be found through money. Security comes from an unshakable connection to your soul. Once you make that connection, money will probably flow more easily into your life. If relationships elude you, your spirit may be calling you to recognize that the love you seek is not to be found in another person. And yet, ironically, once you find the love, your true love may very well appear. If you feel stuck in suffering to live a spiritual life, try to spend some time writing about it. The root of the problem will appear and it may not be what you expected. Remember, the Universe wants you to be happy.

    DailyOM One love :)

  4.  

    A bit about dealing with difficult people

    Judith Orloff MD: There’s a chapter on emotional vampires, which is my term for many difficult people—for instance, a criticizer, a victim, a narcissist, or a controller. I say, let them be our teachers, rather than tormentors. We must ask ourselves: How do they teach us to communicate with more heart and better boundaries? How can we deal differently with feeling irritated, controlled, or insulted? The old way is to get nasty or withdraw. The new way is to not simply react when your buttons get pushed—a behavior that  perpetuates war. Practice what I call “the namaste effect,” which is, ”I respect the spirit within you even if I don’t like what you’re doing.” Your victories over emotional vampires are not small—they’re huge. With every success, you are creating more hope for the world. From an intuitive standpoint, we are all interconnected: my emotional freedom affects your emotional freedom affects everyone in the world.

  5.  

    Quiet water penetrates deep

    This class rock!

  6.  

    Thoughts on -Play and imagination- mimesis an make believe

    I want to start the blog with two words “woohoo” and “lol”. “woohoo” refers to the new acquisition of my iPad! Upon getting my car broken into I have had little to no computer access for blogging :(( but now, I can finally post and articulate some long due realizations/ understandings, and opinions ( as well as read some of yours- woohoo!)

    The second word came when I read the intro poem to the reading “mimesis as make-believe” by Kendall l. Walton

    I laughed because the second day of class I wrote a quote from Shakespeare in my journal, about love and “the mind’s eye” which is posted right below here before ever knowing about any of this! [[I am reading one of the best books in existence, it’s basically a translation/in depth explanation of this poem called “the dark night of the soul” by Santa de la Cruz ( saint of the cross) this poem is sacred to me, and speaks of union of Love, with God, likened to what Kendall calls the spontaneous imagination. This poem can be found at my regular blog (insert link here)

    ]]

    Anyway the reason i mention this is because i want you to know where I stand when it comes to looking at the material In class. I do not believe I am manic, but I understand that without meditation or yoga, I can get sucked into this “thinking mind” that, like a machine with a child’s brain, induces me to behave as mentioned in the text, like a “lover”, “poet,” or “madwoman”. Literally, I use the high intelligence and cleverness of my ego to “think up” an interesting perspective on the bland to protect myself from being bored. And thus, we have the “play” of the mind, like a friend or child decorating the true reality. Note the opening quote from “mimesis as make-believe” Here is the quote from Shakespeare I was talking about:

    “things base and vile, holding no quantity, Love can transpose to form and dignity. Love looks not with the eyes, but with the mind, And therefore is winged Cupid painted blind. Nor hath love’s mind of any judgement taste; Wings and no eyes figure unheedy haste: And therefore love is said to be a child, Because in choice he is so often beguil’d” -Shakespeare

    <

    p>I hope I haven’t lost you yet, but I mainly want you, the reader, to see that the imagination is present and real in many many forms. Imagination addresses many things we in modern days call “love” cough really infatuation, even mental illness, specifically “disorders” such as schizophrenia, mania, add/ADHD, bipolarism, and anxiety(when imaginative fears attack!)

    As Kendall names them, “spontaneous imaginations” are based on our mind’s creation, and these imaginings, which often occur in things like poetry or “fleeting thought/mental illness”, are only harmful when they are not understood to be make-believe. When, due to what I believe is our weakness of will, we are not able to differentiate the spontaneous imaginings from our beliefs and perceptions of reality, we adopt beliefs based on the imagination’s created/false realities. In yoga, we call that one who is living in illusion, Maya, or insanity. (aren’t we all a bit?)

    So now that u can liken my modern day comparison to imaginings and the prominent role/effect it still has on society, I think it’s important I actually explore the topics/questions brought up in class about this reading “representations and make believe” by Kendall.

    I will speak more of the reading and stuff from now, but I really like that I can blog about my particular prism or perspective that I come from as a yogi and conscious being. Or even better, if you would like me to read your blog or post thoughts in anything, GIVE ME YOUR URL LINK„ ;)) Confessions** I always wonder if I actually make sense to others, as I know I make sense, I just don’t know how well I speak my two cents. if u understand or have a blog u think I’d like, feel free to link me or post a reply/comment//question anytime :~)

  7.  

    Understanding Confusion- an enlightening paradox? And request for your thoughts

    Is it possible to actually understand confusion? Is there any such thing as an “anatomy of confustion” Yes, there is.

    L. Ron Hubbard says in “The Problems of Work”.

    I am going to type up a little ker-chunk of this nifty book, which helps us apply scientology to the Workday world. Scientologist or not, i ask you to suspend your emotion for the time being and as philosophy students, I am typing this because I am deeply interested in hearing what others have to say, or what insight you have walked upon, when it comes to dealing with internal torments like confusion or uncertainty. I only say torment because as philosphy majors, we love wisdom, we love learning, but the more we learn, the more we learn we have yet to learn! And so it is only natural to feel insecure with the absence of so much knowledge. This is why establishing grounds and certainty is a crucial element to development and confidence, no? Tell me what you think

    Here is something I found useful so I will straight quote from p. 22 of this short but aidfull book:

    A confusion is only a confusion so long as all particles are in motion. A confusion is only a confusion so long as no factor is clearly defined or understood.

    Confusion is the basic cause of stupidity. To the stupid, all things except the very simple ones are confused. Thus if one knew the anatomy of confusion, no matter how bright one might be, he would be brighter.

    If you have ever had to teach some young aspirant who was not too bright, you will understand this well. You attempt to explain how such-and-so works. You go over it and over it and over it. And then you turn him loose and he promptlyu makes a compelte botch of it. He “didn’t undestand,” he didn’t “grasp it.” You can simplify your understanding of his misunderstanding by saying very rightly “he was confused.”

    When failure approaches, it is born, one way or another, from confusion. To learn of machinery, or to live life, [i like that comparison hehe] one has to be able either to stand up to confusion or to take it apart.

    We have, in Scientology, a certain doctrine about confusion.

    It is called:

    THE DOCTRINE OF THE STABLE DATUM

    If you saw a great many pieces of paper whirling about a room, they would look confused until you picked out one piece of paper to be the piece of paper by which everything else was in motion. In other words, a confusing motion can be understood by conceiving one thing to be motionless.

    The switchboard operator, receiving ten calls at once, solves the confusion by labeling- correctly or incorrectly- one call as the first call to receive her attention. The confusion of “ten calls all at once” becomes less confusing the moment she singles out one call to be answered.

    The shop foreman conferonted by three emergencies and an accident, needs only to elect his first target of attention to start the cycle of bringing about order again.

    Until one selects one datuim, one factor, one particular in a confusion of particles, the confusion continues. The one thing selected and used becomes the stable datum for the remainder.

    Any body of knowledge, more particularly and excactly, is build from one datum. That is its stable datum. Invalidate it and the entire body of knowledge falls apart. A stable datum does not have to be the correct one. It is simply one that keeps things from being in a confusion and on which others are aligned.[«ALIGNED…LOVE THAT WORD! :]

    ……yadda he goes on to explain how to unconfuse someone by emphasizing you must stick to one basic datum or he will be confused: using words like “one datum first” and “simple basic datum”.

    …

    Confusion is uncertainty. Confusion is stupidity. Confusion is insecurity. When you think of uncertainty, stupidity and insecurity, think of confusion and you’ll have it down pat.

    What, then, is certainty? lack of confusion. What, then, is intelligence? Ability to hand confusion. What, then, is security? The ability to go through or around or to bring order to confusion. Certainty, intelligence and security are lack of or ability to handle confusion.

    How does luck fit into conclusion (referring to previous chapter)? Luck is the hope that some uncontrolled chance will get one through. Counting on luch is abandomnent of control. That’s apathy.

    [i didn’t know what apathy was, so I looked it up, this is what i found: apathy is the absence or suppression of passion, emotion, or excitement” ] suppression>?gross!

    There is “good control” and “bad control” the difference between them is certainty and uncertainty. Good control is certain, positive, predictable. Bad control is uncertain, variable and unpredictable. With good control one can be certain. With bad control one is never certain.*P.25

    The text continues to show how we can utilize good control, allowing us to remain intensely interested, present, and unconfused. If this particularly interested you, I would LOVE to know if you have ever had thoughts about this stuff, and if you have found any insights that work with you. I am going to be very selfish and say “tell me!!” because I love learning and sharing different ways to reconnecting to our “source”. (ANND, I JUST OPENED A CAN OF BIBLES, but let’s leave religion to rest for now, and rather focus more on the belief patterns we have developed in life to help us stay confident, present, and unaffected by the clutter of emotions, confusion, and promps brought about by art/illusions in the world)

    namaste

  8.  

    what about (creationdaye) + my Response

    those artists who don’t even know where their ideas come from? As if from a dream? Is that Plato’s “madness” as well?

    THIS IS THE ONLY WAY I KNOW HOW TO RESPOND TO THE POST:

    Interesting question. I’m going to take a giant leap and answer without having done the readings, which I plan to do (and indeed I will re-answer), but Just looking at your question and reflecting on class today, I wouldn’t mind proposing something.

    I’m going to assume that you are comparing Plato’s “madness” to artists who don’t know where their ideas come from?

    Well I’m not sure about plato’s madness, but one answer I could offer (based on the little bit of reading i did in class today on walden) would be that artists who “don’t know where their ideas come from,” are simply unaware of the influences in their environment, which are what caused them to produce their idea, or image. These “influencers” I will name props. To nutshell it: the artists who declare their ideas seem to “just appear” (like in a dream) are merely unaware of the props that caused them to have their ideas/images. They are victims of the the Principle of Generation.

    Was it aristotle that believed sometimes ideas don’t “just appear,” rather they are generated from an image or prop they encountered earlier or unconsciously. These props, in the Principle of Generation, has qualities of a “fictional truth”, and with this “fictional truth” we are “encouraged” or “steered” to produce a certain image in our mind. While this image might differ from the prop, making the artist unable to “spell out” where they got the image from, or what might have provoked it, these props were in fact the force behind the artist’s ideas.

    That could possibly be why Plato worries about the power of props, for they are powerful generators indeed; they can steer a person to imagin/or create a set of beliefs, without the person aware or where of why they attained the belief. The person then, mistakening the belief as the result of one’s own wisdom, can uphold and internalize it. This can be dangerous if used in a harmful way..

    I am not sure if this is what you were asking, but I would love to know what you think about Plato, or yourself, and how you see the role of props (or their generation of fictional truth) in relation to artists. Do you really believe all awesome creations of art are actually the result of props affecting our unconscious mind in a certain coordination? And ideas depend on, or are the result of the particular individual’s collection, or recollection, of props over time? What do you think?

  9.  

    BREAKDOWN of art- simple imitation of nature, manner, and style

    As I decided to re-start this class by reading the first reading over again, I, of course was so intrigued I decided to look up the book this was extracted from. From that, I found that a few pages earlier, an interesting theory on art was discussed. My understanding was sharpened, and I feel like it’s relation to mimesis is important, so I want to copy what I ready simply.

    Here it is, Enjoy.**

    Simple imitation of nature

    Assume that an aspiring artist with some talent begins to paint natural objects, after only a brief training in basix techniques. He copies forms with care and diligence and imitates colors as closely as he can, taking pains not to deviate from nature, beginning and completing every picture with an eye to nature.

    This person will always be an estimable artist because he will necessarily achieve an incredible degree of accuracy,.

    If we analyze such a course of development carefully, we are led to the conclusion that this method is suitable for a capable but limited talent in treating pleasant but limited subjects.

    Such subjects must be easily available at all times. The artist must be able to observe them at his convenience and copy them at his leisure. Whoever engages in such activity must be tranquil, introspective and satisfied with modest rewards.

    This type of imitation would then be persued by calm, conscientious persons of moderate talent who paint still-lifes. Within its limits, this procedures does not preclude a high level of excellence.

     

    Manner

    However, such a technique is usually too pedantic or inadequate for the artist. He perceives in a multitude of objects a unifying harmony which he can only reproduce in painting by sacrificing details. He is impatient with drawing letter by letter what nature spells out for him. He invents his OWN method, creates his own language to express in his OWN way what he has grasped with his SOUL. As a result he gives a distinctive form to an object that he has often copied, without now actually seeing it before him or even recalling exactly what it looked like in nature.

    Now his hart has become a language that expresses his spirit directly and characteristically. And just as anyone who thinks for himself will order and formulate his ideas on moral issues differently from others, so any artist will see, apprehend and imitate the world differently.

    We can see that this kind of imitation is best suited for subjects which constitute a totality made up of many subordinate elements. These elements must be sacrificed if the general character of the whole is to be adequately expressed, as for example in landscapes, where one would miss the point completely by adhering to pedantically to detail rather than trying to do justice to the overall concept.

     

    Style

    Through imitation of nature, through the effort of creating a general language, through painstaking and thorough study of diverse subject matter, the artist finally reaches the point where he becomes increasingly familiar with the characteristic and essential features of things. He will now be able to see some order in the multiplicity of appearances and learn to juxtapose and recreate distinct and characteristic forms. Then art will have reached its highest possible level, which is style and equal to the highest achievement of mankind.

    While simple imitation therefore depends on a tranquil and affectionate view of life, manner is a reflection of the ease and competence with which the subject is treated. Style, however, rests on the most fundamental principle of cognition, on the essence of things- to the extent that is granted us to perceive this essence in visible and tangible form.

     

    The ORIGIN/IMMERSION of beauty??

    It is quite obvious that the three ways of producing works of art described here as separate categories are closely related and can sometimes overlap imperceptibly.

    Imitation of simple subjects such as flowers and fruits can be developed to a high level. It is natural that someone who paints roses will soon be able to distinguish the most beautiful and freshest, and choose only those from among the thousands which summer has to offer. The act of selecting begins at this point, without the artist having formed a definite concept of the beauty of the rose. Thus the art is not a defined set of textures, colors, and tangible forms, but maybe the harmony of the most favorable light, with the colors and textures of the various objects.

    Thus, true style is formed when one understands the function, interaction, and development of the subjects, so the artist will not only show his taste by what he selects but will amaze and instruct us through correct representation of the characteristic features. It then becomes obvious that if such a master were not so conscientious and only concerned with the easy expression of the striking and dazzling, he would soon become a mannerist.

    WOW,  if you liked this, I have good news…let this be merely a door into what else art can do! You can read more from Essays on Art and Literature by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, John Gearey.

    Peace & Namaste

    Yogitoria

    **ps, my reasons for posting this are because I believe I can reference it throughout the course and better differentiate the different ways of looking at, and producing art, which also pertain to the various forms of mimesis.

  10.  

    Poets, mimesis, and why Plato thinks they’re dangerous to the “ignorant masses”

    Plato declares that poets are “ignorant of which they purport”. Saying poet’s are sometimes subject to “divine madness,” and they can also persuade an audience by rhetoric very well without needing to tell the truth. The power to persuade the masses, with an ability to steer them in the “wrong” direction??I understand Plato’s concern for the placement of poets in his city. 

    I do feel, however, that this ability, if used for the overall good, can produce a pleasant way of persuading an audience for the good, using imagination of the heart rather than force. Than, if the person CHOOSES to be privvy to their emotions or imagination so-be-it, than they shall be persuaded. We all make the decision as to what mind we want to believe. And for those who decide to see through the persuasive “techniques” can see something else, for example, the “superhero” not as a superhero but rather some person enacting superficial qualities of the superhero to the best of his ability. The person can then appreciate the art of the particular person and how they percieve as well as portray these superficial qualities of the actual “form”.

    This brings me to mimesis. Hey A backwards blog! Hah well Mimesis in a nutshell is “The representation or imitation of reality or nature”. I believe that the process of mimesis is creating, metaphorically speaking, an arrow that points to some form of reality. Art, I believe, is an arrow that in the process of pointing, can attach a feeling or mood to the audience as well. A way one can think about it is a painting of African Americans back in the day. There were portraits drawn of Harriet Tubman- her head was held high, her dress was pressed and impressionable, her face was deep and pensive, and her stance conservative. There were also portraits drawn of the same exact woman in the same context and she was frowning, her dress was frailed, her hair was nappy , her arms and legs smaller than her body, and her neck very short. Both these portraits convey Harriet, however, I can’t help but feel a sense of “otherness” accompanying these, namely the difference in “sense” (for those who know sense and nominatum). The first portrait gives Harriet an air of cleanliness and likeablility, while the other holds Harriet as violent and disagreeable. These moods, I understand are the subjective belief of the painter. SUBJECTIVITY is excactly what I believe worries Plato in the matters of government. How can a poet or actor, who, when performing, persuades people to live by their beliefs and opinions or emotions, rather than the rational parts of their mind, be productive and beneficial to a city.

    Hmm, plato has a point. Now i figure that people who lead by their emotions will continue to always until they make a distinction between the rational and emotional part of their mind. And once that distinction is made, then it is no worry for them to see the arts because they will understand the intent to persuade by the emotions from the actor and keep that in mind.