| Line 163: | 
Line 163: | 
|   | and the formal merely serves to remind one anew of the relationship  |   | and the formal merely serves to remind one anew of the relationship  | 
|   | between the infinite and the finite.  |   | between the infinite and the finite.  | 
| − | </pre>
  |   | 
| − | 
  |   | 
| − | =====1.3.5.1. The Will to Form=====
  |   | 
| − | 
  |   | 
| − | <pre>
  |   | 
| − | | The power of form, the will to give form to oneself.  "Happiness"
  |   | 
| − | | admitted as a goal.  Much strength and energy behind the emphasis
  |   | 
| − | | on forms.  The delight in looking at a life that seems so easy. --
  |   | 
| − | | To the French, the Greeks looked like children.
  |   | 
| − | |
  |   | 
| − | | (Nietzsche, 'The Will to Power', S 94, 58).
  |   | 
| − | 
  |   | 
| − | Let me see if I can summarize as quickly as possible the problem that I see before me.
  |   | 
| − | On each occasion that I try to express my experience, to lend it a form that others
  |   | 
| − | can recognize, to put it in a shape that I myself can later recall, or to store it
  |   | 
| − | in a state that allows me the chance of its re-experience, I generate an image of
  |   | 
| − | the way things are, or at least a description of how things seem to me.  I call
  |   | 
| − | this process "reflection", since it fabricates an image in a medium of signs
  |   | 
| − | that reflects an aspect of experience.  Very often this experience is said
  |   | 
| − | to be "of" -- what? -- something that exists or persists at least partly
  |   | 
| − | outside the immediate experience, some action, event, or object that is
  |   | 
| − | imagined to inform the present experience, or perhaps some conduct of
  |   | 
| − | one's own doing that obtrudes for a moment into the world of others
  |   | 
| − | and meets with a reaction there.  In all of these cases, where the
  |   | 
| − | experience is everted to refer to an object and thus becomes the
  |   | 
| − | attribute of something with an external aspect, something that
  |   | 
| − | is thus supposed to be a prior cause of the experience, the
  |   | 
| − | reflection on experience doubles as a reflection on that
  |   | 
| − | conduct, performance, or transaction that the experience
  |   | 
| − | is an experience "of".  In short, if the experience has
  |   | 
| − | an eversion that makes it an experience of an object,
  |   | 
| − | then its reflection is again a reflection that is
  |   | 
| − | also of this object.
  |   | 
| − | 
  |   | 
| − | Just at the point where one threatens to become lost in the morass of
  |   | 
| − | words for describing experience and the nuances of their interpretation,
  |   | 
| − | one can adopt a formal perspective, and realize that the relation among
  |   | 
| − | objects, experiences, and reflective images is formally analogous to the
  |   | 
| − | relation among objects, signs, and interpretant signs that is covered by
  |   | 
| − | the pragmatic theory of signs.  One still has the problem:  How are the
  |   | 
| − | expressions of experience everted to form the exterior faces of extended
  |   | 
| − | objects and exploited to embed them in their external circumstances, and
  |   | 
| − | no matter whether this object with an outer face is oneself or another?
  |   | 
| − | Here, one needs to understand that expressions of experience include
  |   | 
| − | the original experiences themselves, at least, to the extent that
  |   | 
| − | they permit themselves to be recognized and reflected in ongoing
  |   | 
| − | experience.  But now, from the formal point of view, "how" means
  |   | 
| − | only:  To describe the formal conditions of a formal possibility.
  |   | 
|   | </pre>  |   | </pre>  |