Changes

MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Monday November 25, 2024
Jump to navigationJump to search
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>
12,080

edits

Navigation menu