Comments | metaphorsbwithu: perception and the open doors

metaphorsbwithu

perception and the open doors

Jan 30, 2007 11:29

***

OR PERHAPS THE DOORS ARE CLOSED TO MOST OF US
We live together, we act on, we react to, one another; but always and in all circumstances we are by ourselves. The martyrs go hand in hand into the arena; they are crucified alone. Embraced, the lovers desperately try to fuse their insulate ecstasies; in vain. By it's very nature every embodied ( Read more... )

philosophy, food

Comments 17

Yum... theresaboo January 30 2007, 19:51:32 UTC

That looks REALLY good...

Re: Yum... metaphorsbwithu January 30 2007, 20:18:32 UTC

I like it with some grilled or pan fried chicken and a salad or by itself as a late night "snack".

It's so simple. While boiling the spaghetti or noodles, crush about 6 or 8 cloves of garlic and lightly brown them in about a quarter cup of olive oil with salt and pepper. Don't over-do or the garlic will be bitter. Add a knob of butter at the end if you like and pour over a plate of pasta. Sprinkle plenty of parmesan (or romano if you prefer) over it and toss. I add a little chili pepper flakes too on occasion and sometimes chives or green onions. It is very addicting but with all that garlic it's better to share. ;)

=) theresaboo January 30 2007, 20:23:12 UTC

I looove garlic. Course it doesn't love me. Sounds like pan fried noodles basically. Very good.

amaliadubois January 30 2007, 20:26:55 UTC

no one will ever really know you as you see yourself and to search for that is really to be searching for yourself in others. a self-centered relationship to the world.
to say 'see ourselves as other's see us' - i think you are talking about those who don't approve? because everyone sees everyone a little or a lot differently.

metaphorsbwithu January 30 2007, 21:06:12 UTC

Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. - Philip K. Dick -

I don't think what others see in us has to only concern the bad or good. It's just that perception and reality have always fascinated me. Stories and Fairy Tales about real and fictional characters like Don Quiote, John Merrick (The Elephant man), The Emperor's New Clothes, have always struck a chord. I enjoy learning what makes people tick and how they really think. It is a difficult task but one I have always been drawn to. As a child, I took everything at face value. That eventually changed. I think the old saying is true, that those who are sure and certain early, later arrive in doubt, while those who have their doubts, become more certain and sure. Relatively speaking, of course. I always enjoy your insights. Thanks.

goodall January 30 2007, 22:53:38 UTC

You need some chard with that pasta.
Or perhaps pickles? :P

I agree with Huxley...there are some things that we experience that either a) the people in our circle have no experience of, and cannot relate no matter how eloquently we describe that experience, or b) we have no words for the experience, and therefore the act or sensation will always remain ours, on our island of self.

metaphorsbwithu January 31 2007, 04:36:43 UTC

Of course Huxley allows that there is some inferential understanding from shared experiences in which we empathasize and sympathize but his point is that the actual mind is a unique and lonely place. Without common experiences words are empty. Describe the color red to a blind person or snow to someone living in the tropics for example. Or imagine what it's like to be paranoid or even insane if you haven't been. You may have a sense of it but only on a superficial level.

Yes, a little chard or spinach or broccoli might be nice although I like the simplicity of the ingredients and tastes and would have them on the side or in a salad ... where I like my pickles too. :) You're so funny.

miss_kat_1968 January 30 2007, 23:33:24 UTC

I don't know that I'd agree with this line: We can pool information about experiences, but never the experiences themselves.I think that if a person describes what they are experiencing, or have experienced, to someone of a similar background, there should be enough in common to lead to a mutual experience. For instance, when an on-line friend gives birth; even though I've never met her, or experienced it for myself, I having experienced birth have my own emotional connections to the experience. Therefore, when someone talks of the bond formed when the child is put in thier arms, I understand that. I don't have to be there to experience it ( ... )

metaphorsbwithu January 31 2007, 04:40:35 UTC

I'll just repeat my previous comment in reply to yours. You are truly accurate in what you say, but Huxley was referring to something a little beyond shared experiences.

Of course Huxley allows that there is some inferential understanding from shared experiences in which we empathasize and sympathize but his point is that the actual mind is a unique and lonely place. Without common experiences words are empty. Describe the color red to a blind person or snow to someone living in the tropics for example. Or imagine what it's like to be paranoid or even insane if you haven't been. You may have a sense of it but only on a superficial level.

Glad you liked the dish. It's so easy to make and one of my favorite late-night "snacks". I gave Theresa the basic recipe above.

miss_kat_1968 January 31 2007, 05:18:37 UTC

And, as I said similar backgrounds. To describe things (as opposed to tactile) is one of the most frustrating experiences of all. So, in that I agree. There are not enough words in our vocabulary to ultimatly describe something. So, I understand your frustration. What it boils down to, with writers, is that they have to write for themselves and hope that others "get them." At least, that's what my experience has been. And, believe me, I've gone through that too many times to count with Mr. Ed.. So, I'll tell you what I've told him, write what you want to write how you want to write it. Not how you feel others will percieve it ( ... )

jchance January 31 2007, 04:06:47 UTC

I like what miss_kat_1968 has to say, though I was thinking something else in addition--that most close pairs (couples, good friends, relatives if we're lucky) have _moments_ of true connection and resonance, where the separation is irrelevant. What RAH meant about grokking, really.

metaphorsbwithu January 31 2007, 05:24:38 UTC

Hey Robin (sp. ?) Good to hear from you. Are you still on the road?

As I commented above, Huxley allows for the above comments and grokking would be closer to what he was implying doesn't exist here (see my comments above). We can all relate and empathize to a certain extent, but what actually happens in an individual mind is unique and unknowable for the most part. You may know a mother loves her child, and another mother may relate to her love, but neither can truly understand or feel what that mother feels, only assume it's something you both have an experience of. In case you haven't read it, this little book was inspired by the discovery of mescaline and Huxley's early experiences taking it for experimental purposes, and his theory that psychedelic drugs remove the filters that limit what we see. I may have to read it through again. It's been a long time and it only takes a couple of hours.