Changing Perceptions

It amazes me how words, like everything else loose and gain depth and meaning. It reminds me of the healthy-minded and sick-soul in James. Or just how bouts of depression cause me to gain and loose meaning in the experience of the world around me. I was told that philosophy was affected my art in that the act of observation is apparent. At the time I didn't understand why or how this would be the case clearly but now I see why. Perceptions fluctuate in the fashion expressed above and I want to express the fluctuation in art. I've come to realize that I cannot capture this through conscious planning. I will have to work through my own fluctuation and express the dualities as I experience them. It will be my best attempt at an objective representation of my subjective states of being.

Now the thought of doing this makes me feel optimistic in that capturing my own changing perceptions may give me a greater insight into my own imperfect self. Our means of perception are a tool we use to create an impression of the world around us and as in any craft the product is altered by the tool which makes it. Trying to do paintings which capture the passing depth and emptiness one can experience in a single object may give me a chance at having a more objective view at myself by seeing my own perceptions held together, frozen, outside of their temporal order. After all the painting, like any painting is as much about the object as it is a self portrait.

Doing this would require myself to "get into character" in order to complete these paintings. I will have to feel the feelings I'm intending on expressing and this leaves me with a very odd and uncomfortable feeling. Usually I think of art, as I assume many do, as something which, like impressions, is marked by the tool which created it (the artist). But now I see that I must shape myself to the work on a much deeper and profound level than I ever imagined. The tool shapes the object which shapes the tool. It is emotionally taxing.

(Sean and I had a conversation about how many of the musicians I like are also actors and he said that both involve getting into character. Art does too. This relationship between art and object reminds me of Pierce's semiotics. It also reminds me of something I saw on television which had profound implications to me. On the program "How the Earth was Made" they talked about the oceans being oxidized by the waste product from early organisms over millions of years. I have heard so often that conditions for life on earth have to be so perfect for us to exist but now it is clear to me that previous life forms came about in an environment which they adapted to themselves, which in turn caused the adaptations of newer life forms, and so on. We are changed by and change our environment. The tool shapes the object which shapes the tool.)

With all this said I feel further invested in my acceptance of my own subjective self. With this comes a difficult struggle to find a sense of truth. Who is right, the Miguel that sees meaning in those words, or the Miguel that sees them as empty. I prefer to think the previous because the later comes out of negative states of mind, but that doesn't guarantee that it's false. And although I feel overwhelmingly compelled towards meaning and purpose I can't help but be shaken by doubt. It reminds me of the following passage Sean wrote me in response to my paper on James (linked above):

Actually I've had a back and forth with myself as to whether it is enjoyment of life or suffering which is the self deception. On the one hand, we could all be repressing how awful everything is and trying to pretend to be happy; however, on the other it is possible that all things enjoy life (as evidenced by every creatures incredibly strong self preservation instincts) and that suffering is merely a sensation, an equally important and enjoyable part of existence as happiness.

In all I feel as if I'm brought back to a conclusion I came to earlier this summer. In giving up the absolute truth, I have also given up my confidence in my own perception. Of course I say confidence, because those who are most confident in there perceptions of how the world is and should be, are sometimes the most unreasonable and insane, as I'm sure many of us know.

Pluralism is emotionally taxing because it still stands for something despite the overwhelming weight of relativism; a weight which isn't in itself heavy. In fact it is light, intolerably light. Whats heavy is meaning, when one tries to set it on a foundation perpetually in flux, a foundation which ultimately is ourselves.