‘Never trust a man with a wind up child’ - love this line!!! I’ve been scowling at Descartes for years, now my arsenal is complete. Thank you Jeanette, shiny brilliant one xx
What a thoughtful and interesting article. I’m with you on this being human is a balancing act between material, spiritual, emotional needs.
Love has to be at the centre of our being. Our raison d’être. And love is hard, people can be totally unloveable at times.
Art can remind us to connect and build bridges. It can show us loveless marriages to remind us to treat each other better. It can describe the horrors of war to
Unfortunately, we’re an aggressive lot, but there are so many people out there trying to build communities, showing love and respect and kindness to their neighbour.
We won’t always succeed but our aim must be to love not hate, resist those who seek to divide us and build communities that nurture. The alternatives will lead to our destruction.
Thank you for another great article and safe travels, Jeanette.
I came to substack today to distract me from my feelings about my illness (MS) making me unable to think clearly. I had tried meditating, and that made me weep, and the tears are still rolling down my cheeks as I thank you for reminding me that feeling ia more important than thinking. And I still have that.
“The white fathers told us: I think, therefore I am. The black goddess within each of us - the poet - whispers in our dreams: I feel, therefore I can be free.”
So validating, thank you! I have felt all my life somehow less-than for valuing the world of emotion over rationality. The gender split on this is artificial and toxic and the whole idea of being able to separate the two is utterly stupid.
I completely agree, if humanity can't raise the capacity to love and be loved above all else, I'm not sure there is any hope for our species. Perhaps writers like you will be our ultimate salvation.
Jeannette your writing often seems to settle in me like a thought I'd been trying to bring together from streams of thought in the mists of my mind. Thank you and welcome to Australia, it's a lovely time to be here, there is a sense of hope that we are not as mad as some.
Art Objects. Yes, it certainly does. It says "there is another way".
What distinguishes us from other animals is the highly "evolved" nature of the human brain and
"I think, therefore I am" seems to express the dominance and arrogant sense of superiority of human consciousness.
But where has all of this deep thinking got us?
I brought me to a standstill. I am coming out of a period of depression, working with a therapist to get out of my head, my instinctive go-to place, and into my body. How does this happen? Through connection: with people and myriad forms of creative expression. I could sum up my experience of depression in 3 words: absence of connection.
When people start in on the "terrible state of the world" subject, feeling totally helpless, I now say that the most powerful "weapons" against all the horror are "imagination and creativity."
I connect, therefore I am. It's a magical superpower.
Of festivals, JW says "... people take their minds along as the entry ticket to their hearts." Yes indeed. Why does JW travel around the world, spreading the word, when she could quite easily stay at home? I think it's a sense of duty to use her own superpower to encourage us all to connect.
And of course her own need to connect.
Going through my playlists yesterday, I got to Joni and her song (poem) Woodstock. Spookily, she wrote it in response to the 1969 festival (!) that she was unable to attend. It's a protest song but also a love song, forging a connection between the artist, her thoughts and feelings and thousands of people needing an answer to the terrible spectre of the Vietnam War. It has become my mantra.
I teach Descartes every year in a Western Thought Survey. It’s hard to get the students to recognize the dangers and destructiveness of Descartes’s approach. Your essay will help a lot next semester!
Sometimes I wonder whether Descartes really believed in his mind-body split, or whether he spun it as a way to survive and justify science to the ever ready to excommunicate, church.
He was interested in wonder in his final books, and wonder is like the senses, reaching beyond their limits.
Where Sense- as meaning and Sense-as feeling connect. Where we try to make sense.
When in Oz, make sure to get a road trip in. Sunset at the lookout outside Silverton, Broken Hill, after the sun is well down sends a vermillion breath, like the lips on a Rembrandt painting, over the iron rich desert, so red love becomes a sense in itself.
You know, in the original French, or Latin, apparently he didn’t say “therefore “ just “I think, I am.”
Not a causal relationship, an instantaneous one.
I’ve often wondered whether that makes a difference.
Thanks for reminding me to get back to my wondering while out west, teaching, and shelving the thoughts amidst motorbikes, country music and sausages.
And if you do go to that lookout, drive over the hill and down the road a bit and just enjoy it without any one else.
Not correct: he did write ´therefore’ - in Latin ´cogito, ergo sum’ and in French ´je pense, donc je suis’. Which both render as ´therefore’. Engraved on my brain from many years ago. I like the idea of ´I love therefore I am, but it’s not what he meant.
I think it is helpful to consider that the only reality is consciousness but a consciousness of an ideational realm and not something ‘out there’ like a god . Maybe the whole material construct is simply a product of current human dualistic belief and not real at all. Maybe there is really only spiritual consciousness - an ideational realm which is our consciousness and which we experience this as thinking and thoughts both material and ideational . So clearly or not so clearly . The same thing but seen through a clear or clouded windowpane
Take an analogy - if we play a piece of music we use all our understanding of the principles and elements of music to play it correctly . If we make an error it is very obvious to us because it doesn’t fit in with that understanding .The question is -is the error equally as real as the correct note within the structure of music ?
And in arithmetic is 2x2 =5 equally as real as 2x2=4
No! One is real and the other an error .
So the same question can be put in relation to reality itself . Is material consciousness equally real as ideational consciousness? Or is it simply an erroneous view of it ? Like with music less and less errors are made perhaps the more we can become one with what is actually ours to take .
This begs the question is there a structured way to understand our idea consciousness more and so be less influenced by the whole edifice of material thinking and reliance on faith , outdated rituals and anthropomorphic gods .
Is the whole material universe real or a construction of material consciousness .I think it was Carlo Rivelli who asked the question ‘did consciousness arise from the evolution of the material universe or is the material universe a construct of material consciousness . If the latter then perhaps we can begin to be more conscious of our idea nature through understanding rather than relying on mere erroneous beliefs .
A problem I see with Descartes, with religions, with racism, facism and other fast-held views, is the human desire for certainty and the fear of impermanence. A willingness to open to mystery, change and vulnerability can allow a deep sense of connection which doesn't separate us from each other and the whole world.
Your comment reminds me of what Pema Chodron wrote: “To be fully alive, fully human, and completely awake is to be continually thrown out of the nest.”
Many moons ago, right out of college, I was a research assistant for Antonio Damasio. The book you recommend is good. All his books are well worth the read. A thoughtful post. Thank you!
Wow, Descartes had a wind-up child? Good lord, enough said. Welcome to Australia - I'm not in Sydney nor Melbourne so I wont see you. Demasio's book looks interesting!
‘Never trust a man with a wind up child’ - love this line!!! I’ve been scowling at Descartes for years, now my arsenal is complete. Thank you Jeanette, shiny brilliant one xx
Ps your adoptive Mum’s line - harsh but funny, and no doubt some of her dark wit has infused yours…
What a thoughtful and interesting article. I’m with you on this being human is a balancing act between material, spiritual, emotional needs.
Love has to be at the centre of our being. Our raison d’être. And love is hard, people can be totally unloveable at times.
Art can remind us to connect and build bridges. It can show us loveless marriages to remind us to treat each other better. It can describe the horrors of war to
Unfortunately, we’re an aggressive lot, but there are so many people out there trying to build communities, showing love and respect and kindness to their neighbour.
We won’t always succeed but our aim must be to love not hate, resist those who seek to divide us and build communities that nurture. The alternatives will lead to our destruction.
Thank you for another great article and safe travels, Jeanette.
I came to substack today to distract me from my feelings about my illness (MS) making me unable to think clearly. I had tried meditating, and that made me weep, and the tears are still rolling down my cheeks as I thank you for reminding me that feeling ia more important than thinking. And I still have that.
“The white fathers told us: I think, therefore I am. The black goddess within each of us - the poet - whispers in our dreams: I feel, therefore I can be free.”
- Audre Lorde
Thank you, Jeanette.
So validating, thank you! I have felt all my life somehow less-than for valuing the world of emotion over rationality. The gender split on this is artificial and toxic and the whole idea of being able to separate the two is utterly stupid.
I completely agree, if humanity can't raise the capacity to love and be loved above all else, I'm not sure there is any hope for our species. Perhaps writers like you will be our ultimate salvation.
Jeannette your writing often seems to settle in me like a thought I'd been trying to bring together from streams of thought in the mists of my mind. Thank you and welcome to Australia, it's a lovely time to be here, there is a sense of hope that we are not as mad as some.
Art Objects. Yes, it certainly does. It says "there is another way".
What distinguishes us from other animals is the highly "evolved" nature of the human brain and
"I think, therefore I am" seems to express the dominance and arrogant sense of superiority of human consciousness.
But where has all of this deep thinking got us?
I brought me to a standstill. I am coming out of a period of depression, working with a therapist to get out of my head, my instinctive go-to place, and into my body. How does this happen? Through connection: with people and myriad forms of creative expression. I could sum up my experience of depression in 3 words: absence of connection.
When people start in on the "terrible state of the world" subject, feeling totally helpless, I now say that the most powerful "weapons" against all the horror are "imagination and creativity."
I connect, therefore I am. It's a magical superpower.
Of festivals, JW says "... people take their minds along as the entry ticket to their hearts." Yes indeed. Why does JW travel around the world, spreading the word, when she could quite easily stay at home? I think it's a sense of duty to use her own superpower to encourage us all to connect.
And of course her own need to connect.
Going through my playlists yesterday, I got to Joni and her song (poem) Woodstock. Spookily, she wrote it in response to the 1969 festival (!) that she was unable to attend. It's a protest song but also a love song, forging a connection between the artist, her thoughts and feelings and thousands of people needing an answer to the terrible spectre of the Vietnam War. It has become my mantra.
We are stardust, we are golden
We are caught in the devil's bargain
And we've got to get ourselves
Back to the garden
Art Objects!
I teach Descartes every year in a Western Thought Survey. It’s hard to get the students to recognize the dangers and destructiveness of Descartes’s approach. Your essay will help a lot next semester!
Sometimes I wonder whether Descartes really believed in his mind-body split, or whether he spun it as a way to survive and justify science to the ever ready to excommunicate, church.
He was interested in wonder in his final books, and wonder is like the senses, reaching beyond their limits.
Where Sense- as meaning and Sense-as feeling connect. Where we try to make sense.
When in Oz, make sure to get a road trip in. Sunset at the lookout outside Silverton, Broken Hill, after the sun is well down sends a vermillion breath, like the lips on a Rembrandt painting, over the iron rich desert, so red love becomes a sense in itself.
You know, in the original French, or Latin, apparently he didn’t say “therefore “ just “I think, I am.”
Not a causal relationship, an instantaneous one.
I’ve often wondered whether that makes a difference.
Thanks for reminding me to get back to my wondering while out west, teaching, and shelving the thoughts amidst motorbikes, country music and sausages.
And if you do go to that lookout, drive over the hill and down the road a bit and just enjoy it without any one else.
Not correct: he did write ´therefore’ - in Latin ´cogito, ergo sum’ and in French ´je pense, donc je suis’. Which both render as ´therefore’. Engraved on my brain from many years ago. I like the idea of ´I love therefore I am, but it’s not what he meant.
I think it is helpful to consider that the only reality is consciousness but a consciousness of an ideational realm and not something ‘out there’ like a god . Maybe the whole material construct is simply a product of current human dualistic belief and not real at all. Maybe there is really only spiritual consciousness - an ideational realm which is our consciousness and which we experience this as thinking and thoughts both material and ideational . So clearly or not so clearly . The same thing but seen through a clear or clouded windowpane
Take an analogy - if we play a piece of music we use all our understanding of the principles and elements of music to play it correctly . If we make an error it is very obvious to us because it doesn’t fit in with that understanding .The question is -is the error equally as real as the correct note within the structure of music ?
And in arithmetic is 2x2 =5 equally as real as 2x2=4
No! One is real and the other an error .
So the same question can be put in relation to reality itself . Is material consciousness equally real as ideational consciousness? Or is it simply an erroneous view of it ? Like with music less and less errors are made perhaps the more we can become one with what is actually ours to take .
This begs the question is there a structured way to understand our idea consciousness more and so be less influenced by the whole edifice of material thinking and reliance on faith , outdated rituals and anthropomorphic gods .
Is the whole material universe real or a construction of material consciousness .I think it was Carlo Rivelli who asked the question ‘did consciousness arise from the evolution of the material universe or is the material universe a construct of material consciousness . If the latter then perhaps we can begin to be more conscious of our idea nature through understanding rather than relying on mere erroneous beliefs .
Sorry this is not very eloquently put !!
War is not confined to being between religions. Tribes in PNG would fight not due to difference in faith.
A problem I see with Descartes, with religions, with racism, facism and other fast-held views, is the human desire for certainty and the fear of impermanence. A willingness to open to mystery, change and vulnerability can allow a deep sense of connection which doesn't separate us from each other and the whole world.
Your comment reminds me of what Pema Chodron wrote: “To be fully alive, fully human, and completely awake is to be continually thrown out of the nest.”
Many moons ago, right out of college, I was a research assistant for Antonio Damasio. The book you recommend is good. All his books are well worth the read. A thoughtful post. Thank you!
Perhaps we could turn to the teachings of the great philosopher Madonna Ciccone in her seminal work VOGUE:
All you need is your own imagination
So use it, that's what it's for (That's what it's for)
Go inside for your finest inspiration
Your dreams will open the door (Open up the door)
It makes no difference if you're black or white
If you're a boy or a girl
If the music's pumping, it will give you new life
You're a superstar
Yes, that's what you are, you know it
Beauty's where you find it
Not just where you bump and grind it
Soul is in the musical
That's where I feel so beautiful
Magical, life’s a ball so
Get up on the dance floor
Don't just stand there, let's get to it
Strike a pose, there's nothing to it
Vogue
Marvellous thoughts yet again.
Wow, Descartes had a wind-up child? Good lord, enough said. Welcome to Australia - I'm not in Sydney nor Melbourne so I wont see you. Demasio's book looks interesting!