Abstractionism as Life

The Human Bond Series : III

' If one is subscribed to faith he is likely to believe that all actions are the act of God.' Such is the speech and thought construction that creates an expression in the abstract. It may be a certain point of view … it speaks in the tentative and by association of ideas … makes no reference to physical reality … speaks of the objects, visions, passions associated with faith and in the process institutes an experience of faith by common cognition with others.

 

The dictionary defines ' abstract ' as ' existing only in the mind ; separated from embodiment.' Worship is defined as ' love unquestioningly and uncritically or to excess.' Put together it is certainly indicative of a mind-set that is arguably self-defining and self-regulated on issues.

 

Picasso painted abstract expressions. In viewing his paintings a person is removed from his normal view of forms and faces and is exposed to the existing state of our passions … the divisions we feel in society … the isolation of the self … and the disorderly state of our thoughts. We identify with that sometimes and wonder about our own abstract views and thoughts … and the comparisons we make with the rationality we encounter in society these days.

 

What we appear to be doing these days is to revive the experience of the abstract with the help of the rationale. This is the first step in the healing of the abstract and the start of our own experience of bringing logic and common sense to the service of the passions.

 

In the experience of the individual, the abstract expression is probably the early way in which we came to deal with the big questions … Who are we? What is God? What happens after we die?  This was helped along the way by folks like Jean Paul Sarte and Jiddu Krishnamurthi. In addition the study of Zen Buddhism has been invaluable as an instrument in the service of the abstract and Alan Watts its guide.

 

As an instrument of the passions the abstract borrows on much that is the way of emotions, feelings, moods and is not without some melancholy … especially in the way it refers to a former experience in which we appear to have been in total mastery of the intent, design and conduct of life. It looks forward to doing the same again someday with the help of the rationale … and that is the nature of the task we have cut out for ourselves … for now and for some years to come. 

Reviews

[Timothy Burjess]

Greetings my friend, I hope you are well. This makes interesting reading, especially considering I have recently begun study into Existential and absurdist philosophy. Faith, in the branch epistemology is, of course, a substantially important aspect. Defined, faith means: "complete trust or confidence", but if one approaches philosophically, two other variables are extremely important, "Truth" and "Justification". The difference between faith and truth are obviously different, and there are many, many, different ways to express this difference, but to make a faith true (or true belief), there must be a level of justification to make the true belief infallible.

You say: "...makes no reference to physical reality ... speaks of the objects, visions, passions associated with faith and in the process institutes an experience of faith by common cognition with others." Now this is obviously coming from am empiricist point of view, and René Descartes responds to justifying true beliefs through empiricism by quoting: "Because the only method by which we perceive the external world is through our senses, and that, because the senses are not infallible, we should not consider our concept of knowledge to be infallible." - therefore, any "Objects, visions, passions associated with faith...' could be construed as not infallible beliefs.

This is where many arguments arise in this modern day. The atheists and agnostics, (especially the agnostics) argue with those who have faith in various religions, for the non-believers require justification to accept a true-belief, whereas the faithful, simply, (yes, simply, and only simply) just do believe, and that's that.

From your writing I gauge that you find these abstractions of the mind to promote more harm than good? - "a mind-set that is arguably self-defining and self-regulated on issues." I love how you use Picasso as an example, and further portray how we individually sometimes question our own level of abstractionism as it were.

Please correct me if I am wrong my dear friend, but what I believe you are saying is this. Abstraction, (faith, beliefs, and all things associated, as well as the opposing repression of thought and need for justification) exists, and you express personal opinion on how to solve these abstractions: To delicately mix together elements from the West, (Logic and common sense) with those from the east, (Zen meditation).

Having now studied Buddhism and the beginnings of Existentialism, I can only agree wholeheartedly with you sir. Areas such as Existentialism and Absurdism, open up the mind in ways that make an individual question the nature of reality, (or, un-reality?) and promote one to use logical thought to push past the boundaries of common existence, and the wholly unnatural restraints placed on them; which are in justified true-belief - in no coexistence with anything other than the greed of lesser souls. The latter is the West's theory, the East's is Zen meditation, and whereas the West's answer is key for understanding the external, the East's is key for understanding the internal answers. I think that is what you have been trying to portray. Please, by all means, slap a ruler across my wrist and correct me if I am wrong, dear teacher, for the lessons you provide are stupendous.

Thank you so much for this Dayran. I shall be sure to continue to review, I feel that talking with you and expressing ideas is a jolly good way to improve my abilities if I one day hope to become an author, especially the genres I want to write into.

Thank you once more.

[Dayran]

Dear dear Mot ... this is not a review ... its a buffet ... and I'm starved.

To put it plainly ... I'm saying that man needs to get in touch with his passions ... with a clarity that is affirmed by his mind ... so that he may come to an individual stability with regards to all the goings on in the world and his society ... and I'm saying that his passions exist and express themselves in the abstract.

There is far too much of a haste in our affairs to call our actions to-date as correct ... or responsible ... or physical. That is why I have moved beyond the existentialism idea to refer to that which we experience as ' abstract.' This makes it possible for the individual to distance himself from his actions in his self review and to do so with an equanimity of mind. That would mean that he would need to express such observations in a way that ' describes himself but as an object of creation.' Hopefully, with that, we can avoid the deeply personal bias of the virtuous individual or is intent on the virtuous.

I'm constantly reminded of the fact that a person who delves into the abstract loses touch with reality ... it appears to be a popular notion in these times ... but far from it ... I've spent some conscientious time with the purely physical and I don't think its all that its made out to be.

Thank you my friend for your comments and review. I'm not sure about being the one with the ruler but I'll accept it in the abstract.

[Timothy Burjess]

I'm glad I provided a feast my friend.

Ah yes, I see now what you mean, and I wholeheartedly agree. Passion is but something we find hard, if not impossible to forgo, but there are two ways one can abide, one authentically and one un-authentically. To feel passion and to let it into the mind is by no means a hazard in-itself, as long as one can, (to quote your elegance) 'come to an individual stability', but if individuals allow passion to enter them and stay ignorant to it (perhaps through little thought or via simple addiction to certain passions), then these individuals are simply "giving in" or "obeying" to naturalistic instinct with no understanding.

I believe you mean that experiences we encounter have been so through an almost absurdist perspective, (I,E, "what happens, happens) and these experiences are what you refer to as "abstract". 'This makes it possible for the individual to distance himself from his actions', do you mean that simply describing these experiences as "abstract", the individual has a lease to not take full responsibility for his actions, but to allow some responsibility to be laid off due to his passions? and thus not feeling emotions like guilt? Further, does the next sentence suggest that individuals stay in contact with their "authentic self" as-it-were, but to allow freedom to say that everything happens for a reason? I believe that if that was the case with more individuals , then yes, I can see how bias could dissipate.

I believe that I could be a prime example of '...a person who delves into the abstract...' who '...loses touch with reality', aha. There is but a fine line between reality and the, "other" perhaps, or should I say the "abstract" perhaps? And again, I wholeheartedly agree with your statement, and I for one have always said for as long as I can remember that I would prefer to be mad than sane, that was said before, and after I began to think logically. But to waver on the line I think is a good place to be, to understand, but to not become. You can test a sinister lake's depth without jumping in.

To be honest Dayran, these are some of, if not THE, best discussions I have ever had. The individuals I know in real life, although somewhat incongruous, find no pleasure in talks such as these, and on attempt seem to end up talking like the stereotypical American hippie, and such ways of communication are not quite fulfilling to me. So thank YOU my friend!