No way beyond thought with thought

And yet thought cannot go beyond thought. We cannot put ‘I’ away, for that would be nothing more than one thought saying ‘shoo’ to another. This just creates more division in the mind, where we think ‘I must do this’, ‘I must not do that’. This has led to the world we live in today, with country against country, and ethnic, religious and political groups all opposed to one another on the basis of nothing more than an idea made with thought.

Next: A question that cannot be answered.

Advertisements

4 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. prolemusings
    Jan 10, 2013 @ 16:52:09

    I like this – so to the point, and got me thinking. To remove ‘i’ would to also remove a collective though, and therein instigate ‘i’ as the divisional fundamental – whilst apparently true, how would ‘we’ exist without ‘i’? And does this merely come back to semantics? And would that just be opening the lid of the honey point of what the self does to oppositional ideaology and practice. what do you think? ahh such questions! questions really are the answers aren’t they :)!

    Reply

    • mbwilliams
      Jan 10, 2013 @ 23:51:09

      Hi and thanks for commenting! Actually your excellent question/s go to the heart of what I am trying to explain. The ‘I’ we may be trying to get rid of is not ‘us’, only a description of us – we can function just fine without having to refer back to a memory of who we are every 5 minutes. The ‘I’ is nothing but semantics. And this is also why thinking won’t have any effect on it – we are trying to argue semantics with ourselves.

      Reply

  2. prolemusings
    Jan 12, 2013 @ 18:20:18

    Ah yes, exactly. Well said! I studied semantics at uni, and it really changed my perceptions (found Lacan very interesting,particularly in light of Saussure/semiotics), but then of course as with all ‘answers’ we are presented with myriad more questions. And i have always found the in regard to the above that the bigger questions is how would we function without semiotics? Could we change semantics? And if so, how can a self exist within an ‘authentic’ ideology individual depth?. what do you think? I reiterate- great post! 🙂

    Reply

    • mbwilliams
      Jan 13, 2013 @ 13:19:58

      An interesting question.

      I don’t think we need to function without them; we will always need words and analogies and the rest of it to describe the world around us and communicate with each other. The problem is we get sucked into those descriptions and take them for the real thing. We see the future through the eyes of projected thought and miss the present that is going on right in front of us. There is no authentic ideology or identity as far as I have found, not one that can be found through thought anyway. The problem comes because we can never see this, and never give up looking for ‘the answer’ that will finally settle it. Of course what I am saying is only an idea, only thoughts unless you find them out for yourself.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

(C) Copyright Mark B Williams 2014
MyFreeCopyright.com Registered & Protected
%d bloggers like this: