BABBLE

About the site

Curriculum vitae

The Book

Books archive

First Drafts

Lola's diary

Free-writing

Links

contact Jeremy
contact Ellen
Check the site map

You've got to understand that what we see and feel cannot constitute a fullness of being, because our sight and intuition are hollow, like clay. That's what Anaximander was trying to explain, and he would have succeeded too and circumvented the succeeding millenia of futile explanation had he but been willing to grieve for this lost grasp of existence. Instead he wanted to have it both ways -- we cannot know existence unless we're enlightened, and that means you need to define what enlightenment is and how it can be gotten.

Enlightenment has to be something you can get and if you have it that means you know what is going on. What else can it be? What else can it mean? It can't mean anything without existing at least potentially and the whole problem introduced by a mention of metaphysics is that existence is no longer a certainty. By being certain I parenthetically mean touching, knowing that what I touch is there like it was last time I touched it.

What is there to touch? Is it really accessible to my grasping hand/mind? Because if not I will never make the football team. How to integrate this questioning, questing consciousness with my day to day eating, drinking, farting. I mean of course I know what's there, I touched it just yesterday...

Tomorrow we will go to the beach.