Reading this more carefully, it's a beautiful essay. It covers so much of the common ground we share.
I made a mistake in going into all that stuff about trust and ignoring the beauty of the whole thing you wrote. It's too picky to do this, I'm sorry. But I'm trying to say that this absence of trust isn't the result of trauma. It's a minor insight into one of the qualities that shifts in a dialogic or metaphoric or proprioceptive state of mind. A link also to what you were saying (and again above): we don't trust the rational or the concrete. When we're in that metaphoric space we trust the reality that exceeds our stories. We trust in the non-rational, unnamable, and communal point of view. I trust finding you there, because everything you write, and all the music you perform is born in that space. My deepest respect to you,
There's a difference between understanding and Seeing. If you merely understand something it becomes a concept (a rationality) and sinks back towards certainty and superficiality. If you See the nature of a psychologically rooted problem it alters the psychology instantaneously (being as they are the same). A change in meaning is a change in being, as Bohm said. Let's talk trust again. The state of Seeing is not a trusting state of mind from one angle. It doesn't trust rationality or conclusion. It is suspended from all that. It neither trusts, distrusts or hopes to find trust, but actively probes the limits of trust and truth in everything it encounters. And from another angle, this suspended state is a kind of faith in what can't be known, or a faith in the presence of something greater than anything we end up knowing. So maybe the nature of trust shifts here from trust IN answers or even people (our images of them), to trust in the ineffable.
Reading this more carefully, it's a beautiful essay. It covers so much of the common ground we share.
I made a mistake in going into all that stuff about trust and ignoring the beauty of the whole thing you wrote. It's too picky to do this, I'm sorry. But I'm trying to say that this absence of trust isn't the result of trauma. It's a minor insight into one of the qualities that shifts in a dialogic or metaphoric or proprioceptive state of mind. A link also to what you were saying (and again above): we don't trust the rational or the concrete. When we're in that metaphoric space we trust the reality that exceeds our stories. We trust in the non-rational, unnamable, and communal point of view. I trust finding you there, because everything you write, and all the music you perform is born in that space. My deepest respect to you,
There's a difference between understanding and Seeing. If you merely understand something it becomes a concept (a rationality) and sinks back towards certainty and superficiality. If you See the nature of a psychologically rooted problem it alters the psychology instantaneously (being as they are the same). A change in meaning is a change in being, as Bohm said. Let's talk trust again. The state of Seeing is not a trusting state of mind from one angle. It doesn't trust rationality or conclusion. It is suspended from all that. It neither trusts, distrusts or hopes to find trust, but actively probes the limits of trust and truth in everything it encounters. And from another angle, this suspended state is a kind of faith in what can't be known, or a faith in the presence of something greater than anything we end up knowing. So maybe the nature of trust shifts here from trust IN answers or even people (our images of them), to trust in the ineffable.