263/Dennis
contemplate the possibility that “objective knowledge” may be available to us now, that was not available when
Why call it “objective knowledge”?
When I hear that term I imagine a moldy 15′x15′ tarp full of old leaves, grass clippings and gum wrappers strapped to my leg and making it frustrating to walk to the car, let alone get in it and go somewhere. Why not just call it “knowledge”?
Knowledge is always evolving, always developing. If you call it “objective knowledge” you kill off the living part of it–in my humble opinion–because the term itself implies something static, unchangeable, “settled,” dead.
Elena
This is very interesting and it's what I've watched you do over and over again Jomo. You fly so well within the sky but the sky is only a small fragment of the universe. If you make it the universe it's you who become fixed, unchangeable, dead. To think that flying is only possible for us in this sky shows our fixation with our lungs but lungs are only a portion of our being. It's also very interesting because you also seem to have a well balanced connection with people even if keeping the distance and stabbing only accompanied so that you're not in the spotlight but you're almost frozen in relation to the public sphere even though you collect information about the Fellowship with great integrity to the public interest as if you were able to take it in but unable to process it, transform it and walk with it outside.
Is that changing now? Are you actually working to take a step? Haven't we all changed a lot since we started? Even Bruce has changed! Isn't that amazing? Could we imagine more success? It was worth burning for it!
I agree with you that "objective knowledge" can be a term that was turned against us for the Fellowship was the one that was suppose to hold THAT and we bought it like children but the fallacies of the Fellowship are only its fallacies, not the universes.
We cannot walk on each other's objectivity without walking on our own, hence the paradox but loosing the fear of the paradox allows us to emulate the tightrope walker and life is, just like that, the eternal flow of such paradoxes.
Your limitation in regard to this subject like that of many who've written on the blog, seems to come from being unable to grasp the idea of being objective as an individual and as a community. It seems that our time is marked by that conflict which is also illusory: the individual vs the community!! The community vs the individual! As if the idea of "objective knowledge", "objective reality" couldn't be grasped by people who are still turning around themselves without having gotten to the other side of themselves, that is, people who've learnt to walk around their own ego as the center of the universe and not yet met with the universe as the centre of their I, emulating the circle in which both eternity and time meet in the permanent cycle of life, flowering and death. Life is the flower of death. The individual is the flower of the community. The community is the Sun of the individual. The Sun is the individual of the Cosmos!
It is fascinating to observe that the law doesn't allow us to go anywhere unless we've been there already inside! That we've all developed in different areas and knowing the whole and having experienced the objective world doesn't necessarily mean that we've solved every aspect of our lives. One comes and goes from objectivity to subjectivity and there is no difference in that internal moving to walking from one place to another: some jump in the extremes, others orderly walk and still some hop. We are like people standing on the many circles of a turning clock and the fact that we've conquered one circle does not mean that we've conquered time and eternity. The challenge is huge but then like a giant ship we stay connected by the I-keel to the Ocean of humanity. The unconscious life of the community manifests in our myriad separations; the conscious life of the community manifests in our acts of love.
Hi Elena
ReplyDeleteI think you are going along a very interesting line of thought with objective/subjective. For me, there is this constant 'going in and going out' in my psychological world, in which I am coming up against the limitations of my understanding of myself and the universe. My spiritual healer student says it is so necessary to have one's psychological 'feet on the ground' before one can attempt to unravel the Great Mysteries. I think the point for me is that we must live the mystery - digest the unknowing in ourselves - and let the universe open itself to us. Using words such as 'objective' and 'subjective' was one of the strangleholds that the FOF 'wordology' put us in - i.e. if you follow what is being put forward by REB (and the whole of his crew, down) then you are being objective; if you act on your own 'inner impulse' (and here I would include Essence and Conscience) then you are being subjective. Could more be shared by us on this subject.....LBO