Friday, February 13, 2009

The Dynamics of Interruption, Part III

Before we are all swept away by the image of the wave and left gasping on the beach where thinking dies, let’s throw ourselves into the surge and its possibilities of ”reactivation”. But first we have to backpedal from Yusef’s metaphor-surfing :-),

If we were so inclined we could take it for granted, happily surfing from one wave of it to the next, up onto the sand wave of the beach, and on to the bar wave of the nearest cocina, where we would surf the waves of a delicious margarita, never pausing in the delight of continuous surging, unless perchance in misfortune we intentionally had a thought which of itself erected a barrier for further surfing. Thought, critique or pause is the absolute enemy.

Of course, thought, critique or pause have never been the absolute enemy on this blog! Forgive me, but that's absurd.

But maybe, when discussing ”life” and ”thinking”, we might still learn something from waveology (yes, there is such a subject of study!) that could wash our eyes and clear our minds. In the following definition from Wikipedia please substitute ”wave” by ”ideas” or ”concepts”,

"Waves travel and transfer energy from one point to another, often with little or no permanent displacement of the particles of the medium (that is, with little or no associated mass transport); instead there are oscillations around almost fixed locations.

Some waves undergo a phenomenon called "breaking". A breaking wave is one whose base can no longer support its top, causing it to collapse. A wave breaks when it runs into shallow water, or when two wave systems oppose and combine forces. When the slope, or steepness ratio, of a wave is too great, breaking is inevitable.

Surging: these may never actually break as they approach the water's edge, as the water below them is very deep. They tend to form on steep shorelines. These waves can knock swimmers over and drag them back into deeper water."


Like waves ideas and concepts transfer energy from one position to another, often with little or no permanent displacement of their cores. In fact, the concepts are frequently oscillations around almost fixed locations.

These oscillations are also examples of "The Dynamics of Interruption" and ultimately "Instances of Reactivation", like the vibrating pauses between one concept and the next. When you reactivate a philosophical ethos, don’t you add to, expand, and create a new ethos from the previous one? In other words oscillate, staying calm in the still waters under the roaring waves?

When I earlier described ”life” as ”surging” it was naturally not synonymous with there being no ”breaking waves”. (Btw: thanks to Christoffer for his clear analysis, but I never meant to turn ”life” into metaphysics).

Reactivating is also repeating (portions) of the old and shaping new formations, new lines of flight. Externally a wave is moving and strong, internally not so much. But still. Something is stirring.

Life moves on: Cliché. Life surges: Biochemistry. That’s no ”misleading generalization”.

The Enlightenment was ”the transfer of energy from one point to another, often with little or no permanent displacement” but over a century or more it turned into a ”surge that may never actually break as it approaches the water's edge, since the water below is very deep”. It still is.

4 Comments:

Blogger Christoffer said...

Only problem is that it is not a wave. It's an underwater frozen ice-formation.

"Before we are all swept away by the image of the wave and left gasping on the beach where thinking dies"

7:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Only problem is that it is not a wave. It's an underwater frozen ice-formation.

I intuit this as a good point although I find it difficult to grasp fully.

Could you elaborate, please.

Orla

9:59 AM  
Blogger Christoffer said...

What is there to elaborate on? I am simply pointing out what obviously is not clear to you: That the image you refer to as a sweeping wave, is not a wave.

10:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am not persuaded your "wave" concept is not a generalization. You are taking one case of a propagation of force and then using it as the general case.

Also, and not necessarily unrelatedly, you are applying the case of propagation of force through water to thinking, but without supplying any reasons for why this case does apply to thinking. Though it isn't unreasonable to think it might, it might or it might not. Or it might in some ways but not others--but which ways it does or does not would be the crucial matter to distinguish here, not something which goes without saying.

I think I overshot when I said thought becomes the absolute enemy in this way, but it wasn't absurd. You know as well as anyone the underlying ploy in using wave images to evoke what thinking is--we conventionally use wave images,sea images, romantically, poetically, as images of the unconscious seen as the effortless and natural and basically the thoughtless in thought.

--Yusef

2:36 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home