I love how we have to write down everything that stands out to us – anything that we have particularly noticed. There’s a saying that goes “an unwritten goal is merely a wish”; there is power in that. It seems to compel us to do something more with it because it has been physically manifested in some way.
Seems. We talked about this word today. We use this word to mean that we don’t actually know for sure, but other sources help us infer what is happening. (eg. the dog seems to like being petted because it wags it’s tail when we do it. Tail wagging is it’s sign of happiness.)
Did a really eye opening exercise today about relations and anthropocentrism (or the lack of it). Here are my masterpieces:
First off, yes, I am married. (not sure if many have noticed..) I found it a bit tricky to do this with my husband, Elijah, in mind because we do so many things together, and for each other. For example, I cook for him at times, and he does the same for me. However, he is also my protector, because he is so much stronger and bigger than I am and I am unsure as to what physical danger I could protect him from that he couldn’t do himself. Perhaps I could protect him from being heart broken…
The second one we did was with an object. The first thing that came to mind was my apartment. It seemed so much easier because it was easier to measure and identify what each was doing for the other. I was “feeding” the home with electricity and water by paying the bills, and it was in turn allowing me to use electricity and water because it has a connection to the mains and powerpoint wall sockets and pipes. I wonder, since a house’s purpose is to house a person (or two), am I allowing it to fulfil it’s purpose by occupying it? Do I give the home a sense of purpose? If it was left unoccupied will it “feel” worthless and like it has failed?
I think it was easier to trace this web of relations in terms of “things” but with human emotions and relationships (huh, is a relation different from a relationship?)* it’s so much harder and more difficult – and yet can it be enough just to use the word “love”?
“Love” is a “Black box” – I like to see it as a general mystery. Something that you notice but can never really truly explain unless you look inside it and pick out what makes it so. You have to unravel all the little bits and tie down the “relation strings” (meaning to relate it to other things) to open it up and then you can see the big picture that was hiding in the black box. How can we quantify feelings and emotions? Do we use the little moments that contribute to the development and sustenance of such feelings or do we measure it using scientific markers such as increased heart rate, dilation of the pupils and the human version of the mating call?
How can we notice the micro and the macro? Perhaps not all at once, but is it better to go outside in? Or inside out like the ripple effect? Or is it more like psychology’s butterfly effect? I think it is both altogether, which shows how life is amazing and very non-linear. But does that make me feel like I shouldn’t do anything at all so there will be a calm, or that I should do lots and stir up the water? I do not know.
Adrian said “agency is controlled by the relations that make it possible.” If we can think this way and master the technique of mapping out the web of relations, does that mean that we can then predict ones agency? Can we find out, based on all the relations he has to others and to things like his job, what he will choose? Is the Minority Report technology possible?
*Update:
Relation = a thing’s effect on or relevance to another
Relationship = the way or state of being connected