My personal ideational framework is held very lightly. It’s somewhat modal too; practical applications draw part of it ‘out’. “Frame” is much too rectilinear and edge-like. It’s much more like having a jazz and dance ensemble at one’s beck-and-call. Yet, I never know what today’s improv is going to be until I’m in the middle of it.
Nonetheless, recently I’ve had to go through my reflections for two different outside purposes. This causes me to do the nigh impossible: write the music down! This captured today’s tune in a temporary self-indulgent turn of the blog. I don’t take any of this that seriously, why should you!?
Individuation. For me this is to live the unique creativity of our own incarnation in a flexing, open, permeable, generous, improvised dance in the bubbling middle. Crucially: this is just me; it’s loving and submission to my own receptivity that allows the cosmos, lifeworld, of another, the other, person, to enter the unanswerable question that is individually my own. It must work the other way/direction too.
The thing is too: this is hard, and, always, this makes room for the tragedy and unbearableness of life. In light of this, the personal poem is a hope and hazard. This poem, in my experience, requires a dancing and the dancing requires other people. Individuation is, then, to be entangled with a more vast cosmos than any hermetic, head-bound, cosmos can provide.
If one trusts every or almost every thread of the great musical weaving, we can at least dare to exemplify the imperfect and paradoxical composition one is the author of.
Conceptually, for me, spirituality is the sum effectiveness of my own prejudices on a day-to-day basis. What is allowed inside? How rigorously do I fill in the blanks?
From this I recognize the work is in progress. As many here know, my own perspective, (itself issued from the prejudicial perspectivism made into an effective waystation, a movement in my ‘symphony,’) does not condemn+ out of hand science, or atheism, or sentimentality, etc. Abstraction to principles or propositions or names is not the thing itself.
+ Incidentally, my own research is partly concerned with this problem. Reductions of disparate cosmologies into forms that remove any self-sense of the integrative and commensurate obviously lead to a discourse infected with sides talking past each other, and lead to many other ill effects.