Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

L's questions-Re: More pers and cons

Expand Messages
  • elaineupton2001
    Thanks, L., for your questions on pers and cons and the lily . Yes, it is hard not to have concepts, like depth and color and such, so I agree that when I say
    Message 1 of 10 , Jun 3, 2002
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks, L., for your questions on pers and cons and the "lily".

      Yes, it is hard not to have concepts, like depth and color and such,
      so I agree that when I say I see depth, etc. I am also forming or
      picking up concepts. Maybe percepts are just simpler concepts??? I
      don't know.

      I think for me the point is (so far) to seek to see Das Dinge an
      Sich, apart from my biases and habits and sympathies and antipathies,
      to see the Thought that is Thinking in the Thing, so to say, how the
      Thing is a gesture, a living being, with a kind of language or
      expression, or, as I said, gesture, that has a relationship to me and
      to the world, and the Thoughts are Thoughts in the thing, so that my
      aim is , as Steiner once put it, not to "think *about* the thing",
      but to "think *within* the thing", to think the Thinking of the thing.

      What awkward language (smile)!

      The practical result here, as Steiner and Goethe teach us, is that I
      will stop going around thinking erroneous thoughts, stop imposing my
      biases, stop thinking out of tune with Thinking, and start tuning in
      to Thought, the spirit beings that are in things. This can be applied
      to thinking about "lilies" or about people or about world conflicts,
      etc.

      Be well,
      elaine

      - In anthroposophy@y..., "luciferius2002" <luciferius2002@y...> wrote:
      > Hi Elaine!
      >
      > It feels like good old times to recieve a letter like yours. Thanks.
      > As Danny pointed out, I am in it to ask questions, rather than
      having
      > answers. Are you in the mood for a little small talk, child to
      child,
      > with "not so fixed concepts" on concepts?
      >
      > Let me pick some sentences to see clearer how you look at things.
      >
      > Elaine: "On the table were a beautiful bunch of white day lilies,
      > with red-pink centers. For days I had been looking at these
      > lilies..."
      >
      > L: What will happen with those lilies after some weeks? Won't the
      > disappear, as well as lilies in the field? What will stay of the
      > lilies and show a new appearence in a year or so? It won't be THESE
      > lilies, but lilies. Would you hold it against me if I call this
      > surviving aspect concept?
      >
      > Now, which is the "real" lilie, Die Lilie an sich? If the
      > word "concept" makes you freeze, could we rephrase it: The lilie is
      > dressing itself in springtime. What do you think?
      >
      > Elaine, earlier: "Then, it occured to me that I wanted to draw the
      > lilies! But I am not (so far) very good at drawing perspective, and
      > the lilies had so much depth, so much depth of color in the pink-
      red
      > centers, and also the petals bent and turned so gracefully. I
      > wondered how I could ever draw that kind of perspective."
      >
      > L: Where does this "perspective" and "depth" come from? It sounds
      > like it is the main thing about the lilies. But is it really part
      of
      > the percept? Doese your senses see the perspective, or could it be
      > your thinking, that adds the third dimension? What do you think?
      >
      > Elaine: "So, I say to myself, let me not too quickly rush to
      > concepts! (Yet, the ability to conceptualize, eventually, is also
      > important, I feel.).
      > Each--per and con--has its place."
      >
      > L: Lets not rush to concepts! I got this adwise from Danny too, to
      > start by exercising (thought control), holding back thoughts and
      > judgements on the phenomenas. It is hard to do, thats why it is
      given
      > as an exercise. But maybe it is not counteracting to reflect on
      what
      > to call a percept and what to call a concept, as well as what to
      call
      > observing and what to call thinking - and their relationships -
      > first, so that we know what to exercise. What do you think?
      >
      > Regards,
      > L
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.