To admit to any training of our consciousness, even our minds, is to no less admit to other influences, and perhaps by such admission begin to see how little is found of freedom or liberty in it (or them). Once a thing is directed, it is directed.
Even the man who might set out in some recognition of this and thus go about to establish himself as only to himself, has issues to face. No matter how scrupulously he may search to either undo, or seek to know, or uncover all other influences that he might recognize in seeking to know “his own mind”, may find even this inward bent to be free of other(s) influences is also, and no less, the result of a fundamental directing. Thus, even any motive to be free or believe one is in mind, may simply be bound to some directive of which he is not aware. A bit like a rebel furiously acting in a diaphanous snare.
But he may only rarely ask “Why do I so crave a free mind or to be free in it?”
What is this thing motivating to unboundedness?
The consciousness of man has a very profound motivating to both believe it can know things, and indeed, does. Even if all it seems to know is a desire to know. Even a need to know. In some ways it is voracious, of never ending appetite. Do you not find it so?
Let it see or find what is of some interest to it and it will explore for the knowing of it. Let it see what captures a greater, or even greatest interest, and it may spend a whole life time in pursuit of knowing. And the proportions of frustrations that come in all learning as some form of discipline, will be accounted according to the capture of interest. The greater the interest, the greater their tolerating. And the lesser their accounting. We are told Edison did a multitude of experiments with failed filaments before settling on tungsten for his light bulb.
But ultimately, what man sets his own interests? Or their bounds? What or who…influences there?
Yet, in all, and in all the explorations of things and matters of interest…is it not rare we consider, why? Why does this capture my interest? Why am I provoked or propelled to it or them? Is this not also of some directing…even if fundamental of it is not known?
If we are able to concede to some matters mentioned previously, as either functions or attributes of consciousness, particularly judgments entered by measurements; we might consider what often takes place. We won’t necessarily here address the question of those measurements being made by very peculiar and particular metrics. Just that it does…take place.
When asked or even asking one’s self of any of the “why’s” of those matters that might be observed…”Why do I like fishing?”…”Why do I like math?”…writing, reading, gardening, test piloting, doctoring, sculpting, religious studies, soldiering, public speaking, serial killing, song writing, nuclear physics, philosophy, baking, and on and on with none necessarily excluding any others, (for we can be like jugglers)…do we not generally supply, if to ourselves or others some reason(s) not only adjudged as sound, but most often for approval(s) in understanding?
Pertaining to interests, pursuits, actions and their pleasures derived do we ever think…”well, really, it’s just the rut I am in”? We tend toward approval of reasonable…reasons. And this is no less…a bent. To order things according to our own reasons and reasonings. Even to finding (or believing there is) some consistency in ourselves. And where would that even come from?
Really, if one concedes (do any truly concede?) that chaos and utter randomness is ultimately their only responsible paternity, why so ill at ease in it when believed perceived? Or if perceived? Do we know how much order it would take, must take, does take, to even recognize chaos? Or even say one can. Why do we so engage in the ordering of things? Even thinking we might recognize order (design) as opposed to something other?
;lkjdkuqrGKVBKjkhge;hjkKJHWEFGKJHLFEyVCHJjklgoiutgjknvbkjh’gnk’lb?
?
israelx7wordpresscom 