The more dynamically versatile and flexible the mass
It's about your energy vitality
'the Inner-Muse of your creative artistry'
In being a more dynamically versatile and flexible mass
Conjured energy by your conscious articulations of your emotional agitation; those agitations are the conjuring interlocutor. You being 'in the moment' in coherence, not only with those temporal conditions, but in affirmation with the holistic alignment of your known empirical ethics. In doing so, you conjure by your coherent praxis to those committed ethics in that passionate moment a change in your previously probable, prospective circumstances. That change is surreal in its mysticality.
Excluding the possibility of external third-party benefactors acting on your behalf in such situations that are so relatively mundane to other more urgent and dire concurrent events, that either you'd have to have been designated some supernatural, privileged status, or have the possibility of your own internal faculties were the facilitator of the aforementioned surreal phenomena. Would that be the result of a psychic architecture at that level of emotional agitation 'switching the tracks' to other probabilistic scenarios? Hard to prove. But the Arthur Conan Doyle-Sherlock Holmes' maxim of 'when all the other likely possibilities are eliminated, what's left becomes that possibility!', brings into question what psychic mechanics have been initiated for such phenomena?
IF there is an external third-party 'benefactor', inline with the notion that it is indifferently specific and unique to the emotions of the actor, then what mechanics of the actor have precipitated the consequences? Returning to the agitated emotions, the nature of their qualities would seem to resonate with an aesthetic proposition of sympathy. By legend and anecdote, the maternal side of my family, starting with my pre-birth, departed Granma Carrie; and then, of a more latent mindset, my more objectivist and materialistically inclined mother demonstrated such tendencies. Could I, the maverick from materialistic trappings, have access to those triggers, though not having any formal groundings and just tangent and casual familiarity with such facilities? Why would it have to be a unique and familial specific trait for my family tree? Was the randomness of circumstance the greater factor than some uniqueness of my family line? I'll go with the former, to give a universal inclusivity as a general, human potential.
The anthropological consequences of the random distribution of those traits and capacities creates level of abilities and expectations similar to how standardized academic test categorize cultural cognitive talents. The talent I'm addressing is independent from the abilities needed in the pedestrian realm of activities. More so, they're an adjunct-for many a vestigial appendage-of our specie faculties. Those who have some form of this faculty will have facilitated moments from the mechanical processes of the operation. It's not a moral or ethical determiner, since I could narrate three instances in which I did not have a moral or ethical high ground in juxtaposition to the protagonist's opposing conditions. I did have fortuitous, precipitated events which were a proximal follow-up to my acute emotional reaction.
Was it because I was 'the more dynamically versatile and flexible mass'? And in what way was I? The unique randomness of emotional development, if not predestined and made me more predisposed to be asocial and having just a more mechanical and learned, accommodating affinity to the mores of my contemporaries, made my instances of emotional estrangement more an intuitively instinctual reaction. I did not have a conscious knowledge or articulation of this until I was in my 30's. Prior to those years I was doing the best navigation within the emotionally disturbing waters of my social and secular environment.
My versatility and flexibility came from what I lacked as intellectual and emotional baggage, as a relative 'tabula rasa' vis a vis my peers more acculturated ways. The following factors seem to have contributed to my outcome.
My own uniqueness made me that relative blank slate. Having a relatively asocial pre-k, circumscribed environment, limited the exposure I had to behavioral templates which were common imprints on others behavior. Also, because of a pattern of mostly dreams, intermixed with serendipitous and synchronistic anomalies suggested a narrative other than subjective interpretations of random, dismissable events. Individually, the dreams and physical events were dramatic in their emphaticness, which gave them the credibility, per se. As an aggregate-connected series they were a sublime signal.
The synchronistic events, which included accounts of second-person parties, gave affirming credence to my concurrent conditions and state of mind since those second-person accounts validated a common thread and a shared perception of the consequences of my catalytic and precipitating expressions.
Had I projected by the intensity of my emotions some perceivable, cognitive matrix? If that's so, then a highly intensive emotional interaction can create a connection. We know this is true of infatuation and romance, yet this was occurring in other secular situations. If an ad hoc connection is capable in such circumstances, is it possible for them to be more than anomalies? We'd be getting into the legendary '100 MONKEY SYNDROME', if that were so.
A shared resonance would be a qualifying filter. That resonance would be more likely in a concerted action than an emotive attitude, which could have a variety of qualifiers. It being an action would restrict it to a locale-a 'provincial' setting, even if the precipitant turned out to be a global event. If such things do primarily have some provincial genesis, then the spread would be through a profound network connection-tactile or virtual. The virtual network presents the more intriguing possibility, since images and holographic forms (dreams), would be part of that universe.
The range, if any, of my individual affects in the remarkably coincidental, synchronistic events would demonstrate the dynamic energy projected that could have changed the probability of the outcomes that did occur. With me having an underlying openness to different and unique forms, which became adjuncts for my psychic antenna that scours the mental and sensory horizons continually. That scouring, similar to the SETI radio telescope, receives in classic Newtonian reaction, equivalencies to what it's 'broadcasting'. The 'what' the sensory-cognitive body receives comes from the feedback of practices of letting the mind initiate and the body facilitate from the lessons learned by the mind reacting than the body reflexing to the incoming signals.
The mind, ala the abstractions is more capable of handling the variety of signals, and it traverses the realms of ambiguity and nuance-the intangibles-better than the body, which is designed for the mechanics of the tactile and empiricals. For this reason, I've concluded that the body is the logistical operation for the mind, than the mind being the facilitator for whims of the body. The mind can go where the body is incapable. The mind has the liberty to roam into realms where the body would encounter drama, sanctions, and punishment.
The adventures of the mind's capabilities in comparison to the more limiting domains of the body will be my next entry
================================
Comments
Post a Comment