First off, I’m sort of new here ya know and to find you so engaged with my writing is a bit surreal! I appreciate your words…
You gave attention to style and connotation…read attentively…but I do think there is a bit of clearing up to do: I’d ask you to lean into my thinking of stewardship as a kind of active maintenance which preserves the integrity of that thing being maintained. It is less a position of authorship or dominance and more of mutuality. You say “as if we are a sort of manager…but this we could take with respect to anyone’s realizations”…this disrupts the word against me because I’m speaking phenomenologically. When I say “steward of their own realizations” I am referring to this double relationship…(meta-cognition etc) which you rightly describe in your example. And if “sign-off” sounds managerial to you, just know I dislike “executive function” for similar reasons and this active/passive issue is not so much a problem for me. I’ll preserve that tension with you.
I think that fear-turned-desire is often recognized by others earlier and the benzene ring ‘might’ have been discovered some other way. Which is to say that some insights are common and shared and emphasizing too much of their personal nature robs them of their facticity which gives more credit to the symmetry and appropriateness of timing and discovery and letting things mature…this is all found in the image of the farmer which I wish you would reconsider. The last lines of my article are perhaps the most unrecognized in your reading.
I also do think epiphany is variable and we could have a million insights a day or one great religious experience a lifetime and still talk about their common qualities…but at bottom you’re correct…the confusion involves their brilliance because they bring together a whole picture (in Kekule’s case for instance) and can take the form of a desire which has its own kind of fidelity and assurance (in your examples).
I do appreciate the difference between stumbling as you say and ‘coming to see’…I don’t think you exposed a contradiction based on my words but I love the thought of coming to yourself, this unveiling to oneself one’s true condition, attitude, desire etc. I believe that is what I mean when I say we “grant to ourselves a condition”. There’s a circle here that is satisfying!
Thanks again for your thoughts on the matter…talk soon!
Practice, and a healthy dose of Epiphany lol! Jokes aside, this general worry, especially in the context of therapy, is something I've been working on for a while in other contexts. I really do have practice making this point--that's all!
First off, I’m sort of new here ya know and to find you so engaged with my writing is a bit surreal! I appreciate your words…
You gave attention to style and connotation…read attentively…but I do think there is a bit of clearing up to do: I’d ask you to lean into my thinking of stewardship as a kind of active maintenance which preserves the integrity of that thing being maintained. It is less a position of authorship or dominance and more of mutuality. You say “as if we are a sort of manager…but this we could take with respect to anyone’s realizations”…this disrupts the word against me because I’m speaking phenomenologically. When I say “steward of their own realizations” I am referring to this double relationship…(meta-cognition etc) which you rightly describe in your example. And if “sign-off” sounds managerial to you, just know I dislike “executive function” for similar reasons and this active/passive issue is not so much a problem for me. I’ll preserve that tension with you.
I think that fear-turned-desire is often recognized by others earlier and the benzene ring ‘might’ have been discovered some other way. Which is to say that some insights are common and shared and emphasizing too much of their personal nature robs them of their facticity which gives more credit to the symmetry and appropriateness of timing and discovery and letting things mature…this is all found in the image of the farmer which I wish you would reconsider. The last lines of my article are perhaps the most unrecognized in your reading.
I also do think epiphany is variable and we could have a million insights a day or one great religious experience a lifetime and still talk about their common qualities…but at bottom you’re correct…the confusion involves their brilliance because they bring together a whole picture (in Kekule’s case for instance) and can take the form of a desire which has its own kind of fidelity and assurance (in your examples).
I do appreciate the difference between stumbling as you say and ‘coming to see’…I don’t think you exposed a contradiction based on my words but I love the thought of coming to yourself, this unveiling to oneself one’s true condition, attitude, desire etc. I believe that is what I mean when I say we “grant to ourselves a condition”. There’s a circle here that is satisfying!
Thanks again for your thoughts on the matter…talk soon!
How do you manage to write so well 😭
Practice, and a healthy dose of Epiphany lol! Jokes aside, this general worry, especially in the context of therapy, is something I've been working on for a while in other contexts. I really do have practice making this point--that's all!
That's great! For your age, you articulate your thoughts remarkably well 😁