Next: Elaboration 15
Up: Elaboration 14
Previous: Elaboration 14.3
Elaboration 14.4
A still slightly altered approach is as follows. Let one, (the
reader) try to define 'emotion'. It seems impossible without being
circular, without putting emotion in, in some way (to like, want to,
better, satisfaction, etc.), a sort of homoiomereia, putting small
things in that what we want to explain and what is exactly these put
in things. But when prolonged and earnest thinking defines
'meaning', lo ... we find 'emotion'. Emotion, from (Lat.) ex-movere,
from 'to move out of-, because of, ... ', readily translates into
'being moved', and there is also the cause for moving, i.e.
'motive'. Hence, the same thing happens when we define 'purpose', we
end up in motivation, in emotion. Superficially, nothing SEEMS more
remote from 'meaning' than 'purpose', yet they both (according to
Ordening-Theory), are virtually the same. All life is driven by-,
based on-, gaining (to have) control, of power over the structure of
REALITY. Was life identical with idea (ting), this also was
identical with the 'I, to have' principle. Most basic, of course, is
'I, to have control', in many cases a sort of control, a power over
reality that fills the belly, provides warmth, protection, etc. In
man, control (purpose, meaning, emotion, etc.) has insignificantly
to do with inanimate reality (physics) compared with the
main-spring, i.e. control over others, control 'in socio', applause.
Idea is synonymous with, a) know structure of Reality (emotion,
meaning, have grasp of, etc. and b) change the (known) structure
into a more desired one (purpose, meaning, motive etc.). The two are
inseparably interwoven. When we speak of one (e.g. attitude,
science, opinion, suggestion, honour, strategy, fault, pain, image,
sympathy, pair, digit, analog, uneven, false, equilibrium,
feed-back, aware, proximity, macho, authority, base, square-root,
etc., etc.) we imply the other too. Idea knows ORDER, for changing
ORDER, it changes order (law of Baudouin) because it realizes
itself, the (known) order being not good enough. When we are not
hungry (cold, etc.), we may try and invent a flying machine
(physics), but always is our applause (control) in first place,
prevalent, even just when we are inventing that machine. Parents,
teachers, scientists, technicians, judges, philosophers, butchers,
the man who clips your railway ticket, they all want control over
mankind first (possession) (applause), their job in second or third
place. The film star has a personality, has poise, is seemingly a
top-ape instead of a mere nought, as she shows you. How does she do
that? What is the observable difference between one who suggests (to
you, the world) that she has 'a' personality, and one who does not
suggest so (although may have one) ? Simply by showing to be in
control. But how does one show to be in control? Simply, again, by
showing 'contempt'. If possible, good-will (ing), plus contempt.
Thus it is, that one gets idolated by people (suckers) for which one
has-, and shows, the most utter contempt.
Next: Elaboration 15
Up: Elaboration 14
Previous: Elaboration 14.3
Ven
2007-09-11