In my fiction I gave my life purpose a priori to life, and my life is the vehicle to that purpose. The fact is, I can’t really know that, but I can feel it, and knowing that I can not really know anything at all gives me the flexibility to work with feelings without need for convictions. Impressions are personal. Neither nature, nor nurture fully explain the complex construction of personal identity. Chasing causal relations only goes so far before an imaginative leap is required. And when one considers the non-causal interrelations that tie through personal identity, there seems to be a deeper than life narrative which is self constructed, yet consistent with external verification.
Astrology attempts to do this by imagining a system of meaning to events correlated with relation to astrological bodies. There is more than one astrological system, yet to those who subscribe to either, or even both- patterns can still be recognized to validate personal content. What is the process of pattern recognition within preconceived systems, and how can it be opened to interrelate all patterns unconstrained by any system?
Plotinus is quoted for asking skeptically, “are the stars causes?” For, the significance given to stars, and symbols in general is a product of the mind, not the symbol or star. And so Plotinus reasoned that, though the stars are not causes to the life of those born under them, they are effectively ensouled within the mind through the process of giving meaning. And so, we see many interpretations of the same stars and symbols, all holding the potential for meaning. One could reinvent meaning and find the same verification of it.
The same can be said about tarot, i ching, kabbalah, tea leaves, or any other method which ascribes personal meaning to patterns within a system. For the content to relate is always non-causal. The proof of this is in the mutual confirmation of meaning within conflicting definitions of belief. It works no matter how you slice it. Synchronicity describes all meaning found in this manner. It is about the closest to an objective science as you can get with such subjective materials, and comes as close to a breakdown of the subject/object barrier as quantum physics- which I know absolutely nothing about, so that is really just an assumption. So much is an assumption, which is sort of the point I’m getting at. 🙂
How this takes place is entirely dependent on the individual, on the accumulation of all that went into constructing their sense of self,-and how it relates to the collective world view or zeitgeist which they are a part of. In childhood we usually don’t think if the process of self development or world view construction. We tend to take information at face value until we are around long enough to discover its contradictions. Sometimes those contradiction turn out to be paradoxes and through this the mind can develop the ability to go beyond belief and use the relative fiction of meaning as a personal tool rather than a mental crutch.
Positivism, Empiricism, and Atheism may be very functioning systems, yet fail to escape the relativity they attempt to diminish by eschewing subjective qualities. What I find more valuable to working with things is perhaps deemed Existentialism, or even plain old Agnosticism. Despite popular belief, not knowing is really one of the most existentially soothing places to be. You can direct meaning how it feels to you, and avoid the cognitive dissonance which is inevitable with any belief system. Do I believe that? No, but it is how I feel about it. See?
I have always felt certain ways about things. As far back as I remember there were familiar themes to my feelings. These themes painted my internal world and I lived them out. The feeling of hesitancy to feeling is a feeling which inspires repression. The feelings of indifference or confusion are feelings which inspire dismissal or agitation. Thought process is motivated by feeling. I am feeling inquisitive about something so I research it. Action is motivated by feeling. I am feeling thirst so I drink some water (not bottled this time). Feelings can be repressed from thought or action, but foremost they are real. What does it mean? It means you have a mind and body of your own which responds uniquely to circumstances, and through interaction, paints a picture of who you are.
Some feelings change rapidly. Tastes change, and affections can fade. But there are some core feelings which seem to inform the particular feelings, and something about that core seems closest to an authentic personal identity as one could get. Out of that, all narrative is personally phrased. Personal motivation comes from the quality of internal feeling. Though we may feel resentful of a situation, we may also feel required to participate in it. Core feelings and secondary feelings are often in conflict, and so we all experience split motives at times.
Personally and collectively we are in conflict. This life is a chaotic and seemingly random collision of conflicting elements, but patterns arise, and conditions emerge which unify seemingly disparate meanings. We can all at least agree that existence is something to experience, but the details are so particular that it seems impossible to relate them all as mutually understood. This is not necessary problematic until it turns into a conflict- as all war is waged by the conflicting particulars over the shard absolutes. Essentially we are all the same, but specifically we are all unique- which makes us all the same again.
It is all a story, and we are the author written in as characters. As we approach the paradox of being the fiction writer and the written fiction something very strange occurs. I don’t want to say, because I don’t want to give it away in case you haven’t read to that point yet. Welp, I’ve already said too much and I should really get going to bed. Goodnight, sweetdreams, I love you.