Cheating at Meaning III: Always Between

As far as meaning goes here on earth, we only have what we have, nothing more, which I don’t like because there's nothing more I can 'get' (i.e. 'get' as in 'to understand' but more fearfully 'to possess'), and nothing less, which implies a simple responsibility to sincerely try understanding what I may about my limited humanity.

Because every one lives here in limitation, between our human biology and our numinous experience, between our bodies and our minds we live between past and future, in the space between our experience and the symbols of our experience. We are neither the experience nor the symbol(s) of our experience, and no matter how much meaning I may obtain by it, I am neither my numinous relationship experience nor the symbols I use to describe it to myself.

At its most basic level a symbol is simply a tool for mental apprehension, and because symbols and symbolism are apprehended in a person's consciousness, a symbol can be anything. But symbols, helpful and functional as they are, are not who we are, are not as 'real' as we are.

This is why no matter what I do to mentally investigate my experience, if I am intellectually honest, I can never capture the experiential 'essence' of my experience in symbol(s), even in symbol representation to myself. Experience, as experience itself, is and will always be a bit of the 'beyond' we get to have while in between.

Cheating at Meaning II

On the other hand, part of what has always irritated me (until recently) about 'people' is their lack of desire to pierce the veil* as it were, to push past the ignorance imposed on our consciousness, by our engrossment in either holding pattern amusement or basic biology survival and reproduction. I have always craved (serious, deep) meaning from the time I was twelve.

Twelve: I remember I was at school, looking out the window, thinking about how many people there were in all those blank looking houses, how many houses there were all over the neighborhood, the county, the state, the world, how many different things those people were doing, and how very much the same they all were; quite naturally I wondered what it all meant, where was the meaning, and what meaning might I have when I grew up.

Story: Perhaps this is why we like stories and storytelling so much, they amuse us (i.e. waste time in holding patterns) and bind us together (i.e. better bonds to survive by). They not only convey meaning, but do it on a myriad of levels: cultural, sociological, moral, religious – birth, life, family, victory, defeat, shame, pride, death, there's just no end to the meanings we can wrap into, tap into, a good story (or even a poor one). Anything this useful to our biological meaning matrix would never be discarded by evolution (if evolution had a will with which to discard) or by any ruling divinity.

I fear if I had the opportunity to attain such deep down meaning I would skirt the very borders of right and wrong in the attempt. This 'flexibility' is why I wonder and worry about my motives in investigating the numinous relationship experience.

~~

* I think (I could be wrong) the phrase "pierce the veil" is a reference to the Jewish temple holy seat, the literal place where God was believed to reside – again, the numinous and meaning.

Perhaps the Origin Doesn't Make the Species

I stopped caring very much about human origins years ago but couldn't explain to people (who obviously did care) exactly why I didn't care anymore, but now I think I can explain. It seems to me many people are preoccupied with the meaning and significance of 'how' we got to have the human experiences we have, and the idea that the origin of humanity might somehow help explain the purpose of humanity is perfectly understandable. So whether it was evolution, or a divinity (or divinities), or aliens, or some other process or some combination of processes, 'what separates us from the (other) animals' is usually part of a body of evidence either supporting or detracting from one or another of these theories.

Yes, it makes sense; except I don't think I really associate my human origin with my human purpose so much. The fact is (right now) our human origin is not a knowable thing (with any degree of acceptable certainty [to me]) while the facts of my experience are knowable things, and I feel very confident in the interactive nature of my physical body with my consciousness.

So if our 'human' consciousness, or what ever it is that separates us from (other) animal species, is an emergent phenomena from the sheer complexity of biology, genetics and evolution (as the scientist in this video seems to suggest), then that's all well and good (I'll honestly be an automatic fan of anything that 'makes me human'), but now I have these meaningful numinous (spiritual, religious) experiences that seem far more significant than the purpose (or lack of purpose) my evolutionary origin can satisfy.

While evolutionary theory can explain 'how' we came to have (some) experiences of meaning we have, it can't meaningfully explain 'why' as in purpose (unless the answer is 'no reason' - which [with apologies to Existentialism] is not meaningful ) without resorting to some sort of scientism. Unfortunately scientistic, evolutionary-biologic explanations of my experiences simply do not reference enough important pieces of my puzzle interior to have satisfactory explanatory power over the human biological meaning matrix.

What I recently realized is that the most meaningful piece for my interior purpose (and motivation) isn't what separates 'humans' (or human experience) from anything else (period), but rather what has the most explanatory power over what I experience as a human, over what I already have on my (human) interior framework. And one thing I already have there are some powerful experiences of meaning and significance that have now become a part of the order of my (human) existence.

On the other hand I am not arguing for 'divinely given purpose' for humanity either, for if I owe my origin to a divinity (or divinities) who claim a purpose for me then I have some faith the divinity would want my experiences (including experiences of and through my biology) to reveal the good purpose(s) the divinity has for me. And while I have been religious in the past, I haven't quite arrived at a divinely inspired personal purpose for my (human) life yet.

Thus, despite all the posible causal permutations and variations of human origination, it seems to me my experience always has primacy over my origin - at least as far as meaning is concerned.

Gendered Frameworks

My wife and I recently had a 'disagreement' and we had the following imagined conversation afterward to explain our points of view.

She: This sweater is itchy.
Me: You can take it off if you want but I don't think it's the sweater because the material is designed to not be itchy.
She: It's not very helpful when you just disagree with me.
Me: But it is helpful to contribute salient and relevant facts.
She: Except that people generally don't want help solving things; they can solve things on their own and if they need help with that they usually ask specifically for some kind of 'solving help'. What they really want normally is supportive help.
Me: Supportive help? With a sweater? I can understand Supportive help with the death of a loved one, but with an itchy sweater?
She: Yes, even with little things like with itchy sweaters.
Me: But that's the most obnoxious and crazy thing I've ever heard, look if--
She: (Looks meaningfully at me.)
Me: Yes, Dear.

For the record I do not believe men and women are from different planets, or even simply communicate as if they are from different planets. I might accept men and women may occasionally demonstrate sociologically statistically significant (if only slightly so) different motivations that could be accounted for by evolutionary theory - but who cares, because we are ninety-nine percent more alike in our common humanity than we are different (i.e. neither sex or gender are aliens to the other, see also the human biological meaning matrix for some real basic elemental and meaningful gender sameness).

Thus, I rather see the difference here as one of frameworks, one framework being more compact (hers) where often differences (facts) are seen but ignored because they not experientially meaningful (see worth), the other framework being more differentiated (mine) where often not very meaningful non-experienced differences are observed, catalogued and filed away for future problem solving reference. And naturally people can only listen to the symbols they understand, so she wouldn't 'hear' the 'help' I was giving her, and I wouldn't 'hear' her request for 'support'. (Actually seeing frameworks in action like this, or inaction as the case may be, is so fascinating.)

I also think this is why educating people, of any gender (race, age, creed, etc.), against their will is never very efficacious; people need a certain amount of experiential meaning to 'relate', and that certain amount will vary person to person as their frameworks differ. Every framework has strengths and weaknesses, even blind spots, but this seems as if it is something all frameworks have in common.

Cheating at Meaning

I read something recently which made me wonder at my own motivations for investigating what I have named the numinous relationship experience. I do believe in my relationship with my wife I am experiencing something as meaningful and numinous, but it is a very valid question to ask if am I trying to force more 'divine experience' by my investigation, if I am attempting to gain more meaning by cheating, cheating on some experiential aspect that is necessary and required for obtaining worth (e.g. spiritual knowledge, spiritual wisdom) while living here on earth.

If investigating the numinous relationship experience in order to qualitatively improve the relationship, improve its innate meaning and significance, is all well and good, I thus start looking for the line in the sand. I wonder at what point is the investigation is trying to 'beat' the meaning game, trying to cheat the biological meaning matrix (for instance taking drugs to 'enhance' the spiritual journey is not my thing), trying to take a shortcut across the material genetic 'code', across sociological terms and rules, even across the nature of human reality, to somehow - win 'illicit' meaning.

The concept of rising above past and beyond the human competition and strivance for meaning in life bespeaks an attempt to skip out on or skip over the bounds and limitations of my corporeal existence - I am wary of the idea of becoming a 'little enlightened god' (through my numinous relationship experience or otherwise) while here on earth.

I do not think I am attempting to force a divine experience; I think I am naming what I experience, i.e. that there is something 'divine' about this relationship experience. I do not claim I am enlightened by the experience; I don't even think I am (re)naming or (re)labeling the experience as 'divine' merely in order to feel more spiritually enlightened, that would be 'empty' meaning.

When I previously asked (also here) how many numinous nodes of human experience could there be, it wasn't because I am trying to catalogue their exact placement and nature in the hopes of revealing some secret hidden knowledge about the meaning of human existence (I honestly don't think there is any such secret hidden knowledge), i.e. cheating on living through the engendering experience aspect of the process of gaining meaning.

Yet I do wonder if I understand everything I can from what I have already experienced, so what I am trying to do is understand the nature of the process by which we experience meaning. Where meaning happens in our lives may indicate the condition under which it happens, the conditions then might more directly sought in order to receive (i.e. not force) as much meaning as would come an individual's way. I want to gain as much understanding as I can from what I do experience, and so I differentiate as much as I can by mentally interpreting and reflecting upon what I experience emotionally, volitionally and spiritually.

What is Gender Good For

So this article asks 'what are men good for', of course the author was asking it on the level of sociological gender differences, but I found myself last night asking 'what are women good for' on a personal level. Aside from my sexuality, I am not sure it matters to me whether a woman is a woman or a man. Surely the fact of a person's gender is part of the mental frame through which I interact with that person; it's part of the mental frame through which they interact with the world, just as it is part of mine.

I think I am uxorious because my wife is the person she is, and happens to be a woman; if she were a man, she'd either be my best friend or I'd need a different word than uxorious to describe myself and a different phrase to describe our relationship than 'female led'. (I am so not an apologist for female led relationships.)

So I sincerely wonder, on a personal level, after one's sexuality is discounted, is gender merely a part of my social reference frame, and then not even a very important part? What is gender good for? To what extent have we managed, will we ever manage, to surpass our gendered evolution? Does it matter?

Self Worth

Self acceptance, acceptance of one's self including all the less than perfect parts and the less than 'normal' parts, is not the same as self worth. I have already pointed out how a fact is different than a fact's worth, different than the personal valuation of a fact that is gained on one's interior through experience. One can accept another person or themselves as they are, not expect them to change, be different, be 'better', be more 'normal', than they are; but this is not the same thing as to value that person, to find worth in that person, or even to find certain worth in that person, or to value that person in a certain manner.

In a very real sense it is an obvious point, but today I found myself, actually telling myself in defense against another (who also felt I offended them), "I have worth, I have value; what I think, what I believe, what I feel, and my opinion, even if no one knows them, matter." And as I said these things to myself I realized I meant these words for myself and not for the other person, I meant to speak the truth and encourage myself, not to convince any other person.

I derive so much meaning from adequately representing and symbolizing my experience, to my self and when communicating with another, I think it is sometimes difficult for me when it seems no one can or will listen, seems no one around who can or will understand. It is at these times I find myself reminding myself I have worth, worth to myself, though no one else may see it, I, from my interior experience, still know.