I hit a black cat with my car in my stupid suburban neighborhood. I was surely speeding slightly, off to fetch some beer, when the cat zoomed past, under my car. That’s when I heard the thud. Then I saw it skit away in limping fashion, full of adrenaline I’m sure. It happened fast, and I kept going, only to turn around about 10 seconds later. It wasn’t around. So sad.

Why reality? Why the big deal? What is Plato’s usage of the word tell us about his definition? How come I am obsessed by this topic? Why must I relate art to reality?
I was confident in my previous theory of reality; the more real the more useful. But this idea still doesn’t get at how I determine the real thing. The real thing was determined by a look. Those things seemed to be useful, however, the theory fails right away. A car seems more useful than a toaster, but the former doesn’t appear (look) more real; they appear to have the same reality. So I determine that all things have the same reality. Reality cannot be thought of only as a look. We can say things like, ‘the TV show, Bachelor is not real’. It doesn’t depict life honestly. It’s just a game. But that’s a generalization. In fact, certain aspects of human nature may be depicted…..

I started to panic. For all the reasons it happens. The worst of it comes with paranoia, ‘why is this happening to me?’, ‘what did I do to deserve this?’, ‘people make mistakes, but this seems cruel and unusual..’. A thousand reasoning that only make matters worse. Then afterwards a defense is manufactured. Things that would not disturb to such excess, in a society that values work and it’s output, a life stitched together with many successes, time that is lost without work’s output, is good reason to panic. Time is for success, not failure. This is how it goes in America. The word doom comes to mind. Getting wasted seems ok.

The reality is that time is coming around knocking on my door. The realization I most likely do not become the kind of artist I had hoped to be is like an avalanche. That I previously could cope with, keep at bay, comes crashing down. Regrets, emotions and feelings about a place,…Alienation, all the negative things, …This place is an obstacle. I must overcome the negativity it generates in me. One does need these mini-successes. I don’t see another way. Damn, I really want a beer right now; a bold beer. And damn to absurd and ingrained notions of beauty.

Surely the fate of human beings is like that of the animals
the same fate awaits them both; as one dies, so dies the other.
All have the same breath. – Ecclesiastes 3:19

<——————— STATEMENTS ARE OUT OF ORDER ————————>

What is an existential threat? A political analyst was talking about nuclear agreements between the US and Russia when she mentioned the ‘existential threat’ present. I don’t like the term, but I do understand the word threat. When I try to make sense of it, I come up with realish (wasn’t I not to use this word?) threat. Perhaps harbinger, or eminent, but not existential. If one wants to indicate a threat exists, it can be said plainly. The usage of ‘existential’ in this context is unpleasing. I believe the term is better saved for human experiences. It may be said if one is not fully absorbed, perhaps semi-absorbed into their situation, surrounding, etc. Or if one’s existence is muted, lessened, not grounded, etc. The word gestalt comes to mind when dealing with existential phenomena. I hear the phrase existential threat too much; it’s an interruption.
If America, the person, felt this way, I would tell her she thinks too much. Sometimes I’m completely fine, and I start to worry about this and that, money, success, etc – these are the existential threats. These inner feelings are not really happening; my surroundings are quite safe. The problem manifests with those that can live in a non-existent future. We humans all do it.

it seems doctor, that only when I’m intereseted in something, does something else interesting come along,
and that’s when I can’t seem to keep a focus on anything interesting. the other times in life are just a drag, you know?
<——————-more proofreading ———————->
Plato seems to refer to the original idea as being authored by God, and perhaps that is true, perhaps not, but why,
or should I say how, does it happen to occur to Man anyway?
Nature provides a place for all the animals to rest. It doesn’t seem to need any
naming; not until he comes along. But why really? Perhaps because man needs an improvement, and perhaps
that is the essence of ideas; an improvement. Take walking for example. If man has an idea for walking, it usually
occurs for a reason, health-wise for example. Thus I wonder if all ideas originate from a lack.
The reality of things. If some object possesses realness. Plato argues that images (paintinings) are imitations, not real.
Although the image is unreal, the container object – even in the case of, say a
dimension-minimized poster – exhibits realness. Only if one attempts
to penetrate into the image in-and-of-itself does one manage to escape reality at all. Whether this is possible,
or not, is besides the point.
Does Plato suggest realness having a functional component? i.e., what makes a chair
real is the fact that it has some function; it serves a purpose.
If I observe the bed in my mother’s room, I can surmise this bed surely is real. It appears real. I believe that. If
my guru tells me surely otherwise, I would dismiss the claim because I am sure. How am I so sure? The bed is
contained within the framework of reality; the painting of a bed as well, only perhaps not the inner image.
All objects seem to display some quality of realness. Thus I conjecture to say, reality is gestalt, only the image – paintings, film, etc – remains in conflict. Plato would argue, the true reality is in the form of ideas only, God’s bed is the
only real bed, the maker of furniture only designs a particular bed. In computer science they call this an
instance. My counter argument tends to be that reality has a visual property, perhaps alongside with other
characteristics. It is this look that causes us to believe in what real and not real. At the same time, our bodies
also seem to exist within reality itself. There is no thread that allows us to unravel our shape to better determine
the nature of reality…
One complaint I have is that certain words are often easily exchanged for another, such as reality and truth. I don’t think
that an idea like “everyday life” should be thought of as reality.
My definition of reality…phenomena that pervades all things,
providing them the quality of realness. So what is real? All
things are essentially real, some are animate, some possess
life, etc. It’s surely a laziness or dumbness, perhaps a
dissatisfaction with status quo, that allows the use
of a single word to replace or become analogous to other words,
especially in a language that is so obviously overloaded.
Strictness of wording is too late for the times, but one can try.

On second thought, perhaps Plato’s thinking derives from function, or usefulness after all. He talks about the three arts: user, maker, imitator. I gather he tends to
sway towards ideas as being the truly real thing. That may be due to his philosophical quest, and in this sense, ideas
are even more useful than the objects that represent them.
I suppose I don’t agree with Plato on his usage of the word reality. I tend not to think that the idea form is the true reality. As I mentioned above, my grasping of reality is more surface level. In fact, I tend to feel interrupted when the word is used otherwise. The use of terms like “alternate reality” often are suggestive of a sequence of events unlike that which occurs in normal reality. For some reason this usage bothers me, but it’s so common that I can easily dismiss.
I wonder if reality is dropping us a clue – mind my anthropomorphic usage.
Our instincts are surely guiding our capability to discern the realness of things.
On the surface it seems that all things that have realness also provide value. The more functional, the more real it seems. Perhaps this is reality’s intention.
I wonder what Plato would have thought about the French Symbolists or the Abstract Expressionists? Imitation arts?

The meaning becomes imbued in the work – writing, painting, etc..Obviously, Kant is heavily influenced by Plato; reason is their
favorite thing. Doesn’t he seem like a cop that Plato? I don’t know, I suppose in a way it’s liberating, but then
also seems constricting in his condemnation; the Buddha perhaps, having similar recommendations, but not nearly
as severe as Plato.
And what about the term invention. Is the bed not an invention? I can sleep on a table, but surely no sane
person would call it a bed. Plato seems to indicate the bed is firstly created by God in the form
of idea I suppose. Thus inventors merely imitate God’s design. The inventor’s bed is not the true bed, only an instance.
But to invent seems to create something genuine, in both the functional sense and the descriptive. A bed is a place for resting still, and since I can rest on a table, or on the grass,
what exactly is being invented in a bed? Some quality or qualities other than a place to rest perhaps give it
invention status. A lack precipitates invention.

This day was like this:

morning breakfast with usual chai cups, giving my dad his diabetes meds, um…
putting on pix 11 news, showering, etc.
surfing the web, getting up, thinking about nothing,
…

this is not about serendipity to start,
then what? this acute eerie feeling I have, like a
vacuum silently sucking away the life’s force. All this
just sitting here at the dining table on a cold grey day.
Like knowing all my activities lead to nowhere and back
into the void, i.e., they won’t take me anywhere.
But maybe instead, it’s a pain; like pain from reading and
absorbing information. I read a
novel about Nietzsche, “I Am Dynamite”. Now it’s Jung,
“Labyrinths”, and exactly now, it’s a NYTimes article about
Joan Didion’s new book, “I’ll Tell You What I Mean”.
But why?
Why am I reading all this or any other thing of information?
I suppose I am very unsatisfied with the benefits. What are the
perks? I don’t discuss with anyone. I am not in a book club. I
don’t even like to read. I’ll forget it all by the end of the week;
any detail of nuance anyway.
My therapist tells me to make the things that are bothersome
explicit. That’s why I am doing this you. And here I was
derailing him for being general – for someone else. So let’s make
whatever explicit.
Now I am in Saturn’s antardasha. Time is seemingly on my mind.
It most likely the culprit for feeling crummy. All that I do is meaningless,
but more to the point time-intensive. I never felt time to be a
commodity before. With so much out there, and so little focus, my
stress level is rising. I spend more time pacing. What can I do?
I can’t stay sitting for long, that I already know. Time can’t be
stopped, and is slow in all the wrong ways. I have wanted too
much for too long. Wanting too much requires too much time.
Now I’ll need to find a way to want less, but that’s easier said
than done.
How my mind is dull. So words flow out without structure, and
might have meaning, but really just noise. So like this:
jump-up-and-down, rope-skipping, etc. What are thiese ideas about?
Random noise that flows into my thoughts but don’t really have
substance. So a dull mind allows this type of penetration of noise and might
attribute excessive meaning when really it’s just fluff. I insist, my mind is dull.
Yes, I’m tired and when I have energy I cannot sit still, except right now I suppose.
I need more time. I am good at wasting time, but that’s not really true.
I don’t have the successes I need. If I don’t succeed in painting I will never be happy.
Once again, I don’t feel the optimism of days. I am in the town, but I don’t
want to be here, or more so, I don’t want any of them to be here. Them is the
community of naysayers I attract.
It seems to me regarding color, that if one doesn’t insist, then the right to use
is diminished. The right to use, that also means going right when using. However,
this is an intuitive idea, I cannot know unless I really dive into the idea, and like I said
I just don’t have the time. Many of my thoughts are based on intuition. Happens quite
a lot.
What is this existential threat I keep hearing about? I don’t feel grounded, not real.
This lack of grounding, it seems to me, is cause for many
problems that arise. How can one ever feel satisfied if one is not fully present in the world?
Does this existential threat give credence to idolatry? But first I must know, if existential implies
a division, or unification, rather nullification. I insist that any form of knowing, i.e., awareness,
still remains in a divisive mode of being.