Intimate Expression

I share my experience because I have come to be aware that so many others have had  a similar experience, many not  having had the opportunity to understand the consequences of our conditioning on how we live our lives. For much of my life  I have been unsure about how to express my experience. Looking back I learned not to trust what I experienced and so it ended up that I did  not know how to allow all experience to be itself. I now realize that it was a part of being  taught to  use the mind to reflect an overlay of opinions and ideas about the experience. I just didn`t really get the connection between the direct  experience and  authentically  expressing it. In entering into the world of  earning money and finding a job and seeking out pleasurable experiences, there seemed to be no advantage to that. The two seemed to be so separate and isolated  from each other.  Ultimately how is it that we can find  words  that reflect the direct experience when the mind is covering it over in its  habitual way of  perceiving, creating  and pursuing something else. They end up being  more about the mind.


6 thoughts on “Intimate Expression

  1. Placing too high an expectation on our writing can be a major constipator of creativity. My philosophy is to not worry too much, but open up and let things out. The idea which doesn’t work may be the stepping stone that leads to the one that does.

    When it comes to expressing the formless, I suppose the time-honoured technique is via symbols – equating freedom to the flight of a bird, justice or reason to the fine cutting of a blade, etc. Abstractions are hard for the mind to hold onto and to integrate.


    1. Yes I no longer put expectation on my writing or painting. I feel that is useful to contemplate the notion of ambition itself in its role in our lives. Symbols and rituals can be used I guess as many religions use but often they become compromised in layers of meaning, belief interpretation and culture it seems. Its funny because words are abstractions and I guess that is what I mean by realizing the limitations. But I have no doubt that there is something more intuitive that is the essence of what we are and what life is that is involved. Animals communicate and we communicated before we had language or the ability to symbolize. Even cells have an ability to interact and communicate that science can not grasp completely. But we continue to look and share and see what we discover in all this with what we have available to us I guess. Awareness is a key for me.


      1. A friend recently pointed me to this scientific paper on how groups of humans sometimes exhibit the characteristics of a super-organism. It also makes comparison to animals such as ants and bees. The author makes the point that much human communication is via body language, of which we may not be fully conscious. And other animals often use sounds or, I think, smells. I think the important aspect of this kind of non-symbolic and non-conceptual communication is that it works because of the degree of commonality between the individuals. A bee has its instincts with communication only having to provide basics such as information on direction and triggers for pre-existing patterns of mutually beneficial behaviour. What makes communication more difficult for we humans is that we have different world-views, different frameworks of perception, which we need to use words to negotiate. Tribal cultures could use dance and singing and body language to forge a common worldview, because the experiences and belief systems of those who made up the group were less diverse. Now that so much of our communication takes place over the internet or via texting on mobile phones, we less often have the advantages of body language.

        But I like to believe that our varied experiences and beliefs are still grounded in something common to us all which we can access and which can help us to resolve our conflicts and discover how our differences can prove complimentary.

        Anyway, you might find the paper interesting reading :


      2. Even though we strive to do so I have doubts that we can know everything. We dont know the origins of consciousness or even really what it is. There are different ways to know or different consciousness you might say. From what I have experienced some are not ameanable to scientific methods. There is an author Rupert Sheldrake that writes about morphic resonance. I think that it is an interesting concept that illustrates that our senses and cognitive capacities might somewhat limit our capacity to know.

        Thanks I will look at that article


      3. I like Rupert Sheldrake. I read his book Science Set Free. I don’t know if his idea of morphic resonance holds up, but it seems credible to me. It would be easy to miss something so universal – to not be able to see the wood for the trees.


      4. I dont know if it holds up either but the spirit of his investigation is what draws me. Yes, that we might be missing something is key for me. That there might be possibilities that our current methods may not be suitable to explore is real. What we are missing, may, allow us to realize our humanity and being in more ways than our current perceptions, norms and concepts do, that may in fact limit and confine us.
        Or maybe there is nothing more but I have an intuitive sense that we are missing something of ourselves or maybe it is that we are not ready to see deeper truths.
        Are you familiar with Jean Gebser?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.