Content and Sense

-- By GregOrr - 17 Apr 2009

In Robert Musil's The Man Without Qualities, a group assembled from Austrian society is given the opportunity to choose an idea to spur the world to a better future (or something like 'identify/point to content/value', in the sense of what mountain, probably something like the author's wonder of life, generally/personally/societally/interestedly/pleasantly/practically/accurately/correctly... , "baseball is life, the rest is just details"?, love, picture of wife and children on work desk... ), and they survey/develop though have difficulty reaching consensus among various things and subgroup perceptions and interests. This provides foreground to personal experience/search/development of the title character, Ulrich, who experiences/sees actualities/possibilities and sides of things. Situations have particular/similar/different/combining/contrasting components, and even individual components have parts in this way, “Like watching someone eat silently, without sharing his appetite: You suddenly perceive only swallowing movements, which look in no way enviable.”

He observes, “Meaning lies roughly halfway between reasoning and capriciousness,” with common forms of capriciousness including how we privilege particular contents/interpretations through cultural or personal preunderstanding and “how we unquestionably seek the firm and solid in life as urgently as a land animal that has fallen into the water.” Ulrich wonders about semi-certainty, considering internal and external material and phenomena, in curious observation and interest/hope about things, good stuff/truth. Reasoning is often sufficient as well as sometimes asymptotic and/or confounded, with some level of capriciousness contributing to decisions made (or not made) in finite time. Ulrich has/finds/develops/codifies some at least subjectively interesting/positive/graceful material as he goes (subjective to me as a reader as well as the character/author, it is a well-regarded book, at least by some), as do other characters, though the book is not concluded, Musil (do you think a muse pun is intended?) died while still writing it.

In this essay I will further explore structure underlying these phenomena/ideas and consider implications. I will consider content and reality, understanding and misunderstanding, people's participation in, appreciation of, and creative development through openness and reflection in thinking and communication, and issues of range and parsimony.

Intersubjective Reality and Communication

In a definition of reality, I would include the objective world (I assume this substratum exists, given its apparent substantiality and consistency) and all subjective consciousnesses/souls. Each subjective consciousness/soul exists experientially with perceptual data and substance, additive to and part of the whole. While there is real material, a large common thoroughfare, experience and reality of good and right at least in some cases/senses, conventional wisdom, common sense, ability to understand and operate individually and between people, because each person only has access to and is particular to a subset of the whole (possibly pending the Lama's suggestion to Carl Spackler), one naturally operates with situations, assumptions, interests, understandings, and meanings that differ from others’.

We have some content, sense, and communication, and our lives, understanding, and effort have some substantial/epistemological robustness/delicacy, as far as we know/understand anyway. We have our five regular senses, thoughts and feelings, with some subset of material experienced/known in some extent, various in kind/degree, consistency/contrast. We have resources and rationality and move along in reality/pace/efficiency of space and time. We have language to formulate/represent/express/communicate/organize reality bouquet material with some fidelity/effectiveness, with some development/boundedness of language and degree of facility with it (how expert a musician are you? what are you able to play with your instrument in comparison with reality beyond/separate from that?), and when a person has/says something, there are usually/often elements of approximate model between reality and understanding and speculative hypothesis subject to iterative development, confirmation/rejection, some other ways of having/developing/resolving. A linguistic representation might be characterized as a metaphor: a signal pointing to reference material, aside from possible non-referential and/or thing-in-itself ars poetica of linguistic material, lorem ipsum. Layered on top of this are supra-linguistic cues such as context, structure, tone, and irony, which further refine the message to make it a more precise pointer. Non-linguistic statements, such as facial expressions, body language, and visual arts, may be further added or stand on their own as expressions that can be characterized similarly. Some Finnegan's Wake surf in phenomenology, though there's much content and form clear positive and well-understood, like I get school, I get laws, I get spatulas and other things, I get industrial design ideas, more or less, reality is substantial/stable/sensible, my apartment and life makes positive sense to me, good/reasonable, health/taste, interest/productivity/responsibility.

There is sense/expression with some facility/difficulty and understanding of expression with some facility/difficulty. Expression conveys something subjective and becomes additional perceptual data for others. Evaluation commonly interprets expressional metaphors to be consistent with one’s own pre-existing subjective world. One tends to lock into what is perceived as common/connective between expression and material as one understands it and reject, ignore, or not hear the rest. Though this may be substantially an unconscious process, logically this may involve imputing to him underlying assumptions and experience similar to one’s own or identifying which communication script one is familiar with that he seems closest to following. Responses then start with this interpretation while adding some related expression of one’s own. What can be funny or tragic is that the first communicator will often interpret the response under the assumption that the other has understood the first expression as intended, and follow-up can be confused. This is what we call talking past one another, which commonly happens to some extent/degree, even amid substantial and often/generally sufficient common thoroughfare, with varying awareness/certainty/import/effort.

Creative Communication

Nietszche said, "Woe to him who hides wastelands within." Ideally and commonly, as children and adults, with some sense and value of good appropriateness, we can and do trust each other enough to participate expressively, including exposure of lack or misunderstanding as it goes. Heidegger said, “We ourselves are pointers pointing toward what calls to be thought about.” In actuality/experience/pertinence/interest... , we participate in and point to reality and direction.

Openness to changing one's views coupled with active reflection on others' expressions allows access to a greater slice of intersubjective reality, which leads to new and more complete ideas. Moreover, greater empathy to others’ expressions helps one to be a clarifying and productive communication partner.

Reflection on the processes of constructing expressions allows more accurate and productive interpretation. What’s his situation? What are his interests? What’s his intention? What’s the tone? Is he earnest or ironic? What’s there that I haven’t incorporated? What seems to be missing? What do I know that might be relevant? What don’t I know that might be relevant? What kind of mistake might he be making? What if I’m making the mistake and not him? What might a third person have a frustrated urge to tell me about it? What might be the next step? What's on second? How unimportant/unintentional might some things be? An interesting note in Samuel Beckett's [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt_(novel)][Watt]], the title of which is probably or sounds/themes like it might be a pun for what (?), is "no symbols where none intended." I wrote a story called "The Squirrel and the Beaver" when I was young in which the primary issue/nature was what a couple of neighborhood friends were going to do with their time.

In this way, interpretations can veer from one thing to another, or from a thing to its opposite. Ideally, open and reflective communication finds its way to increasingly robust understanding.

Range and Parsimony

A reflective orientation increases one’s range in the spectrum of reasoning and capriciousness, and position on that spectrum is part of one's condition/facility. On the razor's edge of interpretation/pragmatism, we have/accept some level of awareness and capriciousness in being/behaving pleasantly and reasonably. The mix of rationality and irrationality has some manifestation of two-sidedness in results, however, one example being that from the ground up in bowling I get some score between 0 and 300, I bowl pleasantly and reasonably more or less (I have not seen myself bowling on video... ) though I 'irrationally'/incapably/happenstantially do not bowl perfect games all the time, and we can sometimes be shocked by bigger misjudgments (not sure what I'd see or how I'd feel about the possible bowling video, there might be some tuning feedback, though I bowl in a personally natural way, a bit like handwriting, I am ok with my handwriting, there is probably some natural feedback mechanism to seeing it, like a deaf person may not speak as well naturally because they don't have that sense feedback, these examples vaguely suggestive of my possibly controversial/delicate karaoke career, which I haven't seen on video though I do have ears, though it's one of those first-person subjective things, getting along, might be / probably would be some level of shock to observe, it may look in no way enviable).

Thanks for bearing with this essay written/iterated in amateur interest/productivity. I currently prefer/practice one space after periods instead of two, though when I originally wrote this essay apparently I was still practicing two spaces. Either way is acceptable to thoroughfare, I mean c'mon, though there may be some good/right thought/reality/experience about it, flow/space/style and whatnot, still think/perceive about it, sometimes/maybe depends on the case, though there's like the policy generally and cases, consistency, yada yada yada. Some other content/style issue concern edits/development. Like Bill Bryson is a decent sense idea/tendency. [Singing] "Life is a highway, I want to ride it ... " God? The way and the truth and the life, the true vine...