Reconstructing a Lost World

I’ve almost lost sense of all that is human. It is the world that has to be reconstructed for me. I wish I had more to feel, more to know, more to say...well, to be sure there has been more to feel, but this stage is extremely inchoate, a wordless pulp, which for some reason cannot be united or verbalized. May be it is a good thing, but I do have my emotions being carried off by something unknown, to a place unknown and beyond any control I can exert upon it. A sense of fatigue looms, to hide myself from all this is the nothingness of sleep seems to be what I am most compelled to do.

And perhaps this conflict between this bombardment of this infinite almost everything at once, at once bewildering and tiring, and the contrasting but similar to it sense of nothingness can be resolved by a sense of something: a unifying order that brings all of this together and doesn’t let it slip away. It would be a world of concepts, as embodying the meanings of a multitude of words, thus reducing to some extent this infinitude. But this too must be reduced and perhaps the only way to do it is to find a sense of ‘the something’, that is, a unifying idea of what ‘something’ is, under which all meanings and things are subsumed.

Now why is a letting go, or slipping away disturbing? At one level, again, as already described, there is the sense of the unknown. But why is this sense of the unknown so disconcerting? One theory of mine is that from the sudden appearance of the hidden and unexpected in nature, which, being contingent and which we therefore fear, because we aren’t sure whether it is there to benefit us or harm us, we extrapolate this phenomena to the world of our emotions, nature turning metaphorically into these emotions (and that is why we find so many of our emotions represented in nature) and individual instances (particulars) of unfamiliar emotions therefore are feared, even as they turn up. SO basically verbalising then helps us to identify the unfamiliar and reassure us that these aren’t unfamiliar after all. Also, when we know what these emotions are, there is a formal order which is applied on to them, which can be reapplied in the case of further instances, because, these take part within the scaffolding of the order.

How then is the order reapplied? To this I would say through a rule: the rule being Identify unidentified instance y with known x, and apply adapted response z for x, to instance y. SO here there is not fear to a known response to identified emotion. But how to associate an appropriate response with x? Furthermore, considering the context is different and the emotion that appears is therefore combined with a different set of further emotions, how do we identify the emotion and how do we find out that the response that was appropriate to a different context is appropriate to this context?

A solution to the above problem would be to further subdivide each emotion into an atomic emotion and parts of a context to atomic events and things which make up a context. These are what exist and are the basic constituents of our world. This might further problematize the whole issue since one wanted to reduce the number of constituents through conceptualising them, now these constituents, being atomic and individual, seem suddenly to have multiplied! However, now that these emotions are predicable, they can now be reidentified through time, thereby economizing on the whole issue...at least...