I agree with this. I tried to say as much when I said that we must symbolize with metaphor and the metaphor is never adequate to embody consciousness or the Real. If I could've I would've written Saul's last sentence, below.
WC --- saul ostrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The Real subscribes to no logic or order it merely > exists in experience > undisrupted by cognition. It is impossible to > integrate the Real into the > realm of the symbolic because it has no other > against which it may be > foregrounded. As such its portrayed, is only > imagined. On the other hand its > evocation is associated with a yearning for a > unification of knowledge and > pleasure, whose achievement is believed to result > in dissolving the > always, already transitory illusion of control and > agency. This vision of > a space in which causality and actuality is > non-existent is embedded in the > notion that all that does exists is the product of > our interpretation of > signs of our own making. Premised on this it is > proposed that the The > manifests itself in the blur or the smudge that is > taken to be an accident > that defaces the seamlessness of the symbolic, which > is taken to be sign of > the Real's resistance to being cut into pieces by > the symbolic order of > language and representation. It is the inability > to differentiating > between the Real and the symbolic that makes our > lives both fanciful and > traumatic. > > -- > Saul
