Pragmatism and Struggle: On Works and Days

Yet Zeus can easily provide great prosperity for more: more hands, more work, and greater surplus. If your spirit in your breast yearns for riches, do as follows, and work, work upon work.”

  • Hesiod

men speak euphemistically of virtue in reference to a life that is adverse to action, but that is not how things truly stand, in my view. . . . Those who sitting full of arguments and philosophizing in a corner discourse very pompously about justice and moderation, usually disgrace themselves when compelled to undertake some action”

  • Damascius

Alt title: Life as a Treatise Against Death: This is the subtitle but it’s just a stand in to say Heidegger’s a Navy bitch

If any action to explain our condition has to appeal to dualism then we can just say that we’re a needle sewing ourselves together. The pains of being sewn by the outside world pushes us to want to do it ourselves. Whence thus this “self movement” comes from? Numb to the pain, we don’t feel when we sew ourselves. Others create a disturbance, an aesthetic one, when they take control of the needle.

We call the needle intention and we call the sewing what is. Whence thus does intention come from?

We can distinguish two types of intention but only kinda. The first intention is universal and is what shaped us into this present moment. The second type of intention is the intention that only kinda exist and it’s our own. We measure our own intention within what is. We accept what is as a consequence of universal intention.

When we die presumably our intention dies. “We” being a composition of expressed traits within what is. Intention being an expressed trait, we first existed as containers for what is based on inherent value systems.

The containers eventually evolved with various traits. The traits themselves contained what is, placed there by universal intention.

What is universal intention? An atom has intention, for example. We study its context and discern the intention expressed. Context expresses intention. Universal intention could be intention within the context of everything. Individual intention could then be seen as contextualized or sub-contextualized universal intention.

We as containers of traits express contextualized universal intention. Contextualized can be seen as individuated. Our intention cannot be divided from itself but it can be divided from universal intention. Why? Or how?

This could be controversial but the first person to see fire as a tool didn’t actually see the fire differently. Rather they saw themselves differently. The human contextualized themselves outside the context universal intention had placed it in. But how?

Here we run into a problem. Wouldn’t it be universal intention that we re-work the intention provided? By re-work I mean when you come up to a concept that can be expressed in a number of different ways (for example, what color shirt will you wear tomorrow?, cf axiom of choice), is there an actual “choice” being worked and re-worked? Did universal intention intend a choice?

This is an opportunity to calibrate the word intention. Once we calibrate the word it becomes a term. In this instance, intention is understood as a necessary result. From this understanding, we’re already trying to beg the question, use circular reasoning. We have a necessary result that includes a container expressing its “own intention.”

A long time ago I was born and developed a Will that “expects” certain results with the expectation that everything in the outside world (including me) has its own expectations. From a practical point of view, universal intention doesn’t seem to act on expectations but expectations are developed within universal intention. Regardless if the expectations are not met, universal intention continues/perpetuates what is.

The issue with free, abstract expression is “understanding” requires reception/expectation. That is to say that universal intention, in creating expectation, creates meaning. Meaning is when expectation is met.

As containers with intention (a positive action) we understand ourselves as met-less expectation (a negative action; we naturally yearn). The universe blindly intended a group of containers that expect each other.

blooms — crazy rants masked as abstract experimental philosophy. s/o CS Peirce