Comment on Montevideo (part 10)

Fast T Sat, Jan 16, 2010
Thank you for a challenging and inspiring post, Xaos. It does indeed bear on some predispositions, as klaitner pointed in the comment above.
Taking the liberty to relate to this comment, I will also allow myself a slight re-molding of the question it starts with. I would ask: If categories are the foundation of logical thought, what are openness and emptiness a foundation of?

These are quite a few if’s to start with, and rightly so. It seems to me there is more than one kind of logical thought, where ‘categories’ serve as one (albeit very easily accessed) order. Whereas categories are most efficient for sorting, sorting isn’t encompassing the full scope employing our cognitive abilities. Taking this line to its logical middle, direction isn’t necessarily confined to categorical means. Inevitably, openness gains an access for direction to emerge in concert with complexity in ways that exceed pre-ordered paradigms. Such is the case for beauty, creativity and indeed vision (as portrayed in this post) as direction.

In this sense, I find the potent line of exploring direction as emerging from ‘human as a vision’ few degrees freer in terms of shedding pre-ordination. Perhaps in that we engage our intelligent direction slightly emptier of the more solidified boundaries our conceptual tools lined for us so far.

As Xaos articulated it in his comment:
The future is opaque in the sense becoming, yet, today, more then ever, we can and we should influence that incomputable process of becoming.

This spells direction to me and moreover, it reminds me not to confuse direction (as an intelligent engagement) with particular content.