Design, which is what give life to my work, to me, is all donethrough subconscious thought. I'm not even aware of what I'm creating until the design appears. as rough as it may be. It is then that conscious thinking and words come in to It's final form. Conscious design is design by outside forces.
mando On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 1:27 AM, Derek Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Re: 'I'm certain you've had thoughts in your day that the other guy > had no idea you were harboring.' > > But this does not affect my point at all. Whether I say out loud what > I am thinking is beside the point. > > RE: '> Second -- I said rock-climbers, chefs, chess-players, even > tennis-players are > > thinking all the time, just not with words. I' > > How do you know this? On the rare occasions I play chess, I am not > aware of having wordless thoughts. Ditto for the others. > > RE: 'Your question about "forms" is a red herring. What is the form of > > mental > > images? Mental images. What is the form of feelings? Feelings. When you > > finally > > acknowledge that thoughts always exist before the words are found to > express > > them, you'll perhaps agree that the answer to the question "What is the > form > > of thoughts?" is. . .thoughts.' > > No it's not a red herring. It is the nub of the matter. Feelings > certainly do have form. (That's what they achieve most fully in art). > And your last line here doesn't help. You are simply re-asserting > that thoughts can exist formlesssly - ie without any form of > embodiment. > > Re: 'I then begin the time-consuming task of "putting them into words". > > But I think you are confusing the physicall aspect of the matter - the > time it takes to write things down etc - with the theoretical issue at > stake. The mind works at such speed we can ignore the physical aspect > - this is not a matter one solves by introspection. > > Re: '> It's interesting that in the thousands of words contributed to > this thread by > > me, Mando, and Brady you have not seen a single point you agreed with, > and > > nothing you acknowledge you hadn't thought of.' > > But I disagree with the *basic* point at issue, and that's what I've > been concentrating on. I think it is a common delusion that we have > wordless thoughts. And that leads to various misundertandings - like > the idea that we are really all Dostoyoevskys manques (which i > mentioned in my last). That illusion is worth unmasking, which is what > i have been atempting to do. > > DA > > > > > > > On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 9:12 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I wrote: > > 'Then how does the writer know when the words he's mulling do not > articulate > > his thought? Obviously the thought already has to be there.' > > > > Derek responds: > > > > "But in what form could the idea even *exist* if you deny it language - > or > > for the painter colour etc, or for the composer, sounds. > > > > "The same goes for everyday thoughts: how could we - including the > thinker - > > know what the thought is if is not expressed in any way. What could give > it > > form?" > > > > If you'd tried to respond to the six challenges in #2 on wordless > thoughts, > > it's pretty to think you wouldn't be putting this question. > > > > First off, I'd hope you see that what "WE know" about another person's > > thought has no impact on whether or not he has a thought. I'm certain > you've > > had > > thoughts in your day that the other guy had no idea you were harboring. > > > > Second -- I said rock-climbers, chefs, chess-players, even > tennis-players are > > thinking all the time, just not with words. I could expand endlessly > that > > list of people who usually are thinking about things without putting > their > > thoughts into words. You continually confuse thought and the expression > of the > > thought. Your question about "forms" is a red herring. What is the form > of > > mental > > images? Mental images. What is the form of feelings? Feelings. When you > > finally > > acknowledge that thoughts always exist before the words are found to > express > > them, you'll perhaps agree that the answer to the question "What is the > form > > of thoughts?" is. . .thoughts. > > > > I wrote: > > "And how do you accommodate the fact that some writers do NOT struggle? > A > > thought comes to them, and they immediately "jot it down". As I'm > writing the > > short paragraphs you're now reading, these thoughts are coming to me in > effect > > instantly. I then begin the time-consuming task of "putting them into > words". > > > > Derek responds: > > "Very simply. The ideas we are expressing are relatively > > straightforward. So the words come easily." > > > > Yes they do -- AFTER I have the thought. It's disheartening to see that > Derek > > left out the last sentence in that quote above (I reinserted it) plus > the > > words immediately following that quote. Here they are: > > > > " Look at my two-line paragraph above beginning, "Then how doesb&" I > knew > > instantly what I wanted to "say". Finding the word to say it took time. > I > > mulled > > the words 'mulling', and 'articulate'. "Will they convey what's on my > mind?" I > > asked myself. The "what's on my mind" was already there." > > > > I wrote: > > "How conceivably could he be searching for words unless he already knew > what > > he wanted them to say?" > > > > Derek responds: > > "Again, how could he *have* the thought if you deny him in form to have > it > > in? It would have to be a kind of 'contentless' thought. Shades of > Zen." > > > > It's interesting to watch great athletes play, to see how they "know" > exactly > > what they want to do trick a defender, how instantly their "thinking" > changes > > when another defender comes into range. The idea that they have to > articulate > > their plan in words or it's a contentless thought is ludicrous. > > > > Derek ends: > > "I know you have made more points but as i said I don't like to do long > > posts." > > > > It's interesting that in the thousands of words contributed to this > thread by > > me, Mando, and Brady you have not seen a single point you agreed with, > and > > nothing you acknowledge you hadn't thought of. > > > > I close with a word of praise for that under-appreciated item, the > thesaurus. > > I almost never reach for it to find a synonym. Their greatest value for > me is > > their gathering in juxtaposition words for related but not identical
