Here is a second point arising for me from the phone discussion – this one is on another way to use words:<\/p>\n
Words can be thought of as ‘labels, that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s true. In that sense they might be thought of as concepts, and that is certainly how they are used in pure logic. However, what if, in everyday use , words were used like writing on water – where they mean what they do<\/em> (in the speaker and hearer) ? Can they mean by acting on\/in\/from\/as<\/em> us, in the speaking (which will include the context we are speaking in and so many non-linguistic, non-conceptual elements, both known and unknown)? That is, can we use them in a way that changes the usual use of words, so that they mean something more than labels, and something before<\/em> translation into further concepts?<\/p>\n In this way, words can include the \u00e2\u20ac\u02dclabel\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 aspect, but they can exceed their conceptual or labelling function \u00e2\u20ac\u201c in their lived use. \u00c2\u00a0And, relating back to my last post, can the embodied felt sense play a part in generating this living (especially meaningful) use of words? This way they might include models, while not being limited by models; exceeding models.<\/p>\n I’ve been experimenting for some years with speaking this way, and it’s definitely a different experience than relying on them as labels for something that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s already been experienced. This latter kind of use \u00e2\u20ac\u201c merely as labels that is limited by the past uses \u00e2\u20ac\u201c draws on their public meanings (all those in the memory, library or in the dictionary), but this is exceeded by the embodied use of words.<\/p>\n This way of working with speaking and thinking might also avoid a commitment to ontological models behind such words as \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcself.\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 The meaning of the word \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcself,\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 then, can be found in how it functions in discourse. It can function to firm up a commitment to a model of self, a limiting fiction \u00e2\u20ac\u201c and in Rinpoche\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s books it seems that ‘self’ usually means this \u00e2\u20ac\u201c or it can function more experientially, in which case it won\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t \u00e2\u20ac\u02dcthing\u00e2\u20ac\u2122 a self. It won’t set \u00c2\u00a0up a self as anything ultimate or ultimately findable.<\/p>\n Experiment: While speaking with another, unify voice, breathe and awareness.<\/p>\n Regards, Here is a second point arising for me from the phone discussion – this one is on another way to use words: Words can be thought of as ‘labels, that\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s true. In that sense they might be thought of as … Continue reading
\nChristopher.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"