For this week’s exercise, I have played with attending to change while sitting at my desk at work.\u00c2\u00a0 It is a static place, so I have focused on my shifting experience of the cubicle — either to the roving of my eyes (and attention) around the space, or to subtle ‘flickering’ and changes in the ‘still’ objects before me (and my ‘interior’ responses to them).<\/p>\n
I have done this sort of exercise before, but I was surprised this time to find that, on a number of occasions, my conviction was that “change is not given in experience.”\u00c2\u00a0 I had the sense of discrete ‘units’ that did, yes, somehow replace each other, but there was not a sense of one thing ‘changing’ to the next.\u00c2\u00a0 There was this, this, this.\u00c2\u00a0 But at other times, I could ‘toggle’ to a different view and it seemed that, no, change and movement were apparent — very much so.\u00c2\u00a0 The sense of ‘change’ seemed to become more apparent when I was able to take a ‘meta-view,’ holding several experiences in attention at once — usually one experience strongly present, the others like echoes ‘behind’ it.\u00c2\u00a0<\/p>\n
The seemingly equally true contrary perceptions — no-change and change — have intigued me and I will stay with this.<\/p>\n
On an ‘academic’ note, I’m finding the topic of these two chapters timely, since I’m otherwise in the midst of some readings in the new field of Object Oriented Ontology, which is making a case for a return to substance-thinking (quite contrary to my preferred — and TSK-influenced — orientation).\u00c2\u00a0 I’m appreciating this contradiction as well.<\/p>\n
Bruce<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
For this week’s exercise, I have played with attending to change while sitting at my desk at work.\u00c2\u00a0 It is a static place, so I have focused on my shifting experience of the cubicle — either to the roving of … Continue reading