While thinking the other day I found myself thinking that a lot of what I try to do (that is, in thinking and philosophizing about things) is to do nothing but revive something that was lost. In that sense, I’m trying to ‘recreate’ something I once knew (or, perhaps, thought I knew). As a result, I called this tendency the ‘reviving philosophy’.
In many ways, I feel that most people’s philosophizing and pondering is really nothing but a reviving of something they already know and sense deep down. This, of course, would state that we were already know something but forgot. In other words, it’s not a ‘learning’. In effect, it’s a ‘relearning’. As a result, this would make it so that much of philosophising is nothing but the relearning of something we forgot but “feel” deep down. In that sense, it sort of completes a circle . . . we end up where we started. I often feel that is the “genius” of it all. But the relearning goes beyond that. The relearning creates a ‘reapplying’ of something we once knew to our current life. In that sense, it is not just a ‘reviving’ but a ‘reusing’.
The ‘reviving philosophy’ seems to suggest this process:
- There is something that we already know.
- It disappears or is forgotten.
- We continue to sense it deep down.
- We think and philosophize to revive it.
- We reapply it to our current life.
This process, as I mentioned above, as if completes a circle. It as if spans ones earliest sense to ones current life, causing a more homogenous life. In that sense, it creates a ‘unifying quality’ in ones life.
It shows that, in the ‘reviving philosophy’, a person has to have three qualities:
- An ability to sense what one feels deep down.
- An ability to think and philosophize.
- An ability to apply what one thinks and philosophize to ones current life.
Without these qualities a person cannot do a ‘reviving philosophy’. Personally, I don’t think many could.
THE ‘PRIMAL SENSE’
Generally, what people assume thinking about things or philosophizing is about is to gain some form of knowledge, some new fact, or point of view. There is some degree of truth in this but I think it misses the greater point. The ‘reviving philosophy’ does so much more.
In general, what seems to motivate the ‘reviving philosophy’ is a “sense”. In many ways, thinking or philosophizing is nothing but following this “sense”. Its much like picking up and then following the trail of an animal. Thinking and philosophizing is nothing but ‘following the trail along’. Even if one watches the process it appears just like that. This is why, in thinking and philosophizing, things go ‘here and there’, through this phase or that phase, through bad thoughts and good thoughts, etc. It’s like a description of the terrain one is passing. Many people can’t do that nor have the patience . . . it seems to take a special person.
This “sense” seems to originate from a deeper aspect of our self, something that has always been there . . . our primal self. As a result, I call it the ‘primal sense’. It seems to contain several traits such as:
- An actual knowledge.
- An intuition about life.
- An innate understanding.
Much of this, probably, we are born with. This is what makes it ‘primal’ (hence the name).
But this sense comes with some dilemmas. To begin with, when we are young, we’re not developed enough to apply this “primal sense”. Our mind is not formed enough and we simply are not in control of ourselves, or our world, enough to make any use of it. Because of this, it often as if ‘sits dormant’ and unused. This is further complicated by the fact that when we get older we tend to forget the “primal sense”. As we age things like the self, experience, learning, personal traits, etc. comes in and as if hides the “primal sense” practically making it disappear. In many people, I believe, it does vanish completely. Most people, I feel, tend to feel it in some way though. Very few seem to follow it.
AWARENESS AND THE ‘LEARNING MYTH’
It seems that the main effect of the ‘reviving philosophy’ is the development not of knowledge or learning but of awareness. It does not create ‘facts and figures’ nor of theory or principles. It increases awareness of ourselves, our situation, and the world. To me, this shows the importance of awareness over knowledge and learning. This tendency of the ‘reviving philosophy’ shows what I call the ‘learning myth’ which is basically the overvaluation of learning and knowledge as far more important than it really is. Many people will get ‘hung up’ on the learning and knowledge they gain from thinking and philosophizing. Because of this, they emphasize this or that philosophy or point of view as if it were a commandment from god. Once this happens the process has stopped for, as I said above, this is not about learning or the ‘gaining of knowledge’. But the tendency to the ‘learning myth’ is so strong that it often overpowers us and, as a result, it is a common hurdle in the ‘reviving philosophy’.
THE ‘REVIVING PHILOSOPHY’ AND ‘POESY’
Being that this is the development of awareness it makes it associated with what I call ‘poesy’ (aspects of this can be seen in this article “Thoughts on how I am not an intellectual – the coming of ‘Poesy’ and the seeking of a state of mind“) which is primarily the seeking of a particular state of mind. In some respects, the particular state of mind sought for in ‘poesy’ is really a form of the ‘primal sense’. As a result, the ‘reviving philosophy’ is really a form of ‘poesy’.
What all this shows is that this form of philosophy is not one of explanations, of theories, of ideas, as philosophy usually is. There is no empiricism, intellectualism, existentialism, etc. here. There are no schools of thought. If things like this are used they are only used temporarily as part of the process . . . they do not define it. In many ways, it is nothing but a continuous rediscovery and relearning of oneself by following ones inner ‘sense’.
Copyright by Mike Michelsen