Nslavu
Posts: 342
Joined: 2/1/2010 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote:
ORIGINAL: Nslavu For some there's one or two aspects of self that are more 'sacred'? .. and hence becomes a fear of losing a part one's self, that they cherish. The normal way I visualize people when I'm evaluating their mind is with two concentric circles. The outer one is "everything which I care about". The inner one is "That which is necessary". Some people (Carol & myself among them), seem to have a very, very small inner circle. Accordingly, we are very malleable -- chameleons by nature. For others (my previous wife who I respect greatly - not bashing) have an inner circle which fills most of their outer circle. So she was not very flexible. Art, I think, is in a special category of "creativity". I strongly suspect that by it's very nature creativity requires a fair amount of free-agency. If I told Carol to paint a certain painting a certain way it would not be a creative act for her. It would be a technical function. So I suspect that if I routinely commanded her art I would effectively be taking it away from her. For some people that might not be a problem but obviously it would be for a real art type. I suspect that for Carol taking that away from her would strike as deeply as taking my honor away from me. I wouldn't want to quote such a thing as any sort of literal truth, but I've always like this. I think, and this is really just from my observations, that the management of abstract perceptions is probably at the root of handling a slave. Honor, as you've used in a 'loss' comparison, is no less an abstract than creativity is. Even the offering that someone is by far more knowledgeable and therefore wiser than the rest of us is an abstract notion. (not mentioning any names) They have dependencies on one's perception and a certain amount of belief in them. What can be taken away from my slave can only be something that is perceived as hers by her. As well, even if taken away, that too is perception of loss, when in fact it (that notion) is probably still there in tact and ready to use, as the same abstract notion she held before she gave in to the notion of losing it. I agree with the thrust of your comments Jeff, though I think it likely applies to a wide range of individual 'sacred' activities, as well as perhaps a confluence of lessor held activities that contribute to general 'loss of self' feelings. Individuality is mutable; because, it's an array of abstract notions all conspiring to be you. It gets confirmed or disaffirmed in an active reality of course but those abstracts are at the root. And .. as perceptions go, that's mine. (determinism made me do it! )
|