by evilgenius » Thu 02 Feb 2017, 13:27:43
I've been thinking about this topic lately. Recently, I've had occasion to contemplate the importance of symbols to man, especially in juxtaposition to language. I've been wondering about the number of consciousnesses people possess. One such consciousness could be called the human spirit. It doesn't understand the world in terms of language, though it must understand language, but through analogy and metaphor. It seems more energy than exactness which might direct that energy toward a specific kind of work, though energy is described as the ability to perform work. More history than the moment of perception, though it does exist in that moment.
If you go from the principle that the truth we say we want language to convey cannot be conveyed conversationally within language without that language becoming impenetrable, not to mention the limitations of short term memory in such a process, then you can understand analogy and metaphor. There have been bigger brained branches of monkeys off of the evolutionary tree. Maybe they couldn't get abstraction, but had to be precise with language? If so, you can see how they could not adapt as fluidly as homo sapiens when it came to new environments or external threat. They couldn't use like or as to conjure up proximal enough comparisons so as to deal with change.
The reason why I have been thinking about this has to do with the topic of childhood trauma. For most people the basic foundation of our inner analogies, the starting points for further adding to them, occurs in childhood. When the things we put in there are skewed toward either coping too severely with something that shouldn't be part of any child's life or are too blatantly of a camp that rejects love and embraces hate, then all further basic life analogies suffer from that basis. Often times a person built upon that order finds themselves battling issues they cannot control or repeating behavior patterns they don't understand. To fix it they need to get at their underlying assumptions, the ones upon which their ancient analogies were founded. This can come about through the influence of words, but it will probably need symbols as well.
We also use symbols in connection with words, you see. They store meaning beyond that which simple dictionary definitions contain. By controlling how we educate ourselves in the definitions of new words and the symbols associated with them and our existing vocabulary we can gain power for use in addressing our ancient symbols and analogies, those we have to change in order to free ourselves unto health. This does relate to religion, insofar as it has been an attempt at this which tends to flatten out in power as its terminology becomes progressively swallowed up in an association with the status quo rather than liberation. There is huge power in words, yes, even in religion. The way we think in both stark and abstract terms can elevate that power or render it banal.