Skip to content

Imaginary Beings

You look about you and it seems that all you see are imaginary beings – ciphers and apparitions. 

Then you gaze in the mirror and there you are, another one.

But it comes to you that the real imaginary beings have all been replaced with cardboard cutouts.

You can no longer see a sun in your lover’s eyes or smell the faint scent of orchid upon unscented skin.

There are nothing but gray quantities –

when suddenly

breath-mind colors:





How do you sustain what possessiveness destroys?

Absent possessiveness, nothing to sustain.


You think you can possess things, images, objects and relations,

but it’s only you possessed

by ghosts.

Your Focus?

Do you fill your self on the comparison and consumption of things?

Does it work?

Is there another way?

Name Brand Worth

Corporations sell us worth as a name brand, wearing the Nike swoosh or some other mark somehow imbuing us with the feeling that we are special.  But of course it is simply a form of groupthink masquerading as individuality.  It is a deep and pervading form of inauthenticity. 

This inauthenticity extends to the kinds of behaviors we reward as a society (e.g., personal wealth production) – and what the rewards are (things to be owned as opposed, for example, to the creation of social value or beauty).  And we are all susceptible, in varying degrees, to forming our self images by identifying with labels and possessions.

And so, even if the Age of the Corporate White Male may be coming to an end, we may rightly be concerned that it will continue on with brown White Males and female White Males.

Conning Whom?

You may think (s)he’s a happy master of manipulation, but (s)he’s desperately hungering hard to fill an empty place (s)he cannot name.

Out Of Step

Being even slightly out of step

bares the lockstep

many take for freedom -

and you may be despised

and vilified

for bringing the lockstep

to awareness,

for breaking the precious bond

of ignorance.


Look closely at any Truth said to ground everything:

those assumptions, theories and beliefs,

do they include all

or exclude some;

and if they exclude,

how can they ground


‘Nature’ And Living Practice

How does the nature of a thing differ from its practice?

Water is a substance with the chemical composition H2O, two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen.  It may manifest, dependant upon temperature, as fluid, solid, or gas. These facts touch on its nature. 

A cup of water giving life; a surging tsunami taking it: these touch on its living practice.

So too with the objective analyses of the nature of a biological being, the nature of a social structure with all its intertwining systems, and the place of a biological being within that social structure – no matter how complex the analyses, none reveal the myriad ways that beings follow, manipulate, subvert and challenge an existent circumstance even as they are altered by it. Analyzing the ‘objective nature’ of phenomena privileges the removed, scientific observer as knowledgeable arbiter of what things ‘really are': that is, things isolated, taken out of context and then used as illustrations of an overarching and reductive theory from which things in various relations not so investigated nevertheless cannot escape.

In effect, then, it seems that what people do isn’t what they do; rather, what occurs has another, ‘real’ meaning, one assigned by the ‘neutral’ observer carving out objects of interest – out of a fluid field of interactions that could be sliced in infinite ways – and locating proximate chains of causation that ’cause’ what has been abstracted out. The scientific ‘answer’, then, is nothing other than the form and content of the question asked, and of the very narrow way in which it is asked.

So the scientific method veils the complex, sophisticated, interdependently fluid practice of living beings in social and ‘natural’ relation, relations within which the seemingly ‘objective observer’ is in fact fully and subjectively enmeshed.

What’s the source of it all

just as it expresses itself?



Science is based on a method for quantifying the relations between abstractions.  It is but a map of the actual terrain of the lived, used to navigate it in certain highly effective but limited ways and according to predefined criteria. But to mistake the map for how the actual terrain is traversed,

how foolish.    


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 329 other followers