êthos mystéthikos - Chapter 1 (From the work in progress: The Poetized Critique) By M. Santos

 

1. THREE GUIDING CONSIDERATIONS

Throughout this book, we will develop a discourse capable of activating the reader's creative imagination. Initially, and to better explain our intention, we will use three aphorisms that can serve as guides. 

In this way, before proceeding to the following chapters, an initial reflection can be made, something that will extremely facilitate the full understanding of the book at the end of the study.

These are the sentences:

1. It is by way of conduct that people show themselves to us, therefore they teach us who they are. Thus, we will live better remaining immune to what they try to impose, that is, what we are essentially not.

To this first consideration, we will metaphorically associate the brain as the organ of reason and also of the correct discernment of judgments in general as well as of actions, whether the most appropriate or not.

2. In general intuition and insights into Eastern thought and Western philosophical monisms (eg advaita, monadology, etc.) we must not neglect metaphysics. Even because, in the intuitive human being, especially in the creative genius, everything is one and brings together the philosopher's thoughts, works of art and great actions.

To this second consideration we will associate the pineal gland, metaphorically, as the seat of pure intuition.

3. Perfection is secret and inaccessible to the egoist, that is, to the human being full of desires and whose vision never exceeds his own individualistic limits. But, the intuitive and disinterested human being is a sage, fulfilled in the intuition of the Idea of ​​Humanity and in the realization of the works of love.

To this third consideration, we will metaphorically associate the heart as the center and source of greatest strength in the body, where each cell pulsates in tune with all the others, producing an electromagnetic signal so powerful that it radiates beyond its own limits. This is how human compassion works in the world. And so even philosophizing, mystethically speaking, will rely on creative intuition and on the neurons of the cardiac body as well.

Based on the above, we seek to elucidate creative intuition and the works of love arising from it. However, we will not stop at the aesthetic rules that teach the way to achieve the effect of the fine arts. We know that there are aesthetic methods and techniques to achieve this end, which are limited to academic art, and that, without them, institutionalized art cannot be created. 

However, we will not deal with these rules and other techniques for the standardized artistic exercise. Before, we will present what can be called a poetized ontology of Beauty, that is, and more specifically, we will show why the genius / creative soul is in a dialectic-dialogic-epistemic with the Idea of ​​Humanity, whenever a human being 'loses reason' in the face of the natural Beauty of life, and even in the face of beautiful genuine artistic expressions.

We will call immediate knowledge the exceptional way of knowing, whose best representative is the creative genius, that is, the one who knows at least one idea in life. 

We will therefore deal with the intuitive subject who has a very special way of appreciating the world and pure knowledge, something very peculiar to the creative geniuses of humanity.

In a work of art, for example, ideas are independent representations of the principle of reason. On the other hand, the irreproachable epistemic of the intuition of Beauty resides in the Cosmic Energy, that, in the human world is what makes possible the realization of compassionate works, the works of creative geniuses, each of them a type of original cosmic attitude.

This understanding, at least in part, had already been suggested in Platonic writings, as in Parmenides 132, a-d [Return to infinity] The unity of the idea itself arises from the uniform character which is common to objects. But by uniting the idea itself with all participating things, another idea will arise in this process to the infinity of multiplicities. 132 b – At this point, Socrates intervenes to associate ideas with thought, keeping them together in the spirit. c – If thought is relative to something that thinks present to all things and equal to itself, then it is an idea that thinks everything or a thought that thinks nothing. d [Natural Paradigms] – Parmenides suggests the association of ideas with paradigms in nature, things being copies similar to ideas. (Check Glossary)

And, in República X, 597 b - step quoted here just to highlight a correction, namely: that the work of a carpenter cannot serve to exemplify something of the ideas in an accurate way -. Because Nature does not create tools except from men, who need them for use and comfort.

Let us also observe that, the objects of art, although being mere objects, in general do not serve for common use but to express an idea.

In this sense, an artifact cannot properly express a timeless archetype, that is, it is correct to speak of the idea of ​​the quadrupedal animal and the vegetable; but it would not be correct to speak of the idea of ​​the table or the horseshoe, for example.

Thus that ancient Platonic Idea may now be understood as the separate representation of the doctrine of the understanding, and as the eternal archetype of all phenomena. To all this we have access only through aesthetic intuition.

The German expression Metaphysik des Schönen implies the possibility that phenomenal reality can be accessed by pure aesthetic intuition. Thus, the Natural Beauty expresses itself as immediate knowledge of the Idea of ​​Humanity in this world.

Therefore, investigating how this intimacy with beauty occurs, in those who claim to have the sensation of the Beautiful and, simultaneously, the sensational cause of it, will be exactly our way of applying the metaphysics of the beautiful in support of the elucidation of the neologism mysthesis.

From there we will arrive at the understanding and the correct explanation about the need or not to keep ourselves in the circumscriptions of reason, whenever we want to take the flight of freedom in this life. So, initially, this will be the basics of our exercise so far.

A brilliant work has a character of elevation, in relation to the concept of academic philosophy for example. The same occurs with the aesthetic intuition of the world, in relation to the empirical mode of knowledge.

But the difference between phenomenon and idea is that, although both are representations, in the case of the idea there must be independence from the principle of reason.

Therefore, it does not hurt to reinforce that an idea is something that totally differs from something in the phenomenal world, because it is what the pure subject of knowledge accesses without interest.

In short, it refers to the very essence of the human being, an essence indissolubly imbricated in the Idea of ​​Humanity.

So, let's keep in mind that there is, in fact, an exceptional way of knowing, whose best example of an easily verifiable representative is the aesthetic genius. This we call immediate knowledge, that is, what refers to the question of ideal knowledge.

Furthermore, to the disinterested artist, everything is presented as a very special way of knowing, even because this is a very peculiar way of appreciating the world as well.

But notice that by ideal knowledge we are suggesting something in the art object as well, that is, an idea as a representation independent of the principle of reason.

In this way, mystetically speaking, the most epistemic truth is that which is intuited in the thing itself as an original act of the Beautiful, and something that takes place in the pure subject of knowledge.

Now, such a subject is the same subject devoid of will and suffering. Therefore, this is totally different from the type of knowledge that comes from the phenomenal approach to the world, which is replicated as a mere representation of representation, that is, that nothing brings us genuine 'innovation'.

We cannot deny that all this has something interchangeable with the philosophical concept, but not in its essential character, which is based 'axiomatically' and epistemically on the Idea of ​​Humanity, that is, the mystéthika approach to the concept is not merely academic philosophy.

That is to say, the Latin etymology concēptus denotes the action of containing, in the sense of the thought that contains the mental representation of an object, whether in abstract or concrete, and which shows itself as a fundamental instrument of thought, in its task to identify, describe and classify the different elements and aspects of reality.

But, in mysthesis, the mere abstract notion of the words of a language, to designate the properties and characteristics of a class of beings, objects or abstract entities, for example, has merely accessory value.

Therefore, it is the value of imagination and creativity that becomes decisive, that is, the more we activate our imagination and our creative activities, realizing them as compassionate works, the better the concept will be, as it will always have to be resized, together with all the rational paradigm in force at the time, and that in an infinite trend, until the Idea of ​​Humanity becomes popular, in the most universal sense of that term.

In a similar way, mysthesis will always dispense with the dogmatic need for the definitive use of understanding and scientific reason, that is, if one can make use of it, but we must never take such an 'instrument' as the very Idea of ​​Humanity.

In short, what the human mind conceives or understands by that 'Kantian way' is always a mere notion, as a general and abstract representation of some sub-reality, understood here as a mere conventional semantic unit, even those of epistemological value, that is, , which, in this sense, are nothing more than a mere mentality fascinated by symbols and false beliefs of knowledge.

Therefore, in the face of mysthesis, the scientific and empiricist way of knowing the world remains incomplete, its power being merely partial, in the face of the totality of the real world, that is, in the face of the Conscience of Humanity.

Today there are very honest scientists, like Marcelo Gleiser, for example, who do not shy away from dealing with the limits of science, in this inglorious rational search of humanity for meaning in life.

Some even claim that what contemporary science knows does not even cover 5% of the observable universe, admitting that, as the 'island of knowledge' grows, the 'sea of ​​the unknown and mystery' also increases from size. (Check Glossary)

But, in the case of immediate knowledge, it is not limited to this, since an idea appears as a whole, while a phenomenon appears only in parts and dispersed, according to the notion of space, time and causality, this is, according to the general form of the principle of reason.

Such knowledge is what is given as the necessary correlate of that ideal in free consciousness, that is, as a pure subject of knowledge devoid of will, and it is the most effective for creative freedom. Especially when what is being dealt with is the essence of the nature of human conduct at any time.

The metaphysics of the beautiful already proposed, around 1846, that, overcoming the subject-object relationship, that which characterizes the principle of reason in the empirical and subjective way of knowing of the creative genius who can know immediately, because he contemplates the world with a disinterested look capable of reaching him in his ideal essentiality.

Therefore, in science, the world is a mere phenomenon of the understanding, therefore, it is a non-essential manifestation. That is to say, scientifically, we would only access the knowledge of an idea in a fragmented way, as if assembling disconnected parts of a jigsaw puzzle, because the essence of a thing can only be known at the moment we apprehend it in the whole, that is, in the your own idea.

This is because the Idea of ​​the World can only be understood at the moment when the thing in itself of this World gives in to immediate knowledge. But, well, even the adequate objectification, in the different degrees of the things of the world, even that, reveals nothing of the thing in itself. Therefore, ideas must be distinguished from their mere manifestations in the form of the principle of reason, the conditioned mode of knowledge, that is, a non-essential and epistemically inaccurate mode, especially with regard to the sphere of the Idea of ​​Humanity.

The most radical objectivity of knowledge, that is, the epistemic immediacy given in pure aesthetic intuition is, here, the depersonalization of knowledge itself, in the sense of being collective knowledge that is depersonalized in the Consciousness of Humanity.

As a universal human look at the past, which somehow constituted us, but which, in the now, makes us glimpse the possibility of the new as continuity, what the epistemic immediate demands of us, and, at the same time, what we must have in mind as what only occurs if the filter of understanding is removed, that is, of what stands between the subject and the object.

However, we must emphasize that the human unconscious cannot define anything of consciousness. But still, the Consciousness of Humanity is not dependent on the Empiricist Consciousness, unless the latter admits itself as the Metaquantum Science of Tachionic Ubiquity.

That is, in the face of the dismantling of the logical square and the Cartesian plane, by examples of old paradigms of reality, the 'paradise' opens up where subject and object are immediately connected in the Idea of ​​Humanity, then, the freedom that arises in the creative genius it causes the mere three-dimensional spectrum of the world to end up breaking up, faced with the superpower of the insinuating and convincing fifth-dimensionality.

But, a work of genius, although it is also a phenomenon, assumes a character of epistemic superiority in relation to any philosophical concept and even to any scientific observation about the world.

In this way, the difference between phenomenon and idea, although both are representations, becomes, in the latter case, the independence of the principle of reason, the same happening with the aesthetic intuition of the world, in relation to the empirical way of knowing.

It is known that epistemic values ​​express the speaker's attitude towards the truth or falsity of the propositional content of his utterance. This attitude is based on the degree of modal knowledge that is at the origin of the judgment emitted.

But, in the case of mysthesis, the epistemic value is based on the inalienable truth of the Idea of ​​Humanity as immovable, indefectible knowledge, therefore real and true.

So the pattern of paraconsistent logic will serve us much better than that of epistemic logic in general.

If a total overcoming of the apparent opposition between the knowing subject and its objects were something theoretically possible in the historical sciences, even in a limited way, then each person would have to demonstrate to this extent the pure faculty of knowledge, and therefore one could have access to the essentials of the world, also expressed in the work and in the historical artifact.

An example of this could be the power that sacred art exerts over all the religions of the world. It is such a power, which is even capable of totally destroying religious institutions, if such objects and expressions (such as music) are removed from their core.

At least theoretically, the total overcoming of the apparent opposition between the knowing subject and its objects would be something possible only in the historical sciences, and, even so, merely as something that would happen only in a limited way, as to the immediacy of knowledge being able to us. occur beyond the scope of the metaphysics of the beautiful and mysthesis.

That de-individualization already mentioned, in the sense of the mystéthiko knowledge of the Idea of ​​Humanity, which deserted the service to the selfishness of the human race in general, because it assumed the mystéthiko look of the eternal present that constitutes us and that makes us glimpse the possibility of the metaquantic of the now, and no longer of the past nor of the future.

In this way, for creative geniuses, being is no longer merely thought, and time loses its chronological potency in the nunc stans where being and time no longer clash.

In this way, being can be intuited in time, mystically assumed as the moving image of eternity, and idealist conceptions of the world must be confronted in the factual reading of the aionic 'moment', something like an epiphany arising from the Idea of ​​Humanity and present in every great work.

In mysthesis, the focus of the metaphysics of the beautiful is the archetypal and undying content of the multiverse in flux, and our considerations of the Beautiful represent a necessary part of the whole of philosophy, being an intermediary member between the metaphysics of nature and the metaphysics of nature. ethics, in an interdependent and reciprocally complementary way, that is, enlightening one and the other.

In this way, the mystéthika that will henceforth unfold is a kind of miraculous daughter of the intertwining of the metaphysics of the beautiful with the metaphysics of ethics. But only later chapters will be responsible for elucidating all this.

For now, it is only up to us not to lose sight of the three aphorisms mentioned at the beginning, because, without a clear vision of what they suggest, it is very likely that the reader will want to give up reading right now.

As immediate knowledge, in us, is the special way of knowing any representation displaced from the principle of reason and independent of it, then, all this must aim to apprehend it from ideas, that is, to be able to objectify them as objects of art, because each work of art manifests the essence of what is in the Beautiful, and it does so, for being the work of genius creation.

In mystetica this could include the genius scientific works and even some of the elegant expressions of physics and mathematics as well. But only and provided that the 'motivation' of such an expression is not guided by interest and greed, and that it is an expression of genuine compassion towards humanity.

However, we recognize that Metaquantum, as a science that does not need to be grounded on the old crutch of understanding, is easier to suggest than to get the support of the ordinary scientific community and become something really popular.

But it's not that we're popular here, it's that we are real. Even so, we can assure you that it is a foolish attitude to be content with just the appearance of the world, because, through aesthetic intuition, something better in the phenomenon is reached, something that also it is a greater manifestation and what makes the phenomenal world itself possible.

In this case, it will be better to look for what is essential in the world and not what is merely apparent. Once, beyond the merely phenomenal, we can know ideas, although this occurs fleetingly and as if in a creative rush.

However, we have something immediate in this, so something liberating emerges here, starting with knowledge and culminating in the realization of works so compassionate that they are themselves the expression of full human freedom.

We know that living in this world pushes us towards a merely analytical knowledge of objects. However, by making this impulse disinterested, we elevate ourselves to the level of knowledge that presents the Idea as it is, that is, as a thing in itself in the world.

Therefore, the subject finds, in this 'disinterest', a way of knowing independently of reason, he finds the freedom to be.

Although animals in general are also capable of representation, it is only in human beings that intuition of the Idea as a thing in itself occurs; and this cannot occur in other degrees which are inferior to it.

Therefore, the decision to affirm or deny Negativity in life, in itself, will be the real event for the human being and the very source of everything else, whether for suffering or for the freedom of aesthetic enjoyment, for example.

An idea is, therefore, a first object and thing in itself, something that secures knowledge as the only real definitive. Thus, the essential truth of the Idea will always be hidden by the phenomenon and will only manifest itself in a non-causal way, because it is timeless.

It is the multiplicity of phenomena in the world, which distracts the less astute minds, those that stick only to the causal chains that impose themselves by virtue of the principle of reason. However, the objective sum of what one must know, that is, the 'discourse' of an idea and the essence of a phenomenon does not escape the creative genius, even though it remains obscured to common sense by the festival of the intermittent flow of objects in causal effectiveness.

Now, it is well known that the faculty of producing a real effect and its habitual effect of functioning normally is effectivity. But this ability to produce and maintain an effect can be positive or negative. Consequently, what is effective is not necessarily efficient or even effective, at least in mystese.

Therefore, the immediate and adequate objectivity of the thing in itself is the content and proper object of that metaphysics of the beautiful; and which, in turn, has as its sole purpose the communication of immediate knowledge. Therefore, it is also the most efficient and effective knowledge.

However, there are two determining factors that an object is considered as such: First, it must be the knowledge of an object as an idea, considered independently of causality and conceived in the intimacy of its essential determinations, but not in the stereotyped ones. Second, the aesthetic contemplator leaves his own individuality, becoming the consciousness he knows not as an individual, but as the Consciousness of Humanity.

Finally, we see that an idea is capable of expressing epistemic reality par excellence. But the multiplicity of phenomena in the actual world is nothing more than degrees of objectivity of the thing itself.

This shows that the main event for any individual is to conceive ideas, so that, whatever happens in anyone's life: luck, fortune and even misfortune, nothing can be compared.

In short, what happens in the world of phenomena can represent, for someone, a waste, a loss or a gain. However, what is de-objectified from effectiveness cannot be exhausted, that is, being an idea and infinite quality, it is not exhausted as something of the linearity inherent to the universe of quantitative planism.

Therefore, what is inexhaustible and what is endless continually return from the Consciousness of Humanity to the cycles of the world, as a thing in itself and from which ideas hang, gradually determinable from the works of creative geniuses. All this because the Idea is what speaks to each according to the measure of his own pure faculty of knowledge, and also when it is expressed in the works of creative geniuses.