There we lived for a time, a time incapable of passing, in a space one could not even think of measuring. A passing of time outside of Time, a space that knew nothing of the usual habits of real space… O futile companion of my tedium, what hours of happy disquiet seemed to be ours! Hours of ashen wit, days of spatial longing, inner centuries of outer landscapes… And we did not ask ourselves what it was for, because we took pleasure in knowing it wasn’t for anything.”
The Book of Disquiet
Why are potential overlaps between recreational and therapeutic often discredited? Can’t recreation be therapeutic in some cases too?
Is studying philosophy a sham? Is studying ethics morally permissible? Is the ability to study philosophy or act in and of itself problematic and/or intrinsically valuable? Is it limiting or expanding to read philosophies of those who were able to record theirs? Could it be purely for pleasure?
Their conversation is like a gently wicked dance: sound meets sound, curtsies, shimmies, and retires. Another sound enters but is upstaged by still another: the two circle each other and stop. Sometimes their words move in lofty spirals; other times they take strident leaps, and all of it is punctuated with warm-pulsed laughter—like the throb of a heart made of jelly.”
The Bluest Eye
Can the unseen/abstract/spiritual (unknowable, immeasurable) be separated from the seen/material/physical (knowable, measurable)? If the mind cannot exist without the brain, nor consciousness without electric sensation/connection, then isn’t the unknown/spiritual intertwined with the known/physical? Can psychedelics help Western society overcome an extreme secular reaction to religion and return to the mystical/metaphysical through the physical?