Where there are impediments to the appreciation of the "metaphorical" eloquence of art, music, poetry, story, allegory, allusion, aesthetics, there is something seriously wrong.

This is the language of the whole. It communicates at intellectual, emotional and spiritual levels, rational and supra-rational; it does not set out to inform so much as to enlighten. It does not set out to instill a new attitude, it sets out to liberate imaginations. This is why some people of certain political leanings become very uncomfortable with it. Attempts to devalue or diminish this language constitute a far greater attack on the freedom of a people than imposing controls on the content of literalistic statements. (For example, an attack on abstract art is far more oppressive than an attack on an expressed opinion that, let us say, the government is a gang of criminal inepts.)

The word "metaphor", though, is a mistaken usage in such contexts. A metaphor asserts a resemblance between one thing and another, but the "one thing" remains a separate entity from "the other". This is very different from the more holistic language of art, music, poetry and aesthetics which expresses reality in terms that are not dualistic, limited and superficial. Symbolic communication is another potentially enriching medium of expression that has in recent decades become undervalued and poorly understood in most modernist and postmodernist societies. We are, I think, experiencing the suppression of our cultural poetic.

The language of factuality — the language that has become the everyday argot of the modern materialist — is banal and shallow. Because it is so narrowly specific and materialistically-based, its content is typically so context-specific as to be inconsequential. Its power, however, lies in its requirement that the communicator and the audience share an often wide set of premises about "factuality" and the boundaries of what is "rational" and therefore admissible. In doing so, it becomes intellectually confining and emotionally barren… dehumanising, in fact. It has its uses in narrow, technical contexts, but as a way for humans to talk about humanity it is simply brutalising.

And, Waterbuoy…

Neither love nor intelligence need scare anyone.

I think everyone believes in the power of metaphor, particularly so in our post-modern age, where relativism is the latest, intellectual insight. In a relativistic universe, the power of the metaphor is all we have to guide ourselves by.

Why would people of power be scared by love or intelligence? As I just said, in our Age of Relativism, logical intelligence has lost its postition of absolute power, and intuition has regained its rightful, foremost positition of power. And our foremost intuitive insight is, and has always been, universal unitive love. Thus, people of real power are not afraid of love--they are people of love.

Hello WaterBuoy...........God bless you....

Those who know God Love God and know God Loves Us...

God first Law is the Law of Love for all things..created...

Are people scare of this Love...some people are ...because it is

such a Powerful Love that Overcomes Fear....

Love Drives Out all Fear...

Agape is the Love of God...not an earthly Love a Love

of the Creator of Love .....

IJL:bg

Arminius: I meet literalists and materialists who also are "relativists" all of the time. I meet people who denigrate art and poetry who are "relativists", I meet "relativists" who are visibly discomfited by any articulation of insight and truth that breaks out of the bonds of factuality and materialism.

You say: “In a relativistic universe, the power of the metaphor is all we have to guide ourselves by.”

That is very wrong-headed, my friend. Relativism as it is now being expressed merely dissolves discernment. Rather that encouraging mutual respect and desires for wider understanding, it has come to resolving discourse into a form of hyper-communication that is no communication at all. It is about generating countless ways of saying, "whatever". It generates floods of “information” that may or may not have any value at all. It allows image to replace content without the image needing to carry meaning at all. It incites a kind of egocentrc isolation that tries to find a firm foundation in the concrete, the materialistic, the literal. “Common ground” is the factual world, in which it becomes possible to buy an identity off the shelf and well-being is most generally defined by consumption. “Freedom” is the freedom of the shopping mall. In the atomization of societies, we see enumeration replace evaluation, we see celebrity replace fame; as amusement supercedes engagement, entertainment displaces art (to the extent that the worst insult you can hurl at anything is that it is ‘boring’ and representations of car crashes, killings and domestic abuse, instead of sickening, are exploited to raise a laugh). Volume replaces meaning and stars replace heroines and heros. Intensity is loudness, rather than focus. Sensitivity becomes increasingly difficult to sustain. The extreme relativism produces desires not to live fully, but to stop time, deny aging, avoid discomfort: a cult of eternal youth replacing an awareness of eternal life. The wisdom of paradox becomes the worthlessness of contradiction. Sincerity comes to be seen as naivety and deceit as cleverness. People who crave gratification over satisfaction wonder at the existence of long-lasting personal relationships. And anyone with a modicum of money is pretty much enabled to avoid any “unpleasant” encounters with life.

The discourses that are available to anyone on such social paths are necessarily “factual” and literal. “Metaphor” is itself a term of debasement for what I would call “poetic” discourse” a metaphor merely says “A” is in some senses like “B”.

It is only the literalist and factualist who sees absolutism as the only alternative to absolute relativism. And the fiction is that relativism produces “freedom”: it does not. It enslaves. Relativism has become a form of absolutism.

The threat lies in the marginalization of multiple forms of discourse — we can not be fully human without languages that allow us to open the WHOLE of experience to the discovery and expression of “meaning”.

Where meaning is to be found and expressed lies in “poetic” discourse: in art, in literature, in the essence rather than the form of narrative… and this requires a more holistic engagement than is encouraged by the relativism of this age. When we start failing literacy tests in the “poetic”, we lose our humanity. Its precursor is a critical awareness of “self” — but, in the relativism of this age, “self” tends to be understood in terms of images, wants and comforts, rather than character. But “self” is not “me-ness”; and awareness of self is not “me”-ism.

We live in a multi-dimensional universe. Without multidimensional ways of expressing ourselves, and being understood, we might as well live in darkness and under stones.

Hi Mike:

Relativism without intuition is just as wrong-headed and sterile as absolutism without intuition, for it is through intuition that we receive the vital impulses to guide our thinking.

Of the two truths at work in the universe, Synthesis and analysis, the capital T Truth of Synthesis is the foremost and primary Truth, but it can only be intuited. And these intuitions are, or should be, the guide to our small t truth of analytical thinking.

Intuition, of course, is also the bottomless wellspring of metaphor.

I believe Metaphor is very misunderstood.  But I also believe Metaphor is the very essence of truth, because like a metaphor, is truth not relative?

As-Salaamu Alaiykum

-Omni

Oh damn...should have read the posts atop me...

Oh well..

Shalome

-Omni

Actually, if it weren't a relativistic universe, then neither God nor we would be able to create anything. The malleability of relativism is essential for creation!

I'm not arguing in favour of anarchy. But moral law, rules, guidelines, etc. are, or should be, collective creations that we as cultural groups create together to govern and guide ourselves by. When they become outdated, we just update them in the spirit of continuous creation, re-creation or evolution.

Is there a difference between metaphor and a parable?

Hi Neo, parables seem like really big analogies because Jesus always took his story and related it to god or heaven or whatever he was talking about, so I would say that a parable is a metaphor, but a metaphor isn't necessarily a parable (because there are other kinds of metaphors).

That makes sense K. It seems like the words 'figure of speech' is used a lot to describe a metaphor, i.e. 'You are my Sunshine', whereas a parable is always a story involving a hidden meaning behind a seemingly mundane event.

At the convergance point of the two spheres of mystery: emotion and intelligence ... there is confusion ... the medium that seems to be the metaphor of the living creature we call mankind. Now that's a confusion ... not always anarchy ... often getting extremely close.

Then we are told there is a remnant ...

In all of creation a wee small bit! In Hebrew and Roman fullness is a thousand ... one part in a thousand? We have a long way to go on the dimensional ladder. Was that built by Jake, or the Kid? 

I am amazed how many people are frightened of both ends of the scale ... emotions and thoughts ... that leaves a large void in what is necessary for getting it together. Is it odd that the "good book" states 366 times to "not fear" one for ever night of the year and the leap as well, yet so many religious traditions culture fear, terrorisms and all the attached junk?

It is something to think about for those that carry a wee bit of care!

Waterbuoy,

Hi,

Frankly I don't give metaphor a snowball's chance in hell.  Unless of course it has direct access to the lower regions which Dante points out are rather frosty.

Anyway, if a strong person has no fear of both love and intelligence they are a stupid person.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Mike what you have said is so good I can only add there is a relational universe which is different from a relavistic universe -

Pan: yes. I agree. But I don't think everyone's exactly there, and "factualism" stands in the way with its jackboots on.

And what people mean by "relativistic" is also a bit loose and variable.

Well, Mike and Pan, why can't the relativistic universe be relational?

If, as I believe, the universe is in a state of synthesis, a mutliverse within a universe, then it is totally relational and relativistic.

Or is this one of those "loose" definitons of relativism?

I think the cosmic synthesis is naturally relativistic.This, however, need not and must not be translated into moral relativism simply because synthesis is also totally inclusive!

When Hitler translated Nietzsche's relativism into factualism, and abused it to justify moral relativism, then he was dead wrong!

The all-unitive aspect of synthesis, within which everthing is related to and united with everthing else, is what governs, or should govern, our moral values and behaviour.

To state relativism as a mere fact, without the moderating factors of unity and synthesis, is morally and spiritually irresponsible, and "wrong-headed," as Mike said.

Most people use the term relativistic in the moral sense - as in -it is your opinion - as if every things is unrelated and completely your opinion - no synthesis ....

Yes, physical relativism has been abused to justify moral relativism.

Whereas, when one actually experiences the cosmic synthesis, one experiences the Divine, and with it the unitive and universal love that permeates the universe and compels one to act in that spirit. This is not moral relativism!

Metaphors can be used to convey a message but should not be the actual message.

Zerlina, just to clarify, when you say "actual message", you mean the literal message right? If so then I agree. When we apply this to the bible, we unfortunately come to the problem of what parts are supposed to be metaphors? The answer to that shouldn't be that difficult to figure out but pure literalists make it much more challenging than it needs to be.

Fear is derived from an old Hebrew word that has alternate meaning of reverence and respect, as I have touched upon in other articles ...

Does that turn the God/Jesus (Love/Light) thing into a mystery for those that cannot relate to awareness of anything outside thy's elf because of fear of the unknown and therefore they don't care to know any part of creation? That should cause fallout, castoffs and bifurcation of the heavens! Absolutes, abstrax?

Does a metaphor have no end? Perhaps there is a hidden interpretation for the viseral hart and strong mind that needs annealing .. a softened approach.

Indeterminate particles that approach in the mystery of space can cause phenomenal explosions ... X-Pan-Zions on the fly. Then if you belong to a fixed institution ... how would you deal with such infinite change without preparation, conditioning? Wahls must come down.

It is just a passing thought ... you know ... state of mind that is somewhat amourish ... like chocolate ... irony melds in the heat ... sort of ethereal bonding. Now is "ethereal" sort of wispy like ghosts and spirits ... thin space of the mind that is mostly imaginary to physical peoples?

Killer,

Is the storm of neurons on the physical brain white cloud or dark cloud; an intangible mystery? Does light represent awareness and darkness emotion? Do we drift and wobble in unknown space without light ... an infinite metaphor? Consider the red-shift gap when reading the spectrum of what seems to be blank space in the sky above (between the observed stars, bos condensdate). Did you know that bos, or boze in ancient tongues is a metaphore for fiery confusion. Now in the indeterminate space called mind ... what is word ... just a distant hmmm of a drummer ... Ka-thump, or is that just a bump in the night shadows?

Science states that we know far less about inner/outer space than perhaps 99% of what's out there ... 1% Lam, which in many archaic linguistics is translated infinite vanishing space ... a hint carried by James Hilton's classic Lost Horizon! Now is that cutting edge like circumcision of the unknown?

What if there was a social order that shared all resources, like thought and cares ... dreams of expansive space ... would some powerful group (Jud'c, Jupit'r) state that it was devilish because their powers are definably against sharing with the common? Then a common peasant is also transcribed as Pagan. Where does that place the paradigm in the eye of physical authority ... light in another dimension? Does that represent  aphorism, metaphor, pseudonym  of mind ... just something else again?

Can you read yours in love and thought or did you drive ID into hiding like most caring emotion as it is found on earth ... buried? Can you imagine creation isolating such an extreme in deep space? It was called Ptolemy in ancient tongues ... in direct opposition to cle' O'Patras, then the power of the lanos ... patros is something to research as virtually unknown mortal dimension that mankind uses as if it were infinite source. Does that transcend several discussion threads in the weaving of a membrane of thought? Weird!

Then in reverse psychology of the mind, the whole arguement can be turned upside down by the lens (window) of the soul; like an image of the cross on the back of the retina. Is there distinct alchemy between the physical world of ours and Da Vinci's fascination with light and the occult world of Mirs and lens? Was Einstein a Vue Due Master tu!

Perhaps one can extract light from the darkness and darkness from the light ... a sigh in oid aL dance! Devilish shimmer from outer space, the other face of creation. Do you know what some fixations call the enemy? Have we pushed the mortal expanse to near collapse, and in heaven shall be like earth ... fallen in a world that doesn't know up from down?

And worse still, they refuse to learn anything outside the self, that Jacob bean looks at itself as God and not something part of a much larger mystery. All alone in a desert place like roues without water ... ancient symbol of media of th' ought. Then do we as children of Gods care about the past? When we never saw ID going ... odd things in space!

You can't tell a man about errors, the truth, and you can't tell a lie ... such philosophy gives a great basis for a metaphorical story ... something that'll melt and alter like the soul with time and powerful light!

Parhaps one can get lost in the myth and start believing them to facts?  Myths change over time.  The lessons they teach change over time and are actually rewritten.

An example of this the Little Mermaid.  In the Grimm Fairy Tales the Prince marries another and the Little Mermaid dies.  This story would have been powerful to keep young people from acting on their attractions outside their social class.  The story has been rewritten for today where Ariel gets the man of her dreams.  So this could be interpretted as a reaction against social classes or that one should never give up on their dreams.

Another example is Cinderella.  The story is dated in that a man has to come and save her from her life as a servant.  The principal though remains the same.  She did not get discouraged by her dire circumstances.  She believed in herself.  She did not become bitter, angy, or jealous and the Universe rewarded her.  Life is often  not fair but we can choose how we respond to it.

Although, I cannot come up with a reason why we would need a virgin birth?

Shadrach, Meeshack, and Abnego were unfairly disciplined for doing right.  Their God did not allow them to die.  Many of the Christians post New Testament died in the arena reading this story literally.  They were prepared to die and they did. God did not save them.  However, Shadrach, Meshack, and Abednego were prepared to die.  Parhaps the story is a myth.

The difficulty with the Bible is that the Bible was written to point people to God.  Yet, if you want to get to know someone for example if my husband died in the war that is what I would tell our children about their father what a brave man he was and how he died serving his country.  If he simply dissapeared as a draft dodger would I lie to my children about their father?  Would I tell them he died heroically in the war?  If the Bible is all myths than what do we really know about God?

Now the bible is said by some to be the word of God ... and the bible itself tells us that God is Love! Is this not confusion to the thinking part of the mind? It seems to have that effect on people of the fall ...

Now is the bible chaos? Now that makes the story intersting, no?

If only we could piece it all together after the fall and begin to understand the emotions and how they befell us! Would we wish to know about an intinite intermingling of opposing poles ... Ptolemy in the realm of Clay O'Patris ... us? Not a pretty picture of chaos ... but could we put it together given time?

Infinite enigma! Something has to amuse the myth of the soul!

Then some of us believe in the metaphysical ... meaning to vast scattered stories left as a sign ... the hazing of humanity as initiation into a bigger frasternal structure that didn't evict the mother of this space ... a cosmological disorder in abandonmnet of creation ID's elf?

Christmas giggle, a "shimmer" to all ... Hebrew gold if you weren't aware of the creative story-teller of all time ... gather, hanging of aulde, fatty lams (infinite light)!

WaterBouy, je ne comprende pas.

He's hard to understand at the best of times k_r....

...Partial insanity...the price to pay for such brilliance.

We <3 you WaterBuoy!

As-Salaamu Alaiykum

-Omni

Hi Omni:

"Partial insanity...the price to pay for such brilliance!" That's what I said to him a couple of month ago.

He's a waterworks expert, in deep water all is life. That explains it!