In this world, meaning hides all over, but for us humans, meaning is found solely in our language. We cannot think without language. We cannot see without language, in the respect that we may be seeing, but we will have no ideas what we are looking at. Listening, the sounds would go on namelessly. And I am not here passing judgment one way or another, although it is simply inconceivable to grasp what it would be like to be alive and be isolated, without some sort of language, viewing the world from a mind untouched by conditioning. But as we look around, as we take in the surroundings, we see that things themselves will always remain themselves, what changes the world is the ideas we infuse into those things, how we see them, and how those ideas alter who we are.
But first, let us take a closer look at the breakdown of ideas. There are really only two kinds of ideas, ideas came upon individually, and ideas brought up from others (who not necessarily came up with them individually, although if we follow the trail long enough, someone did come up with various forms of the fragments of the evolved idea). Now ideas are usually reactions to obstacles. One sees a new value to this object because of a new-found value. So there can be a combination of the aforementioned class of ideas. There can be a societal idealism, that all of the individuals embrace as a class, but because of this societal outlook, there too will be individuals, sole individuals acting as individuals, that will base each one’s new ideas (on how to act, how he perceives his self in relation to this new society, to those he knows, his value, where his place in the world is, etc..) on the new idealism (or against) of the society. Just as conversely, because society wants to be a multiplicity, acting as a whole, it will grow its own idealism against those very idealistic individuals within its societal walls. Can meaning be found within a group, as a group, as a group identity, and is it really meaning at all, or is it a need to belong, which reaches even deeper into that individual’s psyche, questioning what he is missing which makes him crave external acceptance? Or is meaning only to be found on an individual level, from the individual, as individual to individual, from a sharing process, where individual A contemplates his own meaning, shares it with individual B, and the communication interchange that occurs, leads to a deeper understanding of the selves of both, if each knows how to use the process of communication to its fullest powers.
Language is societal, in that it is a shared tool that everyone can learn in order to understand one another. But it is also individual so that man can know his self. And this is precisely where the cross point occurs. As man uses a tool meant for the whole of society, he learns of his self, shares that self with another, and learns what that other thinks of his self, how that other interprets what he is saying and relays that understanding in its own language and interprets what he has heard. Because this is the phenomenon that is communication. Communication is not the dull lifeless interchange where two beings merely speak at one another, telling what they are, awaiting a pause in the noise that she may say her piece and then be on her way. No. Communication is an alive symbiosis of metonymyc interchange, that is a constant interpretation of what the other is saying. Many people have similar definitions of the things that are found within the world, both in things and ideas, but what is missing most from these interactions, is that there are not many people that are willing to find out what differences there are, in their selves or in their others.
What most people do not realize is that communication, and how one communicates is really what makes him what he is. I have written it before, and the key is this: If you cannot listen and communicate and interpret and see the depth and the reflections in what an other is saying unto you, then how is it possible for you to see all of those variations and depths within your own self? Listening is the miraculous tool that allows you to get right next to that other speaking and visualize the process that is going on in his mind as he chooses words, uses experience within his self to relay a story, and gives you the opportunity, once he has finished speaking, to let him know what it is that you heard, and as you tell him what you heard, a shared experience is being created for the both of you, one that lets each of you know that what you are thinking is being acknowledged, one that transforms what is inside you and becomes something new when shared between the both of you. A new perspective is added into your mix, and hopefully, if the other whom you share with is open enough and able to listen to his self properly, then the interchange of the messages will offer new insight into each of who you are. For there is nothing like another set of eyes, another set of ears to shed some light, a vision, on what the world around him means as well. And then once your are home all alone, contemplating your day on your chari, it is then that you will see that the same processes you saw occurring in the other, occur in you too….you and others are only as alive as you and the other allow you and the other to be. yet you can only do what you are able to do in the complex interchange…
one obviously must interpret his world as he sees it, and can only do it alone, for he is the only one isolated within his body. but in a world full of selfs and others, the languages that not only separate us, but can also bring us together. words sound comforting when they bounce around our own skulls spoken in our own voices, but the new voice, from across the room, whom our reflection sits in the glass of her eyes, of his eyes, lets us see the inner working of the mind making meaning of its own, making judgments, discernments, and we can learn just as much from what other people say, positively and negatively, as we can from the whole worlds that have been created within the universes that exist within the strongest individuals amongst this planet….
share. listen attentively. give feedback. accept criticism. no matter how harsh. change for you, growth, destruction of the self, only has a lifespan of x number of years. be your self….but learn what that self is by exposing it by holding it up to the mirrors of others.
words can have so many uses. who do you want to be. what words embody the you? are your ideas yours, or are they a rehashing of what you have heard of others.
making meaning begins with listening, and the best practice is to begin to listen to your self. make some time to spend alone, and write the things you find within. each day listening deeper to what you can hear. then time and practice and practice of time will let you perform the same thing yet when others talk….what was it he said? you would have written it down in your mind…
I learned to listen by taking notes in class, lots and lots of notes, and then going home and trying to interpret, based upon the subject matter i knew that the professor was talking about, how he structured his lessons, and what the people he talked about in his lessons wrote…then I could make a good analysis of what was going on. after many years of constant attention, this became second nature, and when i interacted with others, i watched how they behaved all the time, what their verbal response reactions were on a daily basis, and what those responses seemed to mean to them psychologically. from that i could build a pretty accurate self profile. listening more and more i became able to continue to build on their profiles, or find that there was not much more depth than my original findings.
and listening…well…i could see my own profile, and i began to deconstruct myself, by learning to listen and take notes of what my self said, and then building my own profile. there is no better road to meaning than the art of listening…the complex relation of your self to the otherness of your self, will all be found when you open your senses….
“deconstruction is the relentless pursuit of the impossible, which means, of things whose possibility is sustained by their impossibility, of things which, instead of being wiped out by their impossibility, are actually nourished and fed by it.” Derrida