Context-transcendent Meaning?

[bonnitta roy]

I am researching a working paper tentatively called "The search for context-transcedent meaning." In this post-metaphysical age, is there any context - independent knowledge or context-transcendent meaning? If maybe so... what kinds of categories, notions, meaning-drivers, values do you suppose they would be?

[bonnitta roy]

The verb "still-hunting", post-metaphysically like the subject waiting for an impossible object, open, diaphanous... whatever presents (objectifies) is not that, this position of still-hunting is

bonnitta roy said:

First, to search for something context-trancendent and post-metaphysical seems for me like something very worthwhile and meaningful. It shows an interesting direction for something, at the very least our own reflection, and it does something with our perspective on our human meanings and context.

Nicely said/ pointed. You help me remember that it is this "search(ing)" for context-transcendent meaning that I am pointing to (inquiring of) not "something" context-transcendent... Reminds me of something Szanne Cook-Greuter likes to mention -- the Native American notion of "still hunting" -- being still and vigilant, aware of environs on a very peek level... aroused without an object or sensation of arousal... but for me the "still" also means "always" or an enduring continual way of being...

 

bonnie

Øyvind Solum said:

First, to search for something context-trancendent and post-metaphysical seems for me like something very worthwhile and meaningful. It shows an interesting direction for something, at the very least our own reflection, and it does something with our perspective on our human meanings and context.

It may help us taking smaller og larger leaps, and it may often be very clarifying and very freeing for many of our perspectives. 

But, in Rumi-stories are other things of its kind, there is not a full transcendence or anything of that kind - even if I am too a fan of Rumi. Yes, it's a pointing. It is reminding us that other perspectives exists, whether we believe we grab them or not.

But there is at least one context, and actually also others. And that is the context that says that there is a relative world were we are living in some kind of illution, and that there exist another world or perspectives were things are very differen – more true, evolved and enlightened. 

It is not that I am saying that this is not true in some kind of version, but it is some kind of history about truth or the human existence. This is a gnotic tale, also spelt out in advaita or elsewere.

It is actually splitting the world in two halves, saying one is more real than the other. It is probably THE most basic context or meaning. And then, even if it may be called advaita or whatever, it is not nondual, but just a very basic ways of humans to make meanings in our very human reality or perception. Often it is also used to justify avoidence for many human struggles - in the name of the nondual - even if that is actually making the split even larger.