Sometimes we think we are accepting new thoughts into our constellation of sensemaking. Breakthroughs. Advances.
And sometimes we freeze.
And sometimes the new thoughts we think we are having end up too fragile to keep.
Consider the self-help book, or those programs we put ourselves through int he name of self-improvement. Desires to “change” , to “grow”. Diets. Educations. We may feel entirely new following a practice we have yet to be accustomed to, but to truly change, grow,whathaveyou, can only come from the ground already going us. You simply won’t get a pineapple tree to grow outside in Alaska. That’s why real metamorphosis is so terrifying, groundless until more fertile soil is found.
The science eyeball can only detect what emerges, and it does a fine and necessary job of determining the qualities of the things emerged,revealed as well as (sometimes) the ground from which it emerged - but only from the expression of these properties within the already fled emergence. Consider considering if plants have understanding.
Two methods: 1) to go by what we have come to understand ourselves as understanding on our own playing field. For example, plants do not have a recognizably similar nervous system in regards to our own. They don’t scream like we scream like some animals scream. 2) to follow the hunch that perhaps we can understand more about understanding by guessing at how a plant understands.
The scales are so far tipped in favor of 1 that at any movement towards 2 seems to be a wild assertion, hoodoo, an elimination of everything we have built thus far. But really it is neither both. If we practice listening to plants, we will only discover dimensions yet unexplored of our own understand. When we love it is our own hearts we grasp.
XX Considering objects:: plants remain intolerably foreign, a life of their own before and after us indifferent. Unspeaking objects, darlings of materialisms, these are the tails, trails of human subjectivity. Once this is understood, then consider