The TrekEarth Forums - View Single Post - Photography & reality
View Single Post
  #23  
Old 11-24-2004, 12:51 PM
cgrindahl cgrindahl is offline
TE Expert
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,310
Default Re: A few semiotics, if you please... (II)

We've touched on some of this in earlier exchanges Gal, and it is probably safe to say that we won't come to agreement on the more fundamental premises. I also know the good will between us makes it possible for us to disagree without becoming disagreeable. I appreciate that greatly.

I'll focus, as I did in my comment to Richard, on the efficacy of "asking questions about the world" as means of fathoming reality. You're aware no doubt of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle that so shocked the scientific world when it was postulated. Up until that time, it was believed that with sufficient care, scientists would be able to determine the ultimate nature of reality. Then along comes Werner Heisenberg who discovered that the way the scientist designed the experiment determined the outcome he would obtain. If he looked for light as a particle, he got a particle. If he looked for a wave, he got a wave. To my mind, at least, this statement demonstrated the ultimate subjectivity of our view of the material world. I mentioned David Bohm's book Wholeness and the Implicate Order because he is a well known physicist who was among the vanguard of those who concluded that what we deem as reality may in fact be an extension of consciousness. I suggested that meditation may be a more suitable tool for understanding reality because it is the only vehicle available for us to explore this realm. And yes, practitioners from eastern spiritual traditions are much more expert in using this tool since they've been using it to explore the human psyche for much longer that we've been using the scientific method in our attempts to scratch the surface of reality.

As I've observed elsewhere, "the mind creates the abyss the heart crosses." Poets have a much better chance of expressing the ineffable than scientists will ever be able to do. And photography is capable of touching the deepest chords of human experience as well. That is photography as art. But it becomes art not through discursive analysis of the photograph or descriptive analysis of the act of taking a photo, but from the heart to heart connection between photographer and viewer of the photograph. One might call it an interpersonal subjectivity, but those are just more words to describe. You may wish to "be aware of the way you may be touched by a Bach cantata" but I feel what is important is simply being touched. Awareness of the mechanism of how one is touched is a rather empty exercise in comparison, in my opinion. It would be like trying to understand your motivation for putting a coin under your child's pillow. Love needs no analysis... ;-)
Reply With Quote