"Experience" is the framework through which the subjective experience of objectivity is reclassified and understood as the objective description of subjectivity. Hence "experience" is not a thing to be experienced - it is a manner of speaking.
Through "experience", experience itself is made into an object. The coincidence of thought and experience?
It is informative as it's use implies knowledge about what this relationship between the 2 categories consists. But it is information that only relates to the way in which it is used. Is it possible to understand why it is used in this way? What would that question consist in?
In being used this way, the object which is material is not the object being referred to in experience. It becomes the experienced object.
The application of that categorization to reality presupposes that it fits that description.
***
The oxymoron of relation being subjective - without anything to relate to.
And of objectivity being the relation of fact to itself, and the negation of a relation.
No comments:
Post a Comment