From: "Gene Smith" <SmithFrow@worldnet.att.net>
To: <baidarka@lists.intelenet.net>
Subject: Re: baidarka spirit /life lines
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 20:22:03 -0000
I meant 'otherness' as exemplifying a viewpoint that is so different from
one's own that it is difficult to think about it. Amongst a general and
very positive move toward tolerance and understanding of other peoples and
other ways has been a false thread that seeks to reassure those with
parochial fears that 'We're all the same.' Well, we're not. We may all be
brothers - to invoke another observation - but brothers aren't the same,
either. One could make the same statement about cetaceans if one was so
inclined, followed by citations of similar needs and drives...food,
companionship, reproduction, survival...but it is also fairly obvious that
the cetacean viewpoint is going to be, well, 'other'. Not superior or
inferior to humans - just very, very different. Now I make no claim to
understand the cetacean mind, but I suspect their 'reality' is unlikely to
be made up of a collection of discreet 'things' like ours (modern civilized
humans) tends to be. By the same token, I believe that at least until quite
recently, the Native American 'reality' would tend to see the 'reality' that
we perceive as a huge collection of things - desirable and undesirable - and
the choices we make among them more like a vast organism or a complex story.
It is very difficult to think and speak outside one's own culture, or
milieu, or paradigm. I also suspect that anything even remotely
approximating 'enlightenment' virtually requires one to do so.
So I find a glimpse like this into a very 'other' way of perceiving reality
very interesting and thought provoking. Not because I want to 'think like
an Inuit' but because being able to 'think like an Inuit' even a little bit
allows me to see my own culture and mental processes more clearly. All
'points of view' create boundaries and assumptions which are extremely
difficult to see from the inside. By being exposed to an alternative view,
the assumptions I unconsciously make can become a little more obvious. It's
hard to realize the extent I think of the universe as being made up of
'dead' stuff until I come across a viewpoint that says, oh no - that tree
has a 'spirit'. That piece of wood has a 'spirit' - it 'wants' to be
something - and it's your job as the artisan to help it do that and become
that, or express that 'spirit'. Now if I can think about something that my
culture thinks of as dead stuff as having 'spirit', it leas me inevitably to
then ask, "Well, what the hell is this spirit stuff anyway?"
And if you think that's a bunch of meaningless mumbo-jumbo, here's some
science for you. It is now thought that between 95 and 99% of the Universe
consists of 'dark matter'. Invisible. Can only be observed through its
effects on the stuff we can see. Controls the destiny of the Universe
because of its vast mass and gravity effects. So, ummm...what would that
stuff be do you think? Does it fit within your common sense view of the
world? Does a kayak have a counterpart in the dark universe? Or is it just
a nice little boat?
Gene Smith
still thinking about what the hell 'spirit' is in Houston
>What is otherness? Do you mean like "that certain something"? Or something
>even more "other"?
>
>At 10:38 PM 1/3/99 -0000, you wrote:
>>This is a fascinating observation - thank you for posting it and adding
your
>>own comments. I wanted to post a response, but I am still thinking about
>>the implications in what you have written. Unless one is endowed with a
>>world view that allows one to simply dismiss things like this a primitive
>>nonsense - either more or less interesting intellectually, but certainly
>>devoid of any validity outside of psychology or anthropology - then it
>>reveals an alternate world view that is quite overwhelming in its
>>'otherness'.
>>
>>Gene Smith
>>still thinking about it in Houston