AshvinP wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2024 2:29 pmFederica wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2024 2:11 pmAshvinP wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2024 1:49 pm
Hmm, when would the primary target be feeling? I'm not sure that would make sense in a phenomenological approach. Although I have always thought about how it would work to add musical accompaniment to some illustrations, to add the feeling element. For ex., if there was a discussion about how no object exists in isolation but can only be what it is at any given moment in the context of all Earthly and Cosmic forces, there could be a video that expands out from a single cultural object and traces all the relations through the Natural and Cosmic contexts, accompanied by some moving classical music.
I was not so much suggesting to stir emotions through music. I also recall what Cleric said about the new relevance of Earthly music. In another sense, the primary target could be feeling for example within the following context:
Cleric K wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 3:57 pm Today we are at a point where the intellect practically can no longer find any excuse not to understand its spiritual nature as an immediate and self-evident reality. Anyone who follows with their thinking the simple phenomenological truths, as we attempt to do, simply stands face to face with the facts. Now if one is honest, they would have to admit that if they still reject the spiritual, it is no longer because it makes no sense but simply because it is emotionally resisted.
We know that the two major emotions that keep the human being from knowing its spiritual dimension are fear and pride. Each related to the corresponding class of adversarial beings.
When the above applies, the phenomenological approach can't even start. There is a blockage upstream of that step, so no amount of encouragement to thinking activity would help. In such a situation, maybe the fear or the pride can be somehow more immediately evoked, or related to in pictorial form. But I am not sure.
As you know, everything should unfold in complete freedom, which of course means through the life of thinking. If one tries to work too directly on others in the realm of feeling or will, this subverts their freedom and can lead to many unintended consequences, such as subtle resentment that builds over time. People should be allowed to modify their feeling context out of their own free thinking efforts. I know you are not suggesting otherwise, but I am just indicating we should be careful in this domain.
But perhaps that emotional constellation could be evoked to thinking via a video narrative. For ex. one could illustrate Plato's allegory of the cave and suggest what keeps the cave dwellers fixed on the shadows is the constellation of fear or pride, when they could just as easily turn around and be active in the Light through the life of creative thinking.
In all cases, I think the illustrations need to be accompanied by a context of lucid reasoning through their significance.
Ashvin,
The more I ponder this question, the more I think that, by far and large, the added value of a sensory picture, video, or animation is emotional. In your example, what conceptual element would a video or picture of Plato's cave add for the reader, that can't be effectively expressed or evoked through words, other than an accrued emotional involvement, and a sense of relatedness with the dwellers?
I agree that one should be careful with trying to surreptitiously trigger emotional responses, in other words, manipulating. On the other hand, feeling and thinking are always intertwined anyway, and so maybe it's better to acknowledge that fully, to acknowledge that there is always an added emotional effect when pictures or video are added to the words, and maybe take responsibility for that part to, striving for carefulness, respect, and consideration of others, of course. In that sense, I agree that "the emotional constellation is always evoked to thinking”, as an intention at least (nobody can grant it will work as we expect at the other end of the communication, though, but this is true for thinking as well). So yes, the goal should never be to stir emotions subliminally, but to create relatedness around, and proximity with, the questions at hand.
Even the use of visual cues that we have recently introduced has the primary purpose and effect to be felt in a particular way. If it was only a matter of encapsulating a concept or idea, we could use x,y, or z. The encapsulated thoughts are already conveyed by the words. However, the visual cues add a feeling bond that hopefully consolidates or colors the thoughts in a beneficial way. What additional quality would the cues add (to the mere encapsulation) if I say for example that emotions
are inseparable from thoughts 
in any communication, other than a quality of feeling that opens an extra dimention of angles of approach?Another example: could one argue that adding the Columbo gifs to my post on the Symphony of Minds thread - as opposed to reporting the gifs’ captions alone, as simple text - subverts Lorenzo’s freedom? And what about sharing a movie trailer to color and enrich some text illustrations, as you sometimes do? Does it evoke emotions? Does it subvert freedom?
PS. All the above being said, I don't imply that I am free from fear and pride, of course.
That was a great show, as far as I remember 
