We use emotion to make decisions on just about everything, but then try to rationalize it as well. What are the exceptions, for which subjects do people broadly insist on or are regularly comfortable with making decisions based on emotion or gut? Religion, love, who to be friends with, appreciation of arts and nature... more?
A new and neat perspective on art and spirituality I developed in India which seems agreeable cross-culturally and cross-belief, remarkable for such sensitive topics. Atheists, agnostics, evangelicals, artists, musicians and psychiatrists approve so far, each contributing to its fleshing out. It's to hopefully be the hypothesis for which my next music album will be proof of concept, constructed and considered something like a doctoral thesis: The Natural Expression of Intangible Thought.
The purpose of music is to express that which reason kills? The topics of beauty and emotion and magical qualities. For those things for which we have no words, or which words destroy by quantifying, we have art.
At my mom's new church, the preacher spoke fifteen minutes on the virtue of patience. Where else is my grandmother going to sit and consider an intangible concept like patience? Or the following week, maybe then the virtue of self-motivation. Religious services provide a revolving diet of intangible thought.
Spirit-led children and artists
musician - technician
“smoke leaving the room” “put your heart into it” “you touched my soul” “emotionally naked” “tell me your story” “Blue smurfs running around the room” “listen to the spaces”
Active and Empathetic expression spectrum: children - artists - designers - djs - women - choir singers - movie and music fans/consumers - men - IT - military men who can't play guitar - engineers
The Twilight series of films seems particularly suited to provide empathetic passive expression for girls in early puberty, Bella representing that tween girl viewer with a lot of new secrets to keep and blood involved as never before, like her menses, suddenly unique and the center of carnal attraction. The wolves are athletic in a pack like a sports team or gang, all protective but one singles out his attention on her which the others respect, like boys also in early puberty: warm, cuddly, young, poor, loyal, wild, unorganized, super strong, sometimes hairy and smelly, immediately ready. The vampires represent men post-puberty from the perspective of a tween girl: impossibly old and wealthy rich, love her more as a daughter, cannot kiss or have sex with her before she's had her first blood (menses) or they could kill her or some mysterious life-destroying worse, civilized and organized with lots of rules to learn, also protective and super strong though less obvious about it, and have a much harder time understanding her but she feels compelled to become ready for them. The boys (wolves) and men (vampires) often don't get along, but tolerate each other. In the end, Bella matures enough to be with the vampire and has a daughter which is eventually for the wolf she left behind.
Much of the movie "My Dinner with Andre" discusses how we perform and are affected by the performances of others. Our perception of cultural reality is clouded untrue by the indirect expressions of others, and we in turn hide or shade our true emotions and opinions for the sake of civility or brevity, which clouds others' perceptions untrue. Something like that. We all help create the fantasy others live in.
As the Intangible becomes detailed, it loses its magic, its essence while changing into something tangible. Rationalizing intangible thinking threatens those who believe they master it mystically. Viewing religion tangibly is to murder homosexuals and disobedient children and for women to marry their rapers, or to rationalize rules as temporarily cultural relevant.
Poetry/parables/analogy/copywriting - technical writing
Spirituality - Religion
Esoteric/Wisdom - Knowledge/Education
Maturity - Age
Responsibility - Obligation
Patriotism - Nationalism
Spirituality - Religion
Naturism - Environmentalism
Astrology - Astronomy
Talent - Skill
Style - Fashion/Genre/Era
Art - Craft
Elegance - Efficiency
symbolism - symbol
Eroticism - Pornography
Charm/Seduction - persuasion?
Faith/Trust - Reason/Dependability
Ceremony - Tradition
Wonder - Interest
Majesty/Grandeur/Glamour/Contempt - Status
taste/smell - texture/viscosity
figurative - literal
Tangible and intangible are so congruous as to avoid distinction
I love being able to put my stories on paper for everyone to read. I especially love forcing them to confront thoughts that their minds do not have protection against. - Jason Yungbluth, cartoonist “Deep Fried”
Is abstract/theoretical math intangible? Is math, as a separate language, capable of intagibility? Perhaps involving transcendental or irrational numbers? Does math have poetic language? For mathematicians, an elegant solution is a formula as abstract beautiful representation. Google makes elegant coding which coders enjoy using and trust as a succinct form of perfection, as opposed to clunky ugly code with extraneous or occasionally troublesome bits. Non-emotional or societal examples of intangibility: impossible colors like Red-green and yellow-blue.
It may be releated to the psychological and philosophical field of Phenomenology, the study of subjective experience founded in the early years of the German 20th century by Edmund Husserl. What I name intangible, philosophy names qualia?
Abstract vs Concrete Thinking
Conservative religious followers may suffer from inability to abstract think. That's likely the reasoning behind disallowing graven images and idols. People often believe what they can see, and in the days before wide-spread literacy being able to point to an icon or graven image you can say "there, it is because I can show it to you." (Concrete thinking.)
A monotheistic god is more abstract in a certain sense, but if your god creates everything and is infallible then literally everything you see confirms the existence of god... except for idols and images of other gods.
Then there is the other reason for the prohibition: god is apparently the one that creates life and images, and thus to people unable to take it in the abstract, graven images and icons are literally people attempting to create life and usurp the role of god.
So in a sense, banning icons and images is there to keep concrete thinkers among the faithful, to force them to accept an abstract god you can't sense or see in place of a concrete one you could. But it discourages further abstract thinking beyond that point, since if you are a literal, concrete style thinker, then if you accept the prohibition, the reason for it is that you believe doing these things is literally trying to usurp the role of god.
Basically then, you are left with a system that makes concrete thinkers into fundamentalist, and likely the cause of their inability to think in abstract terms. (link)
Concrete Reasoning: Basic knowledge of names of objects, places, and people;
Understanding of basic cause and effect relationships;
Solving problems that have clear processes and logical solutions; and typically
do not involve theory, metaphor, or complex analogy.
Abstract Reasoning: Forming theories about the nature of objects, ideas, processes, and problem solving;
Understanding subjects on a complex level through analysis and evaluation;
Ability to apply knowledge in problem-solving using theory, metaphor, or complex analogy; and
Understanding relationships between verbal and non-verbal ideas.