John W. Cox, M.A. C/M
The use of “objectification-metaphorically” to justify our existence, simply isolates the individual, yet maintain our ability, at a safe distance, to function within peer-groups, and wander among strangers, within a civil manner. Yet, ironically at the same time, somehow or another, “keep” within the development we achieve, and through time, maintain our perception of ourselves. Although, and often, what we believe ourselves to be, conflicts directly with the supposed “reality of the day” (i.e. modernization and advancement of technology just a couple of many “situations” that conflict with who and what we are and how we “deal” with daily life), as well as how we think of ourselves and our place in the society we live within. This is the source of “Drama” as well as “Art”, and other metaphorical leaps and bounds into common conversation of today.
The definition of knowledge as a justified true belief of our own being, appears for the first time from Plato. In other words, “. . . belief is required to have an explanation to be correct, beyond just happening to be right.” – Plato’s Meno, this is taken from a Socratic dialogue by Plato. Meno begins the dialogue by asking Socrates whether virtue is taught, acquired by practice, or comes by nature. To determine whether virtue is teachable or not, Socrates tells Meno, that they first need to determine what virtue is (or a “moral” bases included within the decision making process). Here we can start to understand how conflicts develop within the very subjective arena of Nature. We objectify all that is around us, daily. The difference between male and female, for example, and what “roll” each play as we live our life individually, yet, socially, is a very simplified form of objective metaphors for survival. Wrong or right, it exists with each individual, differently.
We can also go further in explanation, for example a politician’s roll, or “objective-metaphor” within our society, as liars and cheats, that conflicts with diplomatic mind-sets and as we are led to believe, why they are elected for their honesty (??? Perceptions can be manipulated as well???), and yes, a false-narrative throughout the entire election process – One can say elections are irrational at best, metaphorically and objectively. . . Until we become angry enough to correct such corrupt behaviors; or, business & advertising mind-sets that conflict directly with truth, of actual necessity; or, the industrial concept of thinking, which opens the doors of perception toward many destructive and conflictive elements, that sacrifice and destroy our natural environment for money, or property values to rise, both toward unfounded riches. Many more examples, but in today’s times, does any of the ongoing examples relate, what so ever, to what Plato wanted us to understand to be “virtues”? Probably not.
We communicate through objective-metaphors daily. We use Nature, and wildlife, as metaphors; for example, trees, mules, elephants, lions, wolves, bears, rocks, and the list goes on and on . . . What we indeed have accomplished, is losing site of what these metaphors are, and within reality. It comes down too the situation, or the ability to separate the two – the dimension of Objective-Metaphor, which must be separated, from the truth of Reality, and within our internal language to ourselves – in our own minds.
This is primarily due to being so “disconnected” from Nature, and especially wildlife, other than through media, or conversation. The reality becomes nothing more than someone else’s perception of what Nature and Wildlife “is or is not”. The conflicts grow, and suddenly the average person, who is conflicted within their own metaphorical-language, conflicts directly with Nature. As Nature and Wildlife are simply true to themselves, which we often perceive as survival, which leads us to assume Nature, often, is nothing more than a battlefield, of animals that remain in constant battle with one another . . . but the truth, when in-nature itself, much different.
Sitting cliffside, or, sitting on a stump in the middle of a Wilderness area, we see things in a much different perspective. A calm develops, in the quietness of a Natural Setting away from society and people. It develops into a mindful experience, when we realize it is the human’s, within the cities and streets upon where they live, that often are battle-zones, are indeed unsettled, and just as often, conflicts arise unnecessarily – the fact becomes of a non-virtue (i.e. Plato’s conversations with Meno), that people treat one another far worse than Wildlife treat one another.
Until we resolve these issues, and outright unnecessary conflicts, as we foreshadow our own grief and force it upon Nature, as if a reality, we will as a species, subject Nature and Wildlife to destructive situations, and refer to it perceptively as “modernization” and “advancements” in technology” (the destructive use of pesticides’ and herbicides in Nature remains one destructive aspect of many more – as we see a purpose in the “numbing-down” of people to, in reality, function as needed (pay taxes & work), equal to the destruction it causes.
But being so detached from that reality (i.e. that we are worse than wildlife could ever be), intimidation and fear overwhelm the human species within a natural survival-tendency. Within this perception, Wildlife often is referred to as the Enemy (the metaphorical scape-goat, for example), within one’s own mind or spirit metaphorically (whether subordinate or of priority, at the time), as we touch upon a reality we cannot grasp, because our metaphorical-mind conflicts with that which we cannot control — for example Apex Predators – Friend or Foe? Or, just live and let live, and Nature take its course. Our “disconnect” from Nature very destructive to Nature and the Habitats in which we live today.
Yet another example to use in this discussion is the human mind-sets, or “objectified-metaphors”, that extend a hunters-perception of themselves (movies, television, articles, books, et al), while neglecting truth, or any moral grounds toward behavior, under the guise of heritage, yet derived from myth. Wildlife becomes the target of their aggressive behaviors, combined with their psychological-malfunctions which remain hidden due to their own “objectified-metaphors”, and yet, the reality being, their aggressive behaviors and killing Wildlife, is and remains unnecessary, in today’s world – there are “options” that do exist, yet ignored.
Locke’s epistemology was an attempt to understand the operations of human understanding, Kant’s epistemology was an attempt to understand the conditions of the possibility of human understanding, and Russell’s epistemology was an attempt to understand how modern science could be justified by appeal to sensory perceptions, et al.
So I will leave you with the definable term of “epistemology” for further thought into how we perceive today’s society, and the daily conflicts within it. This can also explain many of the conflicting perceptions we have not only forced upon Nature, but within society and the levels of conflicts that do arise, in conversation, all the way to political decision making that favors one objective over another – most often through false-narrative, or conflicting perceptions of a non-reality base of non-necessity, that conflicts directly with the reality of virtue (i.e. moral standards) which, in today’s time seems to be in upheaval on a constant basis . . .
“To determine whether virtue is teachable or not, Socrates tells Meno, that they first need to determine what virtue is.” — Plato
Photojournalist - Journalist 