real 3

When I was younger, I was raised in two families. One of them were my parents and the other were a couple of elders whom I would be with nearly all the time until the age of twelve. Having always lived in a rural village, I worked three years on a farm, near the woods and in my youth, I unwillingly became part of a group of spiritual mystics and millionaires. At times, I was at the private college or university, and then some other times, at the public school or the workshop. I have seen the attitudes of the church, of the farmers, of the pompous students, of the fighters, of the rich and the poor, of the craftsmen, of the athletes, of the spiritualists, of the satanists and many others. Such personal πάθει μάθος that is mine and perhaps, familiar to many others, lead me to believe that I have (without generalizing) a good sense of how the mechanism of the mind function when it comes to world versions.

I have previously stated that in most cases, be they conscious or unconscious, human beings tend to select a world version (category or ism) or a mixture of human-made worlds for their lives to be imbued with meaning. Thus, if my readers recall correctly, a good example of a world version could be anything that sets certain rules to life such as: Religion, science, spirituality, politics (…) These parameters who are language limited and imperfect, fill the holes of ‘unknowingness’ which in turns, frequently lead beings to hubris, to the certainty of knowing. So, this prophet becomes the only truth, this empire, becomes the only power, this law becomes the only law and so on. Through an incomplete language, we are creators of a plurality of worlds.

But now I wanted to add to this ‘Goodmanian perspective’ of ‘worldmaking’. It is my now expanded belief that this process is so innate to us, humans that it has become second nature. And just the same way we use different tools for different sets of work, we awaken specific sets of worlds (categories) for specific encounters. For example, having a conversation with a Christian will trigger certain categories defined over time by your personal πάθει μάθος. Discussing with a boxer or an old monk, some others.


A logical manifestation of attributes for a specific world version (category) could be:

Conversation with a boxer:

World version (category): Masculinism

Attributes: Masculinity, competition, defiance, challenge (…)


Again, this is a general perspective of what would mostly be awakened, a norm. The slight alteration to a world version will trigger different reactions. For example, the attributes are not the same for a boxer and a martial artists both in actions and talks. Interestingly enough, this conclusion reveals that nearly every individuals are consciously or unconsciously tricksters, switching between masks when confronted with different world versions. I have observed this behavior in every spheres but perhaps more among rich people…

My new conclusions seems to add a bit of ‘expansion’ and activity which fits how our mind works. I believe some individuals are feeling more secured in settling themselves entirely or as much as possible in one single world. This happens frequently in religion. But with modernism, many felt unsatisfied with this and wanted something more broad and so the Internet brought this massive torrent of information. It is now easier than ever to have create mixtures of world versions or have a ‘mask’ ready for any thinkable subject. It is also easier now than ever before to succumb to the ever growing encyclopedia of labels…

Personally, I believe that the true adept (which might just be another world version) is an individual that managed to become undisturbed on his path by all this torrent, this insanity of worlds. He removed all the masks, one by one and admitted the ‘unknowingness’ with his heart instead of filling it with void, imperfect, clay-like creations. This leads me to think, is evil really a component of the creation, or did we forge it ourselves, out of ignorance like so many other things?

Truth cannot be defined or tested by agreement with ‘the world’; for not only do truths differ for different worlds but the nature of agreement between a world apart from it is notoriously nebulous. -Nelson Goodman

-Beldam, 128 yf


2 thoughts on “Polymorph

  1. Yes, this view reminds me of psychoanalytic theory of Lacan in which he distinguishes between the Symbolic and the Real. The symbolic consists of the various world version: a father, a mother, a soldier, a boss, … All of them have a certain perspective and many people combine various versions. Now, as you mention a devout Christian has a very strong version which he follows. An true adept is rooted in the symbolic as well as he uses language which is the very foundation of the symbolic, but a true adapt is able to go beyond language, definitions and so on. The connection with the Numinous, the Undefinable, and the non-knowledge of the Mystics.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s