The Geography of the soul.

Plane one: Self love.

It is set at the confluence of two distinct elements. On the one hand self shares a boundary with intelligence. The self lover is therefore someone always sizing up their effect upon others, and through others. To love myself is therefore not eke loving anyone else . That comes an goes in washes of hormones, while self love needs to be thought through, and my effect understood. On the other hand self love is also about a feeling. There pleasure or other pain is s converted into my own passion in my love. Y effect into others, is therefore felt as well as looked for, I feel their passion as my pride.

The love therefore takes up feeling and envelopes them with and idea of myself (whatever that s. However at this point two deep chasms open up in the powers of such a love.

Firstly it  bound by the problem the fact that the self which loves is always a fraction of all I am. there s always therefore more in that self. There are always other places to a me, places which might not inspire love at all – places which I might loath or despise or feel as problematic. 

A which point many paths open. My love for myself might remind me that elsewhere I hate myself or that in an other land I simply ignore myself. Nor is this love constant. that is what I love in myself changes, as it does my take on what I am is never simply and never merely mine.

The idea of the self does not necessarily marry very ell with myself as lover.

Secondly and even more problematically it is impossible ever to simply claim ones passions as ones own. the very feelings that one might want o be one own effects or ones own mind therefore are always bound up in a shared axis of loves and loathes which binds one into a society 9at the point of a family or elsewhere). One cannot therefore simply say I feel therefore I am, a s those feelings are not to be allowed to be simple or even ever purely mine.  I feel any yet what that feeling is not simple or easy.

The self therefore and it live is real enough. I really do feel myself to be. And yet the constituent parts of hat reality are not easy in their relationship. One might therefore think I am and assume that this thought to make the world as straight forward and easy place As I am the powers and domains of the ought to follow from that being  ought to be the ones that matter. After all if I am as I think I am then reality is also that which supports that being and ought to conform. The world ought therefore to be resolvable ought to be straight forward enough. People ought to operate from heir own particular motives. They ought to be entirely open and straight forwards. They ought to be…

Safe of course at each point internal to itself, an even worse outside of any self the power and privilege to be oneself collapses. Or at least it is likely to do the only time is does not, the only time the alliance of feelings and idea of myself remain conjoined is if one ac morally. They ones self love and the idea of oneself as a moral agency in that love age reinforced. This was at least Hume’s dream. The problem is of course that exactly what is moral of rather different. in a sense there is a real logic here. To act morally, is to at according to the pattern with allows then self love I have, that is the feeling that I matter, and hat the idea of my is important to the world to be expectance in such a way that that idea id strengthened. In acing morally therefore the feeling have for others reflect back into self. That is the web of feelings, the very fact that no feeling is ever that simple is allowed for. I know this the case and act accordingly. I therefore feel from a posting that is between mess. Or better I create a space o be moral in and to think of myself (ironaically0 with that is between a you and a me.

That is I can have self love is I act according to the great empirical principle which allows feelings not really to be about a  me at all. Ad s on as I act in the light o the polling and the interlocking of feelings then I act morally, and can love myself in that moral. And yet of course at this point the entire domain the landscape off self love buckles and bends under the rod or passion ..If I love myself even in this space in-between anything I am then I will reintroduce myself as an object/ It will immediately lay claim to the between space of morality. I will demand then that it is min and all mine, and the problem starts again.

Self love is therefore caught in a paradox. On the one side of a great chasm it can see where it ought to be, it can see the moral domain the saying and the pitching do what it in the light of pooled interacted feeling, upon which it ought to judge. On the other it is very hard for it to sty in such a place. On the contrary the movement it throws itself against this space, and attempt to occupy it, then the between split way, and what ought to be shares (what morality tells one is not ones own, however one might feel) is lost within a the general malaise of me-ness.

Plane 2 The swamp of the affect.

The problem therefore is that means either affects and impossible demand-  that he would behave itself; or it is caught in the trap of morality which takes a circuitous route back the same self0. it cannot therefore simply be. it cannot escape what it is. And yet At this point the divide between what is shared and in the saying is changed and what is demanded as already shared (to world as an object of participate or an artefact to play in), is a real divide. The same feelings lie on either side and yet of course they are not the same series or set of consequences of those feelings. 

On the one side of the would be moral human, lies the feelings at are affective (and their real support no one human as such).These feelings are therefore pitched in the knowledge hat the feelings that one feels on this divide are never simply shared an never simply their. One is (here one needs to follow Hume again) always to start from a place and in a time. One therefore always needs ones own feeling, and then one ought o move out-  of better come the realize how these feelings are already caught up in other feelings That is how they are already a part in others an then yet others, the other here being at once the others of feelings and he other of individuals (the difference thus far is alms academic0.  am what I am as I feel therefore the cry rings out, and as  feel that is caught upon the prisming of those feelings into other places and other domains. And yet this kingdom then pay a price in this othering. If one accepts the argument Hume employs there is a savage loneliness in the feeling taken s itself. That is the affect is always also a product in a position. It is therefore never something can share with you. We might both be happy, but do not assume that his is the same happiness we are feeling you and. Where and what I  am is therefore is problematic an rather shifty. It is far from simple.

This then creates a real problem – of is the very power and pattern of an affect is to involve others and yet always to share within others, and in sharing change the pairing – how can one ever hope to encode that haring that thought in a description/ how moreover can one act upon it when it is a changing as the day? How can one understand it?

The problem here though is not the old problem that this understanding is somehow tricky. It is not I can understand an affect or at least an aspect of the affect very easily – the moment I trap it in an passion I will feel that it is mine.

This move can then be effected in three ways.

Firstly I can draw out an affect. I can sit quietly by and make the affect reveal everything. I can run the gamut of feeling it produces, naming them one by one, and in the naming seek to produce a map of passions, and how they look into each other. The dynamic exchange of the affect is then mapped out, and as long in subsequent times the power of the affect remains by and large within the intensive bounds of this map , the affect can be treated pretty much as a thing understood, that is as a passion.

Secondly I might make the affect confess everything? That is it turns it power and its shared uncomplaining passion into  web of words. I might then treat it as if they were what I sometimes pretend feeling are-  the result of behaviourist response and stimuli. I might therefore attempt to find the causes to the feelings, and mappings out the causes create the moral high ground for the affect. Than is the domain which would want to claim predated it-  the web of causes that allow and police it. The point  one needs then the break-up feelings or inject a self in this feeling or that feeling. The point then that one might want to control from.

Thirdly I might use the trick of empathy to cease control of another’s feelings. This trick is the hardest of the lot. One might their confess just enough oneself to force the other into confession. Once then one has that other of the slippery slop of admittance and therefore forced them to bare a soul .Or better one might keep on implying that it was the same for oneself and it was for them /they pour out therefore there side in the affect, and one captures that side within the geography f one sown passion. The passion takes it over as its right, and behaves then as if it (the passion were the real master to the affect. My feeling – the act that I do feel might then be seen by both parties as enough f a pretext for the other person to admit their feeling and give them over to the passion to decide to do with as it will .My soul becomes then another property because of their passions.

In straight conflict between passion and affect,  the passion with its loop into the self and its ability to mirror itself into affect, and across others (passions can be shared where affects are what I

making the sharing, what is silently and dynamically making it), cannot not. The passion therefore controls, it  forces confessions. It turns it feelings into veneers of power. I seeks to own ultimately what cannot be owned. The land between feelings.

That is in claiming the same feelings (and using that felling as the pretext to force another confession) the passion moves in on the space between. This space, this domain of money, faith or creativity is its preserve itself (this is the purity of the feeling) and the generative affect ought to conform to this high ground and allow for it.

The affect has only one response. It cannot except that assumption of what makes it under the orbit f another. Where can it go and what cannot do therefore save fell?

That is faced with the assertion of the passionate self to the rights and  domains of the shared, the affect withdraws the sense that it shared the land at all, and as it does so calls the passions bluff.

If is really powerful enough the affect asks to claim this land for its own?

Plane 3; the Lonely passion.

Passion therefore claims on the face of it some much. It can claim that it is what  can be shared, as it finds it mirror in others (w love together) the it is the real one, it is the social one, the one that can therefore map out a territory and hold down a people. And yet t can do it only through what is lost to it. That is it can do it, I can one this land only in the absence of the element actually shred, the affect. The passion can therefore hold out the dots as dot. T can create a real landscape and treat feeling as if they were genuinely landscape of the already shared (the other side of that divide).  

An yet in going so in making this claim it loses the power to join these dots of passion together. Between a You and  I therefore the opens a chasm deeper than death. We might feel and share the same, we might be human beings and yet our feeling sit in dreadful isolation even as they are name and even ad the cod falls on their understanding. We therefore pretend that we understand them that we know them, that we trace them, and yet in dong so sell them into a me.

Even here the sealing is never complete never absolute how can it be? we are caught therefore in always thinking of the fact that these elements which we want nice and neat and easy are indeed actually shared in the loops of one another. We might therefore be saying this in mine an yet we dream it might not be merely ours. We might therefore create a series of property right of feelings (a series of marriages) and realize or understand that series ought not or canto include the affect in it(I is too much of a hobo-  too much the poor girl to be caught in the rights of property the big feelings and landed passions that allow for a marriage), and yet we want to include that poor girl, we desire to marry it. That is we desire to treat it as it were a passion (and so could be claimed) while accepting that it is not and cannot. One is caught up in the great dilemma.

Do we accept it is an affect- love it and let it free? do we attempt to  force the passions net on it? Or do we ourselves change?

But the there problem is how can we so change? Or o put it another way what bolt from the blue can jolt us and our lives outside the end of passions and the traps in being they produce?

Or to put it another way what can force us out of our own skin and into the skins of the affect? What exchange then allows us to move beyond the pitch of passion (an it admitted understanding in the marriage proposal of thee do aim beyond itself) and allow that passion not necessarily to need to claim straight forward rights over the domain it craves? The answer of is that this is only possible through a mini – death and at the moment when the self is occluded . here the agency is no doubt the passions themselves. That is the place beyond every self that passions can lead one to if let unchecked and raw . From this other land, the deaths kingdom of passion (passion without affect, assassinates the self and makes one rage of base passion), the power comes to destroy the needs and craving of the property tights.

But of course there is  real danger here. This death of a dream of landed owning of passions is real one, one really might loose ones right to live in this place That is the power of the passions without the self might be such that the affect might not be able to catch one up into itself and hold on. Or again the power the passions realize might disrupt a body so that it loses everything that I it losses all possibility of life beyond a self or no. To want t lose oneself as a self is therefore to take a risk on the powers of the affect, an the abilities of the body. This much is plane.

But then the risk might be worth it if it is the only point to take one across the dilemma and bridge the planes of affects and passions.