{"id":1401,"date":"2018-04-15T11:03:30","date_gmt":"2018-04-15T11:03:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/?p=1401"},"modified":"2021-07-27T07:58:01","modified_gmt":"2021-07-27T07:58:01","slug":"symbolism-and-placebo","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/aurelis\/symbolism-and-placebo","title":{"rendered":"Symbolism and Placebo"},"content":{"rendered":"

These two domains have lots in common. Rationality cuts through both, but in essentially different ways.<\/h3>\n

Power to the people<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

As a matter of fact, the \u2018power\u2019 of a symbol doesn\u2019t lie in the physical symbol itself, just as the \u2018power\u2019 of a placebo doesn\u2019t lie in the placebo itself. It lies in the person who is affected by it. Positing that the placebo holds\/carries\/provides the power is a lie. In the end, the placebo is just \u2018sugar in a pill.\u2019 Likewise, a symbol is just a \u2018piece of wood\u2019 or \u2018golden calf.\u2019<\/p>\n

But the related power that people feel is<\/em> genuine. That\u2019s not a lie. Moreover, looking at what it can make people do, it is a very important power to many.<\/p>\n

A better term for this \u2018power\u2019? Deep motivation (being at first place an \u2018emotion\u2019).<\/p>\n

Depth<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The active ingredient comes from very deep inside, as deeply as possible. A symbol without \u2018depth\u2019 is not a symbol at all. [see \u2018Symbolism lost. Symbolism regained.<\/a>\u2019] So, in order to grasp symbolism, one needs to grasp depth, as in: \u201cthis deeply means very much to me.\u201d There is just no getting around it.<\/p>\n

One should never look at the surface as if there lies the essence.<\/p>\n

Like waves at the surface of an ocean<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

They make up only a small part of the ocean. They are not downright the most important part, only the most visible one.\u00a0This way,\u00a0the surface waves are like the \u2018ego\u2019 of a person. They do not exist apart from the ocean\u2026 nor can this ocean exist apart from them.<\/p>\n

Unfortunately, a person\u2019s ego can easily forget that behind the symbol lies an ocean of deep meaning. This ocean is the person himself, in totality.<\/p>\n

Symbol as placebo<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

As said before, symbol-related power comes from deep inside the symbolizer. Contrary to this and especially in absence of this, unproportionate importance can be instilled in the \u2018correctness\u2019 of the symbol, as if this is essence-related. Thus attaching to \u2018correctness\u2019 the \u2018power of placebo.\u2019 This is divisive. It\u2019s how re-ligare sprouts to many religions fighting each other over \u2018the correct correctness.\u2019<\/p>\n

What a pity.<\/p>\n

Rationality in all this<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I see rationality \u2013 that is: a striving towards as much of it as possible \u2013 as an end value. Not the \u2018cold rationality\u2019 that throws all poetry overboard, but one that goes all the way through: investigating everything, taking into account everything, whether it\u2019s conceptual or sub-conceptual (‘poetic’ as a close approximation).<\/p>\n

Now, taking rationality into full account, one can discern a difference between both domains:<\/p>\n