Theme concerning self-nature and manifestation

On the theme of Descartes and Hume (e.g. what one can and cannot know), the authority one seeks in knowledge or manifestation (considered in the abstract as a given end) is the same authority that grants that one seek it; thus how may one claim there is a basis in knowing or manifestation when the authority comes from what it seeks, rather than the process of seeking in-itself? Further, if the seeking prefigures understanding, its as though the authority came utterly from nothing.

Although this is evasive, seeking is predicated on an absence or a trend that lives in itself; its object, defined as the reality does away with the authority of seeking it apart from itself; if object becomes seeking-trend, one might on one hand say the seeking has swallowed object, while on the other that process has gained credence as authority, yet the thought or knowledge preceding a given point of realization is not founded on what it finds, necessarily, unless process is truth-as-object, which in itself may be dubious. However, the equation of truth-as-object may be justifiably as just as life inherent in manifestation, proving the point that without life it is difficult to justify a system, however valid (perhaps not every philosopher would go so far).

The quotidian angle is that thought is motivated by a desire to know what one does not; with knowledge one might assume there is no motive to think, however, the life of knowledge depends on the life of mind; valid systems may well promote mind without life or life without mind (considering things under one rubric or another) yet in principle they are interlinked on the subject of the motive and basis for understanding.

Unless being is equated with knowing, life or mind may exist in its own majesteria within which the life of a trend exists independent of the consciousness of the effective law or source of its engenderment.


temporary note for sake of blog record, blog failing somehow, blame someone