Series context: In the first three posts, we explored how meaning creates non-meaning, how phenomena emerge relationally, and how perception unfolds across time. Here, we turn to a classical debate: is meaning immanent within phenomena, or transcendent above them? The lantern metaphor helps us reconcile these perspectives.
Meaning as Immanent
The immanent view sees meaning as arising within phenomena themselves. It is inseparable from context, use, or material instantiation. Examples include Aristotle’s forms in matter or Wittgenstein’s later idea that meaning is in use.
-
Lantern metaphor: Meaning is like a lantern lowered into the ocean. It illuminates its local surroundings, creating patterns and shaping the dark field around it.
-
Implications:
-
Phenomena and meaning co-constitute each other.
-
Non-meaning (the dark ocean) is structured by existing meanings.
-
Perception and cognition are active processes of local actualisation, not passive recognition of pre-existing truths.
-
Meaning as Transcendent
The transcendent view posits that meaning exists above or beyond phenomena, as a fixed, universal, or divine order. Plato’s forms or medieval ideas of eternal essences are classic examples.
-
Lantern metaphor: This is like saying the light exists independently of the ocean and lanterns. Darkness is merely a stage; the patterns revealed are pre-determined.
-
Implications:
-
Phenomena are treated as vehicles or shadows of pre-existing meaning.
-
Non-meaning is passive, not generative.
-
Perception becomes about “accessing” meaning rather than co-phasing it.
-
The Relational Synthesis
The relational perspective synthesises these views:
-
Meaning is never purely immanent: it always defines a horizon of potential, structuring the field of non-meaning.
-
Meaning is never purely transcendent: it cannot exist independently of actualisation in the relational field.
-
Key insight: Meaning and non-meaning are co-constitutive, emergent yet directional. Lanterns illuminate, shape, and phase phenomena; darkness provides the structured potential for new lights to appear.
-
Immanent intuition: patterns of phenomena arise relationally, contingent on actualisation.
-
Transcendent intuition: the directional shaping of potential gives experience coherence, continuity, and horizonality.
Implications for Perception and Cognition
-
Phenomena are emergent, not pre-given.
-
Non-meaning is generative, structuring possibilities.
-
Perception is active, participatory, and temporal.
-
Experience is relational: actualised meaning phases phenomena, while potentiality guides future actualisation.
Looking Ahead
In the next post, we will explore broader implications for language, cognition, and society: how collective phasing of meaning creates shared perception, symbolic alignment, and social formations. We will see that this relational synthesis is not just philosophical—it has real consequences for understanding communication and experience.
No comments:
Post a Comment