0014 The human, Kanzelberger writes, “aspires to know more and more of the being of nature in its natural constitution.” Humans are always busy trying to figure out what is happening3a. What does it mean to me3b? Our objective potential1btries to make sense of each subjective potential1a, resulting in our fallible phantasms2b.
The human sees the cat strike the bird2a, witnessing perfection in the cat and privation in the bird.
The cat subjectively1a wants to objectively1b wound the bird.
The human throws a guess2b as surely as the cat throws its paw.
0015 A phantasm2b does not gain the full potential of its objectivity1b until it becomes intersubjective1b. In order to become intersubjective, it must be constellated2b.
0016 An objective phantasm2b can become intersubjective1b, in two, non-exclusive ways, through judgment2c and through discourse2a.
In the first option, the intersubjective1b stands at the gates of the suprasubjective1c. Passage leads to a judgment2c.
In the second option, the object2b stands at the gates of human blather1a.
An event2a gives rise to a phantasm2b, in the mind of a beholder, who, without delay, decides to release that phantasm2bfor someone else to hear2a. The decision3c casts the phantasm2b down, like a bolt of lightning, into an event2a, born of human subjectivity1a.
0018 The observer says, “Did you see that? That cat broke the bird’s wing.”
To which the graduate student replies, “Say what?”
“That cat is evil!”, the observer declares.
“Oh no, God made all cats in His goodness. But, still, the cat’s action may be a symbol of an evil, murderous and immoral spirit. The symbol doesn’t apply to the cat. The cat becomes a symbol to us.”